(Public Pack)Agenda Document for Leicestershire Local ...

www.leics.gov.uk/laf

Meeting: Leicestershire Local Access Forum

Date/Time: Thursday, 5 October 2017 at 5.30 pm

Location: Framland Committee Room, County Hall, Glenfield

Contact: Sue Dann

Email: [email protected]

AGENDA

Item

1.

Chairman's welcome and opening remarks

2.

Apologies for absence

3.

Minutes of the previous meeting

(Pages 4 - 11)

4.

Declarations of interest & any items which the Chairperson has agreed to take as urgent

5.

Request for urgent items to be included in the agenda accepted by the Chairperson

6.

Reports from committees and working groups:

(a) Planning and Travel (Roy Denney) (Pages 12 - 20)

(b) Network Opportunities (John Law) (Pages 21 - 27)

(c) Unrecorded Ways (Stan Warren) (Pages 28 - 35)

7.

Reports from outside bodies

(a) Heart of the Forest, Access and Connectivity Group (Vicky Allen)

(b) River Soar and Grand Union Canal Partnership (John Law)

(c) National Forest Access & Recreation Group (Roy Denney)

(Page 36)

(d) East Midlands Local Access Form (EMLAF) Chairs meeting update (John Howell)

(e) Charnwood Forest Regional Park Group (Roy Denney)

(Page 37)

(f) Leicestershire Parks, Open Spaces and Countryside Partnership (Vicky Allen)

(g) Other meetings and Groups

8.

Name and brief for Network Opportunities Committee

9.

Correspondence:

(a) Responses advices and comments sent by LLAF

(b) Received (Edwin McWilliam)

(c) Circulation of minutes and agendas

10.

Funding and Monitoring of Unrecorded Ways third-party funds

11.

Orders update (Edwin McWilliam)

(Pages 38 - 53)

12.

Mailing List for 6th November 2017 - training event

13.

Future meetings:

6th November 2017 – Unrecorded Ways Committee Volunteers training evening (7.30pm Park House, Glenfield Parish Council)

9th January 2018 (5.00pm for 5.30pm) – FORUM – County Hall (Workshop from 4pm)

17th April 2018 (5.00pm for 5.30pm) – FORUM – County Hall (Workshop from 4pm)

18th July 2018 (5.00pm for 5.30pm) – FORUM – County Hall (Workshop from 4pm)

14.

Any other items which the Chairperson has decided to take as urgent

1

Minutes of a meeting of the Leicestershire Local Access Forum held at County Hall, Glenfield on Tuesday 4th July 2017.

PRESENT

Mr. J Howells (Chair) Mr. R Denney (Vice Chair)

Ms. V. Allen Ms. H. Brown Mr. C. Faircliffe Mr. M. Gamble Mr. T. Kirby Mr. E. McWilliam Mr. L. Quincey Mrs. S. Dann

Mrs. A. Pyper Mr. S. Warren Mr. A. Hillier-Fry Ms. H. Edwards Mr. J. Law

1. Welcome by Chairperson and apologies received.

The new Chairman Mr. Howells welcomed all those present and listed apologies from Mrs. Posnett CC MBE, Mr. Tame and Mr. Sutton.

The Chairman thanked the last Chairman Mr. Kirby for all his good work in the

previous term.

2. Minutes of the previous meeting and matters arising The minutes of the previous meeting held on 3rd April 2017 were discussed and

some amendments requested by Mr. Denney, which will be made before the minutes are signed off by the Chairman at the next meeting.

Action SD/EM/Chair The Chairman went through the minutes and the matters arising from the minutes. It was stated that the issue of charitable status was deferred due to lack of time at

the last meeting, although Mr. Law thought it would miss the deadline. This was discussed at the East Midlands Regional Chair’s meeting which can be found in the pack on page 44. It was agreed that this item be added to the agenda for the meeting on 5th October 2017.

Action SD/EM/Chair

3 Agenda Item 3

2

Mr. McWilliam referred to item 4 in the minutes, last para, where it refers to the

concerns regarding the future of the City LAF. He advised that he had been in contact with officers at the City and although couldn’t speak on their behalf, he thought the group had not ended but was only in abeyance. Mr. McWilliam advised that he will raise the issue again.

There were no further matters arising from the minutes. 3. Declarations of interest and any items which the Chairperson has agreed to take as

urgent

There were no declarations of interest. The Chairman confirmed that there were 2 items that he had agreed to take as

urgent business. These will be discussed later on the agenda.

4. Reports from committees and working groups

The Forum received updates from the committees and working groups.

a) Planning & Travel Committee (Mr. Denney) (page 8)

Mr. Denney gave a brief summary of his report and there were no further comments from members.

b) Network Opportunities Committee (Mr. Law) (page 37)

Woodland Trust Mr Law advised that, following his meeting with the area managers at the Woodland Trust, there would be further information provided at the next meeting, although he gave his apologies for the next meeting as he was unable to attend. Mr Law advised that many Regional Managers in Leicestershire and Rutland were very helpful and interested in submitting bids for funding for route improvements. Mr Denney advised that there will be a further update on the Chronicles of Charnia HLF bid at the next meeting. Visit England Mr Law updated members on the interest that Visit England has on the ‘Countryside for all’ route leaflets. Leaflets have recently been posted to all households in Lincolnshire and Derbyshire which is an example of the importance that these County Councils have in promoting Countryside events. He suggested this could be replicated on the website to include routes and hotels etc. There is also an opportunity to include things like the Chronicles of Charnia who would benefit from this.

4

3

Changing Places Toilets Mr Law updated members on the funding given by Councils for the provision of accessible toilets and the need to develop this in Leicestershire. Mr Law has identified some clips on uTube but unfortunately these could not be shown at the meeting. Mr Law advised that he would send round a link to the clips which were produced by Ashfield Academy and were taken at Bradgate Park. Mr Law would like the LLAF to write to the grant teams of the County and District councils, to influence applicants requiring funding to upgrade toilet facilities to include "changing places toilets" in their applications. He advised that although he won’t be available for the next meeting he has asked that a vote be made at the next meeting to take this forward if everyone agrees. Members of the LLAF are requested to send a letter to the County and District councils to enquire into any available funding. Mr Law asked members to watch the clips as they really bring home the real issues faced by disabled people and their carers. Mr McWilliam agreed that when looking after children or even for yourself, having access to toilets is critical and provides dignity for all. Link to uTube clips :

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=8eLBxoabxjA

RESOLVED:

That a vote be taken at the next meeting on a decision to take forward the development of Changing Places Toilets

The Chairman asked that members consider at a future meeting to discuss how to tap into Public Health.

Action SD/EM/Chair Choice Unlimited – The Event

Mr Law thanked Mr Warren and the Chairman for their support at the Event for Choice Unlimited. The Chairman updated members on the event and said that it was well attended and there were a great many requests for information from schools and colleges and other groups but stated that many did not know what was available. He said that he felt that there was so much more that could be done to inform mentally and physically disabled people of what is available. Mrs Pyper advised that there didn’t seem to be the will in Leicestershire, Councils are saying that we need to get people out of the towns but it seems to be harder than in Lincolnshire and their farms differ from those in Leicestershire with difficult gates and paths. The Chairman agreed but stated that we need to publicise those that can be accessible. He mentioned a route around Rutland Water that had been requested but this is not smooth or has gravel laid. Mr Law referred to Watermead Country Park and Bosworth.

Other issues

Mr Law asked members if they knew of any organisations that could provide funding for a couple of banners, similar to the one Mr McWilliam had brought

5

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=8eLBxoabxjA

4

into this meeting but would have ‘Countryside for all’ on them. The Chairman stated that the cost would be about £200 per banner. Mrs Edwards stated that she had some information that she promised to forward to Mr Law on this. Mr Denney stated that all Local Authorities are strapped for cash but he was optimistic that there are funding opportunities to be found. Mr Gamble suggested that 3 or 4 possible routes be picked for the Forum to focus on The Chairman stated that choosing is the easy part, the hard part it is getting the landowners to officially agree and support what we do. It was discussed that the National Forest is a waste of time currently as there is still no further progress on route leaflets for the disabled. Mr Law gave an update on Willesley all-weather track now being developed, and stated that they have the responsibility for funding this themselves. He also gave an update on Hicks Lodge and that they have adapted bikes available there. Both Mr McWilliam and Mr Quincey highlighted that they were very impressed with the visitor numbers there. Mrs Allen raised concern that horse boxes were parked near the disabled spaces which was causing difficulties. A discussion was held about other parks and Mrs Pyper asked about Foxton Locks as she thought they had some accessible routes across the canal east to west. Mr Law agreed with this statement. Mr Law updated members on the Choice Unlimited event and that it will now be incorporated with the Local Offer Live event so more children would be expected to put on displays which will encourage more visitors.

c) Unrecorded Ways Committee (Stan Warren) Mr Warren gave an update on this and requested that Mr McWilliam may be able to fill in any of the gaps in the network to create a definitive list. He talked through the digitising of the information and suggested using cloud technology as they currently use CDs and memory sticks. Mr Denney suggested that memory sticks can hold a lot of information. Mr Gamble suggested that there are a couple of clouds that can be used for free and are relatively secure, he agreed to follow this up and report back. Mr Denney suggested that access to the cloud be restricted to only a few people. It was agreed that Mr McWilliam will continue to make the Council information currently available but he warned that the problems will occur with the speed of the internet servers used to download this information if placed on cloud account. Mr Denney suggested that someone would need to keep a record of the money in any communal pot provided by the user groups and he and Stan Warren had been consulting with members to put together a letter to all the User Groups to satisfy their treasurers and auditors as to how these monies would be used.

6

5

RESOLVED:

That the updates from the committees and working groups be noted.

