Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton

Agenda No 6 AGENDA MANAGEMENT SHEET

Name of Committee Warwick Area Committee

Date of Committee 18 January 2011

Report Title Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton

Summary Recommending that the Public Path Diversion Order for Public Bridleway W205 in the parish of Baddesley Clinton, which attracted four objections, be submitted to the Secretary of State for confirmation.

For further information Chris Williams please contact Rights of Way Officer (Legal Orders) Tel. 01926 476942 chriswilliams@warwickshire.gov.uk

Would the recommended No decision be contrary to the Budget and Policy Framework?

Background Papers Correspondence from; Baddesley Clinton Parish Council Forestry Commission The Ramblers Kenilworth Footpath Preservation Group Mr H S Williams Mr R Steele Mr A Kind

CONSULTATION ALREADY UNDERTAKEN:- Details to be specified

Other Committees ......

Local Member(s) X Councillor J Compton (With brief comments, if appropriate)

Other Elected Members ......

Cabinet Member ...... (Reports to The Cabinet, to be cleared with appropriate Cabinet Member)

Chief Executive ......

Legal X L Arben – comments incorporated.

AreaW/0111/ww2 1 of 11 Finance ......

Other Chief Officers ......

District Councils X Warwick District Council

Health Authority ......

Police ......

Other Bodies/Individuals X Baddesley Clinton Parish Council Forestry Commission The Ramblers Kenilworth Footpath Preservation Group Open Spaces Society British Horse Society Byways and Bridleways Trust Auto Cycle Union Cyclists Touring Club Statutory Undertakers (various)

FINAL DECISION YES (If ‘No’ complete Suggested Next Steps)

SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS : Details to be specified

Further consideration by ...... this Committee

To Council ......

To Cabinet ......

To an O & S Committee ......

To an Area Committee ......

Further Consultation ......

AreaW/0111/ww2 2 of 11

Agenda No 6

Warwick Area Committee – 18 January 2011

Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton

Report of the Strategic Director for Environment and Economy

Recommendation

That the Warwickshire County Council (Part of Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton) Public Path Diversion Order 2010 be forwarded to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for confirmation.

1. Location

1.1 The parish of Baddesley Clinton lies approximately 6 miles (10km) northwest of Warwick, as shown on the location plan attached as Appendix A.

1.2 Public Bridleway W205 runs between Hay Wood Lane and Wood Corner Lane, as shown by the plan attached as Appendix B. The majority of the bridleway lies within Hay Wood itself but at its western end it emerges from the wood and runs on a surfaced track for approximately 100 metres before it joins Hay Wood Lane.

2. Background

2.1 In 2008 the County Council received an application to divert the western end of the bridleway, as shown by the plan attached as Appendix C.

2.2 From Point A on Hay Wood Lane the definitive route of the bridleway passes through a field gate, then runs along approximately 100 metres of a wide, surfaced track before passing through a further field gate at the boundary of Hay Wood. Point B is approximately 9 metres further into the wood.

2.3 From Point C on Hay Wood Lane the proposed route passes a bollard preventing vehicles accessing the route, and then runs along a 5 metre wide path for approximately 100 metres. It then passes through a field gate at the boundary of Hay Wood, Point D, and follows a beaten path making two turns to meet the definitive route at Point B.

2.4 The applicant states that there have been multiple incidents of anti-social and criminal behaviour on the bridleway, in close proximity to the residence. The Police have responded to many of these incidents and have made arrests. The

AreaW/0111/ww2 3 of 11 applicant states that diverting the bridleway would have a substantial beneficial effect on the lives of their family.

2.5 Temporary Closure of Public Bridleway W205

2.6 Between 26 May 2008 and 31 January 2010 the section of bridleway proposed for diversion was temporarily closed under a temporary traffic regulation order (TTRO) made by the County Council and extended by the Secretary of State. The TTRO was made because works were being carried out on or near the line of the bridleway. The redevelopment of Old Keepers Lodge required the demolition of the previous residence, removal of the demolition material and the construction of a new residence at the same location. The track leading from Hay Wood Lane carrying the bridleway was the only vehicular access to Old Keepers Lodge.

2.7 The applicant made the proposed route available to the public throughout the duration of the temporary closure. This route is still available to the public.

