Item A03 Appendix 1
Rights of Way Improvement Plan 2007 - 2017
This is the first Rights of Way Improvement Plan for Southampton, as required under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.
The written information is available, on request, in larger print, Braille, on audio tape and on disk. It is also available in other languages. Please contact 023 8083 2628
Any matters relating to Public Rights of Way may be addressed
in writing to: The Rights of Way Office Southampton City Council Planning & Sustainability Ground Floor, Civic Centre Southampton SO14 7LS
or email to: [email protected]
Contents Page Foreword Executive Summary 1. The City of Southampton in Context Plan showing general overview 2. Background 2.1 The Legal View The National Parks & Access to the Countryside Act 1949 The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 The Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000 2.2 The Rights of Way Improvement Plan 2.3 Scope 2.4 Process 2.5 The Local Access Forum 3. Vision and Objectives 4. Policy Context 4.1 The city of Southampton strategy: A 20-Year Vision 4.2 Corporate Improvement Plan 2007-08 4.3 Local Transport Plan 2006-11 4.4 Active Travel Plan 2006-11 4.5 City of Southampton Local Plan Review, adopted March 2006 4.6 Draft Open Spaces Strategy 2007 5. Access Benefits for All 5.1 Inclusion 5.2 Tourism 6. The Definitive Map & Statement 7. Other Means of Access 7.1 Parks & Open Spaces 7.2 Waterfront Access 7.3 Access to Water 7.4 Cycleroutes 7.5 Long Distance Walks 8. Present Status 8.1 Public Rights of Way 8.2 Routes assessed for the Improvement Plan 8.3 Parks & Open Spaces 8.4 Waterfront Access 8.5 Access to the water 8.6 Cycleroutes 8.7 Links to the wider countryside 9. Performance 10. Appraisal criteria 10.1 Rights of Way and the ongoing Definitive Map Review 10.2 Parks & Open Spaces 11. User Information 12. Evaluation and Conclusions 12.1 Users and Activities 12.2 User Satisfaction 12.3 Maintenance 12.4 Accessibility 12.5 Communication 12.6 Conclusion 13. Action Plan 13.1 The Action Plan 13.2 Sources of Funding 13.3 Monitoring Progress 14. Reference Material
Appendices Page A1. Definitions of Public Rights of Way A2. Definitions of Open Space Classifications A3. Plan showing assessed Rights of Way and Potential Rights of Way A4. Plan showing assessed Open Spaces within the City A5. Participants sent User Need Survey Questionnaires A6. User Survey Result Report 2006 A7. Plan showing Ecologically Sensitive areas within the City A8. How Rights of Way come into being; an outline A9. Summary of Responses to 12 week Consultation on the Draft Rights of Way Improvement Plan
List of Plans General Overview of the rights of way in the City
List of tables Summary of routes assessed for the Improvement Plan Length of Cycleroute Network 2006 Performance 1997 to 2007: Best value performance Indicator No178.
Foreword
The public rights of way network has traditionally been recognised as an important means of accessing and enjoying the countryside. However, the value of an urban network should not be underestimated.
The Rights of Way Improvement Plan provides an opportunity to recognise the importance of Southampton’s public rights of way and the network’s role in providing safe routes and shortcuts away from main roads, and opportunities for sustainable forms of transport. The network can also be used to access parks, areas of open green space and the waterside, as well as linking to the surrounding countryside.
We are enthusiastic to develop a better network that will benefit both residents and visitors alike and therefore, the approach we have taken is to go beyond the directives of legislation and assess not just the public rights of way network, but those other areas of open space available for public use.
The Rights of Way Improvement Plan reflects as closely as possible the needs and expectations of residents and visitors towards the improvement of our rights of way and accessibility to open spaces. Its successful delivery is dependent on the support and involvement of rights of way users, interested organisations and the wider public.
Signature……………………..
Head of Division Planning & Sustainability Southampton City Council
1 Executive Summary
This assessment involved looking at the Section 60 of the Countryside and Rights of existing legally defined network, as well as Way Act 2000 required all Highway those routes that have been identified Authorities to produce a Rights of Way through initial investigation as potentially Improvement Plan. This is intended to set out having public right of way status. a strategic approach to improving the rights of way network and access to the We identified where links are already in countryside. existence, and where they are required to improve access to areas of open space and The Rights of Way Improvement Plan, the waterside. (RoWIP), is an opportunity to assess and develop the service we provide. It is a Access to the water was also considered as a mechanism for us to build on our statutory separate issue, through researching the duties and identify what actions we could location and accessibility of public hards. take to improve the network and make it more accessible and enjoyable for residents The strategic evaluation showed how the and visitors to use. Improvement Plan fits in with existing policies. In particular, we identified strong ties In producing the RoWIP, we have assessed with the Local Transport Plan, with the rights how local rights of way meet the present and of way network playing a valuable role in the likely future needs of the public, what local transport infrastructure, providing opportunities are provided by local rights of opportunities for sustainable modes of way for exercise, recreation and enjoyment, transport, such as walking and cycling. and how accessible local rights of way are to the blind or partially sighted persons and The RoWIP also contains a statement of others with mobility difficulties. actions setting out how we propose to manage improvements to our network of local rights of way and access to areas of open space. These actions are based on the key findings of the assessments and consultation, under the three general headings of Maintenance, Accessibility and Communication.
2 1. The City of Southampton in context
Southampton, one of Britain’s most historic ports, lies on the south coast of England and is one of the major, heavily urbanised cities in the south outside London. Its’ unique location at the head of Southampton Water has, historically, ensured its development as one of the country’s principal ports that has necessitated major growth and urbanisation, mainly residential but also localised industry.
Key Facts about the City of Southampton that are considered within this Rights of Way Improvement Plan:
• It has a population of some 228 600 people, (Mid-year estimate 2006, Office • There are approximately 880 hectares for National Statistics). of open space in the city that can be enjoyed by the general public and • There are several major developments visitors. (Open Space Desktop being proposed, (e.g. the old Vosper Assessment April 2006). Thornycroft Shipyard site in Woolston), and presently being carried out at • There are nine right of way footpaths various sites in and around the city- and two bridleways that cross into or centre, that will result in a substantial abut Southampton from adjoining Local increase in the number of residents. Authorities. (Local Transport Plan 2006-2011). • There are seven areas of recreational • Major retail developments such as the interest that lie immediately outside the West Quay Shopping Centre have City that are open to the public, (e.g. attracted more visitors to the City. Stoneham Golf Course and Itchen (Local Transport Plan 2006-2011). Valley Country Park, which is accessed via Riverside Park). • Major developments have and will be taking place in and around the • There are four areas of light industry University of Southampton, which that lie immediately outside the City that already has more than 30,000 students, attract travel of some type, (e.g. as well as those attending Nursling Industrial Estate and Test Southampton City College and the Valley Business Centre). Southampton Solent University. (Local Transport Plan 2006-2011). • The City lies within easy travelling distance of the New Forest, the South • The City is bounded by areas of Downs, the Isle of Wight and coastal woodland, (e.g. Lord’s Wood), natural resorts, (e.g. Bournemouth). open space, (e.g. Test Nature Reserve), residential and local industrial estates, (e.g. West End).
3
THIS PAGE WILL CONTAIN A PLAN SHOWING THE GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE CITY CONTAINING THE RIGHTS OF WAY NETWORK AND OTHER ROUTES INCLUDED IN THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
4 2. Background taking into account the needs of all types of users. It has to be reviewed within a ten year cycle. It is not designed to provide detailed 2.1 THE LEGAL VIEW solutions to access problems in every locality, but to take a strategic approach to managing The National Parks and Access to the public access. Neither is it a tool with which Countryside Act 1949 made it compulsory to resolve the general problems that Local for every Surveying Authority to investigate Authorities face in completing and/or its public rights of way and, through legal reviewing their Definitive Map and Statement. processes, have them recorded on a Definitive Map and Statement. However, as 2.3 SCOPE Southampton was a County Borough in 1949, it was excluded from the process. It is a legal requirement that the RoWIP
should address; Under The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, any previously excluded areas had to be included. Southampton came under the • the extent to which local rights of way jurisdiction of Hampshire County Council at meet the present and future needs of that time, and so it was their duty to prepare the public, a Definitive Map & Statement for the area. • the opportunities provided by local Unfortunately, due to a lack of resources, a rights of way for exercise and other rights of way map was not prepared for the forms of outdoor recreation and the city. enjoyment of the area, • the accessibility of local rights of way to Southampton became a Unitary Authority in blind or partially sighted people and April 1997, and consequently took on the people with mobility difficulties and statutory responsibility for recording and • how local rights of way, and the wider maintaining its public rights of way, preparing network of access, fit in with existing the first Definitive Map for the city in strategic documents already produced December 1999. by the City Council.
The most significant piece of legislation As well as public rights of way, the people of affecting public rights of way in recent years Southampton can enjoy the facilities offered has been the Countryside & Rights of Way by nine categories of open space, three of (CROW) Act 2000. which are restrictive as to use and therefore have not been included in the assessment The CROW Act is concerned with improving towards the RoWIP. public access to the countryside for everyone to enjoy. It created a new right of access to The categories that have general public certain areas of the countryside, modernised access have been assessed towards the rights of way legislation, strengthened the RoWIP because most contain paths or other protection of important areas for nature routes that the public use. conservation, and made provisions for the better management of Areas of Outstanding 2.4 PROCESS Natural Beauty (AONBs).
Overall, there are six “stages” to the RoWIP The two most important changes that have that can be briefly described as: affected the City Council have been new duties of preparing a Rights of Way 1. Assessing the adequacy of local rights of Improvement Plan (RoWIP), and the setting way to identify where the network does not up a Local Access Forum. sufficiently meet demand through:
2.2 THE RIGHTS OF WAY • Desk study; IMPROVEMENT PLAN • Public survey.
The RoWIP is intended to be an on-going mechanism for identifying where improvements can be made to the network of public rights of way, (defined at Appendix 1), 5 2. Preparing a statement of action that will To complement this approach, Southampton address such issues as; Council has not only assessed the rights of way network, but also areas of open space, • proposed actions to meet the aims of access to the water and the waterside and the RoWIP, the additional publicly maintained highway / • estimated costs of implementing the adopted footpaths. actions, • what small-scale improvements could 3. Vision and Objectives be implemented at an early stage, • key organisations and stakeholders to The RoWIP will ensure the provision and be involved in the implementation and maintenance of a network of high quality • the timescale within which rights of way that allows access to those implementation may be carried out. areas of open space throughout the City which contain many interesting and enjoyable 3. Publishing a draft RoWIP for consultation routes that can be used by residents and to allow public comment on the proposals. visitors alike.
4. Amending the RoWIP in light of comments The principal objectives of the RoWIP are to; received. • establish and maintain a high quality 5. Publishing the Improvement Plan. rights of way network that will grow to meet the demands brought about by 6. Reviewing the RoWIP within a ten year the growth and diversity of users, cycle. • utilise many of the routes within Open Spaces to extend and enhance the 2.5 THE LOCAL ACCESS FORUM pedestrian network in conjunction with users and stakeholders, Under the CROW Act, each local authority • develop the network to benefit as wide had to either set up its own, or be part of, a a range of users as possible, offering Local Access Forum. Since July 2002, more opportunities for a healthier Southampton City Council has been a lifestyle and improving the quality of life tripartite member of the Hampshire and Countryside Access Forum, which represents • improve accessibility for those with Hampshire County Council, (the host mobility or sensory impairment so as to authority), Portsmouth and Southampton City offer more opportunities for uncluttered Councils. and defined areas of use and allowing
facilities for all. Its role is to advise those authorities on access issues, rights of way and recreation matters, including commenting on the Rights 4. Policy Context of Way Improvement Plan. The advice given by the Forum to Hampshire County Council The RoWIP will play an important role in relating to the preparation of its Improvement complementing current City Council policies Plan, (comprising 7 Countryside Access and its production has been with the intention Plans), was taken on board by Southampton of incorporating existing targets. Identifying City Council during the preparation of its shared objectives with other policies will add RoWIP. Southampton City Council had input strength to the RoWIP when applying for into three of the Access Plans, namely the funding, and will help to identify opportunities Solent area, the New Forest and the Test & for partnership working. Itchen area. The plans and strategies that have been The approach taken by Hampshire County considered in the development of this RoWIP Council, in preparing a series of 7 are: Countryside Access Plans that divided the county on an area basis, went beyond that • The city of Southampton strategy: A 20- set out in legislation. Instead, HCC not only year vision (formerly The Community looked at rights of way and access land, but Strategy). also at areas of open space. • Corporate Improvement Plan 2007-08.
6 • Local Transport Plan for the City of • A place with partnership and shared Southampton 2006-2011, including leadership at its core where local Active Travel Plan 2006-2011. people are informed, involved and • City of Southampton Local Plan Review listened to. - Adopted version - March 2006. • Draft Open Space Strategy, January Objective 4: An attractive, sustainable and 2007 – to be superseded by the Green stimulating environment Spaces Strategy, (due early 2008). • A well positioned city with excellent transport infrastructure providing world- 4.1 THE CITY OF SOUTHAMPTON wide links through land, air and sea and STRATEGY internally well connected with the imaginative and creative use of public The city of Southampton strategy is a fresh space. vision for the City of Southampton. The • A city which lives within clear document sets out the aspirations for the city environmental limits and is responsive over the next twenty years. In short, the to the impact of climate change. strategy aims to improve the overall quality of • Well maintained with a high quality life of local residents and those who work in, public realm, featuring distinctive, or visit the city. The vision for Southampton in quality buildings, some iconic, offering a 2026 is: mix of accommodation including affordable housing, family housing and “As the major city in central southern attractive, safe and welcoming open England, Southampton will be recognised as spaces for everyone. the region’s economic, social and cultural driver, building on its role as an international 4.2 CORPORATE IMPROVEMENT PLAN seaport, centre for cutting edge research and 2007-08 leading retail centre. It will be a centre of learning, have a varied and exciting cultural The Corporate Improvement Plan (formerly landscape and be known for its innovative the City Performance Plan) sets out the City and creative businesses, leisure opportunities Council's commitment and overall approach and fine parks and open spaces. Adapting to securing on-going improvements across a into a sustainable waterfront city, wide range of services that are provided to Southampton will have a world-wide profile, local residents, businesses as well as visitors attracting visitors, new citizens and to the city. businesses by being the UK’s premier cruise liner home port, a major European container The Corporate Plan sets out a programme to port and the local city for one of the UK’s top secure the delivery of the City Council’s five airports. Southampton will be known as a city corporate priorities. These priorities structure that is good to grow up in and good to grow the work that we do and what kind of old in where people are proud to live and organisation we wish to be. They are: economic success is harnessed to social justice.” • Tackling deprivation and inequalities.
To realise this vision, six strategic objectives • Promoting life long learning for all have been identified. Of these, the following people. share targets with the RoWIP. • Improving community safety and reducing crime and disorder. Objective 1: People proud of their city and • Improving the street scene and the making a positive contribution environment. • Promoting independent living. • A culturally diverse city free from discrimination which welcomes new The RoWIP should sit within these priorities, communities, provides opportunities for and there are clear links between the everyone to contribute to the life of the documents. In particular making the network city and its region. safer for users with improvements such as • A place which promotes health and additional lighting, where appropriate, wellbeing and continuously improves improving the environment by litter picking the quality of life of all its people. and clearing overhanging vegetation. It will also contribute towards tackling deprivation 7 and promoting independent living by network that is low-cost to maintain in improved accessibility. relation to the benefit provided.
4.3 LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN FOR THE The importance of the rights of way network CITY OF SOUTHAMPTON 2006-2011 is recognised by the LTP in that the “nature and location of … [rights of way] means that
they have the potential to play a key role in The Local Transport Plan (LTP) sets out the the delivery of a sustainable transport improvements to be made to the transport network for the City, especially with regard to network over the next five years. This is the the promotion and encouragement of active second LTP produced for the city. It looks at travel modes.” the wider objectives of the city’s continued development, examines the challenges and opportunities faced by the City and the 4.4 ACTIVE TRAVEL PLAN 2006-2011 implications for travel and transport. The Active Travel Plan is an appendix to the The City Council aims to make travelling Local Transport Plan. Its aim is to increase around, into and through the city, better and the levels of active travel by improving the easier. As part of this process, the LTP takes environment and facilities for walkers and account of the Shared Priorities for Transport, cyclists, and by influencing travel behaviour agreed between central and local through training, education, marketing and government. This involves us looking at how promotion. we will improve accessibility, reduce congestion, improve road safety and enhance The Plan encompasses the walking and air quality. cycling elements of the LTP and links to the wider health agenda in terms of increasing The objectives of the LTP are to: physical activity levels and reducing obesity.
• Improve accessibility - rights of way can “The primary aim is to provide a pedestrian make a significant contribution to and cycle-friendly infrastructure, to enable all improving accessibility. users to reach all destinations safely and • Support economic development. conveniently.” • Promote urban regeneration and neighbourhood renewal. The principal objectives for the Active Travel • Support the provision of decent homes Plan are: • Reduce congestion on the network - the contribution that rights of way can make • To increase the role of walking and to the walking and cycling network has cycling as transport modes, in support the potential to increase the amount of of wider transport, health, and social travel by those modes. policy objectives by increasing the • Improve road safety - rights of way are respective networks. generally located away from the road network. • To develop a safe, convenient, efficient • Help reduce crime and disorder - in and attractive transport infrastructure some locations, the use of rights of way that encourages and facilitates the use can help to reduce perceptions of of walking, cycling and public transport unsafe areas by increasing the amount and which minimises reliance on and of ‘presence’. discourages unnecessary use of private • Support the night-time economy. motorised vehicles. • Minimise the impact on the environment - the network provides facilities for more • To ensure that policies are promoted sustainable forms of transport. and given high priority so as to increase • Help improve standards of health - by walking and cycling and ensure that the providing a resource for people to gain needs of pedestrians, cyclists, and exercise and / or access leisure disability groups are fully integrated facilities. onto the South East Plan, Local Plan, Local Development Framework, Local • Help raise educational aspirations. Transport Plan, Road Safety Plan, • Obtain value for money - rights of way development briefs and other resource provide an additional asset to the bids; and in all complementary 8 strategies including environment, Sustainable Development Policy 3: Travel education, health and leisure strategies. Demands
The RoWIP shares these objectives. The Development will only be permitted where the rights of way network will provide the travel generated by the development can be opportunity for people to exercise and to accommodated without causing any material access opportunities for work, education, impact to the safety, efficiency and shopping, leisure, recreation and social environment of the transport network activities. The promotion of routes can also including access to the Port of Southampton. contribute to increasing their use. Sustainable forms of transport also present an excellent Where travel generated by the proposal opportunity to reduce noise and pollution cannot be so accommodated, permission will created by motorised transport. only be granted where problems can be resolved. 4.5 CITY OF SOUTHAMPTON LOCAL PLAN REVIEW 2006 Sustainable Development Policy 4: Development Access
The Local Plan is the current plan providing Development will only be permitted where guidance for development and land use. Its access into the development is provided in aim is to provide a framework to improve priority order for; Southampton’s environment, increase employment opportunities, provide for more (i) pedestrians and disabled people, housing and increase accessibility by means (ii) cyclists, of travel, other than the private car. (iii) public transport and
(iv) private transport. The development policies that share objectives with the RoWIP are: Sustainable Development Policy 11:
Accessibility and Movement Sustainable Development Policy 2:
Integrating Transport and Development Planning permission will only be granted for
development which; Planning permission will only be granted where development provides for integration (i) contributes to an attractive network of and connection of development to enable public routes and spaces for access by all modes of transport. Where the pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles; proposal does not integrate satisfactorily with (ii) secures adequate access for all existing transport networks the City Council pedestrians including people with will seek relevant improvements to transport mobility and sensory difficulties such as infrastructure through the use of an elderly people, disabled people, the appropriate planning contribution. very young and those using prams and
wheelchairs. 2.16 Development should always be
integrated into pedestrian, cycling and Culture, Leisure and Tourism 10: Public public transport networks to ensure Waterfront and Hards easy access to these modes of travel.
Development will not be permitted which 2.17 To ensure the alternatives are would result in the loss of accessible public genuinely attractive, measures waterfront and/or public hards. undertaken must be designed to be
safe and convenient for pedestrians, Culture, Leisure and Tourism 11: Waterside disabled people and cyclists. This Development means ensuring that;
Proposals for waterside development and • existing cycle and pedestrian routes are development which supports water-based not severed and recreation, will be permitted where; • new cycle and pedestrian routes are convenient and direct. (i) public access to and into the water is incorporated or enhanced unless there would be a danger to public safety, 9 (ii) there would be no adverse effect on physical and mental health by nature conservation interests and encouraging a more active lifestyle and (ii) there would be no conflict with other enjoyment of the natural environment. river uses. • Movement in and between spaces – Homes and Housing 7: The Residential well designed streets and public spaces Environment can encourage walking and cycling and make the environment safer by Planning permission will only be granted for reducing vehicle use and speeds. residential development provided that the highest standards of quality and design are applied, in particular; 5. Access Benefits for All
(vi) ensuring that both hard and soft 5.1 INCLUSION landscaped areas do not provide an opportunity for concealment, especially near dwellings and footpaths, thereby The RoWIP presents an opportunity to review maintaining clear sight lines for how access can be improved for the benefit pedestrians of all ages and of all. The legislation states that this should (vii) minimising the number of through include “an assessment of the … accessibility routes in new forms of development, of local rights of way to the blind or partially whilst ensuring that all walkways sighted persons and others with mobility remain visually uncluttered, visible, problems.” This includes those overlooked, and clearly defined as part accompanying wheelchair users and people of a public area. with children and pushchairs
The Southampton City Council document, 4.6 DRAFT OPEN SPACE STRATEGY, ‘Equality Schemes 2006-2009’, outlines JANUARY 2007 (to be superseded by a duties when addressing disability, race and Green Spaces Strategy document, due early gender equality issues. Of the actions 2008). identified, the top two relating to the rights of This strategy sets out the planning framework way service are: for Southampton’s open spaces. The main objectives of the Strategy are to; • Improving the way we communicate and provide information, to make it • create a green grid of open spaces more accessible to everyone. across the city, • maintain the quantity of open space • Improving service take-up by making it currently protected in the Local Plan easier for people who don’t use our Review, services now, to do so in the future. • improve the quality of open space, • enhance the biodiversity and ecological Public rights of way are classified as a value of open space, service under the Disability Discrimination Act • improve access to the waterfront and 1995 and therefore the City Council must • ensure appropriate funding through have regard to the needs of blind and S106 agreements. disabled persons when carrying out any works, including any which may impede the The importance of open spaces is discussed, mobility of disabled persons or blind persons. in that “they have a role to play in reducing stress, improving health and increasing This could be the provision of ramps or the people’s enjoyment of life.” placing of lamp-posts and other obstructions and therefore, steps need to be taken to Particular ties with the RoWIP are the ensure the current rights of way network is as identified benefits that the city’s open spaces accessible to people with disabilities as is provide: practical and that every measure is taken to accommodate such issues when dealing with • Impact on physical and mental the creation of new or diverted routes. health – access to, and views of, good quality, well maintained public spaces can reduce stress and help improve 10 5.2 TOURISM being the ‘legal events’ that brought the Definitive Map & Statement into existence. Tourism and visitors already play a significant role in the city’s economy. Research has However, the work carried out since 1999 shown that tourism visits contribute £165 has identified many other potential routes, million each year to the local economy, most of which are now being dealt with supporting over 4,000 full time equivalent through due legal processes to enable them jobs for local people. A total of 10.1 million to be added to the Definitive Map & tourism trips are made to Southampton each Statement. year- primarily a mixture of day visits, short breaks and conference (or business) tourism The process includes the opportunity for visits. members of the public to object to the making of the Orders and if objections are made and Tourism is vital to the future of Southampton not withdrawn within a specified time frame, because it; then recourse has to be made to the Planning Inspectorate, who can opt for a Public • stimulates business activity and Inquiry. employment, • acts as a powerful regeneration The majority of routes currently under review mechanism, towards inclusion on the Definitive Map & • supports local amenities, including Statement are those that are considered to retail, public transport, arts venues and be of the most strategic importance within the museums, communities in which they lie. That is not to say that the number of routes is conclusive • promotes a positive image for the city, but are those that already play an integral • adds to the quality of life of those living part in the daily life of the local residents. and working in the city
The continual review of the Definitive Map & By supporting the local amenities; visiting Statement has been progressing towards open spaces, walking and cycling, this will there being a revised version during 2009. assist in achieving the aims of the various strategies previously outlined in this RoWIP 7. Other Means of Access 6. The Definitive Map & Statement 7.1 PARKS & OPEN SPACES The first Definitive Map and Statement for Southampton was sealed on the 9th In August 2004, consultants were appointed December 1999, copies being distributed for to carry out an open space audit for the public use on 16th December, exactly 50 whole city. The end report proved beneficial years after the enactment of the 1949 Act. towards this Improvement Plan in that the audit dealt with many of the aspects of Whilst often referred as being one document, accessibility that this RoWIP intended to the map and statement are two separate include of its own accord. items. There were nine categories of open space as The Definitive Map is a pictorial record of identified within the Audit, (defined at routes that have public rights over them. The Appendix 2), and which have been used as Statement is a textual accompaniment that the basis of assessment of Parks and Open describes the route from end to end. Both are Spaces for the Improvement Plan admissible in a court of law as conclusive evidence that public rights exist. Five of the classifications offer open air recreation and facilities that can be enjoyed The 1999 Definitive Map and Statement by all residents and visitors alike. A sixth depicts eight rights of way; seven Footpaths category, Outdoor Sports Facilities, contains and one Byway Open to all Traffic. The a majority of locations that were not reason for there being so few initially was the accessible to the general public, (only for scale of the task of identifying, locating and specified groups), or that have controlled reproducing the legal documents associated access. However, there were fifteen locations with, and necessary for, the application for that were accessible by the public and which Definitive Map Modification Orders; these have been included in the assessment. 11 Three categories are totally restrictive and been identified within the category of routes only offer facilities relevant to specific groups assessed towards possible future inclusion of users, e.g. Allotments, Community on the Definitive Map. Gardens & Urban Farms that, generally speaking, are not available to the public at Included within the cycle network are two large, as is the requirement for public rights National Cycle Network routes (NCN) that of way. pass through the City. NCN 2, which is the principal south coast cycle route linking The classifications outlined above and used Cornwall to Kent. It passes through the New within this RoWIP are currently being revised Forest, entering Southampton via the Hythe and assessed towards the City Council’s ferry and follows the southeast coast to Green Spaces Strategy document which is Portsmouth. The NCN 23 runs from Sandown due to be published early 2008. on the Isle of Wight, heading towards Eastleigh, Winchester and on to Reading. The importance of parks and open spaces in the city is recognised because; 7.5 LONG DISTANCE WALKS
• residents value the areas, There are two long distance footpaths that • they give a positive image to the City, cross Southampton, mainly using the publicly • they add to the quality of life, maintained highway network of pavements • they are beneficial to health and and footpaths: • they are important for flora and fauna biodiversity. The Itchen Way is a 27 mile long-distance footpath in Hampshire, running from Hinton Ampner Gardens to Woolston. 7.2 WATERFRONT ACCESS
The footpath is waymarked by with a yellow For a maritime city, Southampton has arrow on a black background and the words surprisingly limited public access to the “The Itchen Way”. The footpath may be waterfront. The City Council has a policy to walked in either direction. The southern end protect and increase the amount of waterside of the footpath joins the Solent Way next to access through future development. It is the Itchen Toll Bridge. therefore important to identify the current provision of waterside access and how this The Solent Way is a 60 mile long-distance relates to the wider network of open space. footpath in Hampshire. With the exception of a few inland diversions, the path follows the 7.3 ACCESS TO WATER coast of the Solent. It forms part of the E9 European Coastal Path, which runs for The provision of public access to the water 5000 km (3125 miles) from Cape St Vincent has been considered within this Improvement in Portugal to Narva-Jõesuu in Estonia. Plan. As a heavily urbanised area, the role that the water can play in providing 8. Present Status opportunities for recreation and exercise fits neatly with the objectives of the RoWIP. 8.1 PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY
7.4 CYCLEROUTES Progress continues to be made in reviewing the Definitive Map & Statement, partly due to Cycling is a major component in the City’s substantial changes being made to improve developing integrated transport system that the internal process of dealing with routes as encourages more sustainable ways of potential rights of way. This had an impact on travelling. The cycle network is formed the timescale for preparing many routes for primarily of publicly maintained highways, the process of applying for Definitive Map either on-road or as separate shared or Modification Orders, (DMMO’s), that will segregated routes and has an on-going eventually put them on the Definitive Map. expansion programme. The elements of maintaining rights of way so Those that are off-road and follow ways that that they meet the demands of the Best are not publicly maintained highway have Value Performance Indicator survey are on- 12 going as a matter of course, but it is • any minor anomalies that can be dealt considered that a more structured regime with quickly. towards route clearance can be instigated solely for rights of way, thereby reducing The legally defined rights of way network is dependency on other divisions of the City fragmented to the point where these are Council. sporadically sited throughout the city, as are those routes identified as potential rights of In tandem with the on-going Review, scrutiny way. (See General Overview of the City of the Definitive Map & Statement formed an illustration on page 3). integral part of the RoWIP. It allowed for an assessment to be made of; Whilst there is scope to increase the network towards connecting open spaces in the • the extent to which routes and networks northwest and southeast of the city, this is not are available to different groups of the case for those areas that lie in the central users, corridor and which needs to be addressed. • areas which are deficient in rights of The network of publicly maintained highway way for all or particular groups, footpaths that exist divorced from the main • other opportunities to improve the carriageways will prove to be highly beneficial network, including the restoration of towards accessing open space and generally severed rights of way resulting from the enhancement of the rights of way road building or other development, and network.
8.2 ROUTES ASSESSED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Restricted Footpaths Bridleways BOATs Total Byways Number of Rights of Way on the 7 0 0 1 8 Definitive Map & Statement 1999 Number of legally defined Rights of Way not on the Definitive Map & Statement, 14 4 2 0 20 (i.e. the subject of previous (2495m) (3161m) (265m) (5921m) legal event orders found since publication of Def map 1999) Number of Routes identified as potential Rights of Way (i.e. in 168 1 169 the process of being (36007m) (108m) (36115m) researched towards inclusion on the Definitive Map) 189 4 2 2 197 Total (38502m) (3161m) (265m) (108m) (42036m)
Therefore, the potential extension to the rights of way network, (exclusive of routes within Open Space) is 42km. (The table above is further illustrated at Appendix 3).