5. Reports from representatives on outside bodies

a) Heart of the Forest, Access and Connectivity Forum (Edwin McWilliam) Mr McWilliam gave members an update on this Forum and the details of

cycling routes that have or are being developed. A discussion was held on whether these routes would be on definitive maps.

Mr McWilliam stated that this was up for discussion and would depend on permissions given. Mrs Allen said that the bridle paths are the only places published that are consistently definitive.

Mr Denney asked why the Bradgate Park strategy was appended to the pack.

Mr McWilliam stated that the Forum fed into this strategy so felt that it would be of interest to members.

b) River Soar and Grand Union Canal Partnership

The minutes of the last meeting were appended to the pack for information. Mr Law asked if he could be added to this group. Mrs Dann suggested discussing this with him after the meeting as her team also administer this meeting.

Action SD

c) National Forest Access and Recreation Group (Roy Denney)

Mr Denney gave a quick update on this group.

d) East Midlands Local Access Forum (EMLAF) Chairs meeting update (Terry Kirby)

This had already been discussed earlier in the meeting. It was agreed that as there was a lot of information provided in these minutes that in future these minutes would be summarised for the LLAF members. The Chair was asked to produce a short summary of the minutes for the next meeting.

Action Chair

e) Charnwood Forest Regional Park Group (Roy Denney)

Mr Denney informed members that the results of the bid application should be received by the end of the year with the following 2 years being used to put the project plan together. He stated that it would be very unlikely not to be awarded the rest of the funding. There will definitely be a role for the LLAF to play in this.

7

6

f) Other meetings and Groups

Let’s Talk Good Finance (page 57) was attached for information by Terry Kirby.

6. Confirmation of Committees & Working Parties & Members A full list will be produced and sent round with the minutes for members to comment.

Action SD/EM A discussion was held about the title Network Opportunities and whether this should be changed.

7. Events and Training update including Regional and National The Chairman, Mr Gamble and Mr Denney attended a conference in Cambridge which the Chairman stated was very informative, professional and knowledgeable and there was a well presented training session. He informed members that another session would be arranged for later in the year and he encouraged them to attend. The Chairman updated members on his attendance at the Birmingham National Conference where Defra informed that the cut-off date may be delayed and could be provided not in 2026 but now in 2028 or 2030. Brexit – National England Workshop – nothing really to report from this. Mr Kirby attended a Network Rail Matters workshop. He stated that this was well facilitated and there were many examples of heavy handed issues and the options of getting round these where a level of understanding was reached.

8. Funding and System for Unrecorded Ways Research Mr Warren confirmed that a letter was being drafted with a document to confirm how the funds will be administered and what they will be used for and these documents will be made available by 7th August, with the Local Authority being the bankers etc. Mr McWilliam confirmed that there will be the facility for members to use the Records Office which can be taken from this fund. The final drafts of these documents will be sent out prior to the August meeting.

9. Forum Support and Website (Edwin McWilliam) The support for the Forum is to now being provided by Mrs Dann and her team at County Hall. Mrs Dann agreed to ensure that the minutes were turned around quickly (by 14 days) and sent out to members. Mr McWilliam gave members an update on the changes to the County Council website and that it has gone back to basics. Mr Quincey agreed to talk to his team and see if the Forum can be promoted through his team’s areas on the website. He currently publishes the sustainable transport information which includes walking

8

7

maps, cycling maps, strolls on your doorstep and Mr Quincey is happy to promote the Forum where he can. Mr Denney asked if the profile of the Forum could be raised so that their skills could be recognised and used appropriately.

10. Correspondence

Mr Denney advised that he had attached the letter of support regarding the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) bid (page 62) for members’ information. Mr McWilliam advised that he had attached the Local Delivery Pilots document as he felt that in terms of health, sport and wellbeing this overlapped with certain areas of this Forum and encouraged members to look at the document. A discussion was held around the work that Parish Councils have the powers to do around the Public Rights of Way, if they have the manpower to do it. Mr Denney asked about the cuttings that accumulate when Parish Councils cut overhanging hedges. Mrs Pyper suggested that, every village seems to have a useful person with a tractor that may be able to offer their services, they could be used to assist with adhoc tasks. Mr McWilliam advised that the Parish Council can be the eyes and ears of the County Council and can send in information and photos of issues they come across.

11. Orders update and Headland Grants An update was given on this.

12. Any other items as taken as urgent The Chairman agreed to take the following items as urgent on this agenda:

Process of maintenance and upgrading of outside furniture

Mr. McWilliam stated that there is a yearly maintenance programme set, with an on-going responsive programme for interim repair. Every path is checked every 6 years and renewed as appropriate. The Chairman asked if groups could contribute to the upgrade or replacement to a gate or access. Mr McWilliam stated that a price list could be passed to members and he would be more than happy to discuss this with interested parties.

Rights of Way Improvement Plan Mr McWilliam advised members that even though the Deregulation Enabling Legislation had still not come a decision was made to revise the plan anyway. He stated that the forum would be engaged in the process.

9

8

13. Dates of future meetings and sub groups:

5th October 2017 Venue - Framland Committee room (to be available from 4pm –

meeting to start at 5.30pm)

9th January 2018 Venue to be confirmed

Sub-groups:

2nd August – venue to be confirmed

7th September (evening) – venue to be confirmed

10

East Midlands Consultation Co-ordinator Department for Transport 2/21 Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London September 2nd 2017 SW1P 4DR

East Midlands Franchise Consultation Response

This response is sent on behalf of The Leicestershire Local Access Forum (LLAF). The observations given have been agreed following discussions between members of the Forum’s planning group with the other members given an opportunity to comment. LLAF is an independent statutory body, set up as a result of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CRoW) 2000, and exists to represent the interests of everyone concerned with access to the countryside and the public rights of way network including footpaths, bridleways and byways, cycleways and areas of open access. Section 94 of the CROW act makes it a statutory function of the forum to give advice to a range of bodies, including local authorities and government departments, on access issues. These following are our specific observations where we feel it falls within our remit. Q1 How do you think closer co-operation between staff in Network Rail and the operator of the next East Midlands franchise can be achieved? A1 We wish to see a franchise which has a passenger focused approach with improved performance of train services but feel such co-operation arrangements are outside our remit. We do feel there should be more local involvement between Network Rail and other access interests as whilst we wish to see improved services it must be balanced by the needs of users of highways and rights of way giving an integrated network of travel; possibilities including sustainable travel without the use of motorised transport. We also feel that Network Rail, as the infrastructure provider, should be involved directly in Community Rail Partnerships. Q2 How can the operator of the next East Midlands franchise engage with community rail partnerships or heritage railways to support the local economy to stimulate demand for rail services in the region? A2 We consider that Community Rail Partnerships are very important, and voluntary help is always welcome and as such they should continue to be recruited and supported as a valued resource, with appropriate funding and administrative support. We also feel that Network Rail as the infrastructure provider should be represented. Q3 Do you think that the operator of the train service, stations and support services should take the following into consideration when they run the franchise: • The environment? • Equality? • Communities in the areas they operate? If so, how should they do this? A3 We believe the National Government should ensure the delivery of a more sustainable, environmentally responsible rail provision, and see an early need for electrification of the Midland Mainline all the way from London via Leicester to Nottingham and Sheffield. Franchise Bidders should be encouraged to detail how they would promote diversity in the industry and their intentions for the provision of apprentices from a full range of backgrounds The railway should engage fully with local communities and seek to add value to them, rather than simply provide a train service for them. They must take responsibility for not only their customers but the impact of services on and communities living near to the railway, and those having to cross rail tracks. The Access Forums bring together all interests in the countryside and could play a part in any ongoing dialogue.

11 Agenda Item 6a

Q4 Do you agree with our proposed approach, which could reduce journey times on long distance services and increase the likelihood of getting a seat? A4 We broadly agree but with some issues on the emphasis on certain elements. It is essential that a reliable and well connected rail service and network fully supports economic growth across the area. That means connectivity to all potential markets and places of employment. One ill served link from Leicester is to the north west of England. We obviously wish to reduce travel times but not at the expenses of other means of transport and the closure of at grade crossings without bridges or tunnels can have a detrimental effect locally both on commerce and public safety. We strongly advocate enhanced local services providing better access for smaller communities into the major towns and cities. This can take pressure of the road network and help negate air and noise pollution levels. There is one major link that is missing in Leicestershire and that is a suburban service from Leicester to the west linking Coalville, Ashby de la Zouch and possibly Burton on Trent to the City whilst providing local transport from the outer suburbs of Leicester for commuters. The existing freight line could provide much of the route with some upgrading and any early year’s subsidy would be offset by savings in road repairs and less health demands on the NHS locally. Variants of this potential route could feasibly be connected to mainline services somewhere in south Leicestershire and could take in East Midlands airport or have a spur off to that facility. Q5 What are your suggestions about how to mitigate the potential loss of some direct services between Oakham, Melton Mowbray and London? A5 Whilst the improved capacity into London is very welcome, loss of a direct service to London from Melton Mowbray and Oakham can in no way be described as progress or an enhanced service. If we are to employ bi-mode trains we cannot see any justification for not maintaining these links. If this has to be accepted, then considerable thought is needed about time-tabling at interchanges to make those journeys as seamless as possible, with reasonable through ticketing fares. Also we feel that there is a possible diversion to Kings Cross via Peterborough, which would also serve Stamford. A service from Derby via this route would also benefit Loughborough, which has no direct connections with East Anglia at the moment Q6 What are the particular services, routes and times of day when you think additional space for passengers are most needed? A6 Most services need some capacity enlargement. Not necessarily through increasing frequency, but probably by increasing train length. We accept that some stations cannot take longer trains which makes for organisational challenges and can slow the process of picking up and putting down, but feel customer comfort and seat availability is more important than speed or frequency. Platform lengths should not be a major issue with selective door opening technology available. If all trains have corridor connections between carriages and the facility for on-board announcements/displays to direct passengers to the doors available and all pre-booked seats were at the correct position on the train then this issue can be adequately managed. Q7 Which on-board facilities in order of preference (these are listed in the response form), are most important to you: • On short distance journeys (up to 60 minutes) • On long distance journeys (over 60 minutes) A7 Train interiors could be much improved. Facilities for luggage and push chairs etc on many services are inadequate, as they are for cycles – if economies of scale mean that the same rolling stock should be able to perform on services with different user profiles then a more flexible layout is required presumably with fold down additional seating. We cannot see that any first class or catering services can be justified for journey of less than 90 minutes if there is insufficient seating for other users. Q8 Which other on-board facilities should be: • Introduced? • Improved? A8 As previously mentioned, cycle, luggage, pushchair storage space needs to be addressed urgently. Q9 How could your local train services be changed to better meet your current and future needs?

