To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Cannon, Councillor Haseler, Councillor Baldwin and Councillor Muir. Councillor Clark, Councillor Shelim and Councillor Werner were attending the meeting as substitutes.

Councillor Rayner was attending the meeting virtually, due to the current legislation this meant that she was unable to vote on any item on the agenda.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Councillor Rayner declared a personal intertest, that she had visited the site with Councillor Stimson, officers and the applicant. This had also been declared at the last meeting of the Panel, where the diversion orders had been initially discussed.

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 18^th October 2021.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes of the meeting held on 18^th October 2021 were approved as an accurate record.

To consider the report.

The Chairman explained that this item had been considered at the last meeting of the Rights of Way and Highway Licensing Panel. The footpath diversion order, for parts of footpath 17 and 59, was to make the permitted footpath into the permanent right of way and close the current public footpath at the site. The Panel had voted to proceed with the diversion orders, the report had now come back to the Panel for consideration after the statutory public consultation.

Anthony Hurst, Parks and Countryside Manager, said that the report was for the Panel to consider the responses to the statutory consultation on the diversion orders. Maps in the agenda pack showed the location of the footpaths, while all responses to the consultation had been included. There had been a total of 78 objections received from a number of different groups, along with a number of individuals. Five neutral comments and two comments in support of the proposals had also been received. Anthony Hurst had also included the informal comments which had been made as part of the preliminary consultation, which the Panel had initially considered in making their decision in October 2021.

Steve Gillions said that he was the Chairman of the East Berkshire Ramblers Association. A number of the members had walked the footpaths a number of times and still objected to the diversion orders. Any amendment needed to be in line and meet the requirements of the Highways Act, the group had discussed it with a professional and they agreed with officers at RBWM, that the requirements had not been met. The views from the current footpaths would be lost and also the ability for walkers to participate in a circular walk. Steve Gillions did not feel that the new permitted footpath was a like for like swap, but it would be good for both footpaths to exist. Steve Gillions said that the council had a good record of looking after its footpaths and footpath 17 had historical significance as a through route, it had been there since at least 1875. Landowners had a responsibility to maintain rights of way across their land, muddy paths were not a new issue and the Ramblers suggested that signage could be erected to explain to walkers that they should look to use the permitted footpath in bad weather. Steve Gillions concluded that the diversion orders were not acceptable and that the permitted footpath should be maintained along with the current footpath.

Dick Scarff explained that he was representing the Cookham Society. The Society had objected to the diversion orders for a significant period of time, it was pleasing to see the number of objections and also officers recommendations to not proceed with the diversion orders. In the report, it stated that the closure of the current footpath would allow for more economic farming practises, but there was mention of what this actually involved or what the savings could be. Three members of the society had met with the applicant in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

To consider the report.

Anthony Hurst set out the report and explained that the Panel was being asked to approve the Milestones Statement, which set out the priorities, standards and targets for the coming year. RBWM had consulted with the Local Access Forum and a number of parish councils. Comments from parish councils would be followed up in due course. Suggestions that had been made and were reasonable had been incorporated into the Milestones Statements. Considering the targets achieved from the current year, a presentation was shown to the Panel which showed various photos of the work which had been undertaken.

The Chairman thanked the volunteers, who had done a great job. She asked if comments from the volunteers on the work they had done was in the ‘Around the Royal Borough’ publication and in media outlets such as resident newsletters.

Anthony Hurst said that an article had been included in the most recent issue. He agreed with the Chairman’s comments and said that they provided invaluable support, it was important to continue to promote the work that volunteers did for the borough.

The Chairman asked if links could be added for potential volunteers to join the volunteer groups.

Naomi Markham, Environmental Services Manager, confirmed that this could be done and it could also be added to the website.

ACTION – Officers to add links to the various volunteer groups in both articles and the website.

Councillor Brar said that the path from Odney Lane to Cookham Lock had a significant pothole, she asked if this was the responsibility of RBWM to fix.

Anthony Hurst said that he would discuss this case with Councillor Brar after the meeting.

Councillor Werner said that he echoed the sentiments from the Chairman and officers on the volunteers. He suggested a letter from the Chairman of the Panel, thanking volunteers for their work.

The Chairman said that this had already been done, they had done an excellent job and their work deserved to be recognised.

Councillor Werner commented on number 20 on the Milestones Statement and asked if there was any progress. The last time Councillor Werner had visited Odney Common, the gates on the lock were locked and walkers were unable to get across to the island. He asked if this had been reopened.

Anthony Hurst said that on number 20, which was around filling in a missing link, the landowners had not been willing to agree to the proposal. