suffolk local access forum · 2020. 2. 11. · suffolk local access forum title: agenda meeting...

Suffolk Local Access Forum

Title: Agenda

Meeting Date: 20 October 2011

Author/Contact: Jill Christley

Venue: Assington Village Hall, The Street, Assington, CO10 5LW

Paper Number

1. 3.00 Welcome, apologies and housekeeping

2. Minutes of previous meeting LAF 11/23

3. Declaration of interest

4. 3.10 Local Nature Partnerships Genevieve Broad, Biodiversity Officer Suffolk Biodiversity Partnership Local Nature Partnerships – summary

Presentation LAF 11/24

5. Future of the Public Forest Estate SLAF meeting with Norfolk LAF SLAF invitation to Independent Panel on Forestry SCC response to Call for Views

LAF 11/25 LAF 11/26 LAF 11/27

6. SLAF Annual Report 2010/11 SLAF Annual Report feedback NE LAF Annual Report

LAF 11/28 LAF 11/29 LAF 11/30

7.

SCC budget consultation LAF 11/31

8. SCC Countryside Sites (Dedication of Public Rights of Way) – Progress Report

LAF 11/32

9. Rights of Way Road and Rail Crossings – Update A11 Dualling Between Fiveways and Thetford

LAF 11/33

10. Ipswich Fit for the 21st Century Ipswich Waterfront Traffic Management

LAF 11/34 LAF 11/35

11.

Correspondence • NE review of OA restrictions • National Planning Policy Framework • DEFRA consultation on registration of town

and village greens • Management of Commons • LAF Chair and Vice Chair meeting • Herts LAF case study • East of England LAF meeting dates

LAF 11/36 LAF 11/37 Verbal LAF 11/38 Verbal LAF 11/39 LAF 11/40

12. 4.50 Any Other Business

13. 4.55 Public question time

14. 5.00 Dates & Venues of Future Meetings

LAF 11/23

Suffolk Local Access Forum Title: Minutes of meeting held in Aspall Room, Kerrison

Conference Centre, Stoke Road, Thorndon on 14 July 2011


Author/Contact: Jill Christley

Venue: Assington Village Hall, The Street, Assington, CO10 5LW 1. Welcome, apologies and housekeeping.

Present: Melinda Appleby (MA), Bryan Collen (Chairman) (BC), Barry Hall (BH), Margaret Hancock (MH), Gordon Merfield (GM), Monica Pipe (MP), Norman Southgate (NS), John Wayman (JW), Anthony Wright (AWr).

SCC Officers Present: Beth Barham (minutes), David Falk (DF), Andrew Woodin (AW). Apologies – Lynda Foster (Natural England), David Barker, Ann Langley, Sandy Martin, Mary Norden, Alan Moore, Jane Storey, Mike Taylor.

2. Minutes of previous meeting The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed to be an accurate record.

3. Declaration of interest

AWr declared interest in Ipswich Chord where Sustrans are land owners.

4. Natural England (NE) LAF 11/13 and 11/14 refer. AW covered papers and summarised Natural Environment White Paper which concerns how communities can connect better with their natural environment and be involved, appreciate and value the countryside more. In April 2013 an SCC Director of Public Health should be in place to influence local services including accessibility to the countryside. BC commented that nature was often robust giving the example of airfields and the importance of farming in countryside management, which was not recognised in previous White Papers. Under LAF 11/14, DF advised that discussions were being held between SCC, NCC, Wildlife Trusts, Brecks Partnership, AONBs and Biodiversity Partnerships to establish a Norfolk-Suffolk Local Nature Partnership (LNP). The LNP should include at least one representative from LAFs. DF advised that Coastal Access had commenced in Norfolk with a desk exercise in progress. No date had been set yet by Natural England for Coastal Access to commence in Suffolk.

ACTION SLAF to request representation on LNP.

LAF 11/23

5. Independent Panel on Forestry (IPF) Concern was raised that membership of the panel was mostly land managers and may not include all access users. MA praised the letter on behalf of SLAF to the Independent Panel on Forestry as it may have influenced their decision on where to visit, but highlighted the need for a follow-up letter. MA also mentioned wood fuel project in East Anglia and asked if this could be included in the letter. JW asked if more recent figures on visitor numbers than those presented in the letter were available. AW reviewed the IPF press release and highlighted the intention of the panel to visit a forest in East Anglia. It was agreed that the panel should be invited to visit Thetford Forest as it straddles Suffolk and Norfolk allowing joint representation from SLAF and NLAF. DF highlighted importance of connectivity between Thetford Forest and other areas, including areas of Open Access land, Elveden and King’s Forest. ACTION Confirm that IPF received letter from SLAF. ACTION SLAF to meet NLAF to discuss joint working on this issue. ACTION SLAF to write to IPF to confirm visit to Thetford Forest and invite them to meet representatives of SLAF and NLAF.

6. Divestment

LAF11/20 refers. Countryside Sites AW briefed SLAF on divestment of countryside sites highlighting that emphasis had been given to protecting access as follows:

• Clare Country Park – dedicate rights of way on 4 routes including former railway line • Lavenham / Long Melford – dedicate rights of way on former railway lines. There had

been concern over liability for maintenance of structures. It had been confimed that responsibility for maintenance of bridges would remain with SCC.

• Sudbury – to have a dedicated cycle path. • Greyfriars – path to be dedicated. • Thorpeness – dropped RoW along shingle shore. • Iken/Nacton – dedications of OA land.

BH queried how SCC sites would be managed if there is no funding. AW confirmed funding was secured to operate sites until they were disposed. GM queried maintenance of commons (citing Knoddishall Common) by Suffolk Coastal District Council and the position of local community to take on their management. MP mentioned a similar issue at Blaxhall Common. Public Rights of Way AW confirmed reduction in the rights of way budget with alternative options to deliver targets being explored with detailed discussions being held with Eye Town Council and other parishes. NS confirmed off-road driving groups had offered assistance but need to know SCC’s standards to work best in partnership and concern was expressed generally about H&S, training, provision of tools, guidance and legal issues. MA suggested contacting parishes to advise what they could do, including minor vegetation clearance on rights of way and BH suggested using SALC and PC newsletters for communication.

LAF 11/23

MA highlighted change in culture was needed to encourage communities and individuals to improve their environment. GM agreed the community approach has been lost. AWr advised that Sustrans carry out maintenance with permission of land owners and stressed the importance of covering health and safety and proper use of tools. BC felt it was important for volunteering to be firmly under the control of SCC. ACTION AW to consider the most appropriate way to engage more comprehensively with parishes. ACTION AW to raise management of commons with SCDC.

7. SLAF Annual Report to Cabinet LAF 10/25 refers. DF confirmed that the Annual Report covered the period August to July. BC highlighted the importance of investing in countryside access to address health issues and safeguard access. Key issues were agreed as:

• A11 dualling • Future of forestry • Divestment of countryside sites • Divestment of countryside access • Threat to ROW budgets • Severance of rights of way over railways and trunk roads • HLS • Rail crossings

8. A11

AW advised that a meeting had been held on 30 June 2011 and works were due to commence in 2012 and scheduled to last 2 years. Concern was raised over the budget pressures for the scheme, which could include reducing the height of the underpass from 3.7m to 2.7m (resulting in horse riders having to dismount). Concern was also raised over detour of the footpath at Icklingham to the B1112 underpass and HA’s wish to leave this as a natural surface (grass) path without any surfacing. AWr commented on similarities with situation at Bury St Edmunds where the path was left as shingle surface. On a related subject of Network Rail crossing points, SLAF supported SCC’s position to ensure safe crossings, and the closure of a right of way without replacement was a last resort and only if the path was a very low priority.