12

A9 We are looking to secure local services into Leicester, helping with onward travel to other areas. A commitment to liaise with bus providers to cooperate and coordinate timings should also be sought. Q10 What additional services would you wish to see provided in the next franchise? A10 We have already answered this is general terms but would highlight gaps as we see them. There should be a regular and probably hourly service between Leicester and Manchester and the North West There should be improved links to Leeds and North East, extending the existing Leicester, Derby, Sheffield services to Leeds and beyond. We favour more frequent trains to Coventry from Leicester (possibly as part of a through service from Nottingham). Some to be limited stops and some serving intermediate communities. Alternate trains to be limited stop with the others perhaps not always stopping at the same intermediate stations. More and faster journeys to Lincoln and Newark from Leicester with limited stops on alternate trains. Q11 Do you support the proposal to reopen the line between Shirebrook and Ollerton to passenger trains? If so, what sources of investment could be identified to fund this proposal? A11 Outside our remit Q12 Do you think that the current number of services on the Midland Main Line to and from Luton Airport Parkway is adequate? A12 Probably, but the airport is expanding and there will be increased demand and eventually we feel more through trains will be required to stop there, even at the expense of journey times. Q13 Would you like additional fast trains from London each hour to call at Luton Airport Parkway if this meant that, as a trade-off: • Some services are withdrawn from other stations, such as Luton? • Journey times to other stations may increase? • Freight capacity and/or frequency is reduced? A13 Eventually this is going to be needed if we are to have an integrated transport system. We have no figures as to usage of Luton station itself but a local shuttle is proposed from the Parkway to the airport and this could possibly be extended into Luton. Also the existing Thameslink service meets the needs of the airport to the London area so the demand for passengers joining the service going south could be managed by enhancing that service reducing stopping time at the Parkway. Some journey times would possibly be affected but not by enough to make any real difference. We would however be reluctant to push more freight onto the roads Q14 How could the train service be better at meeting the needs of passengers travelling to and from airports within the East Midlands Franchise? A14 To improve access to Birmingham and East Midlands airports, regular and evenly spaced services are needed. We need improved rail access between the East Midlands Airport Parkway station, and Leicester Any improvement of services at East Midlands Airport will also attract additional contributory funding by the airport. Q15 What ideas do you have for improving the current service on the Liverpool – Norwich route? A15 Outside our remit Q16 Would you support changing the destinations served by the existing Birmingham – Stansted Airport service, such as serving Norwich instead of Stansted Airport?

13

A16 A link from Leicester to Norwich would be useful but the Leicester to Stansted airport service is very useful Q17 Are you in favour of these route changes? • Liverpool – Norwich • Birmingham – Nottingham • Birmingham – Leicester/Stansted A17 Largely outside our remit but in as far as it affects Leicester we would welcome the routes being part of the franchise as they provide key connections across the East Midlands linking up with other EM services. Q18 Would you like to see any other routes transferred to or from the East Midlands franchise? If so, which routes? A18 None affecting Leicester directly Q19 Do you support increasing the frequency of train services in Lincolnshire despite the impact this may have on level crossing users? A19 This is a major issue we have already touched on. The closure of level crossings in Leicestershire is a very hot subject causing a lot of disquiet. We would only support these if there were adequate mitigation measures in place and have engaged with Network Rail on numerous occasions to try and agree workable and safe compromises. This is not a safety issue but a financial one. If increased speed makes a crossing problematical then a bridge or tunnel is almost always a possibility at a price. Q20 How can we improve all aspects of your door-to-door journey experience? A20 To improve the door-to-door journey, stations need to be easy to access by all modes of travel with bus times coordinated where bus services are infrequent. Timetables should be well communicated and reliable, and through ticketing should offer best value. Q21 What more could be done to improve access to, and provide facilities at stations, including for those with disabilities or additional needs? A21 We cannot comment on specific locations but the Franchise has to commit to current legislation about the needs of the less able and demonstrate the financial muscle to make good any deficiencies. Q22 How could the next franchisee operator make better use of stations for community and commercial purposes? A22 We believe that there is a win-win situation if we can bring disused/underused station buildings back into productive life. Possibly also, stations could be converted into pay on train or in advance with no railway presence and the buildings find alternate use. Either way by definition these are presumably going to be in smaller communities which may have lost their corner shop or post office and buildings could double up or change use. They could also become museums, visitor centres or pubs Q23 What could be done to improve the way tickets are sold and provided? A23 Ticketing should be made available offering best value at all times and where possible could be integrated with bus and tram services allowing travel by combined means on a pay-as-you-go or advanced basis. Possibly with a prepayment card or an account. Q24 What changes to the fares structure would be of benefit to you?

14

A24 Quite simply fairer pricing with best option obvious and a simpler means of buying them from multiple sources. Q25 What additional information would be useful to you when planning or making your journey, such as seat availability, journey times and connections? How would you like it to be communicated to you? A25 An automated individual quote and suggestions following input of specific requirements. Q26 How could staff can be more effective in providing the service and assistance that passengers need on a modern railway network? A26 They should be much better informed and up to date with problems and more willing to actually try and help. It is also essential that staff can be found when needed Q27 How would you prefer the next operator to engage with: • You as an individual • Your organisation (if applicable)? A27 Over and above measures already suggested user groups and the LLAF should have a meaningful role in the on-going franchise management. Q28 What would make you feel safer and more secure on your journey A28 Reduced risk of passenger luggage crime Station design removing dark corners, more CCTV and either staff or help points Reliable connections Q29 How do you think more investment might be put into the railways to match money already coming from government through Network Rail? A29 It is part of the national infrastructure but with limited funding available it is probable that the users should pay the cost of travel if not the tracks and furniture in much the same way as road traffic. If public funds are available we would feel assisting in the provision of bus services to link villages to major towns with train stations would be better value Q30 Are there any other areas that you think it is important for us to consider that have not already been discussed in this consultation? A30 If the envisaged length of the franchise is likely to coincide with the opening of HS2 in the East Midlands then the connectivity to that station should be considered. There is one other area where we feel there should be more clarity. That is the issue of managing stations used by more than one franchise. We were under the impression that the rules were that it was run by the major user but applicants for a new franchise must be told which if any they will have to manage. John Howells Chairman, Leicestershire Local Access Forum, Roy Denney, Chair LLAF Planning & Travel Committee C/o Room 700, County Hall, Leicester, LE3 8RJ (www.leics.gov.uk/laf) Telephone - County Hall 0116 305 7086

15

REPORTS FOR LEICESTERSHIRE LOCAL ACCESS FORUM

Meeting Oct 2017

PLANNING AND TRAVEL COMMITTEE REPORT (Chairman - Roy Denney)

We continue to watch the Network rail crossings situation but there has been little change in the situation

We continue to monitor larger planning applications and the progress of local authorities towards the creation of

their various strategic plans. We had an input into the access arrangements for New Lubbesthorpe and I attended

the formal opening of the new bridge over the M1 in July and have had a progress presentation from the Blaby

Planning Officers. By the time of the next Forum meeting the first planning application for commercial buildings in

the section of the site will have been decided on. House sales are going well and as fast as builders can have them

ready. Schools and public transport provisions are geared to occupancy levels and the first primary school should be

produced before long the way things are going.

We have responded to a national consultation on a new standard for Gaps, Gates & Stiles and another on the

potential terms for a new East Midlands rail franchise.