8.3 PARKS & OPEN SPACES presence. Access, in terms of roads, paths and cycleroutes, was another subject
considered within the report. Other subjects Southampton can be proud of the diversity of assessed included play areas, lighting, public open space that is enjoyed by its standards of cleanliness, planting areas and residents and visitors. The Open Spaces toilet provision. Audit, (see Section 7), recognised this fact but was able to demonstrate that there are Within the open space category of Outdoor improvements needed. Sports Facilities, most are within school
premises and are therefore limited to specific The Audit looked at various aspects that groups and/or access. However, it was govern the enjoyment of these areas. For identified that there are fifteen areas that are example, main entrances form a welcoming not associated with any specific grounds but invitation to a park as well as advertising its 13 are accessible by the general public. These 8.5 ACCESS TO THE WATER have been included in the assessment, but for the purposes of clarification within this Within England, there are no automatic rights RoWIP have been titled Open Sports Areas. to access rivers. Most are privately owned Consequently, six categories of open space and permission is required of the landowner have been assessed towards the RoWIP to do so. However, in most users can legally because of the abundance of footpaths and paddle on tidal waters. Canoe England is other means of access that they incorporate, funding a Rivers Access Campaign to secure illustrated at Appendix 4. a right of access to rivers.
• Amenity Green Space (55) approx In terms of accessing the water for recreation 1.8km of additional linear routes purposes in Southampton, there are eight • Civic Spaces (20) 0km of linear routes Public Hards, all on the River Itchen, with car • Formal Parks & Gardens (18) approx parking facilities at five of them, with two 12.3km of additional linear routes others having parking facilities within • Greenways (10) approx 43.6km of approximately 300 metres. additional linear routes • Natural & Semi-natural Urban Green 8.6 CYCLEROUTES Spaces (32) approx 5.5km of additional linear routes Cycling and the cycle network have been • Open Sports Areas (15) approx 7.8km reviewed and incorporated within the Active of additional linear routes Travel Plan (ATP), itself forming an integral part of the Local Transport plan 2006-2011. Overall, these offer a potential 71km of The ATP outlines proposals for schemes that additional footpath and other linear accesses will further enhance the network, together within open spaces which complement the with how these will be implemented and existing and potential rights of way network. monitored.
A major consideration towards the RoWIP Close collaboration exists between Rights of was how routes could be created to link Way staff and the Cycling Development areas of parks and open spaces Officer in order to benefit as many users of both the cycling and pedestrian networks as 8.4 WATERFRONT ACCESS possible.
Southampton City Council’s Planning Policy Length of Cycleroute Network 2006 is that every opportunity is to be taken to Demarcated on Road 12.3km open up as much of the waterfront to public Segregated 6.9km access as possible, when assessing planning Shared 26.1km applications that propose waterside development. Total 45.3km
Natural England has made recommendations Improvements to the shared pedestrian and to Central Government that as much cycle network have been identified which coastline as possible is opened up and made compliment some of the works already accessible to the public, (in many ways undertaken, such as the improvements made similar to opening up areas of new ‘access within Thornhill Park, in partnership with the land’ under the CROW Act); the general Groundwork Trust vision being: 8.7 LINKS TO THE WIDER “A coastal environment where rights to walk COUNTRYSIDE along the length of the English coast lie within a wildlife and landscape corridor that offers Among respondents to the public user enjoyment, understanding of the natural survey, (section 11), there was a high environment and a high quality experience; frequency of recreational day visits to other and is managed sustainably in the context of parts of Hampshire, with 57% doing this at a changing coastline”. least once a fortnight, (table 11, appendix 6), with the major attractions being the coast and woodlands, (table 12, appendix 6).
14 A study carried out by Hampshire County number is expected to increase to about Council, (Local Countryside & Greenspace 62 000, thereby emphasising the need to Guidance document, April 2007), contained protect, improve and create links to the wider reference to statistical analysis that countryside. concluded that in 2006, there were over 60 000 people from Southampton who paid a Within the City, the increase in population, visit to a countryside site, (including country together with those who are less likely to parks). travel to sites outside the City, (e.g. those within the lower income group), places a Based on this figure and with a projected 7% greater pressure on the City’s parks and population increase over the next 20 years, open spaces. (due mainly to the level of housing development substantially increasing), this
9. Performance
In December 2000 the Government published new and revised Best Value Performance Indicators, (BVPI’s), in line with its programme to modernise local government. Best Value Authorities are under a duty to seek continuous improvements in the way in which they exercise their functions and BVPI’s provide a performance management framework for reporting progress.
No of routes Year Target Surveyed Actual Disparity 1997 – 98 Unknown 100% 100%
1998 – 99 Unknown 100% 100% Surveyed under old method of assessing 5% of the total 1999 – 00 8 100% 100% number of routes 2000 – 01 11 100% 100%
1. New definition and criteria for BVPI 2. New methodology adopted 2001 – 02 14 100% 64% 3. More routes surveyed 4. 100% of the total number of routes surveyed 1. Less routes surveyed as two in 2001-02 withdrawn 2002 – 03 12 80% 100% because of legal anomalies 2. New methodology enhanced 1. More routes surveyed incl two withdrawn 2002-03 2003 – 04 15 100% 86% 2. One route of substantial length failed due to obstruction and lack of signing caused by vandalism Two routes failed due to obstruction and lack of 2004 – 05 21 100% 91% signage caused by vandalism Two routes failed due to 1. Traffic Regulation Order temporarily prohibiting use 2005 – 06 21 100% 96.5% due to development on adjacent land 2. Flooding that submerged footbridge Three routes failed due to 1. Gating Order prohibiting use of Footpath across 2006 – 07 21 90% 88.5% M271 2. Flooding that submerged footbridge 3. Bridleway direction indicator signpost missing
BVPI No 178, which superseded the ‘old’ Audit Commission Indicator, covers aspects of a highway authority’s rights of way functions and is a measure of “ease of use” of its network, stating “The percentage of the total length of footpaths and other rights of way which were easy to use by members of the public.”
15 10. Appraisal Criteria • The distribution of open spaces and their strategic relevance to those routes
outlined above. 10.1 RIGHTS OF WAY AND THE ONGOING DEFINITIVE MAP REVIEW 11. User Information Since the publication of the Definitive Map & Statement in 1999, there have been Two of the crucial elements that needed to be numerous routes identified as potential rights addressed in the development of the RoWIP of way that, together with others that are were how the current network is used and legally recognised as rights of way by virtue what enhancements users would like to see. of documentation discovered since Consequently, a survey was conducted with publication, are currently being processed the objective being to consult residents and towards having them included on the visitors on the ways that they use rights of Definitive Map & Statement. way and to explore any concerns they had.
There have been other routes identified as To obtain this information, an article about potential rights of way which require further the Improvement Plan and associated survey research towards their possible inclusion on was published in a City Council publication, the Definitive Map. City View, which is delivered citywide. It included a successful invitation to all The assessed criteria for the public rights of interested persons to take part in the survey, way network being: to supplement the known consultees and contacts (listed at Appendix 5), such as local • Current management of those legally interest groups. defined rights of way that appear on the Definitive Map. A questionnaire was devised, with hard • Current management of those legally copies being distributed to all known defined rights of way that have yet to be contacts, those who responded to publicity included on the Definitive Map. about the Survey and generally made • Strategic relevance of those routes available at libraries and the Tourist currently within the Review. Information Office. An on-line version was • Strategic relevance of those routes also available on Southampton On-line, the identified within Open Spaces. City Council’s website, with the overall survey conducted in the eight week period between th st 10.2 PARKS & OPEN SPACES 10 July and 1 September 2006.
Overall, the response to the 250 The City Council appointed consultants to questionnaires sent out was that 65 produce an Open Spaces Audit for the whole completed paper copies and 26 on-line of the City. The report, covering many of the replies were received. The feedback proved aspects that had been identified as important enlightening and confirmatory, (a shorter issues to be addressed by this RoWIP, version of the final report is at Appendix 6). together with the desk-top assessment carried out as part of preparatory work Participants in the Survey represented a towards it, forms the basis of the conclusions good cross section of ages and abilities with outlined in section 12. 30% being members of groups or associations with an interest in Rights of The assessed criteria for parks and open Way. spaces being: 12. Evaluation and Conclusions • The quality of the open space relating
to such matters as accessibility, A range of issues were raised through both information, lighting and safety. our internal evaluation and public • The relationship of the open space with consultation process. The general theme for the nearest right(s) of way, public improvements was concerned with making it highway, connection to public transport easier to use the City’s public rights of way, and existing and potential cycle routes. either physically, or through the availability of information. 16
The User Survey (See Appendix 6) in The main problems that were identified as particular, provided us with useful information needing to be improved can be grouped about how the City’s rights of way and under three main headings of Maintenance, publicly maintained footpaths are used and Accessibility and Communication. perceived. 12.3 MAINTENANCE Although we can take on board this information, the survey also revealed that The top three problems as rated by the public there is a misunderstanding amongst were maintenance related. These were participants of exactly what public rights of overgrown vegetation (with 59 respondents way are and also the physical area of the City counting this as one of their top three Council’s jurisdiction. problems when using rights of way), poor
surfacing (41) and rubbish (34), (Appendix 6, 12.1 USERS AND ACTIVITIES Table 9).