3. Consultations made Prior to Making the Diversion Order

3.1 A consultation into the proposed diversion was conducted with the local County Councillor (Councillor Jose Compton), Warwick District Council, Baddesley Clinton Parish Council, the Ramblers (formerly the Ramblers Association), the Kenilworth Footpath Preservation Group, the Open Spaces Society, Byways and Bridleways Trust, The British Horse Society, the Auto Cycle Union, The Cyclists Touring Club, and the statutory undertakers.

3.2 Baddesley Clinton Parish Council replied that they had no objection to the proposal provided that the proposed route would be surfaced to the same standard as the definitive route and that this work was overseen by the County Council.

3.3 The Ramblers indicated that they would object to the proposal as they considered that the definitive route does not present a safety or security problem to the house owners, and that the two right angles turns on the proposed route were not acceptable as a matter of principle. The Council replied to suggest that the proposed route follows a well-beaten path in the wood but would also be fully waymarked if it became the definitive route, and that the proposed route will be better connected to the remaining path network as it would eliminate any need for road walking or riding to reach the nearest other path. The Ramblers replied indicating that they did not consider that the advantages of the proposal outweighed the disadvantages of the definitive route.

3.4 The Kenilworth Footpath Preservation Group had no objection to the proposal.

3.5 The statutory undertakers had no objection to the proposal.

3.6 No other replies were received.

AreaW/0111/ww2 4 of 11

4. Making the Diversion Order

4.1 A Public Path Diversion Order was made on 28 July 2010. Site notices of the making of the Order were erected on 28 July 2010, copies of the notice of the making of the Order were sent to the statutory list of bodies on 28 July 2010, and notice of the making of the Order was advertised in the Leamington Courier on 30 July 2010. A copy of the Order is attached as Appendix D.

4.2 The Order received four objections within the statutory period.

5. Objections to the Order and Responses

5.1 Objection 1 - Mr H S Williams ‘I wish to object to the proposed diversion on the ground that in winter and after any period of heavy rain the new route is ankle deep in mud and is unpleasant to use. I would not object if the new route were to be provided with a stone surface similar to the section at the entrance to Hay Wood’.

5.2 Response. It is acknowledged that the proposed route, which is already available to the public albeit unsurfaced, is subject to waterlogging and becomes very muddy in bad weather. However, if the diversion order is confirmed and the proposed route becomes the legally-defined route then the applicant has agreed to surface it to the same width and standard as the current definitive route. This work is completed to the satisfaction of the County Council.

5.3 Mr H S Williams has subsequently confirmed that he withdraws his objection subject to the works mentioned being completed.

5.4 Objection 2 - Mr Richard Steele. ‘There is historical and amenity value to the original position of paths and they should not be relocated on the whim of property developers or anyone else unless there is a very good reason’.

5.5 Response. The Council considers proposals to alter public rights of way against the tests of the relevant legislation. A letter explaining the tests and how this proposal meets those tests, as explained in paragraphs 6.1 – 6.30, was sent to Mr Steele but no reply has been received.

5.6 In the absence of a reply it is assumed that Mr Steele is sustaining his objection.

5.7 Objection 3 - Mr Alan Kind. ‘The Order contains a ‘Part 4: Description of works required to bring the site of the new path or way into a fit condition for use by the public’ [but] a section 119 diversion order has no Part 4’.

5.8 Response. A similar objection from Mr. Kind to another diversion order (Part of Public Bridleway SD348 Tanworth in Arden, Public Path Diversion Order 2010), also made by the County Council, was received at approximately the same time. Mr Kind objected to the SD348 diversion order because ‘the form of the order is not substantially the same as that set out in regulations’, that is, there is no Part 4. The Council replied that despite there being no Part 4 in the regulations it was believed that the inclusion in the Order of the works required to be

AreaW/0111/ww2 5 of 11 completed before the path would be deemed acceptable would provide the user groups and the public with a clear idea of the physical condition that the proposed path would have.

5.9 However, Mr Kind declined to withdraw his objection to the Diversion Order for Public Bridleway SD348 Tanworth in Arden and it is therefore considered that he would also sustain his objection to the diversion Order for Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton, the subject of this report.