16

[email protected] Melton Mowbray distributor road consultation The Leicestershire Local Access Forum (LLAF) would wish to comment on the plans for the Melton Relief Road. The LLAF is an independent statutory body, set up as a result of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CRoW) 2000, and exists to represent the interests of everyone concerned with access to the countryside and the public rights of way network including footpaths, bridleways and byways, cycleways and areas of open access. Section 94 of the CROW act makes it a statutory function of the Forum to give advice to a range of bodies, including local authorities, on access issues in respect of land use planning matters. The Secretary of State has advised that in particular, forums were to focus on the impact and options for minimising possible adverse effects of development proposals in respect of future public access to land and identifying and expressing support for opportunities to improve public access, or associated infrastructure, which might be delivered through planning policies or new development. We therefore represent the wider public with an interest in the legal right of passage along routes affected by this project. We also bear in mind the impacts and potential benefits of the footpath, bridleway and cycleway network on sustainable transport, green infrastructure, recreation, tourism and health & well-being. Melton can be proud of its riverside parks in the centre of the town but as the town expands, care should be exercised that these do not become isolated pockets of wild life. Creatures need green corridors to be able to migrate if gene pools are not to be reduced to the point of local extinctions. Such green corridors can also make excellent rights of way (PRoW) to allow people to escape into the wider countryside. In designing this new road route, migration corridors, hedgerows and stream courses should be protected as much as possible. There is and will be an increasing need for open spaces and we feel that informal and lightly managed areas should be provided and during the process of land acquisition for the new route consideration should be given to some natural separation zones We feel that as a key market town Melton, must work to keep the town centre attractive and alive. Every opportunity should be taken to increase the number of people living within the town by maximising the use of brown field sites for housing developments and to encourage and facilitate people to visit to shop and access services. It is also important to encourage a diverse range of employment opportunities. Given the number of houses required however, there will inevitably be green field development within the potential route under consideration. We accept that the hamlet of Thorpe Arnold and the village of Burton Lazars would have to expand but we would limit that to 30% to allow them to keep their own identities. In addition we would wish to see green separation zones between these communities and the growing Melton, and between each other. These could provide wildlife and recreational links from the river to the wider countryside. In a similar vein we would like to see a green corridor along the river maintained, continuing the parkland features at present in Melton. If Melton Country Park is to retain a wildlife population it also should still be a gateway to the wider countryside and not an island oasis within urban sprawl. In the greater scheme of things the opportunity should be taken to create a bridleway along the old railway from Melton Country Park to Scalford, largely parallel to E18, but more suitable for adaption for non motorised multi-use. We feel it important that such green wedges and corridors be included in the Local Plan. It is all to easy for planners to lose track of the bigger strategic picture when looking at planning applications in isolation and it would strengthen their case when wishing to turn down inappropriate applications.

17

mailto:[email protected]

It is also essential that where any sizable development is planned there are off road routes created to allow people to both join the wider rights of way network and to also gain access to local amenities, shops, schools and bus stops etc. The paths and cycleways are the primary mechanism for linking employment areas, communities and facilities if we are to reduce motorised transport and the carbon emissions that ensue. Whilst moving traffic out of the town centre will assist in mitigating these problems we feel the project affords an opportunity to enhance the non-motorised links into the town centre possibly from car parks along the proposed route. The protection or indeed development of the recreational potential of the area, in which the rights of way network plays a large part, will have to be considered along with the need to protect and enhance the ecology and landscape It is all too evident that the town centre’s road network is not fit for purpose and the need for a relief route obvious. Given the roads are at or close to capacity and cannot cope with the levels of road traffic at present, if we are to build 6,000 new homes with associated facilities and employment opportunities the need is pressing. As we see it, the problem is there is no obvious solution which fully addresses all the issues. Whilst arguments could be made for routes to the west, the project is too far advanced to be looking at these options and we must assume we are now talking about fine tuning an eastern route. We do not have access to the detailed studies which have been made so must accept that the eastern route is the best and we now look at the impacts, the design of junctions and the exact route. Two basic routes have been considered, a shorter route passing to the west of the River Eye and a longer route passing to the east of the river. We must assume the longer route would be more expensive but do think that the shorter route has some issues. The proposed route involves a 4 mile single carriageway but looking to future-proof this we suggest a dual carriageway should be considered, especially if the East Leicestershire distributor road is ever constructed. We recommend a cycle lane or better still a bridleway alongside the road especially if it is to be single lane. This could facilitate better connectivity between existing rights of way. Also if a single lane, we see no reason to divert any PRoWs crossing it, as long as waiting spaces were provided and central refuges, with appropriate road signs warning of the possible presence of pedestrians. Looking at the preferred route, Melton Spinney Road is part of National Cycle Route 64, so the roundabout here would need special provision for cyclists to negotiate it carefully. One other junction in particular looks problematical. Junction 5 has many issues and we would have thought could be better sited or designed. It is challenged where it is by the existing infrastructure. As indicated Lag Lane would cease to be a through route and the proposed route of a restored canal would seem to be compromised. Lag lane is of course, part of a British Horse Society and Leics County Council promoted horse riding route around Melton and is the only safe route for horse riders going north/south to the east side of Melton. Redesign close to where suggested is hampered by pylons but power lines can be buried or pylons re-sited. The Oakham Canal is an ambition for restoration and would run alongside Saxby Road and this possibility should not be thwarted by this scheme when solutions are available. Saxby Road would be diverted to a new roundabout once a junction is created on the new road and we see no reason why this diversion and junction should not be moved further west solving several problems. We are looking at something between the two option routes. We suggest that the new road could have a more gradual curve and could cross the river at the point where Saxby Road is nearest the river where a bridge over the river could also go above the route of the possible canal. This would take it away from Lag Lane and it would be roughly half way from Lag Lane to Shipman’s Barn. Lag Lane need not then be cut off from Saxby Road which

18

itself could be raised to give access to a new junction as the new road rises to create the river crossing. Another option to protect the route of the canal would be to bridge it. The road will have to rise to cross the railway further south, so perhaps it should be elevated above the flood plain of the river from the B676 southwards. Lag land would have to be crossed further south as it approaches Sawgate Road and some means of accommodating horse riders here is needed possibly in conjunction with pedestrians using path E1 Looking at the rest of the route we are conscious of the impact on PRoW and informal paths etc. Starting from the A606 Nottingham Road to the north of the town, before crossing Scalford Road, it cuts across footpath E17 a valuable off-road route from the town opening out into an extensive network of paths and an invaluable leisure route into the wider countryside. This route must be accommodated in some fashion. Between Scalford Road and the Twinlakes Park it similarly crosses footpath E18, a walking route out of Melton; north along valley of the Scalford Brook to Scalford. It is a part of the long distance Jubilee Way and again this must be protected. From there the proposed route either crosses E25 or obliterates it (hard to tell at the scale the route is indicated) and a solution to this is needed. The route then cuts path F2, a valuable walking route to Thorpe Arnold, and then east to Woodfold Lane, Brentingby. There is a spur off F2 currently shown as a dead end but possibly historically a through route. A possible continuation to the dead-end spur of F2, turning to meet the A607 would provide a good off road route. This would be virtually parallel to the line of the new road as an alternative to providing a route serving the same purpose alongside the new road. A completely new route would though give better connectivity to the paths on the east side of the A607 Moving south it then cuts path E1 which is a valued route to Burton Lazars. These rights of way must be protected as they will be of increasing importance as additional infill housing is created. Potential cycle ways should also be considered to accommodate non-motorised travel into Melton from these new potential suburbs. It is quite possible that informal paths and currently unused historic paths might become of great worth as Melton expands. Also wherever possible bridleways should be considered, to afford present and future populations in the urban fringe, the chance to ride out into the rural areas, both for the exercise and fresh air, but also for the boost to rural economies that can then occur. We trust you will find these observations constructive and of assistance as you fine tune this project. John Howells Chairman, Leicestershire Local Access Forum, Roy Denney, Chair LLAF Planning & Travel Committee C/o Room 700, County Hall, Leicester, LE3 8RJ (www.leics.gov.uk/laf)

19

http://www.leics.gov.uk/laf

NETWORK OPPORTUNITIES REPORT FOR

5th October 2017 LAF MEETING

COUNTRYSIDE FOR ALL

1. Woodland Trust

We are currently advising on the access statements for a number of woods. A site visit is due to take

place with the Woodland Trust at the Queen Elizabeth Jubilee Wood in order to modify the Access

Statement and look at the opportunity for creating a Countryside For All type leaflet for the routes

on this site.

Another Inclusive Countryside Access course is being delivered by the Countryside For All sub group

of the Lincolnshire and Rutland local access forums. Fourteen Woodland Trust officers wish to be

trained on thIs course, including Chris Williams from Leicestershire.

2. Visit England

Visit England has provided a number of resources which should improve accessibility for the elderly,

the disabled and their carers. Further details of this will be provided at the next LAF meeting.

3. Dementia Friendly Strolls

The final report is at the end of this document.

4. Hicks Lodge

A meeting has been arranged with the Forestry Commission to discuss the possibility of :

A Countryside for All route leaflet

Changing Places Toilet

The hire of adapted bikes

5. National Forest

We have been asked to Larry Greenwell of Pulse Associates Limited, to advise on access for the new

high level tree top aerial walkway. We have passed this onto Leicestershire Centre for Integrated

Living to work with Pulse Associates Limited.

20Agenda Item 6b

SHIRE Community Solutions Grant PROJECT REPORT FORM (2015/16)

More information is available from www.leics.gov.uk/shiregrants If you have any queries regarding the completion of this form please call 0116 305 7269 or email [email protected]

Leicestershire County Council recently awarded you a SHIRE Community Solutions Grant. This document is for you to inform Leicestershire County Council about your project, how the funding was spent and a description of the outcomes achieved as a result of the funding.

Please enclose with this form receipts/invoices of all purchases made with the funding received from Leicestershire County Council.

If you would like any help or advice in completing this form, please call 0116 305 7269 or email [email protected].

ABOUT YOUR PROJECT

1 .Name of Group/Organisation: Dementia Adventure

2. Project Title: Volunteer Walk Leader training

3. When did the project start and when did it end?

June 2016 – May 2017

4. Please describe the benefits

your project has had on the

community (particularly

vulnerable individuals) and how

your project might help to

reduce demand for public

services. Include examples of

any particular successes of the

project.

The grant was provided to fund walk leader training to enable volunteers to set up dementia inclusive walks and other outdoor activities. We were aiming to increase choice and opportunity for people living with dementia in the community, primarily concerning outdoor activity. A total of 6 training days were provided for a total of 66 delegates. Partner organisations and individuals trained have gone on to set up dementia inclusive activities and have programmes in place to provide opportunity and choice to have a significant impact on people living with dementia in Leicestershire. They have committed to supporting dementia friendly walks and other activities including improved signage, quiet spaces and time in visitor centres (Bradgate Park), improved communication through dementia awareness training and new ideas for indoors nature-based activities.