The majority of survey respondents (87%) Vegetation used rights of way for recreational purposes. The issue of vegetation was raised in the This was followed by 50% to access shops, survey, and corresponds with our own 48% to get to a specific location, e.g. a library assessment. Our current practice of or school, and 46% to visit other people. This vegetation clearance is reactive, that is, confirms the network as not only a valuable clearance is arranged when we receive recreational resource within the City, but also notification of the nuisance. In the past, this important as providing opportunities for has been an effective system due to the sustainable travel. number of legally recorded routes. As the number and length of routes increases Walking was the activity that most survey through the Definitive Map review process, participants used the network for, with 91% we will need a proactive, structured system of saying that they had done this within the last vegetation clearance in place. twelve months. 47% of respondents used the network for cycling, followed by 25% of Surfacing respondents who used the network to access 41 respondents felt that surfacing was poor. the waterside. As a highway authority, we are under a statutory duty to maintain the surface so that Within this 25%, a high proportion of it is fit for ordinary traffic. As urban paths are respondents used urban paths around more heavily used than rural paths, we can riverside properties, closely followed by those identify where surface improvements can be using paths within waterside open spaces, made to benefit all users. such as Chessel Bay. Only a small number (9%) used the public hards and quays to Rubbish access the water. Rubbish was the third most mentioned problem. Although Southampton is in the top Additional users included runners who 25% of UK clean cities, rubbish is still a represented 19% of respondents, and horse problem. To combat this we can look at the riders who accounted for a further 18%. location of litter bins, although this issue is also affected by the responsibility of users. When asked what other activities, in addition to using the rights of way network, 12.4 ACCESSIBILITY participants had done during the last twelve months, 92% visited a park or common, and Extending the path network 73% visited one of Southampton’s open The network of legally defined public rights of spaces or greenways. way, potential public rights of way and
publicly maintained footpaths is fragmented 12.2 USER SATISFACTION throughout Southampton. Whilst the urban environment limits the physical opportunities Overall, 59% of survey respondents were at for creating new rights of way, it also creates least satisfied with public rights of way and opportunities through the development recreational land in Southampton, with only control process. The ongoing review of the 25% being dissatisfied (Appendix 6, Table 8). Definitive Map, as well as taking advantage 17 of the planning process, will enable us to Barriers connect and extend the existing network to Seven respondents identified barriers as a accommodate a range of users. problem to their use of public rights of way. Within an urban environment, staggered An extensive number of potential public rights barriers are used to deter antisocial activity, of way exist, that require further research such as motorbike use. As part of our towards inclusion on the Definitive Map. We assessment of the accessibility of the can assess how routes are prioritised and network to blind or partially sighted persons processed in terms of their strategic and others with mobility problems, we have importance within the wider network. identified the problem staggered barriers create for this group to access the network. Parks and open spaces We will need to create a balance between The Open Spaces Audit Report, (section 7.1), opening the network for more users, whilst made numerous conclusions based on controlling inappropriate use. research and surveys that looked at such issues as entrances, accessibility, standards Signing of cleanliness and lighting. The fourth most mentioned problem was that of poor signing of rights of way, with 31 The report recognised that areas of open respondents mentioning this (Appendix 6, space could be better interlinked, but Table 9). This was the second highest rated acknowledged that there is a failing issue needing to be improved. This infrastructure of footpaths in many of the corresponds with our own knowledge of open spaces. There is scope to address vandalism of fingerposts in particular. these aspects for open spaces in the Improving the specification of signs and the northwest, north and southwest of the City. information they contain can encourage the Less opportunities exist for connecting areas take up of people using the network. of open space within the central area, and Identifying examples of good practice by this issue will need to be addressed. other authorities could help us to resolve this issue. The network of publicly maintained footpaths that exist divorced from the main Links to the countryside carriageways will prove to be highly beneficial The pressure of ongoing development and towards accessing open space and the projected population growth will result in general enhancement of the rights of way increased pressure on areas of open space network. within the City, and the links to access the wider countryside. These issues are to be addressed through the production of the City Council’s Green This was emphasised by the user survey with Spaces Strategy, due in 2008. the majority of respondents visiting other parts of Hampshire for a leisurely day visit Access to the water and waterside (57% of respondents doing this at least once The user survey showed that accessing the a fortnight, (Appendix 6, Table 11)). The top waterside is important to the City’s residents. five locations were 68% visiting the coast, Within the diverse character of both the 68% visiting woodlands or the New Forest, Itchen and Test Rivers, there is scope for 35% visiting country pubs or markets, 34% developing waterfront access that would visiting National Trust property and 34% address water-based recreation, as well as visiting an Area of Outstanding Natural riverside walks. These would need to take Beauty. into account the various ecological designations of certain areas. There are a number of public rights of way outside of Southampton that presently The issue of navigation rights along particular terminate at the City boundary. Recording stretches of non-tidal water within the City these routes, and working with adjoining was raised through the public survey. authorities to develop other cross-boundary Presently there is only access between routes, would create pedestrian, cyclist and Gaiters Mill and Woodmill. We have therefore equestrian links out of the City. recognised the importance of the existing eight public hards located along the River Safety Itchen. 30 respondents to our User Survey listed accessing a right of way from a busy road as 18 one of the top three problems encountered 12.6 CONCLUSION when using Southampton’s rights of way (Appendix 6, Table 9). 6% of respondents Although the network is well-used at the rated more patrolling and security within their moment, for both recreational purposes and top three things to be improved, with 2% of as part of the City’s transport infrastructure, respondents wanting improved lighting there is room for improvement. The majority (Appendix 6, Table 10). Although these are of users walk the network, as it consists of fairly low percentages, it is hoped that mostly footpaths. Other users, such as improving user safety across the network will cyclists and equestrians, currently have encourage more users. Any physical limited opportunities for these activities within improvement, such as lighting, would have to the City. take into account any ecological issues. Many of the concerns raised by the public 12.5 COMMUNICATION were maintenance issues. We also received requests for physical improvements to the Three respondents to the User Survey listed network. raising awareness of and increasing publicity of rights of way as one of their top three How we supply information is also identified issues requiring improvement. A further three as an area requiring improvement. This respondents wanted improved includes both publicity of the network and communication and involvement between the communication with interest groups and Rights of Way Section and members of the users. community (Appendix 6, Table 10). The importance of the network in terms of Our own assessment and experience has providing sustainable connections to areas of identified a need to improve how we provide open space and the waterfront within the information, in particular on the location and City, as well as links to countryside areas status of public rights of way. Certainly, we outside of the City, was made apparent can make better use of the City Council’s during the assessment. web site. In addition to this, strengthening the links with local residents and groups is Based on this evaluation, we have identified something we would like to improve on. a series of actions to be carried out within a ten year period. These are set out in the following Section.
19 13. Action Plan
This Action Plan has been developed as a response to all of the issues identified. It is intended to be a realistic programme of improvements.
13.1 THE ACTION PLAN
BHS British Horse Society P & DC Planning & Development Control, HCAF Hampshire Countryside Access Forum Southampton City Council HCC Hampshire County Council, P & OS Parks & Open Spaces, (Rights of Way Section) Southampton City Council Hwys Highways, PEco Planning Ecologist, Southampton City Council Southampton City Council IT Information Technology Unit RoW Rights of Way Section, Southampton City Council Southampton City Council L & DS Legal & Democratic Services, SL Street Lighting Southampton City Council Users User groups NP Neighbourhood Partnerships
It is anticipated that costs on an annual basis are likely to be:
Ä Use of existing rights of way staff £ Less than £2 500
Ä Additional staff required to action ££ Between £2 500 and £5 000 (Temporary and/or Voluntary)
Topic: MAINTENANCE Issue ID Action Priority When Cost Involving
Overgrown M1 Investigate the use of Field H 2007 - 08 Ä+ RoW / vegetation Operatives to monitor and Ä Hwys assess seasonal vegetation growth and general route £ conditions.
M2 To carry out a feasibility study H 2007 - 09 Ä+ RoW / towards instigating a programme Ä NP / of general maintenance and P & OS cutback, (including height £ clearance for cyclists & horse riders), which is independent of current practices involving other divisions.
M3 To establish maintenance M 2008 - 10 Ä RoW / regimes around wildlife and P & OS / ecological considerations, e.g. ££ Hwys nesting birds.
Surface M4 Upgrade surfaces where M 2010 - 13 Ä RoW / appropriate to accommodate P & OS / less mobile users. ££ Hwys
Facilities M5 Where appropriate and L 2013 - 17 Ä RoW / conducive, install waste bins for P & OS / both litter and dog waste. £ Hwys
M6 Where appropriate and L 2013 - 17 Ä RoW / SL conducive, improve lighting / Hwys along routes with consideration ££ to wildlife, e.g. bats and roosts. 20 Topic: ACCESSIBILITY Issue ID Action Priority When Cost Involving
Barriers A1 Where appropriate and M 2010 - 17 Ä RoW / conducive, assess removal of P & OS / barriers, stiles or gates that £ Hwys obstruct free use by wheelchairs and similar, but with reservation that in some cases barriers assist in the reduction of anti- social and criminal behaviour.
Extending A2 During the continuous review of H 2007 - 17 Ä RoW the Network the Definitive Map, to place more strategic importance on ££ routes that link open space, schools, shops and other local amenities and that link to the wider countryside.
A3 Negotiate for the upgrade of L 2012 – 17 Ä RoW / suitable routes to Bridleway or BHS / Restricted Byway, where ££ Users practical, to extend the equestrian and cycle networks with consideration to ecological issues.
A4 Ensure that routes affected by H 2007 – 17 Ä RoW / proposed development are P & DC considered in the planning £ application and development control process.
A5 Prepare Guidance Notes for M 2008 – 11 Ä RoW / planners and developers that P & DC advise on routes and public £ rights of way affected by proposed developments.
A6 To assess and advise on the H 2007 – 17 Ä RoW / creation of new routes as part of P & DC the planning and development £ process.
A7 To advise on any proposals that M/H 2009 – 10 Ä RoW / develop waterside areas where P & DC it is possible to create links to £ other existing or planned routes.
A8 To liaise with the Planning M 2007 – 17 Ä RoW / Ecologist when creating, PEco / upgrading or working on routes £ P&DC when in ecologically sensitive areas.
A9 To strengthen links to water user M 2009 – 11 Ä RoW / groups and develop Hwys / improvements to access to £ Users water via known public hards, quays and slipways, and make better use of non-tidal waterways.
21 Topic: ACCESSIBILITY Issue ID Action Priority When Cost Involving
Extending A10 To upgrade and improve the H 2007 – 09 Ä RoW the Network quality of signposts to better combat vandalism. £ LTP2
A11 To carry out a sign and route H 2007 – 09 Ä RoW condition audit to better identify signing needs and £ improvements. LTP2
A12 To improve road safety at road M 2011 - 17 Ä RoW / crossings where rights of way Hwys / and link routes meet main ££ HCC carriageways. LTP2
A13 To work more closely with M 2007 - Ä RoW / adjoining Local Authorities on 17 HCC actions within this RoWIP that £ involve cross-boundary issues.