5.10 Subsequently, the Council has considered the inclusion of the description of works in diversion Orders. It has concluded that such descriptions are not strictly necessary since a new path provided by a diversion Order can only be legally created upon separate certification by the Council that the works have been completed to the Council’s satisfaction. Therefore, the Council will request that the Secretary of State should modify the Order to remove Part 4 of the Schedule, and replace the wording in the paragraph 1 of the Order ‘…shall be stopped up upon the issue by the authority of written certification that all of the work described in Part 4 of the Schedule has been satisfactorily completed’ with the wording ‘…shall be stopped up upon the issue by the authority of written certification that all works to implement the Order have been satisfactorily completed.’

5.11 Mr Kind has been made aware of this proposed modification and has subsequently confirmed that he is willing to withdraw his objection if the Order is forwarded to the Secretary of State for confirmation with the modification outlined in paragraph 5.10.

5.12 Objection 4 - The Ramblers. The Ramblers objected on several grounds.

(i) The applicants interests of privacy and security do not justify the diversion. The new buildings have been specifically designed for the plot of land. (ii) The existing route is direct and obvious and been in existence for centuries. The proposed route would seriously detract from the public enjoyment of the route. (iii) The need to turn through two right angles in quick succession makes the route less convenient, this has already caused walkers some difficulties.

5.13 The Ramblers had by this stage submitted three letters in opposition to the proposal and it was considered that further attempts to seek the withdrawal of their objection would be unsuccessful. However, an assessment of the points raised by The Ramblers, and the Council’s responses, are given below in paragraphs 6.1 – 6.30.

5.14 Of the four objections, Mr Williams has agreed to withdraw his knowing now that the proposed route will be surfaced to prevent the bridleway becoming waterlogged and too boggy to use, and Mr Kind has agreed to withdraw his objection if the Order is forwarded to the Secretary of State with a request for modification. Both of these conditions are agreeable to the Council. This leaves two objections outstanding: Mr Steele has made no further comment following

AreaW/0111/ww2 6 of 11 the Council’s reply to him so it has been assumed that his objection is sustained, and The Ramblers have sustained their objection.

6. Observations

6.1 Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 details a number of tests that have to be met before a Public Path Diversion Order can be made or confirmed by the County Council or the Secretary of State. The tests and the County Council’s assessment of the proposal against these tests are given as follows.

6.2 Legislative Test: In the interests of the owner of the land crossed by the bridleway, or of the public, it is expedient that the bridleway should be diverted.

6.3 The diversion is sought in the interests of the landowner. The track between Hay Wood Lane and Hay Wood, on which the bridleway runs, is owned by the applicant. This track has been the subject of numerous incidents of criminal activity, anti-social behaviour, and lewd acts over a number of years as recorded by the applicant. A memorandum from the applicant detailing the occasions when these activities have compromised their family’s safety, security, and privacy is attached as Appendix E. The applicant considers that the activities recorded in Appendix E, particularly the activities involving vehicles, have arisen because the track is in a relatively isolated location, and likely to be partly the result of the displacement of similar activity following the closure of a car park/picnic site within Hay Wood approximately 500 metres south of the applicants property.

6.4 The Ramblers have suggested that the diversion would not be in the interest of the landowner. They suggest that the new house and garage have been specifically designed for the plot. However, even though the bridleway is separated from the residence and its garden by a hedge and gates, the track on which the bridleway runs is owned by the applicant and is the sole means of access to the residence. As noted, the track is subject to behaviour that is, at best, distasteful but is also abusive and threatening.

6.5 The diverted route will still cross land owned by the applicant but unlike the current track it will not be used as a vehicular access and will exclude vehicles by means of a bollard off Hay Wood Lane. The diversion will therefore prevent the kinds of activities that have been car-based, such as the joy-riding and lewd behaviour, as indicated in the applicants memorandum.

6.6 It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the diversion is in the interests of the owner of the land crossed by the bridleway.

6.7 Legislative Test: The new termination of the bridleway should be substantially as convenient to the public.

6.8 As with the existing termination, the new termination will meet Hay Wood Lane at a point which has good views in both directions of traffic using the lane. In addition, the new termination has adequate manoeuvring space for horses, in particular, at the roadside, and if the diversion order is confirmed by the

AreaW/0111/ww2 7 of 11 Secretary of State then the termination of the bridleway (and that section of the proposed route between Points C and D) will be suitably surfaced in order to eliminate the potential for the termination of the bridleway to become waterlogged.