New initiatives derived from Shires Community Grant Funding to Dementia Adventure:

- Melton Borough Council - Weekly inclusive Health Walk in Long Clawson Village with new sensory element

- Melton Borough Council - Weekly Walk & Talk Sensory stroll in Wilton Park, Melton Mowbray

- Age UK/Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council - Weekly dementia inclusive walk coordinated by Age UK for Argents Mead Park in Hinckley starting 7th June 2017.

- Age UK/Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council - Two taster events organised by Age UK at Hollycroft Park and Argents Mead Park, Hinckley on 15th & 17th May as part of Dementia Awareness Week 2017.

- Age UK/Charnwood Borough Council - 6 week walk programme organised by Age UK at Queens Park, Charnwood starting 6th June 2017

- Age UK/Charnwood Borough Council – 19/5/17 – Dementia Awareness Week – Kath Pyke from Dementia Adventure led a sensory stroll on 19/5/17 during Dementia Awareness Week at

21

http://www.leics.gov.uk/shiregrants





Queens Park, Loughborough as part of a joint event “Celebrating Choices” (for carers and people living with dementia) with partners Age UK and John Storer House (see poster below)

- Bradgate Park Trst, Newtown Lindford - Planned dementia inclusive visitor event for September 2017. Ongoing outcomes from training include changes to café and visitor centre experience incorporating quiet time visits, reduced noise in visitor centre and trained staff in café.

- Several attendees who also provide Dementia Friends sessions have committed to incorporate the training into their Dementia Friends Train the Trainer scheme.

- The Lodge Trust - Weekly inclusive walk on Lodge Trust grounds which are open to the public from June 2017

Because most partners requested spring training courses, the majority of walk programmes are only just starting to be initiated. The people living with dementia who have and will participate in these outdoor activities will benefit in many ways. Often a person living with dementia finds that their life changes dramatically, they become socially isolated and often house-bound with little opportunity to enjoy activities they once would have enjoyed. There are huge benefits for all of us in getting outdoors & keeping active. Evidence also shows that engagement with the natural environment can have a positive effect on people living with dementia, improving quality of life and increasing independence. The following health and wellbeing benefits are well documented and include:

- Improved emotional state - Improved physical health - Improved verbal expression - Improved memory and attention - Improved awareness - Improved sense of well-being, independence, self-esteem and

control - Improved social interaction and a sense of belonging - Prevention of co-morbidities (other health conditions) - Delaying progression of dementia - Dampening down of symptoms

5. How many people did your

project benefit?

66 training delegates.

Due to 5 out of 6 training dates taking place in spring 2017, new walk

programmes and other initiatives are just being planned with most starting

May/June 2017. This makes it difficult to estimate how many people living

with dementia will benefit from this programme. However, we expect

those participating to benefit in the ways outlined above.

6. How many volunteers were

involved in delivering your

project?

66 volunteer Walk Leaders.

22





7. Were there any factors that

were particularly important to

the successful implementation

of your project?

The project was most successful where we were able to link with a partner

with a shared vision, common goal and enthusiasm for the aims and

objectives. For example, Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council had a well-

established Wellbeing Programme and they quickly identified that the

Shire Project could help them achieve their own objectives as well as reach

new groups of people that they hadn’t previously been able to reach. They

had really good links within the community which they were able to draw

on and share with us. And they were enthusiastic, welcoming and creative

with ideas on how best to attract family carers to the activities.

It was also important to link with organisations that could increase our

reach and promote the project (e.g. Age UK).

8. Were there any challenges or

barriers in delivering your

project? If so how did you

overcome them? Is there

anything you would do

differently if you were to carry

out your project again?

Halfway through the project it became clear that we would not hit our

targets in terms of the number of volunteers trained for a variety of

reasons including;

Local authorities no longer have dedicated staff roles for volunteer

support and coordination. This translates to difficulty in recruiting

and managing volunteers due to capacity and resource constraints.

Changes in retirement age and benefits schemes puts additional

constraints on numbers of volunteers available. Organisations are

asking more of their volunteers and conscious of overloading.

Viewed as a scarce commodity. VAL online has hundreds of unfilled

volunteer role descriptions.

VASL lost funding this year and therefore there was limited

capacity to support us recruiting the volunteers.

The issues identified provided us with some key learning for the future.

However, at the end of October, we discussed with Andy Hayes that we

expected to train a maximum of 50 volunteers (target originally 105)

throughout the full programme and we were successfully able to deliver on

this (in fact exceeding the revised target by training 66 volunteers).

We underestimated the time is would take to identify and secure

supportive partners. The frequent changes to potential partners due to

changes in funding can also make it more difficult to establish relationships

and set up ongoing activities. In future we would look for support to

identify partners in advance of receiving the funding or build in an

implementation phase in the first few months.

The start date of the project coincided with the start of the summer

holiday period and therefore it was a difficult time in which to start

developing relationships and book training. In a future project we would

secure a start date that fits better with the partner organisations. For

example, many wanted the training to take place in Spring so that the

activities could be set up in late Spring / early Summer.

Capacity cuts within Local Authorities have had an impact on Walks

23





programmes managers with local councils who have had funding and posts

reduced. Consequent increase in work load has reduced capacity and

resources to support start of new walks programme.

9. Did your project benefit from

joint working with any other

community groups and

organisations – if so could you

please outline what these

benefits were?

We have a good working relationship with the Local Access Forum. They

have good links with local councillors who helped to encourage support for

the programme within local councils.

Age UK became a partner on two of the projects which gave us greater

reach for recruiting volunteers, better marketing and promotion and reach

into the community.

Volunteer organisations helped us to recruit volunteers. Voluntary Action

Leicestershire was extremely proactive and worked with us to develop

volunteer online profiles and promote the opportunities.

10. How do you plan to

continue/ sustain the project

beyond the period of SHIRE

Grant funding?

The use of volunteers means that the activities are self-sustaining.

Dementia Adventure will be available to support the existing activities with

information and resources should they be required.

11. Do you believe that your

project could be replicated to

provide benefits to other parts

of Leicestershire? If so, what

would be needed to successfully

implement similar initiatives

elsewhere?

Yes, easily. We would just need similar funding in order to dedicate

resource to provide the volunteer training across other parts of the county.

It would also be extremely useful if LCC could support us to source and link

with relevant partners that have the same vision and objectives.

24





EXPENDITURE

14. Breakdown of total project costs: (Please provide supporting documents e.g. quotes/invoices/ receipts)

Item description Cost £

Staff costs (salaries inc on costs)

Training and Consultancy Mileage and Expenses

Postage, Freight & Courier

Marketing & promotion time allocation

Training packs

£9,706.58

£283.16

£48.00

£505.60

£305.00

Total project cost: £10,848.34

Amount £

Staff costs (salaries inc on costs)

Training and Consultancy Mileage and Expenses

Postage, Freight & Courier

£9,706.58

£283.16

£48.00

Total amount: £10,037.74

16. Please detail any in-kind support (e.g.

volunteer hours or free professional support)

We absorbed the cost of the marketing and promotion and training packs. The following Dementia Adventure professional support was also provided free of charge;

Fundraiser time (for grant management)

Senior Management Accountant time (for financial grant management)

17. Total amount of SHIRE Community Grant claim: £9,975

18. Please add any other comments you would like to make

AUTHORISED

Print name: Kath Vale Date: 23/05/17

Signature:

25





Please submit copies of all relevant invoices and include any additional information / reports / press cuttings / certificates / photos relating to the project:

Andy Hayes Strategy and Business Intelligence Room 300B Leicestershire County Council County Hall, Glenfield, Leicestershire LE3 8RA

Tel: 0116 305 7269 Email: [email protected]

26




Control and Administration of Research Expenses

The County Council will provide meeting rooms whenever possible but if not available or required late into the

evening they will pay for two hours at Glenfield Parish Council.

Under our supervision and control they will pay reasonable travel expenses to productive researchers

Over and above those expenses that the County Council will cover under our supervision, there will be some costs

incurred to our common benefit for items which can be made available to all researchers or will form part of an

evidence chain. To cover these costs, contributions are welcome from all user groups working to these common

ends.

The Access Forum’s Unrecorded Ways Committee have nominated five of its members to act as authorisers and they

must always act in pairs The County Council will hold these funds on our behalf and disburse them under these

authorities. (2 from 5)

The County Council will hold these funds on our behalf and disburse them under these authorities.

Contributions from user organisations etc. must be properly acknowledged and receipted.

All contributors to the fund must have access to itemised income and expenditure records.

Likely expenditure is envisaged

Use of County Record Office or other Archives

Paper copies of evidential documents

Purchase of digital copies of documents

Photography permits (We can use the County Council licence)(Need to check whether we need to

reimburse them)

Photocopying

Stationary and computer supplies

Postage

Memory Sticks

Costs of staging Training Courses

Expenses will only be paid to sub-committee members or previously registered researchers and by prior

arrangement. Those who are so authorised may incur expenses up to £30 without prior authority when

necessary subject to advice to the authorised signatories at the earliest opportunity.

Otherwise written (e-mail) approval must be obtained in advance from two members of the authorising

group– claimants cannot authorise their own expenses.

Expenses cannot normally be paid in advance unless exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated by the

claimant

Travel should wherever possible be by public transport and expenses claims must be accompanied by a

receipt or ticket. Car costs can be reimbursed if use of a vehicle is cost effective or necessary

Other expenses must be accompanied by a receipt wherever possible.

In all cases a properly completed and authorised claim form must be submitted before a payment is made.

The group will create a standard request form to be used by claimants

Whenever possible we will ask Leicestershire County Council (LCC) to purchase items for us even if at our

expense

Expenses for overnight accommodation and associated sustenance can only be paid in exceptional

circumstances and strictly by prior sanction.