A14 To research internal and H 2007 - 17 Ä RoW external opportunities for funding projects to improve the £ rights of way network and other access issues.
Topic: COMMUNICATION Issue ID Action Priority When Cost Involving
Community C1 Strengthen links with local H 2007 - 09 Ä RoW / NP Involvement community groups to ensure / Users they are aware of / involved in £ the overall management of rights of way and access issues by closer involvement with Neighbourhood Partnerships.
Information C2 To prepare and present to the H 2007 - 10 Ä RoW / NP relevant Committee proposals / Users / for a comprehensive Policy £ HCAF / Document on Rights of Way, to L & DS involve the Local Access Forum, (Hampshire Countryside Access Forum) during preparation stage.
C3 To prepare and publish a new H 2007 – 09 Ä RoW reformatted version of the Definitive Map & Statement by £ late 2009.
C4 To prepare leaflets on rights of M 2008 – 10 Ä RoW / P & way, their meaning, status, OS / PEco where they are and the £ / P & DC Definitive Map.
22 Topic: COMMUNICATION Issue ID Action Priority When Cost Involving
Information C 5 To prepare leaflets that promote L 2011 - 13 Ä RoW / walks to and within open P & OS / spaces, outlining topics of £ PEco interest, such a flora and fauna, and which are available to different users in other languages or medium.
C 6 To prepare leaflets aimed at M 2009 - 11 Ä RoW promoting responsible use of the £ network, and the rights and responsibilities of users and landowners.
C7 To revise internal procedures for M 2011 – 13 Ä RoW responding to allegations of £ misleading signs on or along rights of way. LTP2
C8 To encourage use of the M 2011 – 13 Ä RoW network by including destination £ and distance and user information on signposts. LTP2
C 9 To produce a biannual H 2007 - 08 Ä RoW newsletter for all interested groups and individuals. £
C 1 0 To increase the amount of rights H 2007 - 09 Ä RoW / IT of way information available on the City Council’s web pages. £
C 1 1 To undertake a feasibility study M 2010 - 13 Ä RoW / IT into creating an interactive Definitive Map facility for £ Southampton.
13.2 SOURCES OF FUNDING £10,000 for people to take part in art, sport, heritage and community
activities, and projects that promote Various sources of funding have been education, the environment and health identified, although no direct approach has in the local community. been made regarding specific projects.
However, from the anticipated feedback to this RoWIP, together with known planned • Forestry Commission; projects by other Divisions of the City Council The Government Department or outside bodies, partnership working will be responsible for protecting, expanding sought that will include funding for and promoting sustainable improvements / enhancements to the rights management of woodland and of way network. increasing their value to society and the environment. Possible sources of funding and potential partnership bodies include: • Groundwork Trust; Groundwork supports communities in • Awards for All; working with partners to help improve Supported by the Arts Council England, the quality of people’s lives and the the Big Lottery Fund, the Heritage places where they live, work and play Lottery Fund and Sport England, awarding grants of between £300 and 23 • Local Transport Plan; • Sustrans; Central Government funding to local Sustrans provides creative and authorities to implement the practical solutions to transport, programmes identified within their LTP. environmental and health initiatives. In Southampton, Sustrans has been a • National Lottery; major contributor towards the extension Grants and awards to the arts, charities of the National Cycle Network and and voluntary groups, heritage, health, installation of cycle and walkways, in education, the environment and sports particular NCN2 and 23. to improve and assist in local community and national projects. 13.3 MONITORING PROGRESS
• Other Local Authorities (where cross The implementation of the action plan will be boundary projects are identified); prioritised based on a range of factors, such Identifying funding through one or more as; of the sources available, some included in this list. • the level of usage,
• the safety of users, • Section 106 Agreements; • the costs involved, Section 106 of the Town & Country • the contents of other policies and Planning Act 1990 allowing a local strategies and Planning Authority to enter into an agreement with a developer over • the benefits of implementation. related issues and which may include a financial commitment to a specific Implementation and progress of each Action project associated with the will be monitored internally and reviewed development. either on completion or as considered relevant during the life of the project.
• Sport England;
Sport England works to sustain and
increase participation in sport and
active recreation, investing in a range of
projects across the country. Within
Southampton, Sport England has
contributed to projects that improve
sports facilities.
24 14. Reference Material
Active Travel Plan 2006 – 2011, Southampton City Council City of Southampton Local Plan Review, adopted version March 2006 City of Southampton Local Transport Plan 2006 – 2016 City of Southampton Strategy, (formerly Community Strategy), Southampton City Council 2006 Corporate Improvement Plan 2006-07, Southampton City Council Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs: Rights of Way Improvement Plans; Department for Transport: Full Guidance on Local Transport Plans, 2nd Edition, 2004 Draft Open Spaces Strategy, January 2007 Hampshire County Council; Draft Countryside Access Plan for the Solent Initial Draft Open Space Strategy, Southampton City Council; November 2006 Institute of Public Rights of Way Management: Good Practice Guidance; Isle of Wight; Rights of Way Improvement Plan Local Countryside & Greenspace Guidance, Hampshire County Council, April 2007 Parks & Open Spaces in Southampton; Audit Report 2005 Rights of Way Improvement Plans Sense & Accessibility; Countryside Agency Publications, May 2000 Solent Countryside Access Plan February 2007, (produced toward the Rights of Way Improvement Plan for Hampshire County Council) Statutory Guidance to Local Authorities in England, November 2002 Test & Itchen Countryside Access Plan September 2007, (produced toward the Rights of Way Improvement Plan for Hampshire County Council) The Nature Conservation Strategy, Southampton City Council 1992 User Need & Expectation Survey; Southampton City Council July/September 2006
25 DEFINITIONS of PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY APPENDIX 1 (With Waymarker colours)
FOOTPATH
© A highway over which the public has the right to pass and repass on foot only.
This is the only right of way that does not permit cycling.
BRIDLEWAY
© A highway over which the public has the right to pass and repass on foot and leading or riding a horse or similar animal. Additionally, the public were given the right under the Countryside Act 1968 to ride bicycles along bridleways. Sometimes there are also rights to drive animals.
RESTRICTED BYWAY
© Created by the Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000, restricted byways are highways over which the public has the right to pass and repass on foot, horseback and cycle, and with horse-drawn but not motorised vehicles. They reclassified the former category of Roads used as Public Paths (RUPPs).
BYWAY OPEN TO ALL TRAFFIC (BOAT)
© A highway over which the public has a right on foot, leading or riding a horse or similar animal, with driven horses and all classes of vehicle. The distinction between a BOAT and a road is that a BOAT rarely has a sealed surface, and the main use by the public is that of foot or bridle rights
Η
26 DEFINITIONS of OPEN SPACE CLASSIFICATIONS APPENDIX 2
(In accordance with Planning Policy Guidance 17, July 2002)
Allotments, community gardens and urban farms – includes all forms of allotments with the primary purpose of providing opportunities for people to grow their own produce as part of the long-term promotion of sustainability, health and social inclusion. May include urban farms.
Amenity Greenspace – most commonly found in housing areas, and having the primary purpose of providing opportunities for informal activities close to home or work or the enhancement of residential or other areas. Very often limited in size and simple in function, although may contain limited play facilities in the form of equipment.
Cemeteries and churchyards – burial grounds encompassed within the walled boundary of a church or outside the confines of a church (in the case of cemeteries). Their primary purpose is for burial of the dead as well as quiet contemplation, and the promotion of wildlife conservation and biodiversity.
Civic spaces – open plazas or concourses near places of activity such as shopping centres, libraries, etc., and often containing soft landscaping, outdoor furniture such as seating and litter bins, and sometimes used for small- scale outdoor activities such as music or mime.
Formal parks and gardens – this type of green space includes urban parks and formal gardens that usually contain a range of functions, and provide opportunities for various formal and informal recreational and community events.
Green corridors – this green space type includes predominantly linear open spaces along riverbanks or between built development, with the primary purpose of improving biodiversity or acting as a “green lung” buffer between buildings. It may contain footpaths and cycleways, but is not to be confused with an area such as Riverside Park, which has a variety of outdoor recreational functions, and is thus in the “formal parks and gardens” section.
Natural and semi-natural urban green spaces – includes woodlands, urban forestry, scrub, grasslands (e.g. downlands, commons and meadows), wetlands, open and running water, nature reserves and wastelands with the primary purpose of wildlife conservation and biodiversity.
Outdoor sports facilities – this is a wide-ranging category including open space with natural or artificial surfaces used for sport and recreation. Examples include playing pitches, bowling greens and golf courses for the primary purpose of participation in outdoor sports.
Provision for children or teenagers – includes areas such as equipped play, ball courts, skateboard areas, adventure play and teenage shelters with the primary purpose of providing opportunities for play and social interaction involving children and young people.
Whole of the classification assessed towards the Rights of Way Improvement Plan
Part of the classification assessed towards the Rights of Way Improvement Plan
27 THIS PAGE WILL CONTAIN APPENDIX 3: A PLAN SHOWING THE RIGHTS OF WAY & POTENTIAL RIGHTS OF WAY Assessed towards the Rights of Way Improvement Plan
28 THIS PAGE WILL CONTAIN APPENDIX 4: A PLAN SHOWING THE OPEN SPACES within Southampton assessed towards the Rights of Way Improvement Plan
29 Participants sent User Need Survey Questionnaire/s APPENDIX 5
STATUTORY AND LOCAL CONSULTEES Hollyoak Court Tenants and Residents Byways and Bridleways Trust Association CTC – UK’s national cyclists organisation Howards Grove and Vaudrey Close Tenants and Residents Association Hyde Housing Association Lordswood Community Association Land Access and Recreation Association (LARA) Mansbridge Community Road Association Pathways Research Mansbridge Residents Association Southampton Action for Access Maybush Tenants and Residents Association Southampton Commons and Parks Protection Millbrook and District Community Association Society Moorlands Community Centre Association Southampton Cycling Campaign Newtown/Nicholstown Community Action British Horse Society Forum City of Southampton Society North West Bassett Residents Association Open Spaces Society Northam Tenants and Residents Association Ramblers Association Old Bassett Residents Association Hampshire Deaf Association Old Redbridge Residents Association Hampshire Advocacy User Group for Blind and Peartree Community Action Forum Partially Sighted Regents Park Community Association Southampton Society for the Blind Sholing Community Action Forum Sholing Residents Association COMMUNITY GROUPS Southampton East Independent Residents Albion Towers Tenants and Residents Association Association Swaythling Residents Association Bassett & Highfield Community Action Forum The Sholing Environment Group Bassett Grove Residents Association Thornhill Tenants and Residents Association Bishops Crescent Tenants and Residents Townhill Park Residents Association Association Townhill Park, Bitterne Park and Midanbury Bitterne & Harefield Community Action Forum Community Action Forum Bitterne Local History Society Underwood and Redhill Residents Association Bitterne manor Community Association Waterside Park Residents Broadlands Valley Conservation Group West Wood Community Park Association Community Consultative Council Weston Anchorage Residents Association Coxford Community Association Weston Shore Residents and Tenants Cumbrian Tenants and Residents Association Association (Independent) East Bassett Residents Association Weston Shore Residents and Tenants Association Friends of Shirley Valley Woolston and Weston Community Action Harefield Community Centre Forum Harefield Tenants and Residents Association Highfield Residents Association INDIVIDUALS Fifteen
30 Rights of Way Public Survey Results, July to September 2006 APPENDIX 6
OBJECTIVE
The objective was to consult with users and interested groups on the ways that they use rights of way and to explore any specific problems with them in order to help develop the Rights of Way Improvement Plan.