9. Correspondence / Update

Ipswich Chord and other rail issues DF summarised LAF11/21 and LAF11/22 highlighting safety aspect of a tunnel on this route and the possible impact of anti-social behaviour it might create AWr outlined discussion of ownership and management of the sluice and inclusion of a ramp to enhance access. Brantham rail crossings AW discussed a possible closure of a route by Network Rail (NWR) at a crossing at Brantham. Despite being a popular walk NWR had suggested it was unsafe despite lack of maintenance

LAF 11/23

of the path bank and furniture. Alternatives to closure including improvements of steps, control measures or a diversion needed to be considered. BC queried if there was a statutory obligation of NWR to maintain routes. SLAF will support SCC recommendations LTP3 DF advised that LTP3 would be implemented next year and draft documents were available online Coastal AW advised SLAF on development of guidance for land managers where there is a risk of flooding and breaching of sea walls. This should be available at a later meeting. AW described the situation in Orford where the river wall will be raised by adding soil to the existing bank. This will raise the river wall height by approximately 2ft. The works would be carried out in the autumn. The scheme was considerably less expensive than other options, although the scheme design may not be appropriate in all situations. Regional LAFs DF advised that Anna Mangini was the new regional LAF co-ordinator. BH requested copy of meeting notes of LAF regional conference held in Ely 15th March 2011. ACTION DF to circulate regional conference notes

10. Any Other Business

AW advised on information regarding horse use of cycle tracks. NE would like a response for DEFRA. AWr noted Sustrans do try and get a width that allows for equestrian use of their schemes. AW noted the legal position is unclear and asked if SLAF members had any examples where shared use might be helpful in Suffolk.

11. Public Question Time

No member of the public attended. 12. Dates & Venues of Future Meetings

3.00pm on Thursday 20 October 2011, Assington Village Hall. 3.00pm on Thursday 12 January 2011, SALC meeting room, UNIT 11A, Hill View Business Park, Old Ipswich Road, Claydon, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP6 0AJ. END

LAF 11/24

Page 1 of 2


Title: Local Nature Partnerships – summary


Author/Contact: David Falk


The following précis LAF11/14 paper distributed at the last SLAF meting and details the development of Local Nature Partnerships, as set out in the Natural Environment White Paper. In the Natural Environment White Paper, published on 7 June 2011, Defra invited new and existing partnerships to come together to establish Local Nature Partnerships. £1million is available for this. Local Nature Partnerships will:

• raise awareness about the benefits which a healthy natural environment brings for people, communities and the local economy

• set priorities for their area • contribute to local authority plans that affect the environment, as well as local plans

and local development frameworks • contribute to the Green Economy • bring together a range of local stakeholders • co-operate with other partnerships where this results in more efficient use of

resources and better outcomes • work at a landscape scale • form at a level that can take a strategic-enough approach to deliver integrated

outcomes Defra anticipate around 50 Partnerships across England, however it will not prescribe that Partnerships should cover a particular spatial area or administrative boundary, and want to encourage them to form around the places, areas and natural systems that work best locally. LNP membership will come from:

• Local Authorities (county and district) • Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty • Parish Councils • Community Forums • National Parks • Arms Length Bodies (Environment Agency, Natural England, Forestry Commission,

Marine Management Organisation, English Heritage, British Waterways etc) • Civil society organisations and Environmental Charities (e.g. Wildlife Trusts, RSPB,

National Trust, Butterfly Conservation etc) • Existing Partnerships (e.g. Coastal Partnerships, Local Biodiversity Action Plan

Partnerships, Local Access Forums, LEADER Local Action Groups, Rural and Farming Networks, Green Infrastructure Partnerships

• Land Owners

LAF 11/24

Page 2 of 2

• Local Businesses • Local Enterprise Partnerships • Health and Wellbeing Reps • Education/Learning organisations • Community Organisers • Local Environmental Record Centres • Local Universities

Timeline

• 31 July 2011: Deadline for application submission to Transition Fund. • September 2011: Notification of funding allocation. • Winter 2011: Defra will invite expressions of interest from local partnerships

aspiring to be recognised as Local Nature Partnerships. • Spring 2012: Ministerial event for first tranche of Local Nature Partnerships.

Once established, Local Nature Partnerships will be expected to fund their own day-to-day running costs. END

LAF11/25

Page 1 of 1


Title: SLAF meeting with Norfolk LAF




SLAF Chair and SCC officers attended the Norfolk LAF meeting on 20th July to discuss a shared approach to the Independent Panel on Forestry and other matters.

• NLAF were interested in more joint working with SLAF, to the point of joint

meetings. AW reminded them Norfolk and Suffolk have to have their own forums but there was considerable merit in working together on items of mutual interest and thinking, e.g. the LEPs (which they agreed with) and the PFE consultation.

• Mike Taylor gave a presentation for the Forestry Commission – Mike

explained FC had a 25% budget cut and 25% staff cut; clarified that the 3500ha out of 9500ha freehold in Norfolk which is not open access is because the land is tenanted and the tenants were reluctant to dedicate; he also reiterated the net operational costs of running the whole PFE in England was £12m and £800k in the East Region.

• Future of the PFE – Gerry Barnes, NCC Environment Manager, summarised

where the forest panel is in its deliberations. NLAF needs to consider what it wants to say to the panel. He confirmed the panel is visiting Santon Downham to look at “Woodfuel East”, but neither he nor Mike knew any more than this. AW explained SLAF were interested in a joint approach to the panel to ask them more about the visit to East Anglia with the intention of meeting members and highlighting concerns about possible loss of access, or opportunities to improve access.

• NLAF were very receptive to this but there was no clear way forward agreed,

but AW would draft a letter from SLAF to the IPF to highlight SLAF’s work with NLAF and highlight the need to meet with the IPF.

For further details on the work of IPF visit www.defra.gov.uk/forestrypanel END

LAF 11/26

Page 1 of 2


Title: SLAF invitation to Independent Panel on Forestry


Author/Contact: Andrew Woodin


(Sent by email on 27th July 2011) Dear Sir, The Suffolk Local Access Forum (SLAF) submitted its views to the Independent Panel on Forestry on 16th June, and followed this up on 12th July, prior to its meeting on the 14th July, to ask both for confirmation of receipt and to ask for further information on the panel’s proposed visit to East Anglia. So far no response has been received and I would appreciate acknowledgement that the forum’s letter has been accepted as the response to the panel’s call for views (this was later received on 27 July). At the local access forum’s meeting on 14th July, the forestry proposals were discussed, and the forum was very interested in the panel’s proposed visit to East Anglia and the possibility of meeting panel members to put their case on retaining and improving access on the Public Forest Estate. Following our meeting on the 14th July, I attended the Norfolk Local Access Forum’s (NLAF) meeting on 20th July at Santon Downham (in the heart of Thetford Forest), on behalf of SLAF. Naturally, the consultation on the future of forests and woods was a major item on their agenda and Norfolk County Council’s Environment Manager advised the meeting the panel’s visit to East Anglia included a visit to Santon Downham to look at the “Woodfuel East” project, although no further details were available. I updated NLAF on SLAF’s position and approach to the forestry panel, of which they were fully supportive, sharing SLAF’s concerns about the threat to public access and expressing an interest in also sending a representative to meet the panel if something could be arranged. In conclusion, I would welcome confirmation that the forum’s letter has been accepted by the panel as the response to the panel’s call for views, and ask that the panel be advised of both Suffolk and Norfolk local access forums’ request to meet panel members on their forthcoming visit to East Anglia. Yours faithfully, Bryan Collen Chairman, Suffolk Local Access Forum

LAF 11/26

Page 2 of 2

Below is the response from DEFRA From: Forestry Panel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 03 August 2011 15:25 To: Andrew Woodin Cc: David Falk; Jill Christley Subject: RE: SLAF PAPER TO THE INDEPENDENT PANEL ON FORESTRY Dear Andrew, Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I apologise for the confusion and the mix up, I have been trying to achieve lots of things all at the same time. We have been inundated with responses to the call for views and requests for the questions that the Panel asked to aid people to respond. Please pass on to the Suffolk Local Access Forum the Panel’s thanks for their response to the call for views which was received on 16 June 2011, we really appreciate the time they have taken to reply. We will use the responses throughout the work of the Panel. Our progress report in the autumn will give an overview of what you have said. Regular updates and information on the Panel’s work will be available on the Panel’s website http://www.defra.gov.uk/forestrypanel/. We will add you to the Panel’s mailing list so we can keep you in touch with the work of the Panel. You can also follow us on Twitter at @ForestryPanel. We will keep your details on a database to enable us to contact individuals and organisations with news on the work of the Panel, to invite views and to send invitations to events. We may share this information with Defra and the Forestry Commission for the purposes of contacting people with news, opportunities to comment and invitations to events relating to forestry and woodlands. If you do not want your information to be included in future mailings please let the panel know by e-mailing [email protected]. When this call for views is completed we intend to put a copy of all the responses in the Defra Information Resource Centre at Ergon House, London. Also members of the public may ask for a copy of the responses under Freedom of Information legislation. Regards, Trevor END

LAF 11/27

Page 1 of 4


Title: SCC response to Call for Views




Dear Sir or Madam, Independent Panel on Forestry – Call for views On behalf of Suffolk County Council I should like to offer the following comments to the above call for views. Question 1 – What do forests and woods mean to you? The debate about the future of the public forest estate earlier this year demonstrated that people feel passionately about the forests and woodlands of Suffolk and there is strong emotional tie to the Forestry Commission estate. Suffolk County Council has worked closely with the Forestry Commission over many years to secure economic benefits to the county, enhance the quality of life for residents and visitors and to maximize the conservation value of both public and privately owned woodlands in terms of both landscape and wildlife. Suffolk’s woodlands and forests have an important role in our programme “Creating the Greenest County” and one of our priorities has been to get at least 50% of Suffolk’s ancient semi natural woodlands positively managed. The Nature of England White Paper has stressed the wide range of benefits and services the environment provides to society (sometimes referred to as “The Ecosystems Services approach”). There is perhaps no other land use than forestry that exemplifies this concept better in terms of the economic contributions, environmental benefits, and opportunities for human health and well being.