Whenever the funds drop below a deemed minimum float, we will make additional requests for funding

from contributors

27 Agenda Item 6c

TTRRAAVVEELL && AACCCCEESSSS DDEEPPTT,, LLEEIICCEESSTTEERRSSHHIIRREE CCOOUUNNTTYY CCOOUUNNCCIILL -- UUNNRREECCOORRDDEEDD WWAAYYSS RREESSEEAARRCCHH VVOOLLUUNNTTEEEERR EEXXPPEENNSSEESS CCLLAAIIMM FFOORRMM

NNaammee ……..………………………………………………BBaannkk AAcccctt NNoo.. ………………………………………………SSoorrtt CCooddee…………………………………… SSuuppeerrvviissoorr // LLiinnee MMaannaaggeerr …………………………………………………………....

AAddddrreessss………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………......

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………PPoosstt ccooddee……..…………………………………………....

TTeelleepphhoonnee nnuummbbeerr…………………………………………………………

EEmmaaiill AAddddrreessss………………………………………………………………..

SSuummmmaarryy ooff ccllaaiimm

IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn

EExxppeennsseess aarree ttoo bbee ccllaaiimmeedd wwiitthhiinn 33 mmoonntthhss aass ffaarr aass ppoossssiibbllee.. AAllll rreelleevvaanntt

ppaarrkkiinngg ttiicckkeettss // bbuuss ttiicckkeettss eettcc aarree ttoo bbee aattttaacchheedd..

TThhee ffoorrmm mmuusstt bbee ccoouunntteerrssiiggnneedd bbyy ttwwoo aauutthhoorriisseedd mmeemmbbeerrss ooff tthhee LLLLAAFF

(( AAddmmiinn uussee oonnllyy -- mmaannaaggeerr ttoo ccoommpplleettee))

CCOOSSTT CCOODDEE:: LL…………………………....000000 335533 00

DDeettaaiillss ooff eeaacchh iinnddiivviidduuaall jjoouurrnneeyy mmuusstt bbee ddeettaaiilleedd bbeellooww.. ££ pp

NNoo.. ooff mmiilleess @@ ............................ppeennccee ppeerr mmiillee

OOtthheerr ttrraavveell eexxppeennsseess DDeettaaiillss

LLLLAAFF CCOOUUNNTTEERRSSIIGGNNAATTOORRIIEESS SSIIGGNNAATTUURREE

11)) ………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………....

22)) ………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………....

TToottaall ccllaaiimm CCeerrttiiffyyiinngg OOffffiicceerr’’ss SSiiggnnaattuurree

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

PPrriinntt nnaammee……………………………………………………………………..……....…………....

II ccoonnffiirrmm tthhaatt tthhee vveehhiiccllee uusseedd iiss ccoovveerreedd bbyy tthhee rreeccoommmmeennddeedd lleevveell ooff iinnssuurraannccee,, hhaass ccuurrrreenntt rrooaadd ttaaxx,, aa vvaalliidd MMOOTT cceerrttiiffiiccaattee ((iiff aapppplliiccaabbllee)) aanndd iiss iinn aa rrooaadd wwoorrtthhyy ccoonnddiittiioonn..

II hhaavvee nnoott rreecceeiivveedd aannyy rreeccoommmmeennddaattiioonn nnoott ttoo ddrriivvee ffoorr aannyy mmeeddiiccaall oorr hheeaalltthh rreeaassoonn..

BBRREEAAKKDDOOWWNN OOFF EEXXPPEENNSSEESS CCLLAAIIMM SSiiggnneedd ……………………………………………………………… DDaattee …………………………

DDaattee TToottaall ttiimmee

eexxppeennddeedd RReettuurrnn jjoouurrnneeyy ffrroomm // ttoo PPuurrppoossee MMeeaannss ooff

ttrraavveell MMiilleeaaggee iiff

bbyy ccaarr OOtthheerr ttrraavveell eexxppeennsseess

29

UUNNRREECCOORRDDEEDD WWAAYYSS RREESSEEAARRCCHH VVOOLLUUNNTTEEEERR RREEPPOORRTT FFOORRMM

DDAATTEE OOFF

EEXXPPEENNSSEE

CCLLAAIIMM

RREESSEEAARRCCHH UUNNDDEERRTTAAKKEENN FFIINNDDIINNGGSS EEVVIIDDEENNCCEE CCOOLLLLEECCTTEEDD

AADDDDIITTIIOONNAALL CCOOMMMMEENNTT

NNAAMMEE OOFF RREESSEEAARRCCHHEERR ………………………………………………………………………………..

30

Leicestershire Local Access Forum, c/o Travel Choice & Access Team, Leicestershire County Council,

Environment and Transport Department, Room 700, County Hall, Glenfield, Leicestershire LE3 8RJ

Telephone: 0116 305 7086

Email: [email protected]

Chairman of the Access Forum

www.leics.gov.uk/laf

(www.leics.gov.uk/laf)

Contributing organisations Unrecorded Ways Working Group

Date:

My ref: Your ref:

Contact:

Phone: Fax:

Email:

08.08.2017 JH County Hall 0116 305 7086 [email protected]

The Leicestershire Local Access Forum (LLAF)* has set up a sub-committee (the Unrecorded Ways Group) to expedite the research into and claiming of Unrecorded Routes and Rights based on historic evidence before they are lost forever under the provisions of the 2000 Countryside & Rights of Way Act, which imposes a cut-off date of December 31st 2025 for claiming such routes or rights. While it is recognised that User Groups are in many instances carrying out such research, it is felt that the LLAF sub-committee can usefully expedite the process within Leicestershire by : a) attracting, training and supporting volunteer researchers who may not be associated with

any user group. b) recognising potential routes or parishes where research may prove fruitful for the benefit of

the public by increasing opportunities for walking or riding. c) preventing duplication of research activity. d) obtaining research material in digital form and making it available to researchers. e) preparing and submitting DMMO Applications where research results justify this action. LLAF has no funding, therefore work carried out so far to expedite research work as indicated above has largely been constrained by having to be cost free. Leicestershire County Council Rights of Way Team are supporting this initiative by the provision of meeting rooms, free access to their modern Highway Records, and free copies of their digitised records. They have also promised financial assistance where material held in archives has to be photographed, copied or purchased in digital form. However, it must be recognised that local authorities are under increasing pressure to cut costs, and therefore there is no guarantee that they will be able to fund the project to the full extent of expenditure required throughout its 8+ year life-span to support the amount of research required to maximise the public benefit in adding new routes and rights to the Definitive Map. The sub-committee anticipate therefore that additional funding will be required from other sources, in particular user groups, and is therefore appealing to your organisation to supplement our funds as far as you are able. Funding may be required throughout the life of the project (i.e. up to 2026, and even beyond if outstanding claims require additional supporting evidence after the cut-off

31

date). As initial funds drop below a reasonable working level, we will repeat our appeal for further contributions. We recognise that the majority of user groups are registered charities which have to satisfy Charity Commission rules on passing funds to other groups; our understanding is that this is acceptable, as we are working in line with the aims of such charities in protecting and improving the rights of Way network. Arrangements are in hand for LCC to administer the fund; a Volunteer Expenses Claim Form has been drawn up and agreed; and a procedure for the checking and payment of expenses is almost finalised – researchers claiming expenses will have to list what research has been undertaken and its outcome (which unfortunately we recognise may not always be positive).All material expenses will only approved if a receipt is submitted with the claim. Travelling expenses will only be paid for exceptional journeys, and at standard local authority rates. The Unrecorded Ways Group has nominated 5 members (representing different user groups), any two of whom are required to approve any claim. It is intended that there will be regular financial reports presented to the Sub-Committee, which will be made available to all funding bodies. The next meeting of the sub-committee is at 1930 on September 6th at the offices of Glenfield Parish Council, Park House, Stamford Street (LE3 8DL) – directions attached. It will review and agree a ‘cascaded’ training presentation for all volunteers who have not attended the external training sessions sponsored by the Ramblers’ and the British Horse Society. We would urge all user groups who are likely to fund the project to send a representative to this meeting. We will be pleased to discuss any concerns and clarify any questions you may have, but look forward to your support. We would like an initial contribution (or firm commitment) to be made by October 1st 2017, as we are shortly contacting user groups and local history groups and anticipate new researchers coming forward who will require funding. (*) Local Access Forums are independent statutory bodies, set up as a result of the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000, existing to represent the interests of everyone concerned with access to the countryside and public rights of way network, including footpaths, bridleways, byways, cycleways and areas of open access.

John Howells

Chairman, Leicestershire Local Access Forum

C/o Room 700, County Hall, Leicester, LE3 8RJ

32

I am contacting you with information regarding a research project which is being initiated by the

Leicestershire Local Access Forum (LLAF)*, and which may appeal to some of your members who

carry out research into local and family history.

One aspect of this which you may not have considered before, but is a key aspect of social history, is

how our forebears moved around in their daily lives before the age of universal car ownership, and

even without the benefit of the internal combustion engine or the railway.

The answer of course, is that they created, by usage, a network of footpaths, bridleways and local

roads for the few who had a cart or carriage. Many of these of course now form the basis of our local

road network, and almost as many are still used as footpaths and bridleways, and are mapped and

protected as such by our county council.

Until very recent times, the law could be simply stated as ‘once a highway, always a highway’, and so

they remained irrespective of use. But in 2000 legislation was passed which simply stated that any

routes not recognised as public by the highway authority would cease to exist on January 1st 2026.