6.9 The new termination has an advantage over the existing termination in that it will provide a more convenient route for users travelling between Public Bridleway W205 and the next nearest public right of way, Public Bridleway W218. Appendix B shows how the proposed route of W205 will terminate on Hay Wood Lane opposite the termination of W218 whereas the existing termination is approximately 35 metres north on Hay Wood Lane.

6.10 It is acknowledged that this is a small advantage in favour of the diversion order being confirmed since the lane does not carry a heavy volume of traffic and the distance of road-walking required between the existing termination and the termination of W218 is small but, nevertheless, it demonstrates that the termination test is met.

6.11 Legislative Test: The bridleway should not be substantially less convenient to the public in consequence of the diversion.

6.12 As a consequence of the diversion the bridleway would become longer by approximately 46 metres. The section of the definitive route to be diverted is 109 metres whereas the proposed route will be 155 metres. However, the additional distance does not represent a substantial inconvenience to the public, and it has not been commented upon at any point in the pre-order consultation exercise and does not form part of any of the objections.

6.13 The proposed bridleway will not be substantially less convenient as a consequence of either the number or type of gates, or as a consequence of the surface across which it will run. Both the definitive route and the proposed route have a field gate of similar designs where they meet Hay Wood, and the section of proposed route between Hay Wood Lane and Hay Wood will be surfaced to the same standard as the section of definitive route between Hay Wood Lane and Hay Wood, to the satisfaction of the Council (the proposed route is only partly surfaced near the field gate at present but work to surface this section will be carried out if the diversion Order is confirmed by the Secretary of State).

6.14 The Ramblers claim that the two right angle turns of the proposed route make the route less convenient and that this has caused walkers some difficulties. However, it should be noted that walkers have been using the proposed route as an alternative route since the definitive route was closed to the public by means of the Temporary Traffic Regulation Order, and they continue to do so even though the definitive route is open and available. The difficulties caused to walkers amount to a lack of confidence in the direction required to travel between the edge of the wood (Point D) and the definitive route (Point B) since there were no signs or waymarks to follow between those two points – a distance of approximately 45 metres – while this was the alternative route to the temporarily closed section. However, the route of the proposed path follows a wide beaten path. Appendix F shows two photographs taken of the proposed route within Hay Wood, the first taken in Spring 2009 and the second taken in

AreaW/0111/ww2 8 of 11 Autumn 2010. Both were taken at or a point close to Point B, where the proposed route and the definitive route meet, and look back to Point D thereby showing that section of the proposed route within the wood. In both photographs it is easy to distinguish the beaten path on which the proposed route will run.

6.15 To further ensure that walkers and riders will be able to follow the correct path, if the diversion order is confirmed, the County Council intends to install two yellow- topped waymark posts. The first post will be located at Point B to indicate the new route departing from the diverted section and the second will be located at the other turn, close to Point D, to indicate the new route leaving the wood and passing down the wide path towards Hay Wood Lane. As can be seen from the photographs, the visibility within the wood between these two points is not hindered by vegetation so that a walker or rider standing at one post will be able to see the other post clearly.

6.16 With regard to the convenience of the right-angle turns, it is considered highly unlikely that a walker or rider would find the open nature of the turns an inconvenience to their journey. The Council would take a different view if the proposal included ‘blind’ turns where high fencing or hedging obscures the view of the path around either of the corners. The Council does appreciate that the Ramblers have good reason for wishing to avoid such situations but in this instance there does not appear to be a reason to believe that a user would find the proposed route intimidating.

6.17 It is also acknowledged that the remainder of the bridleway through Hay Wood is itself not heavily waymarked and there are multiple other non-definitive paths through and around the edge of the wood which could cause confusion if the single public right of way has inadequate waymarking to follow.

6.18 After consideration it has been concluded that the proposed bridleway will not be substantially less convenient to the public in consequence of the diversion.

6.19 Legislative Test: The effect the diversion would have on public enjoyment of the bridleway as a whole.

6.20 The diversion will not have a significant effect upon public enjoyment of the bridleway as a whole.

6.21 Public enjoyment would not be adversely affected by any additional distance added to the path as a result of the diversion. In total Public Bridleway W205 is 1315 metres long; the diversion would technically add 46 metres to this length though as suggested in paragraph 6.10 (the likely use of the network by the public travelling between Public Bridleways W218 and W205) it is probable that only 15 metres would be added to a journey using both bridleways. Nevertheless, neither of these small, additional distances would adversely affect public enjoyment.