Economy, Skills and Environment _____________________________________ Endeavour House 8 Russell Road IPSWICH Suffolk IP1 2BX Enquiries to: Peter Holborn Tel: 01473 264778 Fax: Email: Web: http://www.suffolk.gov.uk Your Ref: Our Ref: Date: 26th July 2011

Secretariat to the Independent Panel on Forestry c/o DEFRA Area 5E Nobel House 17 Smith Square London SW1P 3JR

LAF 11/27

Page 2 of 4

Question 2 – What is your vision for the future of England’s forests and woods? If we are to fulfill the true potential of forestry to deliver the full wide range of public benefits referred to above, then we must have an economically sustainable woodland and forest industry supported by a robust and consistent policy framework that provides all parts of the forestry industry with a secure and clear environment to invest in and operate. This requires a strong, well resourced Forestry Commission to provide a policy framework that is linked to other agri-environment policies and measures within the DEFRA family. There is also an important role to reconcile competing demands on woodland resources; one of the dangers of the sale and fragmentation of the public forest estate is that woodlands will be managed in isolation for single purposes only, whether that is commercial timber production, birds or public access. In a small heavily populated country like England there is a strategic requirement to balance and reconcile these competing demands. Question 3 – What do you feel to be the benefits of forests and woods? Forests and woods have a key role in meeting the challenges posed by climate change. They remove CO2 from the atmosphere and supply a source of renewable energy. They deliver public benefits through providing opportunities for public access and recreation leading to healthier lifestyles and well being. Forests and woods provide environmental benefits in terms of flood protection, wildlife habitats, landscape conservation and the preservation of historic assets. New community woodlands provide a cost effective means to offset the impacts for residential and industrial development. Bringing more neglected woodlands into management will greatly improve their value for biodiversity. There are currently over 16,000 people employed in tree and timber industries in England (Lantra 2007). Most woodlands have the potential to deliver more economic benefits; a recent study suggests that the woodfuel supply chain could generate £1.24 billion gross value to the economy by 2020 and create more than 15,000 jobs in the UK (Forestry Commission England June 2011). The Forestry Commission Estate in Suffolk is of particular interest because of its proximity to the growth areas around Ipswich (Sandlings Forest) and Bury St Edmunds (Thetford Forest). There has already been a considerable amount of work by the local authorities in Suffolk and the Forestry Commission to identify the green infrastructure potential of these forests. It is important that uncertainty over the future of the Forestry Commission is resolved to allow the recreational potential of these two forests to be developed further and allow investment by the private sector to take place. Question 4 – We would like to hear about your suggestions of practical solutions and good practice which can be replicated more widely. The Dunwich Forest rewildling project is good example of an effective partnership between The Forestry Commission, Suffolk Willdlife Trust, RSPB and Suffolk County Council to create a more diverse and sustainable mosaic of woodland and heathland habitats from 700 acres of Corsican Pine plantation within the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This project is delivering a range of benefits for the public and wildlife but if it is to be repeated elsewhere in Suffolk a more flexible interpretation of the Forestry Commission’s Open Habitats policy will be required, otherwise the presumption that equivalent areas of new woodland must be required under such schemes will render them unviable financially. The Forestry Commission’s Jigsaw Challenge Fund for the creation new woodlands in a pilot area of South Suffolk was very successful for the 3 years it operated. Under this project, grant support for the creation of new woodlands was subject to competitive bidding process that ensured only those schemes that delivered the highest benefits in terms of sustainable wood production, biodiversity and landscape conservation were successful. A return to this approach would ensure that scarce public funds could be targeted to those schemes that deliver the most public benefit and offer the prospect of long term, viable sustainable woodland management.

LAF 11/27

Page 3 of 4

Suffolk and Norfolk County Councils helped the Forestry Commission to develop Woodfuels East, a group that has provided advice and channeled government funding to develop and improve the woodfuel supply chain. This is proving to be a successful initiative that is underpinning the development of the woodfuel industry in Suffolk and Norfolk. A successful woodfuel supply and advisory service company (Anglia Woodfuels) has also been set up in Norfolk and Suffolk with the help of local authority and DEFRA funding which included a grant towards the cost of purchasing a woodchipper. The cost of deer to the economy in the East of England alone is estimated to be between £3m - £10m a year (considering road traffic accidents and the costs to agriculture and forestry). The Forestry Commission and the Deer Initiative have been working with landowners in Suffolk and other eastern counties to manage wild deer populations to reduce damage to woodlands, and market venison. Deer need to be managed on a landscape scale and the fragmentation of the forestry sector and woodlands will make it even more difficult to control these animals. The Independent Forestry Panel needs to look the management of deer and other large mammals such as wild boar at a broader scale. Question 5 – What do you see as the priorities and challenges for policy about England’s forests and woods? Suffolk County Council would like to see Government commitment to a strong policy framework that recognises the long time scale of forestry and its ability to provide a range of economic, public and conservation benefits in line with the ecosystems services approach outlined in the Nature of England White Paper. This policy framework needs to be backed up by a strong and well resourced Forestry Commission that can provide the necessary holistic approach to forest and woodland management and creation. Such a policy and regulation framework must support a viable and competitive forestry sector. Developing partnerships such as Woodfuels East can help strengthen the forestry sector and produce a more vibrant woodland economy. Protecting the forest and woodland resource in the face of the considerable threat from climate change and a range of pests and diseases should be a high priority; for example Red Band Needle Blight on pines could have considerable economic impact on commercial woodlands. Acute Oak Decline is causing concern in the East of England and there are fears it could affect the oak population in similar way to Dutch Elm Disease. Research and dissemination of best practice is lead by the Forestry Commission’s Forest Research Agency and this organisation is facing a 25% reduction in funding. The future ownership of the Public Forest Estate remains a concern for Suffolk County Council; fragmentation of ownership through the sub division of woodland parcels has in the past resulted in the loss of continuity of management and erosion of woodland character. A key issue is the distinction between leasehold and freehold land currently managed by the Forestry Commission. If the leasehold sites are disposed of as part of the ongoing programme to release 15% of the land managed by the Forestry Commission by 2014-15, then access and other benefits may be difficult to protect. Finally, I would add that the Suffolk Local Access Forum (SLAF) has also considered the future of forestry in England. It has advised the County Council of its concern for the threat to public access should the management of the public forest estate change. The forum believes strongly that the estate in its entirety should be publically accessible to walkers, cyclists and equestrians (and other forms of access where these are enjoyed currently). This applies to both the 70% of the estate which is freehold and the remainder in leasehold. The Forum notes that protecting and improving public access will have many benefits, including on physical and mental health, enhancing the appreciation of the natural world, strengthening social bonds and providing a low cost source of recreation. The Suffolk Local Access Forum urges the Independent Panel to give access the highest priority in its deliberations and give very serious consideration to dedicating higher access rights under

LAF 11/27

Page 4 of 4

Section 16 of the Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act on the whole of the public forest estate, including land in long leasehold. SLAF have also asked that for access routes to remain physically available, the Government should ensure funding is in place to continue their maintenance (in the same way the Forestry Commission maintains the routes now). Yours sincerely, Peter Holborn Landscape and Biodiversity Team Leader END

LAF 11/28

1

Suffolk Local Access Forum Annual Report August 2010 - July 2011

What is the Cabinet being asked to decide? 1. The Cabinet is asked to accept the 2010/11 Annual Report of the Suffolk

Local Access Forum (Appendix A) and to note the report’s recommendations and the action that the Council is taking to address these recommendations.