Our project is to identify such routes in Leicestershire which are still of public benefit, and prepare

the necessary claim based on historic evidence that they are indeed a highway, and who is entitled

to use them. Finding such evidence will need painstaking checking of historic maps, estate records,

railway and canal plans and many other records which could reveal the existence of an unrecorded

highway, or existing routes with higher rights than currently claimed. The key records which are

regarded as ‘good evidence’ are Enclosure Awards, Tithe Maps, 1910 Inland Revenue Valuation

Maps, Railway and Canal Plans, Estate Maps, and even Sale Particulars for individual properties –

many of which may already be familiar to local history researchers with other interests in the

management/ownership of and changes to the landscape.

We are in the process of preparing list of routes which merit research, but cannot claim to have

found them all, particularly those which may have higher rights (e.g. they are recorded as a footpath,

but historice evidence points to a bridleway), and we are building a library of digital records which

will be made available to researchers, along with lists of useful websites to allow much research to

be carried out at home.

We have the full backing, with financial support, of Leicestershire County Council and various user

groups to pursue these aims, but the task is too immense for their limited resources.

Any involvement, however small, can help – researchers may find references to footpaths and

bridleways as an incidental to their main area of interest, and such a ‘tip-off’ could be the key to a

full research exercise.

Researchers may also be aware of potentially useful documents which are not held in the public

domain, e.g. in personal collections or parish offices or churches. We would be very pleased to hear

of these and get access to them. Oral evidence of usage of routes may also strengthen a claim for a

route.

A meeting has been arranged when anybody at all interested can come along and learn more without any commitment. They are to meet at 7.30 at Park House, home of Glenfield Parish Council (Stamford Street, LE3 8DL) on November 6th

33

If you wish to come along and see if you wish to get involved you will be most welcome. It would be helpful if you could notify us in advance of numbers, but pre-booking is not essential. If you require any further information, or cannot attend the meeting but wish to get involved, please contact Stan Warren: 0116 268 2415 or [email protected]

*LLAF is an independent statutory body, set up as a result of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act

(CRoW) 2000, and exists to represent the interests of everyone concerned with access to the

countryside and the public rights of way network including footpaths, bridleways and byways,

cycleways and areas of open access. Section 94 of the CROW act makes it a statutory function of the

forum to give advice to a range of bodies, including local authorities and government departments,

on access issues.

Stan Warren Chairman LLAF Unrecorded Ways Sub-Committee

34



Meeting Oct 2017

NATIONAL FOREST ACCESS & RECREATION GROUP

They are concentrating this year on the connectivity and access to the areas planted up and promoting recreational

and sporting use of the Forest. I have represented the Forum at one of their Access & Recreation Group’s meetings

and advised them as what the Forum are doing in particular in respect of unrecorded ways within the forest and the

wider area. I have also had meetings and discussions about the location and design of 7 major information hubs

being established throughout the area. They have appointed an Access & Recreation Office to push their agenda.

They have another meeting scheduled for November 8th when this person should be introduced to us and the

location of another fairly sizeable site will be disclosed

Roy Denney Representative

35 Agenda Item 7c


Meeting Oct 2017

CHARNWOOD FOREST STEERING GROUP

John Howells and I were members of some of the working groups which worked up the lottery bid which has now

been submitted. I have since met with representatives of the Heritage Lottery to field questions and ‘sell’ our

project. An answer is expected in October and if successful the development stage will involve putting meat on the

bones of the constituent projects

Roy Denney Representative

36Agenda Item 7e

1

LEICESTERSHIRE LOCAL ACCESS FORUM – September 2017

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT & TRANSPORT ON PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY LEGAL ORDERS AND OTHER ONGOING CASES

Purpose of Report To update Forum members on the current position with regard to various Public Path and Modification Orders. Public Footpath Orders which have been confirmed since the last report 1. The following Public Path Orders have confirmed since the last report:-

Order Number 2403 – Diversion of Footpath F78 at Elms Farm, Normanton, Bottesford Parish (See Appendix A) The above Town & Country Planning Act (T&CPA) diversion was recently confirmed by Melton Borough Council to enable the construction of two new agricultural buildings. 2415 – Diversion of Rights of Way H108, H108a and H37 at Frisby Lakes, Asfordby Parish (See Appendices B, C and D) The County Council recently confirmed the above order as a means of tidying up several loose ends resulting from the successful application to add Footpaths H108 and H108a to the Definitive Map earlier this year and to re-route Bridleway H37 onto the actual route available on the ground. 2421 – Diversion of Footpath E16c (previously unrecorded and unnumbered) at Melton Cattle Market (See Appendix E) Melton Borough Council recently confirmed this T&CPA Order as part of its Melton Cattle Market Improvement Scheme. 2428 – Diversion of Bridleway G67 at Lilac Farm, Grimston (See Appendix F) This Order was recently confirmed to enable the landowner to maintain the land in three separate parcels across the line of the original public footpath.

X 37 Agenda Item 11

2

Public Path Order Applications 2. The following applications for public path orders have recently been received:-

2464 – Proposed Diversion of Footpath F7 off Bescaby Lane, Waltham on the Wolds (See Appendix G) This order is sought by the landowners to manage grazing better by enabling smaller horse paddocks to be constructed. 2472 – Proposed Diversion of Footpath S27 off Brascote Lane, Newbold Verdon (See Appendix H) This diversion is sought by home owners wishing to sell their property and move home. During a potential sale of the house it became apparent the current legal line of the footpath is within the curtilage of their garden. 2473 – Proposed Diversion of Footpath S66 at FP McCann Ltd., Cadeby (See Appendix I) This T&CPA Order application has been submitted to Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council to enable works to be developed for which planning permission has been granted.

Confirmed Modification Orders (Evidential) 3. The following evidence based Definitive Map Modification order was confirmed

since the last report.

M866 – Addition of Bridleways E65 and E65a at Sproxton in the Parishes of Sproxton and Garthorpe (See Appendix J) The above Modification Order, based on user evidence and supported by historical documentary evidence was originally sought by Alex Pyper on behalf of the Leicestershire & Rutland branch of the British horse Society. The order was confirmed as an unopposed order and the bridleways now appear on the Definitive Map.

New Applications for Modification Orders (Evidential) 4. The following applications have been lodged since the last Report.

M1109 – Proposed Addition of a Public Footpath from Footpath T34, Past the Old Post Office to Sketchley Lane, Ratcliffe Culey, Witherley Parish (See Appendix K) The above application has been made by Witherley Parish Council on the basis of historical documentation and user evidence. M1110 – Proposed Addition (Extension) of Public Footpath U4 at Wykin, Hinckley (Critical Gap) (See Appendix L) The above application has been made by the Hinckley Ramblers to resolve the issue of an apparent gap that exists between the recorded start of footpath U4 at Wykin and Higham Lane.

38

3

Forthcoming Referrals to the Planning Inspectorate, Public Hearings & Inquiries 5. There are currently no cases due to be heard at Public Inquiry or hearing in the

near future:- 6. One case has been referred to the Secretary of State as an opposed order:-

M1021 - Deletion of Public Footpath C50A at Higham on the Hill (See Appendix M) There was one objection to the proposed deletion of this footpath on the basis that it had some historical status as an ancient highway and that it is used and was not included on the Definitive Map in error. The County council takes the view that on balance of evidence there is no public right of way at this location.

Decisions Received 7. There have been no new decisions issued by the Planning Inspectorate since the

last report. Appendices

Appendix A – Plan No 2403 Appendix B – Plan No 2415/1/R1 Appendix C – Plan No 2415/2/R1 Appendix D – Plan No 2415/3/R1 Appendix E – Plan No 2421-B

Appendix F – Plan No 2428 Appendix G – Plan No 2464 Appendix H – Plan No 2472 Appendix I – Plan No 17/00530/CONDIT Appendix J – Plan No M866 Appendix K – Plan No LT278367 M1110 Appendix L – Plan No M1110 Appendix M – Plan No M1021

Officers To Contact Edwin McWilliam, Access Manager Piers Lindley, Senior Access & Development Officer E-mail: [email protected] A

39


40

Nplindley

Text Box

APPENDIX A

Sailing C

lub

23

Frisby Lakes Lodge Park

17

2

Club

Path(um)

Track

Track

MILL

CAR

RFIE

LDS

LANE

HOBY

ROAD

Melton M

owbray

(disused)

27

(dis)Lock

RiverWreake

Playing Field

Pond

River

Wreake

Water

Pond

Drain

Water

Slipway

Canal

Water

Water

Water

Water

Pond

Pond

Pp

FB

FB

Sluice

Tunnel

FB

Weir

FordFB

Sta

Ppg

Weir

Pond

62.2m

65.2m

63.7m

63.1m

63.4m

Caravan Site

LC

LC

MP

.5

21

24

COCR

Ward

Bdy

WardBdy

Def

CR

CR

Ward

Bdy

Ward

CR

Bdy

CR

This map is reproduced from

Ordnance S

urveym

aterial with the perm

ission of Ordnance S

urveyon behalf of the C

ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

Leicestershire County C

ouncilPublic Footpath H

108 (parts) and Public Bridlew

ay H37 (part)

at Frisby Lakes, Parish of Asfordby

Public Path Diversion O

rder 2016

Unauthorised reproduction infringes C

rown

copyright and may lead to prosecution or

civil proceedings. Leicestershire County

Council 100019271. P

ublished 31 August 2016

Scale 1:2500

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,

Leicestershire LE3 8R

Jem

ail [email protected]

Director P

hil Crossland

Plan No.2415/1/R

1

Key

Location Plan469100

469200469300

469400469500

469600469700

469800469900

469100469200

469300469400

469500469600

469700469800

469900

318000 318100 318200 318300 318400 318500 318600

318000 318100 318200 318300 318400 318500 318600

GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GDDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD D

EEEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEEE ED

etail on Plan No.2415/2/R

1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1D


1

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkFisherm

en's Car Park

Fishermen's C

ar ParkPlan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Plan No.2415/3/R

1Plan N

o.2415/3/R1

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outesU

naffected Routes

Unaffected R

outes

Proposed Alternative

















































FootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsFootpathsJ - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X J - R