METHOD
A questionnaire was devised by the Market Research Officer, based on the needs of the Rights of Way Officer. The questionnaire was posted to a database of known interest groups, advertised on City web and in City View. An online version was made available on City Web. The fieldwork was during late summer 2006.
RESPONSE RATES
By the closing date there was a total of 91 responses to the survey, of which 26 were submitted on line.
RESULTS
Which of the following describe your interest in Rights of Way in Southampton?
Respondents could tick as many categories as applied to them, so the %’s add up to more than 100%. Table 1 Interest in Southampton % Southampton resident 91 Visitor to Southampton 1 Landowner within Southampton 17 Member of a local interest group 33 Member of any other organisation/ group 30 Local business 1
Which local interest groups/ organisations are you a member of?
Respondents who said they were a member of either a local interest group or other organisation or group were asked which. 21% did not reply but of those who did the largest groups represented were: Southampton Cycling Campaign and British Horse Society. There were 6 respondents from each of these groups. Other groups represented (but each by only 3 respondents or less were: Southampton Natural History Society, Lordshill Road Runners, The Ramblers, Southampton Commons and Parks Protection, East Bassett Residents Association, Residents Association – unspecified, ETRA or EBRA, North West Bassett Residents Association, CTC Cyclists Touring Club, National Trust, Church, University of Southampton, Friends of Southampton, Old Cemetery, Hawthorns Wildlife Association, City of Southampton Society, Scouts, Bitterne Grove Residents Associations, Regents Park Community Association and Redbridge Residents.
31 Please indicate how frequently you have used the Rights of Way in Southampton in the last 12 months
The frequency with which respondents claim to have used Rights of Way in Southampton in the last 12 months are shown in the table below: Table 2 Frequency % Almost every day 41 At least once a week 39 About once a fortnight 7 About once a month 8 6 to 11 times 3 1 to 5 times 3
Respondents are very heavy users of Rights of Way. This is to be expected as these people have made the effort and taken the time to complete the questionnaire so it is clearly a subject they are interested in. 41% use Rights of Way ‘Almost every day’, whereas a total of 80% use them at least once a week. Landowners are less likely to use Rights of Way as frequently as residents (66% of Landowners use Rights of Way once a week or more frequently, compared to 78% of all those classifying themselves as residents (there is overlap between the two).
71% of male respondents use ROW once a week or more, compared to 87% of females.
For which activities have you used Rights of Way in Southampton in the last 12 months? Table 3 Activity % Walking 91 Horseriding 18 Cycling 47 Accessing the waterside 25 Motorised sport 0 Running 19 Orienteering 1 Maintenance (landowners) 1 Other 9
Clearly many respondents use ROW for a number of different activities – the most popular being walking, with 91% saying this.
How far would you say you have travelled on Southampton Rights of Way over the last 12 months?
Respondents were asked this question for each activity which they participate in. The mean average is shown for each activity in the table below. Table 4 Activity Mean mileage in last 12 months Walking 173 Cycling 309 Horseriding 137 Running 505
Although runners represent a smaller group they appear to be individually covering more mileage on Southampton’s ROW than walkers, cyclists or horse riders.
32 The table below estimates a rough total mileage carried out per activity by each group: Table 5 Activity % participating x mean mileage Total mileage Walking .91 x 173 157 Cycling .47 x 309 145 Running .19 x 505 96 Horseriding .18 x 137 25
Among the sample it is the walkers and cyclists who as groups are covering the most mileage on ROW.
For which of these purposes do you use Rights of Way in Southampton? Table 6 Purpose % using ROW for this purpose For recreation 87 To go shopping 50 To get to specific location (e.g. Library, Place of worship, School, 48 Pub) To visit other people 46 To go to work 31 To get to a bus stop / train station 31
The most frequent purpose for using ROW is ‘For recreation’, with 87% of respondents using them for this purpose. This varied little by the different activities – recreation is the most frequent for all.
Which of the following, if any, have you done during the last 12 months? Table 7 Done during last 12 months % Visited a Park or common in Southampton 92 Visited and walked or rode around one of 73 Southampton's Open Spaces or Greenways A recreational walk or ride using the Rights 89 of Way in Southampton None of these 1
The vast majority had done all 3 of these things during the last 12 months. Although too small a sample to be statistically significant, it is worth noting that only 4 of the 10 respondents with a disability had visited and walked or rode around one of Southampton’s open spaces or greenways, compared to 76% of respondents without a disability.
How satisfied are you with the Rights of Way and areas of recreational land that you use in Southampton? Table 8 Satisfaction % Very satisfied 10 Quite satisfied 29 Satisfied 20 Neither satisfied nor 17 dissatisfied Dissatisfied 11 Rather dissatisfied 4 Very dissatisfied 10
59% are satisfied; whereas 25% are dissatisfied. Females are more satisfied than males (64% compared to 51% respectively)
33 What are the top 3 problems you encounter when using Southampton's Rights of Way? Table 9
Overgrown vegetation 59 Poor surface on the Right of Way 41 Rubbish 34 Poor signposting of Right of Way 31 Access to the Right of Way is on a busy road 30 Dog mess 29 Right of Way too narrow 21 Fly tipping 20 Parked or abandoned vehicles on or across 14 the Right of Way Broken gates, footbridges or stiles 11 Barriers that I think 7 should not be there Barrier on bridge could be higher 2 Level crossing across the Right of Way 1
By far the most mentioned problem with Southampton ROW was ‘Overgrown vegetation’. The survey was carried out during late summer, which may have contributed to this high level of mentions. The mentions of ‘Overgrown vegetation’ are even higher among landowners and members of groups, at 80% and 72% respectively. 81% of respondents who use ROW for horse riding say ‘Overgrown vegetation’ is a problem, compared to 59% of walkers. Respondents were given the opportunity to write in a description of the problem if it was not on the list.
Places where encountered specific problems
Respondents were given the opportunity to name specific places where they had encountered a problem.
Accessing the Waterside
Although only 25% claim ‘Accessing the waterside’ as an activity they use Southampton ROW for (see table 3), when given a list of different ways they might access the waterside the majority of respondents (69%) appeared to access it in some way. 42% use paths around riverside properties; 39% use paths within open spaces (e.g. Chessel Bay); 9% use public hards and quays.
34 Please list, in order of importance, THREE things that you consider need improving on Rights of Way in Southampton
The table below shows total mentions: Table 10 Things that need improving % Cut back vegetation/overgrown vegetation 24 More/ better signposting/ maps 23 Tidy up rubbish/ litter (Cleaner)/ Provide more rubbish bins 21 Nothing 17 Improved/ maintain surf aces – potholes etc./ uneven 13 More bridle paths/ improved facilities/ safer for horse riders/ open up Itchen. 13 Navigation/ link existing bridle paths Clearly marked cycle paths/ More cycle paths & lanes 12 Dog owners more responsible for dog/dog mess 12 Clear paths/ more checks/ inspections/maintenance 9 More patrolling/security/ maintain highway codes 6 Accessibility 6 Clear fly tipping 6 No cars parking 4 No access to motorbike, too many/4x4s 4 Residents more responsible for own gardens/ overhanging etc./ tidy up local area 3 More awareness/ publicity of ROW/ get schools involved 3 Cycle gaps in sleeping policeman 2 More shared footpaths/ cycle paths 2 Control of cyclists 2 Drivers giving way to pedestrians/ lower speed limits 20mph 2 Improved lighting 2 More ROWs 2 Listen to residents living by ROW/ local Forum 2 Public access to Riverside Park (along Itchen to Southern End of Vosper site) 1 Involve local community more 1 Maintain grass areas 1 Close "ROW's" that encourage vandalism 1 Pedestrian crossing to reach ROW 1 Enforce anti-cycling on some ROW 1 Re-open lower part Lovers Lane to cyclists 1 Make Thomas Lewis Way into cycle lane/ not wide enough dual carriageway 1 Wider gaps between post into/ out Common - improve access disabled/ children 1 trailers Council to react to calls 1 Give ROW local identity/ name 1 Seating 1 Need more Zebra/ Pedestrian crossings 1 Improve pedestrian awareness of other users e.g. cyclists 1 Take away barriers 1 Integrated public transport at ROW 1 Join up existing paths 1
Once more the issue of vegetation is high on the agenda – with 24% naming the cutting back of vegetation as one of their top 3 things for improvement. Signposting and rubbish follow close behind. 17% of the sample could not name anything that needed improvement! Although not large enough samples to be statistically significant there were some interesting indicative differences between those with a disability and those without. Those with a disability are even more likely to name vegetation and signposting as issues that need improving – but interestingly are less likely to say that surfaces need improving.
35 Please indicate how frequently you have taken a leisurely day-visit to other parts of Hampshire in the last 12 months? Table 11 Frequency % Almost every day 4 At least once a week 29 About once a fortnight 24 About once a month 19 6 to 11 times 11 1 to 5 times 9 Not at all 4
Among respondents there was a very high frequency of leisurely day visits to other parts of Hampshire, with 57% doing this at least once a fortnight.