Reason for recommendation 2. As a statutory adviser to the Council on rights of way and access matters,

and as required by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, the Suffolk Local Access Forum is required to submit an annual report and make recommendations to the Council. Guidance by the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs states: “We would expect the authority to respond positively to the forum’s annual report and to say what actions they have taken on the advice and recommendations of the forum.”


Title: SLAF Annual Report 2011




Report No

Committee: Cabinet

Meeting Date: 13 September 2011

Lead Councillor/s: Councillor Guy McGregor, Portfolio Holder for Roads, Transport and Planning

Local Councillor/s: All Councillors

Director: Director for Economy, Skills and Environment

Assistant Director or Head of Service:

Alan Thorndyke, Highway Network Improvement Manager

Author: David Falk, Countryside Access Development Manager Tel: 01473 264752 Email: [email protected]

LAF 11/28

2

What are the key issues to consider? 3. The key issues raised by the Suffolk Local Access Forum 2010/11 report

are as follows: a) The Suffolk Local Access Forum recognises the continued pressures

on all budgets but notes the savings in the 2011/12 maintenance budgets and encourages the Council to continue investing in the public rights of way and access network to reflect the importance of countryside access on stronger, healthier communities and the rural tourism economy. Council response – The Council recognises the health, sustainability and economic benefit of the rights of way and access network on local communities.

b) The forum are concerned at the speed and direction of transferring countryside sites and encourages the Council to ensure sites remain public spaces in a condition fit for use for the benefit of all to promote healthier communities and a more sustainable economy. Council response – The Council acknowledges the Suffolk Local Access Forum’s concerns regarding public access to countryside sites. The Council is actively working to dedicate public rights of way, where required, on sites to be transferred and has extended the initial timetable of transfer.

c) The forum are concerned about the future of the Public Forest Estate and its use for enjoyment, learning, health and contribution to the local economy. The forum considers that Suffolk County Council should give a high priority to public access in the Forest Estates for all users to ensure access is safeguarded for the future. Council response – The Council acknowledges the importance of public access to the Forest Estate and in its response to the Independent Panel on Forestry’s call for views, has reflected the views of the local access forum.

d) The forum is disappointed over changes to agri-environmental schemes and potential loss of permissive access to areas of the countryside. The forum vice chair met Richard Benyon MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Natural Environment and Fisheries, to discuss these concerns Council response – The Council acknowledges the importance of public access in the countryside and recognises the value of permissive access provided under agri-environmental schemes.

e) The forum continues to give a high priority to the loss of access where routes are severed by trunk roads or railways. The forum are keen to ensure that adequate bridleway access across the dualled A11 is delivered by the Highways Agency, and have noted with some alarm recent moves by Network Rail to seek emergency closures of some rights of way across railways. Council response – The Council recognises the importance of a continuous bridleway link either side of the dualled A11 and was at the forefront of insisting that proper regard be paid to non-motorised

LAF 11/28

3

users. As the relevant Portfolio Holder Councillor Guy McGregor gave evidence to the A11 Public Inquiry in support of the trunk road project and in particular the provision of a public right of way underpass in the vicinity of the War Memorial. He also advised the Inspector that the County Council had agreed to contribute to the cost of providing this facility. The Council is also seeking clarification from Network Rail on its programme for road and rights of way crossings in Suffolk.

f) The Suffolk Local Access Forum is an efficient, balanced and cost-effective forum providing an important advisory service to the Council and other organisations by raising issues regarding how the public access the countryside and use the public rights of way network for leisure, health and sustainable travel options. Council response – The Council acknowledges the continuing impact of the Suffolk Local Access Forum in 2010/11, its cost-effectiveness and its focus on key issues regarding countryside access and the use of public rights of way.

What are the resource and risk implications?

4. The Suffolk Local Access Forum considers that the Council should maintain an effective level of funding for rights of way and access maintenance and improvement. The Director for Economy, Skills and Environment will consider and discuss with the Portfolio Holder for Roads, Transport and Planning the appropriate level of Suffolk County Council funding for the public rights of way and access network in looking at the priorities for Council revenue and capital budgets going forward, recognising the contribution to healthy and sustainable communities and the benefits to the rural economy that these can provide.

What are the timescales associated with this decision? 5. Not applicable.

Alternative Options 6. Not applicable.

Who will be affected by this decision? 7. Officers acting on these recommendations and potentially users of public

rights of way, land managers and communities within Suffolk.

SOURCES OF FURTHER INFORMATION a) Suffolk Local Access Forum web pages:

http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/Environment/PublicRightsOfWay/SuffolkLocalAccessForum/

b) The Suffolk Rights of Way Improvement Plan: http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/Environment/PublicRightsOfWay/RightsOfWayImprovementPlan.htm

LAF 11/28

4

APPENDIX A

SUFFOLK LOCAL ACCESS FORUM ANNUAL REPORT August 2010 – July 2011 Introduction 1. As required by the Local Access Forum (England) Regulations 2002 I have

pleasure in submitting the eighth Annual Report of the Suffolk Local Access Forum to Suffolk County Council as the highway authority.

2. The Suffolk Local Access Forum (SLAF) was formed under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) in 2003. SLAF acts as an independent body to advise the Council on matters relating to rights of way and access to the countryside. It is also a statutory consultee for Natural England on mapping of open country and plans and policies produced by a wide range of organisations. The forum is administered by Suffolk County Council.

3. It is made up from those interested in access to the countryside and rights of way including users, landowners, land managers, members of community organisations and those with conservation interests.

4. Full membership for 2010/11 is listed in Appendix B.

Our Work 5. The forum met four times during the past year at quarterly intervals to

discuss a range of issues that have arisen from consultations, presentations, papers, reports and site visits from amongst others, Suffolk County Council, DEFRA, Natural England, Forestry Commission, England Access Forum, Alde and Ore Futures, Highways Agency and Network Rail.

6. Members of the public are able to attend meetings and have the opportunity to raise items or comment on issues discussed or related to countryside access.

7. Members of SLAF attend regional meetings, conferences and neighbouring local access forums to improve access in Suffolk.

SLAF Cost 8. SLAF have their own identity to ensure they are clearly recognisable as an

independent body with letter heading with PO address box and an independent email address. Development of a dedicated website is being looked into on the One Suffolk platform.

9. The cost for servicing SLAF for 2010-2011 was approximately £1,500. This includes secretariat, room hire and member travel expenses. To place this in context, the overall budget for Countryside Access is £1.2M.

Investment in Rights of Way 10. We congratulate officers on successfully obtaining significant funds in

partnership with Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB with the BALANCE Project, a European funded project between UK and European partners.

LAF 11/28

5

BALANCE will fund access improvements and increase awareness of countryside access across the AONB.

11. The forum congratulates officers in obtaining significant investment in partnership with St Edmundsbury Borough Council Growth Area Funding for green infrastructure improvements to develop access along the Lark Valley Path.

12. The forum welcomes officers securing Natural England Access Management Grant Scheme and Community funds to fund improvements of open access sites.

13. The forum were consulted on the draft Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3) and welcomes the opportunities LTP3 offers with a focus on healthy activity.

14. The forum emphasised that rights of way can demonstrably deliver the type of low cost sustainable transport solutions that the Department of Transport are looking for.

15. The forum stressed that this should be reflected in SCC’s funding decisions and distribution of funds should not favour urban areas at the expense of developing sustainable access in rural areas, with the needs of non-motorised users fully considered when allocating LTP funding.

Transfer of Countryside Sites 16. The forum were greatly concerned at the pace at which proposals had been

progressing with the concern that public access across sites and links between rights of way could be lost or compromised, having considerable effect on people’s enjoyment of the countryside, health and quality of life.

17. SLAF wrote and met with Cllr Judy Terry, SCC Portfolio Holder for the Greenest County, and officers to express these concerns, and this was followed with detailed discussions over safeguarding public access at each site.

18. The forum feels that dedication of access rights with public rights of way or open access should be completed before transferring. In addition, the County Council should maintain control and repair of any former railway bridges on all the relevant sites.

Future of the Public Forest Estate 19. The forum are greatly concerned about the future of the Public Forest

Estate (PFE) and its continued and enhanced use by the public for enjoyment, learning, health, quality of life and contribution to the local economy.

20. The forum carried out a site visit to Dunwich Forest and received a presentation from the Forestry Commission to identify issues with the PFE and access.