- P, G - W

- X &

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U&

S - T - U

AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AProposed A

lternative Proposed A
















































lternative B

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- EB

ridleway A

- E

H37

H108

H108

H108a

RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RJJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ J

PPPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPPP P

H108

H108

(H108)

Footpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed toFootpaths Proposed tobe diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted be diverted J - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- UJ - P, G

- X & D

- U

Bridlew

ay Proposed toB

ridleway Proposed to

Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed toB


Bridlew

ay Proposed tobe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- Ebe diverted A

- E

H37

H37

UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UTTTTTTT TTTTTTT TTTTTTT TTTTTT TTTTTTT TTTTTTT TTTTTTT T

SSSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS S

XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX X

WWWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWWW W

Approx area reservedfor birds

Ri verW

reake

41

Nplindley_1

Text Box

APPENDIX B

Sailing Club

Melton M

owbray

Slipway

63.1m

63.4m

Scale 1:1250

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,


Jem


Director P

hil Crossland

Plan No.2415/2/R

1

Key

Location Plan469200

469300469400

469200469300

469400

318300 318400

318300 318400

GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedFootpath U

naffectedR

outes Proposed to be R
















































outes Proposed to be diverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X

diverted J - P & G

- Xdiverted J - P &

G - X


















































Footpaths J - R - P &

G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- XFootpaths J - R

- P & G

- W - X


G - W

- X

JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ J

PPPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPPP PPPPPPP P RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX X

WWWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWWW W


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.


ouncilPublic Footpath H

108 (parts) and Public Bridlew

ay H37 (part)

at Frisby Lakes, Parish of AsfordbyPublic Path D

iversion Order 2016


rown





42

Nplindley_2

Text Box

APPENDIX C

Water

SluiceC

ar Park 62.8m

Scale 1:1250

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,


Jem


Director P

hil Crossland

Plan No.2415/3/R

1This m

ap is reproduced from O

rdnance Survey

material w

ith the permission of O

rdnance Survey

on behalf of the Controller of H

er Majesty’s

Stationary O

ffice © C

rown copyright.

Key

Location PlanLeicestershire C

ounty Council

Public Footpath H108 (parts) and Public B

ridleway H

37 (part)at Frisby Lakes, Parish of AsfordbyPublic Path D

iversion Order 2016


rown





469000469100

469000469100

318200 318300

318200 318300

LLLLLLL LLLLLLL LLLLLLL LLLLLL LLLLLLL LLLLLLL LLLLLLL L

MMMMMMM MMMMMMM MMMMMMM MMMMMM MMMMMMM MMMMMMM MMMMMMM MFootpath U

naffectedR

oute proposed to be diverted L - MProposed A

lternative PathL - M

43

Nplindley_3

Text Box

APPENDIX D

45

27

PC

s

41

Bank

Fire Station

21

PC

33

39a39b

83.4m

82.9m81.1m

771m

Lorry Park

Cattle M

arket

Car P

ark

Tank

TCB

s

75.9m

Ward BdyC

Cattle G

rid

Cattle G

rid

Cattle G

rid

Cattle G

rid

1715

Scale 1:1250

Plan No. 2421-B


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

Key

Location Plan

Footpath to be Diverted

A - B - C

Alternative Route

A - D - E - C

Footpath unaffected


rown




ublished 29 February 2016

474900475000

475100

474900475000

475100

319500 319600 319700

319500 319600 319700

Melton B

orough Council

Parkside, Station Approach,Burton Street,M

elton Mow

bray,LE13 1G

H

Applicat S

ti avelo

eyLn odgeto D

ivert a FootpathB

etween N

ottingham R

oad and Scalford Road, M

elton Mow

bray

A

B

C

DE

44

Nplindley_4

Text Box

APPENDIX E

Park View

Pond

LilacsThe

61

33 31

Shelter

36

59

41

35

es

31a

Scale 1:1250

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,


Jem


Director P

hil Crossland

Plan No.2428


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

Key


ounty Council

Public Bridlew

ay G67 (part), The Lilacs, G

rimston


rder 2017

Bridleway to be diverted B-D

Proposed Alternative route B-E-F-D

Bridleway U

naffected


rown




ublished 9 Novem

ber 2016

468700468800

468900

468700468800

468900

321800 321900 322000

321800 321900 322000

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

G67

BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB B

DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD D

EEEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEEE EEEEEEE E

FFFFFFF FFFFFFF FFFFFFF FFFFFF FFFFFFF FFFFFFF FFFFFFF F

45

Nplindley_5

Text Box

APPENDIX F

BESCABY LANE

Track1.22mRH

1.22mRH

Def

Track

Def

The Manor H

ouse

BESCABYLANE

Surgery

Scale 1:2500

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,


Jem


Director P

hil Crossland

Plan No.2464


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

Key


ounty Council

Public Footpath F7 (part), off Bescaby Lane,

Waltham

on the Wolds


rder 2017

Footpath to be Diverted A

-BAlternative R

oute A-CFootpaths U

naffected


rown




ublished 15 May 2017 480900

481000481100

481200481300

480900481000

481100481200

481300

325000 325100 325200 325300 325400

325000 325100 325200 325300 325400

F7F7F7F7F7F7F7 F7F7F7F7F7F7F7 F7F7F7F7F7F7F7 F7F7F7F7F7F7 F7F7F7F7F7F7F7 F7F7F7F7F7F7F7 F7F7F7F7F7F7F7 F7

E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82E82

E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83E83

AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA A

BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BCCCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCCC C

46

Nplindley_6

Text Box

APPENDIX G

Track

Path(um

)

8

40

BRASCOTE LANE

72

LABURNUMAVENUE

82

109

123

50

111

38

38

55

62

37

31

26

21

45

123.3m

13

50

90

97

Allotm

ent Gardens

43

Scale 1:1250

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,


Jem


Director P

hil Crossland

Plan No.2472


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

Key

Location PlanApplication to D

ivert Public Footpath S27 (part)B

rascote Lane, New

bold Verdon

Footpath to be divertedA - B - CAlternative Footpath A - C

Footpath unaffected


rown





444400444500

444400444500

303300 303400

303300 303400

AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA A

BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BCCCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCCC CCCCCCC C

47

Nplindley_7

Text Box

APPENDIX H

End

The Old R

ectory

Little

GP

GP

Track

ETL

Ram

p

132.0m

132.3m

128.3m

Pond

Pond

Conveyors

Rock

Freshfields

WB

Lay-by

Beech

TheW

orks

El S

ub Sta

Quarry

Hoppers

Hoppers

BR

ASC

OTE

LANE

Cottage

Court

Nether End

Highfields

HINCKLEYROAD

130.5m

BRASCOTE LANE


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

IT17/00530/C

ON

DIT

17/00530/CO

ND

ITPublic Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66Public Footpath S66


rown





Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500Scale 1:2500

AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA A

BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB BBBBBBBB B

CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC C

S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66S66

48

Nplindley_8

Text Box

APPENDIX I

49

Nplindley_9

Text Box

APPENDIX J

T34

Claimed Footpath

50

Nplindley_10

Text Box

APPENDIX K

Pond

114.9m

114.9m

Corner

Kosy K

ot

6

House

Barn

The Hollow

Wykin H

ouse4

Wykin H

ouse

Whitecroft

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,


Jem


Director P

hil Crossland

App. Plan M

1110S

cale 1:1250


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

Key

Location Plan

Existing public footpathC

laimed public footpath


rown




ublished 30 Septem

ber 2016

440500440600

440500440600

295400 295500 295600

295400 295500 295600


ouncil - Alleged Public FootpathC

onnecting Public Footpath U4 to H

igham Lane, W

ykin, Hinckley

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

U4

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

HIGHAMLANE

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

INW

YKIN

WYK

IN

51

Nplindley_11

Text Box

APPENDIX L

56

8

58

16

18

30a

7

6a

12

The Gables

53

51

51a

15

5

47

The NewChurch

41

18

57

39

34

12

WEIR

LANE

WEIR

MAIN

STREET

Charlottes

Walk

SCHOO

LLAN

E

FOR

SELLSEND

26

2122

1

55

45

St C

atharine's Church

PH

42

14

28

LB

167.4m

TCB

LB

166.0m

24

163.3m

Pond

46

160.4m

Drain

158.5m

1

HOLL

LANE

Path

Track

Sub S

9

8

14

38

7

1

1

41

33a

37

FarmHouse

32a

9

11

4

29S

urgery31

3

5

18a

6

33

44

35

32

38a

36

Church

30

34a

40

34

Hall

2

2

1

7

TheOldBarn

46

Scale 1:2500

Environm

ent & Transport D

epartment,

County H

all, Glenfield,


Jem


Phil C

rossland, Director

Plan No. M

1021.


Ordnance S

urveym




ontroller of Her M

ajesty’sS

tationary Office ©

Crow

n copyright.

Key

Location Plan

Footpath to be deletedA - B

Footpaths unaffected


rown




ublished20th Decem

ber 2016

467600

467600

467700

467700

467800

467800

467900

467900

468000

468000303100

303100

303200

303200

303300

303300

303400

303400

303500

303500

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

D10

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50A

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50

C50


ouncil (Deletion of Footpath C

50A, School Lane,H

oughton on the Hill) D

efinitive Map M

odification Order 2017

AAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAA A

BBBBBB BBBBBB BBBBBB BBBBBB BBBBBB BBBBBB B

County H

ighway Extent

52

Nplindley_12

Text Box

APPENDIX M

(Public Pack)Agenda Document for Leicestershire Local ...

Documents

Transcript of (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Leicestershire Local ...