6.22 The views from the definitive bridleway and the proposed bridleway are substantially similar. There are views of the surrounding hedged farmland and

AreaW/0111/ww2 9 of 11 of the edge of Hay Wood from both routes. This is not unsurprising since the two routes run parallel to each other a mere 30 metres apart.

6.23 Two objectors referred to the question of public enjoyment. Mr Steele suggested that there was historic and amenity value to the original position of paths, and The Ramblers suggested that the proposed route would seriously detract from the public enjoyment of the route.

6.24 The character of the section of public bridleway proposed for diversion is pleasant but there are no special physical or ‘historical’ features of interest. The path runs along a wide stone-surface track, has a maintained ‘field’ hedge on its northern side (the left-hand side when approaching the Hay Wood from Hay Wood Lane), and a post and wire livestock fence on its southern side. The only notable features of this section of bridleway appear to be a few mature trees spaced along the hedge.

6.25 The path does not exhibit any physical characteristics that would suggest it has any intrinsic historical value. There is no evidence, for example, that the bridleway runs in a ‘holloway’, which would indicate continuous use over a period of centuries, or that it was an old, enclosed lane. The bridleway is visibly surfaced up to the boundary with Hay Wood, though the surfacing is modern, and does not continue into the wood, which might have given a user a feeling that the route was historical.

6.26 The proposed route is also wide (5m between Points C and D) and because it too is bounded by livestock fencing it too has an open character. It has already been established that if the diversion order is confirmed by the Secretary of State the proposed route would be surfaced to the same standard as the definitive route, including using very similar materials (crushed stone), and therefore there will be no loss of public enjoyment with regard to the surface of the diverted path. This will overcome the known problem of the proposed route becoming very boggy and difficult to use with ease during the winter months.

6.27 It is therefore considered that the diversion will not have any significant effect upon the public’s enjoyment of the bridleway as a whole.

6.28 Legislative Test: The effect the coming into operation of the order would have as respects other land served by the existing bridleway, and the effect any new bridleway created by the diversion order would have as respects the land over which the bridleway is created and any land held with it.

6.29 There are two landowners affected by the proposal. The applicant, who will be the landowner most affected by the diversion, is aware of the effect that the diversion would have on their land. The second landowner affected (and signatories to the application for the diversion) is the Forestry Commission. The Forestry Commission is also aware of the effect that the diversion will have on its land and have confirmed that it does not oppose the proposal. There are no known adverse effects to either landowner.

AreaW/0111/ww2 10 of 11

7. Environmental Implications

7.1 There are no known environmental implications.

8. Financial Implications

8.1 There are no financial implications. The applicant has agreed to reimburse all of the Council’s costs in processing the application, as normal, and will fund the improvement of the surface of the proposed route between Points C and D, as already noted, as agreed with the parish council. The maintenance of the gate, and the trimming back of any tree growth to keep the path clear are the responsibility of the respective landowners, again as normal.

9. Forwarding the Order to the Secretary of State

9.1 If the Warwick Area Committee resolves to forward the Order and objections to the Secretary of State it is likely that the Planning Inspector appointed to oversee the matter will use the Written Representations procedure to determine the outcome.

9.2 This report will form the basis of the Council’s written representation though a small amount of additional correspondence between the Planning Inspectorate, the Council, and the objectors should be anticipated.

PAUL GALLAND Strategic Director for Environment and Economy Shire Hall Warwick

22 December 2010

AreaW/0111/ww2 11 of 11 420000 Appendix A Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton Warwick Area Committee Meeting 18/01/11 270000 270000

420000

Location Plan Scale 1:25,000 Proposed Diversion Public Bridleway W205 0 250 500 1,000 ± COUNTRYSIDE ACCESS TEAM Parish of Baddesley Clinton Metres Based on the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. (C) Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Warwickshire County Council, 100019520, 2009.

This copy has been made by or with the authority of Warwickshire County Council pursuant to section 47 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (the Act). Unless the Act provides a relevant exception to copyright, the copy must not be copied without the prior written permission of the copyright owner” 420000 Appendix B Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton Warwick Area Committee Meeting 18/01/11

Section to be diverted

Public Bridleway W218

Public Bridleway W205

Proposed diversion

420000

Location of Public Bridleway W205 Scale 1:10,000 and other public highways 0 250 500 Parish of Baddesley Clinton COUNTRYSIDE ACCESS TEAM ± Metres Based on the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. (C) Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Warwickshire County Council, 100019520, 2009.