21. The forum welcomed the creation of the Independent Panel on Forestry (IPF) but is concerned at the lack of representation of access user groups on the panel.

22. The forum wrote to the Chairman of the IPF to urge the panel to give access the highest priority and invite them to visit Suffolk to see at first hand what the PFE offers visitors.

LAF 11/28

6

23. The IPF have confirmed they will visit East Anglia. 24. The forum are working closely with Norfolk LAF on this issue.

Rights of Way Severance 25. SLAF corresponded with Matthew Hancock MP and are pleased that the

needs of non-motorised users are now recognised in the design of the dualling of the A11.

26. The forum are concerned about the effect any pressures on the scheme budget may have on access, including the height of the bridleway underpass and the surface of any diverted rights of way.

27. The forum supports and encourages the work of officers, especially with the Suffolk Road Rail Partnership, to protect and improve access at a number of rail crossing points.

28. The forum have expressed concern with Network Rail over the Ipswich Chord scheme and its impact on access and safety. The forum support SCC and Sustrans’ efforts in securing and improving access in this location.

Higher Level Stewardship 29. The forum wrote to Tim Yeo MP and Dr Dan Poulter MP to stress their

concern over plans to end Higher Level Stewardship payments for countryside access.

30. SLAF’s Vice Chair (in his capacity as Chair of Creating the Greenest County) led a delegation of Suffolk farmers to meet DEFRA Minister Richard Benyon at Parliament to discuss the issue. The delegation (all of whom were agreement holders with Natural England (NE)) was supported by Dr Dan Poulter MP and David Ruffley MP.

31. The delegation explained the implications of losing access and the value of access to users and their enjoyment of the countryside. The minister explained that the major reason for removing access in future agreements was cost. Access funding received no support from the EU whereas biodiversity payments were more than match funded by the EU. However, the minister announced that funding for educational visits by school children would now be part of the scheme.

DEFRA’s Natural Environment White Paper ‘The Natural Choice’ 32. The forum responded to DEFRA’s consultation ‘Shape the Nature of

England’ in advance of the White Paper ‘The Natural Choice’ highlighting; a) the importance of public access in understanding the natural environment

and enjoying the associated health benefits b) the importance of agri-environmental schemes c) the important role of agriculture d) the needs of non-motorised users, in particular horse riders

33. The forum welcomes the White Paper and are keen to be included as a member of the proposed Local Nature Partnership.

LAF 11/28

7

Open Access 34. NE presented their review of directions for conservation on open access

land in Suffolk at a meeting held in Santon Downham, Brandon on 12th January 2011.

35. NE subsequently attended a SLAF meeting on 20th January 2011 to present their review to all members.

36. NE identified open access restrictions for 2011, justifying continued restrictions with successful ground nesting bird populations, Stone Curlew in particular, on a number of sites.

37. SLAF congratulates the Council in successful bids to NE’s Access Management Grant Scheme to improve access with new gates and information at sites managed by RSPB and Ipswich Borough Council, and NE’s Community Fund to improve information at open access sites.

Coastal Access 38. SLAF have been kept informed of the progress of Coastal Access and

welcome its implementation in Suffolk. 39. The forum support the Council in working to improve access ahead of the

Coastal Access scheme with specific regard to the Stour and Orwell estuaries.

Other Issues 40. The forum expressed concern that NE’s Study of Accessible Natural Green

Space ignored the access provided by public rights of way. 41. The forum commented on a gating order request in Felixstowe, agreeing

with the request. 42. SLAF supported the presence of the England Access Forum (EAF) as a

means of sharing advice between forums, raising issues at a national level and ensuring greater recognition of LAFs by government departments and other organisations. However, the forum believed the EAF required more effective communication at a regional level and should either be retained or a national champion identified to represent LAF views at a national level.

43. The EAF has since ended and NE have requested local champions to raise issues at a national level.

Consultations 44. SLAF has been consulted on:

a) DEFRA Natural Environment White Paper ‘The Natural Choice’ b) Natural England Assessment of Accessible Natural Green Space c) Department for Communities and Local Government draft National

Planning Policy Framework d) Future of the Public Forest Estate e) Future of England Access Forum f) Higher Level Stewardship g) Open Access directions by NE

LAF 11/28

8

h) Local Transport Plan 3 i) Transferring of Countryside Sites j) Alde and Ore Futures k) Ipswich Chord l) Gating Order in Felixstowe

Meetings 45. SLAF members have attended meetings on:

a) Regional LAF Chair Meeting – 28th September 2010 – David Barker (Vice Chair) attended to raise local issues

b) Natural England directions for conservation on Open Access – 12th January 2011

c) Eastern Region LAF Conference – 15th March 2011 – David Barker (Vice Chair) presented on the future of agri-environmental schemes and Barry Hall presented on achievements of SLAF

d) Stour and Orwell Estuary Access Group – Barry Hall

Presentations 46. SLAF received presentations on:

a) Local Transport Plan 3 – Dave Watson, SCC b) Natural England Study of Accessible Natural Green Space (ANGSt) –

Diana Curtiss, NE c) Open Access directions by NE – Diana Curtiss, NE d) Future of Public Forest – Simon Leatherdale, Forestry Commission e) Alde and Ore Futures – Bill Parker, Inter Coastal Zone Manager

(ICZM) Initiative Officer

Site Visit 47. Dunwich Forest – A site visit took place with Simon Leatherdale (Forestry

Commission) and Mel Kemp (RSPB) on 7th April 2011 to see how the forest is managed with regard to public access and learn about the management and costs associated with access. The site visit was followed by a meeting where Simon Leatherdale presented on the Future of the Forest Estate.

Membership of SLAF 48. During the past year there have been four meetings, all of which were very

well attended. 49. A full membership list for 2010/11 is provided (Appendix B).

Looking Ahead 50. The practice of making at least one site visit per year will continue. 51. Priorities for SLAF over the coming year include;

LAF 11/28

9

a) Ensuring the county council budget for rights of way and wider access continues to be sufficient to deliver a viable service and rights of way improvement plan priorities.

b) The future of the Public Forest Estate and preserving and enhancing public access.

c) Transferring of countryside sites and preserving and enhancing public access.

d) Severance of public access along rights of way by road and rail networks. e) The future of agri-environmental schemes to provide countryside access.

Main Recommendations for Suffolk County Council to consider are: a) The Suffolk Local Access Forum recognises the continued pressures on

all budgets but notes the savings in the 2011/12 maintenance budgets and encourages the Council to continue investing in the public rights of way and access network to reflect the importance of countryside access on stronger, healthier communities and the rural tourism economy.

b) The forum are concerned at the speed and direction of transferring countryside sites and encourages the Council to ensure sites remain public spaces in a condition fit for use for the benefit of all to promote healthier communities and a more sustainable economy.

c) The forum are concerned about the future of the Public Forest Estate and its use for enjoyment, learning, health and contribution to the local economy. The forum considers that Suffolk County Council should give a high priority to public access in the Forest Estates for all users to ensure access is safeguarded for the future.

d) The forum is disappointed over changes to agri-environmental schemes and potential loss of permissive access to areas of the countryside. The forum vice chair met Richard Benyon MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Natural Environment and Fisheries, to discuss these concerns.

e) The forum continues to give a high priority to the loss of access where routes are severed by trunk roads or railways. The forum are keen to ensure that adequate bridleway access across the dualled A11 is delivered by the Highways Agency, and have noted with some alarm recent moves by Network Rail to seek emergency closures of some rights of way across railways.

f) The Suffolk Local Access Forum is an efficient, balanced and cost-effective forum providing an important advisory service to the Council and other organisations by raising issues regarding how the public access the countryside and use the public rights of way network for leisure, health and sustainable travel options.