What draws you to other parts of Hampshire for a leisurely day-visit ? (Tick top 3) Table 12 Draw % The coast 68 Woodlands/ Forest 68 Country pubs/markets 35 National trust 34 Areas of outstanding natural beauty 34 Hobbies e.g.. birdwatching/ horseriding/canoeing 26 National park 22 Tourist attractions 18 Nothing in particular just a “day out” 17 Nothing 6 Other 6 Walking/ Paths 6 Cycle routes esp. National Cycle Network 2 Historic Buildings/ Places 1
The major draws to other parts of Hampshire are the coast and woodlands. Men and women are equally drawn by the coast, but women are more likely to mention the woodlands (78% of them, compared to 58% of men).
Demographics
Exactly half the sample were male; half female. There was a lack of young people responding, with only 1% of the sample under 25 years old. However, other age groups were well represented, as follows: Table 13 Age % 25 to 34 13 35 to 44 13 45 to 54 22 55 to 64 24 65+ 26
11% of respondents feel they have a disability; 7% have a mobility disability and 6% a sensory disability (some having both).
36
THIS PAGE WILL CONTAIN APPENDIX 7: A PLAN SHOWING THE ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREAS within Southampton
37 How public rights of way come into being; an outline APPENDIX 8
A public right of way is a way over which all members of the public have a right of passage. They come into being one of three ways – express dedication, inference of dedication at common law, and statutory inference of dedication.
EXPRESS DEDICATION STATUTORY INFERENCE OF DEDICATION Express dedication is when a landowner This is where, under legislation, if a way has gives the public the right to use a way over been used for a minimum period of twenty his land, i.e. by dedicating it. The landowner years, it is deemed to have been dedicated a must be shown to have intended to dedicate highway, unless there is evidence of a the way as a public right of way, and it must contrary intention. Certain legislative criteria have been accepted by the public, i.e. the must be met. way must come into actual use. The dedication must be for all members of the The full twenty years user must be proved, public, and for all time. running back from the date of a challenge to someone using the way, such as a locked INFERENCE OF DEDICATION AT COMMON gate. This is termed a ‘bringing into LAW question’.
This is where it is assumed that in the past Use must be without interruption by the the landowner dedicated the way to the landowner’s action, such as actual and public, either expressly (the evidence of the physical stopping of the enjoyment of the dedication having been lost), or impliedly (by public’s use, e.g. by locking a gate. making no objection to use of the way by the
public). Use of the way must be as of right; that is
without force, without secrecy and without At common law, the question of dedication is permission. purely one of fact and public user is no more There must be enough use by the public ‘at than evidence, which has to be considered large’ to satisfy the requirement that the way in the light of all available evidence. Public has been actually enjoyed by the public. use for any period will not, therefore, raise
the inference of dedication where the Unlike common law, once use for the evidence in its totality shows that the public relevant period had been shown, the burden right of way status was not intended. of proof lies on the landowner to show there However, the greater the length of time that had been no intention to dedicate. can be proved the route has been used, the
stronger the inference of dedication. LACK OF INTENTION TO DEDICATE To show common law dedication, the If within the twenty-year period the claimant must prove that it can be inferred landowner (or tenant) can show that there from the landowner’s conduct that he had was a lack of intention to dedicate the route actually dedicated a route as a public right of to the public then this will over-ride the way. It is worth noting that only the presumption of dedication. It is only landowner can dedicate a public right of necessary to show the lack of intention to way, as in effect, they are giving something dedicate at some time during the twenty away. years.
Use of the way must be ‘as of right’; that is This lack of intention can be shown through without force, without secrecy and without erecting notices, the locking of gates, or permission. making a statutory deposition of maps and declarations. In proving a public right of way at common law, the burden of proof lies with those seeking to prove a way is public.
38 Consultee Received I.D. Comment Action Plan Reference Organisations & Authorities British Canoe Union 11 May 2007 1 Concerns with rights of navigation on River Itchen, specifically between Gaiters Mill Noted Sects 8, 12 & 13; A7 and Woodmill. Test Valley Borough 20 June 2007 2 Promote access to wider countryside through Nursling, Rownhams, North Baddesley, Noted Sect 13; A3, A4 Council Valley Park and Chilworth which would also assist in residents of Test Valley accessing Southampton by means of sustainable travel. 3 Utilising existing rights of way to create cycle route from Chilworth to Southampton via Noted Sect 13; A2, A3, A4 Chilworth Common and Lordswood. 4 Make clear what impact any proposals would have on ecological sensitive areas as RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A8 illustrated at Appendix 7. 5 Clearer mapping within the RoWIP. RoWIP Amended Page 2 & App 3, 4 & 7 6 Welcomes action on interactive map on the website. Noted Sect 13; C8 Calshot Activities 06 July 2007 7 Concerns regarding water access to tidal and non-tidal areas; use of public hards and Noted Sects 8, 12 & 13; A7 Centre the River Itchen between Gaiters Mill and Woodmill respectively. Hampshire 19 July 2007 8 To introduce set objectives / targets against which progress can be monitored. Noted Sect 13.3 Countryside Access 9 To extend the scope of the RoWIP to outside the urban fringe. RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A3, A4 Forum Eastleigh Borough 24 July 2007 10 Eight site-specific examples where network could be enhanced / improved, including; Noted Sect 13; A3, A4 Council Links between Portsmouth Road and Botley Road, Links between Netley Common and Kanes Hill, Bacon Hill Copse, between Cheriton Avenue and Leckford Close. Natural England 30 July 2007 11 Illustrate issues from preliminary consultation that led to actions pertaining to Within App 6 increased enjoyment and linkage of rights of way network. 12 More explanation as to relationship with Hampshire Countryside Access Forum, its RoWIP Amended Sect 2.2 input to Improvement Plan. And that Southampton has been liaising with HCAF and Hampshire County Council. 13 Illustrate encouragement and improving sustainable links between the city and the RoWIP Amended Sect 8.6 wider countryside. 14 More detail relating to policy and action on access to water. RoWIP Amended Sects 8, 12 & 13; A7 15 Sustainable links between green spaces and provision of green space near / in RoWIP Amended Sect 4.6 & 12.6 residential areas to relieve pressure on existing open spaces. 16 Fragmentation of the network not raised but which should be addressed e.g. linkages RoWIP Amended Sect 8 across the network to make it more coherent. 17 Opportunity for the RoWIP to address how new housing could be integrated into the RoWIP Amended Sect 4.5 & 12.6 network ensuring good links for new communities to work and recreational facilities. 18 Address the needs of visitors, which would differ from residents, by reference to any RoWIP Amended Sect 5 Tourism Strategies in place. 19 Small scale improvements that can be implemented RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A11, C6 20 Greater details of possible funding opportunities need to be addressed. Noted Sect 13.2
A
P P E
N D I 39 X
9
Consultee Received I.D. Comment Action Hampshire County 3 September 21 Specify importance of collaborative working with adjoining authorities towards RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A15 Council Countryside 2007 managing migration from urban to rural areas by better developing and promoting Service walking & cycling links in and out of the city. 22 Collaborative approach in prioritising surface and accessibility improvements on routes RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A15 that link across the city boundary to ensure seamless, consistent standards that encompass other actions such as road safety at road crossings. 23 Closer working between authorities to develop routes linking the city to other local RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A15 amenities and the countryside which would encompass the extending the network for horse riding, cycling and accessing the waterfront. 24 Information and promotional actions to be complementary between literature RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A15 developed by authorities and on respective websites The Ramblers 31 July 2007 25 Action Plan needs to reflect statement within RoWIP that there is to a revised version RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A12 Association, of Definitive Map & Statement 2009. (Southampton Group) 26 Greater emphasis and priority should be given to Action C8 in creating an interactive Noted and work in Sect 13; C7, C8 map on the website. progress 27 Creation and promotion of varied walks for different groups, (e.g. fit, agile, less agile, Noted Sect 13; A1, A2, A3, C1, family). C4 28 More information relating to long distance recreational walks, the Itchen and Solent RoWIP Amended Sect 7 Ways that cross Southampton. Southampton City Council, Internal Planning Policy & 31 May 2007 29 Concerns relating to defining rights of way and any proposed enhancements to routes RoWIP Amended Sect 8.3 Sustainability within open spaces. Local Councillor 12 June 2007 30 To consider personal safety, issues of anti-social and criminal behaviour Noted Sect 13; M5, A1, C5 Parks & Open Spaces 30 July 2007 31 Concerns regarding the defining of routes within areas of open space as rights of way. RoWIP Amended Sect 8.3 Planning Ecology 31 July 2007 32 Consideration is given to proximity of potential improvements to the River Itchen and RoWIP Amended Sects 12.3 & 13; A8 the Solent Maritime Special Areas of Conservation. 33 Ensure compliance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 which protects fauna from RoWIP Amended Sect 13; M3 disturbance, when considering maintenance and vegetation clearance. 34 Consider implication of installing lighting; a disturbance under the Conservation RoWIP Amended Sect 13; M6 (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994, towards bats and bat roosts. 35 Consider implications of removal of barriers that may allow illicit which may impact on RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A8 the sensitivity of flora and fauna. 36 General concerns regarding the impact the biodiversity of any areas where RoWIP Amended Sect 13; A4, A8 improvement and enhancement is proposed. Individuals 15 May 2007 37 Four site-specific examples where network could be enhanced / improved. Noted Sect 13; A3, A4 18 May 2007 38 One site-specific example where network could be enhanced / improved. Noted Sect 13; A3, A4 22 May 2007 39 Site-specific maintenance issues. Noted Sect 13; M1, M2 12 June 2007 40 Waterside access and use of waterways. Noted Sects 8, 12 & 13; A7 18 July 2007 41 Better demarcation required on cycle / pedestrian routes to distinguish use. Noted Sect 8.5 42 Site-specific example of cycle route with improvement required to lighting. Noted Sect 13; A3, A4 1 August 2007 43 No commitment within RoWIP to identity more potential rights of way. Noted Sect 13; A3, A4 44 No mention of the Sustrans / National Cycle Network. RoWIP Amended Sect 7.4 45 Further access to and along waterside. Noted Sects 8, 12 & 13; A7
40