271400 Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton Warwick Area Committee Meeting 18/01/11 .000000

A Hay Wood Lane 271300 Size and position of new buildings shown Old Keepers approximately Lodge

W205 B W218

C W205

Hay Wood .000000

D 271200

Key

Definitive line shown as A - B 109m

Proposed line shown as C - D - B 155m

Unaffected sections shown as

Grid Reference at Point A 420469 271273

420500.000000 420600.000000

Plan no. P2008/011E/1 Scale1:1,250 Proposed Diversion Public Bridleway W205 Metres ± 0 5 10 20 30 40 COUNTRYSIDE ACCESS TEAM Parish of Baddesley Clinton

Based on the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. (C) Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Warwickshire County Council, 100019520, 2009. This copy has been made by or with the authority of Warwickshire County Council pursuant to section 47 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (the Act). Unless the Act provides a relevant exception to copyright, the copy must not be copied without the prior written permission of the copyright owner”

Appendix E Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton Warwick Area Committee Meeting 18/01/11

Memorandum submitted by the applicant to the diversion (04/11/10)

Good morning Chris

Further to our conversation yesterday I detail below some of the actual events that have occurred over the past 7 years.

Firstly I should point out that we have absolutely no problem with the odd rambler who strays off any path onto our land we’d offer them a cup of tea and help them on their way.

It is the more sinister people who we are worried about and fear.

I should make you aware that some time ago the car park to Hay Wood was closed because it had become a dogging site and was being advertised as such on the web according to the police. The church has also closed off entry to its premises and its bridlepath from traffic at night for the same reasons.

This leaves our road as the only one in the area where people have open access and here as previously stated are some of the events resulting from this problem.

3 separate occasions of cars parked within which lewd acts were taking place they had entered from Hay Wood Lane.

4 occasions of youths on scrambling bikes being ridden up and down the bridleway day and night at high speeds and using threatening and abusive behaviour when approached. These offenders approached from the woods onto the bridlepath and also from Hay Wood Lane down the bridlepath into the woods.

1 occasion of youths entering from the bridlepath at night and when spotted climbed trees in order to hide from the police.

1 occasion of car joyriding down the bridlepath into the woods at night where the car was later burned out.

1 occasion of 2 youths driving their car down the bridlepath forcing entry to my wife’s car from which they stole her computer.

1 occasion of youths who had been taking drugs breaking into the outhouse after they had kicked in the gate on the bridlepath on this occasion the police arrested them.

1 occasion of aggressive and threatening behaviour from youths who had been drinking and were stood outside the house urinating on the pathway.

The police have attended our property on more than a dozen occasions during the seven years of our occupancy. My wife and myself have been threatened and had to endure insulting behaviour. I have returned home at night to find a car parked with two partially undressed people in it and had the embarrassment of having my wife and 4 year old daughter present. My home is isolated. I am often away. Yes we have a sophisticated alarm system but even with police response at their fastest they can’t get to us before 15/20 mins tops.

The only way that we will be able to reduce these risks is to divert the current path which simply serves as an invitation to the wrong type of individuals so that we can install the necessary security gates and the front and back of the property and then set up the proper fencing system.

If it is thought necessary by the police and the parish council to close the entrance to Hay Wood car park permanently and bearing in mind no one lives there how much more important is it for my family to be protected from the same risks? I am certain the chair of the ramblers association would protect his family if the situation were reversed so what kind of person would object to our doing so?

Finally Chris we love where we live why should we have to endure the anxiety and fear of a situation which could be improved so easily. Just recalling these events to you and their memories has been very stressful. However, I hope that you find it helps and that together with the previous information proves useful to our purpose.

Best for now

Appendix F Part Diversion of Public Bridleway W205 Baddesley Clinton Warwick Area Committee Meeting 18/01/11

Photograph 1. View of the proposed route of Public Bridleway W205 taken from Point B. Photograph taken in Spring 2009

Photograph 2. View of the proposed route of Public Bridleway W205 taken from Point B. Photograph taken in Autumn 2009