Bryan Collen Chair of Suffolk Local Access Forum David Barker Vice Chair of Suffolk Local Access Forum JULY 2011

LAF 11/28

10

APPENDIX B SUFFOLK LOCAL ACCESS FORUM Members Details Councillor Jenny Antill – A retired investment banker, Jenny is a Member of Babergh District Council for Waldingfield. Closely involved with local conservation groups, Jenny is keen to protect the vulnerable green edges of the town, while encouraging the citizens of Sudbury to get out into the countryside. Melinda Appleby – Since childhood Melinda has had an interest in wildlife and conservation. With a degree in Rural Environmental Studies, Melinda has pursued these interests in her career with the Countryside Movement, the RSPB, NFU, and at Suffolk County Council. David Barker (Vice Chairman) – With his wide experience within the NFU, CLA and as a former Countryside Agency commissioner, David seeks to work to balance all interests involved in countryside access. David is also Chair of Creating the Greenest County. Bryan Collen – (Chair) Bryan has been involved in the NFU, Anglian Water, Internal Drainage Boards and the County Council’s Rights of Way Liaison Committee. Barry Hall – Barry is a retired local government officer with experience of working on countryside and rights of way projects. Barry retains an interest in countryside access as a member of RSPB, SWT and NT. Margaret Hancock – Margaret is a Blue Badge Tourist Guide. A keen cyclist, Margaret is passionate about promoting sustainable tourism by encouraging walking, cycling and the use of public transport. Margaret is a volunteer for the Out and About charity, providing support for children and young people with disabilities. Ann Langley – Ann is involved with the Pony Club, the Easton Harriers Hunt, and is a founder member of the Mid-Suffolk Bridleways Association which works to maintain and open bridleways. Ann is also Councillor on Ashfield cum Thorpe Parish Council. Councillor Sandy Martin – Ipswich Borough Council and SCC Councillor. Sandy Martin lived in Halesworth from 1971 to 1993, and has lived in Ipswich since then. He is a keen walker and cyclist. He was elected to Suffolk County Council in 1997 and to Ipswich Borough Council in 2002, and is currently a Councillor on both Authorities. He acted as deputy to the County Portfolio Holder for Environment & Transport from 2001 to 2005, and is now opposition spokesman for environment at Ipswich Borough Council and Leader of Suffolk County Council Labour Group Gordon Merfield – With a background in agriculture, since the 1980's Gordon has been active in participating and coaching in field sports events as well as being interested in the wider countryside and walking in foreign countries.

LAF 11/28

11

Alan Moore – Alan is a retired Head of Regional Planning and Transport for the East of England Regional Assembly, and is now a volunteer with the Stroke Association and West Suffolk Headway. With a particular focus on access for disabled people, Alan is interested in the issue of local access and the need to ensure that it is properly and effectively provided for in both urban and rural areas. Mary Norden – Mary works for the RSPB, is a member of Suffolk Bat Group, a bat worker for Natural England and supports the Bat Conservation Trust’s national monitoring programmes. Mary is also a keen walker and cyclist. Monica Pipe – Monica farms just north of Ipswich and has many well-used footpaths on her land including the promoted Fynn Valley Walk. Norman Southgate – Rights of way officer for the Suffolk Landrover Owners Club, Norman keeps members aware of where they can legally go off-road. He is a keen sailor and member of the Copdock & Washbrook footpath maintenance working group. Councillor Jane Storey – SCC Councillor for Thedwastre North, has interests around walking, dog-walking, off-road driving and being a farmer's daughter with some strong views along the lines that with rights come responsibilities. Jane believes that we should preserve our Rights of Way, including BOATS and Bridleways, but not at the expense of common sense. These are an important part of presenting Suffolk as the Greenest County, useful for getting from A to B, but also for getting people who do not normally exercise out and about at little or no expense. Mike Taylor – With a Forestry Commission background, Mike brings experience of managing large tracts of land as a business whilst ensuring that conservation and public access are fully taken into account. John Wayman – A former district council member farming in the Stour Valley, John feels that he now would like to contribute to a the wider rural picture. Anthony Wright – A long-term cyclist and walker, Anthony has worked with several local authorities on the production of cycling and walking publications and works part time with the sustainable transport charity Sustrans. END

LAF11/29

Page 1 of 2


Title: SLAF Annual Report feedback




Below is a summary of proceedings at Cabinet on 13th September

• David Barker (SLAF vice Chair) presented the annual report and highlighted the forum’s activities over the year and, with reference to the A11 again acknowledged SCC’s offer to contribute to the A11 underpass,

• Councillor Guy McGregor (Portfolio Holder for Roads, Transport and

Planning) responded and noted SCC had improved SLAF’s independence, he confirmed SCC would retain the liability for the railway bridges on the county’s railway walks, and thanked David Barker for presenting the report and through him Bryan Collen (SLAF Chair) for chairing SLAF this year,

• Questions were invited from the rest of Cabinet, Councillor Jane Storey

(Deputy Leader of the County Council), who had declared an interest, said SLAF was a strong advocate and better than many of its peers and offered her thanks, Councillor Judy Terry (Portfolio Holder for the Greenest County, Economy and Skills) reinforced the importance of tourism, Councillor Colin Noble (Portfolio Holder for Adult and Community Services) thanked Councillor Guy McGregor and SLAF for their support for the A11 in his constituency and improving access across it, his residents were very appreciative, Councillor Graham Newman (Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Young People’s Services) pointed out the Ipswich Chord is very important economically and asked what the access issue was,

• Councillor Guy McGregor responded SCC is promoting the Chord because of

its economic benefits but, like A11, it was important to ensure access is addressed properly, David Barker reinforced this, saying designers at a national level need to understand this,

• Questions were invited from other councillors, Councillor Sandy Martin

mentioned the Chord and the difficulty of access near the sluice, he acknowledged the importance of ROW for leisure, health and tourism but stressed not to underestimate the big difference improving ROW can make to improving access to services, for a relatively low investment, which he put in the context of expenditure on trains and buses,

• Councillor Guy McGregor agreed on the importance of walking and cycling

and mentioned SCC investment in Lothing bridge at Lowestoft,

LAF11/29

Page 2 of 2

• Councillor Penny Otton expressed disappointment that SCC was struggling to divest the Haughley picnic site, but was pleased SLAF is engaging on rail and road crossings, and she asked what was the SCC contribution to the A11 underpass,

• David responded SLAF would like to see access retained at the picnic site,

Councillor Judy Terry said she too was disappointed with progress there but SCC would continue to negotiate with groups,

• Finally, Councillor Guy McGregor responded that on the matter of railways,

crossings could slow trains and he was not averse to sensible diversions and even new bridges, and confirmed SCC’s contribution to the underpass is £300k,

• Cabinet was pleased to accept the report.

END

LAF 11/30

Review of Current reporting year

Were you successful in meeting the achievements set out in your Annual Report or LAF work programme? Please provide supporting information. SLAF were successful in addressing access needs with respect to a number of local and national issues, most importantly,

1. severance of rights of way by road and rail links, 2. alterations to agri-environmental schemes, 3. future of the Public Forest Estate, 4. divestment of the county’s countryside sites.

This involved meetings with Ministers and MP’s, dialogue with Councillors and liaising with the England Access Forum. Copies of the minutes for each meeting in 2010-2011 are attached as supporting information.

*How many Open Access Restriction cases have you been informed about/involved with?

Local Access Forum (LAF) Annual Report Proforma

*Reporting year Last report was August 2009 – July 2010, dated July 2010 This report is August 2010 – July 2011, dated July 2011

*Name of LAF Suffolk

*Name of LAF secretary Jill Christley


Title: NE LAF Annual Report



Venue: Assington Village Hall, The Street, Assington, Suffolk, CO10 5LW

LAF 11/30

SLAF are involved in the annual review of restrictions on all Open Access sites in Suffolk They were consulted on one new case which was at Mount Pleasant, which they supported.

*Give up to three examples of advice given by your LAF to section 94 bodies: 1. DEFRA Natural Environment White Paper ‘The Natural Choice’ 2. Natural England Assessment of Accessible Natural Green Space 3. Forestry Commission Future of the Public Forest Estate A co-ordinated response with Norfolk LAF and invitation to the IPF to visit the area was successful with a visit planned to Thetford Forest. Give up to three examples where you have encountered difficulties; explain what mechanisms could be put in place to alleviate this issue: Severance of rights of way by road and rail. There needs to be an easy means to raise issues at a national level, with the key decision makers e.g. ministers. The EAF did help to some degree to raise the issue of trunk roads at a higher level but greater assistance from NE would be welcomed to address often conflicting priorities between organisations that inhibit the public accessing the countryside or key facilities and services using public rights of way. Future of the Public Forest Estate. Effective representation on the IPF for NMU access to the forest is a real concern and it needs to be emphasised to relevant organisations that the needs of the public have to be more fully recognised. Not sure what mechanisms are required but loss of national voice for LAFs perhaps did not help. Do you have any issues with recruitment of members from particular interest groups? Does this hinder your work in any way? No Comments from appointing authority

SLAF are a very well informed and influential body who have been effective in tackling some key issues regarding public access in Suffolk. The relationship between SLAF and SCC is a very positive one.

LAF 11/30

Forward Look What are your priorities for next year (list up to 3)

1. Future of the Public Forest Estate 2. Severance of public access along rights of way by road and rail networks 3. The future of agri-environmental schemes 4. Future budgets for maintaining and improving access on public rights of way and open access sites

*What support/training will you need to be able to deliver these priorities?

Key speakers from or known to NE would be helpful to explain and/or discuss key issues. Do you perceive any barriers to delivering your priorities?

Priorities and objectives of other bodies with respect to Forest, road and rail network which conflict with improving public access to countryside, services and facilities. Any other comments

END

LAF 11/31

Page 1 of 1


Title: SCC budget consultation




Mark Bee, Leader of Suffolk County Council is seeking the public’s views on the county council's budget or 2012/13. This link was circulated to SLAF on 7th October, copied below Dear SLAF members Mark Bee, Leader of Suffolk County Council is seeking your views on the county council's budget. This link http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/CouncilAndDemocracy/Consultations/WeAreListening.htm will take you to a page on Suffolk County Council's website in which you will find more information. If you would like to have your say you may do so by completing the survey. Highways and Rights of Way are on the first page. You may wish to circulate these links to others you know to be interested in improving access in the county. Regards, Jill Christley SLAF Secretary PO Box 872 Ipswich Suffolk IP1 9JW Highways and Rights of Way are on the first page of the questionnaire. SCC is encouraging everyone with an interest in its services to have their say on how budgets should be allocated. The consultation closes on 23rd October. END

LAF 11/32

Last month, the Portfolio Holders for Roads and Transport and The Greenest County agreed to the dedication of public rights of way at the following countryside sites: Site Description The Valley Walk, Sudbury

The section of former railway line in SCC’s ownership (as opposed to the southern section of the route in Babergh District Council’s ownership) will be dedicated as a public footpath and subsequently upgraded to a cycle track. The route is part of the National Cycle Route. SCC will consider separately the dedication of ROW on the section of the route not in its ownership.

Melford Walk

The former railway line will be dedicated as a public footpath.

Lavenham Walk

The former railway line will be dedicated as a public footpath.

Clare Country Park

Commonly used routes in the country park will be dedicated as public footpaths.

Dunwich Greyfriars

A public footpath will be dedicated through the site linking Dunwich and FP12 through Greyfriars’ Wood.

Maps will be available at the meeting. It is the intention that these sites should be handed over to the new managers by the end of 2011 and ROW dedication will therefore need to fit this timetable. The county council will retain ownership and maintenance of the former railway bridges on the railway walks. For the time being the county council is putting on hold the dedication of the Open Access Land at Iken and Nacton. END

Suffolk Local Access Forum Title: Suffolk County Council Countryside Sites (Dedication of

Public Rights of Way) – Progress Report




LAF 11/33

A11 Dualling Between Fiveways and Thetford Two meetings have taken place with Mouchels, the Highways Agency consultants working on the detailed design of the forthcoming A11 improvements. As previously reported to SLAF, the Agency is working to reduce costs of the scheme and this includes reducing the height of the underpass at the monument near Horn Heath from 3.7m to 2.7m. The lower height is still compliant with highway design standards provided suitable facilities for the riders to dismount and remount are provided. The county council accepts the case for the reduced height and has been working with Mouchels on detailed design for signing and surface construction for pathways between the laybys and the underpass at the memorial and alongside the A11 between FP2, Icklingham and the B1112. Discussions have taken place on the proposed level of access along the C616 road between Mildenhall and the A11. This road is being stopped up, retaining a private means of access and clarity is being sought on whether cycling rights are being retained and, if they are, whether the link between the junction of the C616 and the A11 and the B1112 can be improved to accommodate cycling. The Agency has agreed to provide ramps from the end of the pathways to be provided either side of the A11 down to the new B1112 underpass. Suffolk County Council will work with Elveden Estate to reroute rights of way north of the A11 to link in with the new underpass, and the Estate is committed to working with SCC to deliver this. Further order making will be required to achieve this. Rail Crossings Previous SLAF meetings have received updates on the Suffolk Rail Road Partnership. The overall remit of this national initiative, promoted by Network Rail, was to work with highway authorities, district councils and civic/transport police to address some of the high risk road and rights of way level crossings on the railway network by:


Title: Rights of Way Road and Rail Crossings – Update




LAF 11/33

• Improving safety performance • Reducing road based congestion and delay • Closing or diverting high risk crossings • Identifying planning threats and opportunities Although this initiative petered out, Network Rail has over the last year requested two emergency closures at Brantham and Needham Market, on the grounds of insufficient crossing time between sighting a train and crossing the line. Network Rail’s failure to continue with the road rail partnership, that would have allowed these closures to be put in a countywide and strategic context, lead to SCC ROW officers requesting a meeting with Network Rail (NR) to discuss the approach to reviewing ROW railway crossings and integrate these with the work NR is doing on road crossings. The meeting took place on 22/7/11 and NR explained it is aiming for zero related incidents on crossing, to be achieved partly by closing those crossings it deemed to be unsafe using its “All Level Crossings Risk Model”. SCC explained it wants to see a joined up strategy for road and ROW crossings in Suffolk and that this is endorsed by the Portfolio Holder for Roads and Transport. Moreover there should not be any external consultations on potential road closures or diversions, without the express agreement of SCC. NR were actioned to confirm the number of high risk ROW crossings in Suffolk and to supply a co-ordinated programme to include roads and ROW for the forthcoming year. So far these have not been forthcoming. SLAF may wish to consider asking a representative from Network Rail to attend its next meeting to explain their closure programme and its impact on Suffolk rights of way. END

LAF 11/34

Page 1 of 1


Title: Ipswich – Transport Fit for the 21st Century




Following a request form Margaret Hancock on progress on Ipswich Docks, the following email was sent to SLAF members to alert them of the following exhibition. Dear SLAF members

'Ipswich – Transport Fit For the 21st Century’ and Ipswich Waterfront For information, Suffolk County Council in collaboration with Ipswich Borough is holding an exhibition at Tower Ramparts in Ipswich between the 12th and 19th October to explain proposals that form the ‘Ipswich – Transport Fit For the 21st Century’ project. The scheme aims to improve the way that everyone travels around Ipswich and help to support future employment and housing growth in the town. Whilst not directly part of the scheme, Suffolk County Council is also taking the opportunity to consult on the management of traffic along the waterfront, now that the highway status of the quayside roads has been confirmed. The exhibition will be in the Lower Mall of Tower Ramparts Shopping Centre and will be open from 9am – 5.30pm every day except Sunday 16 October, when it will be open between 10.30am and 4.30pm. More information will be available at our next meeting. Regards, Jill Christley SLAF Secretary PO Box 872 Ipswich Suffolk IP1 9JW END

LAF 11/35


Title: Ipswich Waterfront Traffic Management


Author/Contact: Steve Kerr


Introduction This report follows the Ipswich Docks public inquiry update provided to SLAF members at its meeting on 20 January 2011. On 4 March 2011 the Secretary of State (SoS) confirmed Restricted Byway 36 (between Foundry Lane and Shiplaunch Road) and on 6 September confirmed a Byway Open to All Traffic (BOAT) between Dock Street and Bath Street and a short section of Restricted Byway 38 south of Bath Street. The Inspector declined to confirm the other three order routes. Please refer to the attached plan (Appendix 1) for an overview of the confirmed order routes. Since confirmation of the two rights of way, progress has been made on the following:

• The hoarding at Albion Wharf has been repositioned and the surface improved for pedestrians and cyclists, in time for the Ipswich Skyride and Ipswich Maritime Festival events, held during the summer.

• The Council has worked with Anglo Norden to legitimise their timber discharging and stacking operations, through the introduction of a temporary traffic regulation order. At the same time the company have applied to the Marine Management Organisation for a Harbour Revisions Order, which if confirmed, will allow the closure of Orwell Quay or Eagle Wharf when a ship is berthed at those quays.

Following the SoS’s decision in March, the Portfolio Holder for Roads, Transport and Planning requested a working group be set up to investigate the practical implications arising from that decision. He asked Councillor Carol Debman to chair the group. The Ipswich Docks Working Group has met three times, with the next meeting scheduled for early December. Through its work the group has prioritised the investigation of traffic management options for the waterfront. Traffic Management Consultations Officers have attended the Waterfront Businesses Forum, Waterfront Partnership and Waterfront Residents’ meetings to gauge opinion on the level of restriction that ought to be implemented on private vehicular use along the Northern and Southern Quays. There has been a mixed response, with some businesses and residents supporting pedestrianisation and others seeking little or no restriction.

LAF 11/35

Traffic Management Byway 38/Restricted Byway 38 Ipswich (New Cut West) A Vehicle Movements TRO is in place on the route, the effect of which limits vehicle movements in one direction only, from Dock Street to Bath Street. A no entry sign for all vehicles exists at the junction with Bath Street, prohibiting vehicular access from Bath St itself. Officers consider the existing TRO needs to be revised, so as to allow bi-directional access for cyclists along Byway 38 (BY 38). This will also require an exception for cyclists wishing to gain access to the quay from Bath Street.

Traffic Management Options for RB 36 (Northern and Southern Quays)

This route is more complex and officers propose two options for RB 36. The section of the route between the Old Custom House and Coprolite Street is currently subject to a Vehicle Movements TRO, the effect of which limits vehicle movements in one direction only (west to south-east). A no entry sign exists at the junction with Coprolite Street but cyclists are able to travel in both directions via a contra flow cycling arrangement.

OPTION 1 (less restrictive) A TRO banning all public motor vehicles on the Northern Quays, between Foundry Lane and Coprolite Street. Motor vehicles exercising private rights would be permitted and the TRO would allow for loading and unloading, with no restrictions as to when deliveries take place. A further TRO between Coprolite Street and Shiplaunch Road that bans public motor vehicles, except for private access. In the case of the TRO proposed for the southern quays, officers acknowledge that on occasions the quay is used to berth large ships and public coaches and sightseeing buses do sometimes require access to the quays. Anglo Norden also use the southern extent of the route to load timber onto their lorries. A more user friendly structure will replace the current Neptune Marina gate, to be authorised as part of the TRO itself. OPTION 2 (more restrictive) A TRO banning all public motor vehicles between Foundry Lane and Coprolite Street. The TRO would allow for loading and unloading but with restrictions on when deliveries can take place. In addition, under this option officers consider the current public car parking spaces ought to be dedicated for loading and unloading purposes only. The proposed TRO for the section between Coprolite Street and Shiplaunch Road remains as above.

Whatever scheme is implemented will have implications for enforcement and will have to be kept under review. Whilst not part of the Ipswich Major Transport Scheme itself, officers have decided to present the traffic management proposals for the recently recorded rights of way at the public exhibition scheduled for 12 - 19 October in Tower Ramparts.

LAF 11/35

END

LAF 11/36

Page 1 of 1


Title: NE review of OA restrictions




Natural England is undertaking a statutory 5 year review of nature conservation restrictions in place in the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area in Suffolk. This requires an initial consultation to collate information on the effectiveness of current restrictions and whether they are still required in their current format. The following sites under review are: Land Parcel Name: Direction

Ref. Dates of restriction on

existing direction: Reason for Exclusion

Brick Kiln Walks 2007020104 1s August 2007 to 31st August 2013

Ground Nesting Birds

Westleton Heath 2007020105 1s August 2007 to 31st August 2013


Dunwich Heath 2007020106 1s August 2007 to 31st August 2013


Walberswick Commom, Tinkers

Walk and East Sheeps Walk

2007020109 1s August 2007 to 31st August 2013


Brick Kiln Walks, Westleton Heath, Walberswick Common, Tinkers Walk and East Sheeps Walk: These sites make up the Suffolk Coast NNR managed by Natural England, Suffolk Wildlife Trust and RSPB. The NNR supports populations of nationally and internationally protected ground nesting birds such as Avocet, Bittern, Nightjar and Woodlark. Dunwich Heath: This site is managed by the National Trust. The site supports populations of nationally and internationally protected ground nesting birds such as Avocet, Bittern, Nightjar and Woodlark. Current Direction: An extension of Schedule 2 exists on each of these sites to keep dogs on short leads from 1 August until 31 August annually until 31st August 2013. Reason for Direction: The purpose of this direction is to help protect ground nesting birds, particularly nightjar, from disturbance by dogs during the breeding season. NE require a response from SLAF by 31st October 2011. SCC support these restrictions. END

LAF 11/37

Page 1 of 1


Title: National Planning Policy Framework




The Department for Communities and Local Government invited views on the draft National Planning Policy Framework. This was followed up by the LAF Regional Coordinator and SLAF were advised on 26th July and again on 15th September. Dear SLAF members I emailed you on 26/7/11 to alert you to this important consultation. If you want to comment on the draft framework you need to do so soon. Regards, Jill Christley SLAF Secretary PO Box 872 Ipswich Suffolk IP1 9JW

From: Anna Mangini [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 12 September 2011 16:20 To: 'Beds Borough LAF'; 'Broads LAF'; 'Cambs LAF'; 'Central Beds LAF'; 'essex & Southend LAF'; 'Herts LAF'; 'Norfolk LAF'; 'Peterborough - 2'; 'Peterborough LAF'; Jill Christley; 'Thurrock LAF' Subject: reminder: National Planning Policy Framework Consultation - deadline 17th October. Importance: High

The Department of Communities and Local Government draft National Planning Policy Framework is up for consultation. http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/draftframeworkconsultation The closing date is 17th October. I have been asked for an easier to understand version. Please find attached two! Could you let me know if your LAF is responding, please? Many thanks in advance. Best regards Anna Mangini Regional LAF Coordinator for the East of England END

LAF 11/38

Page 1 of 1


Title: Management of Commons




In response to the query at last meeting regarding the management of commons, below is the response from John Davies, Countryside & Open Space Manager, Suffolk Coastal District Council. “SCDC has a Scheme for Regulation & Management that covers Knodishall Common. The Council is reviewing management arrangements with the Parish Council for various reasons, not the least being contact from a previously unknown 'owner' offering to sell the Common to the PC and the end of the current Countryside Stewardship Scheme in 2012. There was a public meeting to gauge the local opinions on the Parish Council owning the Common and the District Council and Parish Council continuing the heathland restoration work by applying for a Higher Level Stewardship Scheme in 2012. If either or both options are to be supported, and the conclusion of the meeting was that they should be investigated, then there is potential for this to be delivered through different arrangements, e.g. with the PC taking the lead in future and DC supporting. If there is no possibility of these options being progressed then the DC may have to consider terminating the scheme (which is no longer required to guarantee public access) and passing responsibility back to the land-owner. Blaxhall Common is managed by SWT on behalf of the Parish Council which owns the Common and operates a Scheme for Regulation and Management.” END

LAF 11/39


Title: Herts LAF Case Study




LAF 11/39

LAF 11/39

END

LAF 11/40

Page 1 of 2


Title: East of England LAF meeting dates




Herts: Dates: 1 Dec 2011, 29 Feb 2012, 14 Jun 2012, 12 Sept 2012 Venue: UH, College Campus Lane, Hatfield More info: www.hertslaf.org.uk/nextmeeting Cambs Dates: 29th Nov 2011, 28th Feb 2012 Venue: TBA More info: http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/environment/countrysideandrights/getinvolved/localaccessform/ Essex Dates: Tue 1st Nov 2011, Mon 9th Jan 2012, Tue 6th Mar 2012 Venue: The meetings are held from 2-5pm at the Central Baptist Church, Chelmsford, CM1 1LN. More Info: www.essexrcc.org.uk Central Beds and Luton Dates: 14th November 7.00pm Venues: Priory House, Chicksands More Info: www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk Borough of Bedford Dates: Monday 5th December, Monday 6th February, Monday 2nd April, Venue: TBA More Info: Peterborough Dates: no details Broads Dates: Wed 7 December 2011, Wed 7 March 2012, Wed 13 June 2012, Wed 12 September 2012 Venue: TBA More Info: http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/authority/meetings/broads-local-accessforum.

LAF 11/40

Page 2 of 2

Norfolk Dates: Wed 26 October, Wed 18 January, Wed 18 April, Wed 18 July, Wed 24 October Venue: all at 10.30am in Edwards Room at County Hall More Info: http://www.localaccessforum.norfolk.gov.uk/meetings.htm Thurrock Dates: First Tuesday in Oct and every other month Venue: Civic Offices More Info: www.thurrock.gov.uk/travel/rightsofway and Click on Local Access Forum END

suffolk local access forum · 2020. 2. 11. · suffolk local access forum title: agenda meeting...

Documents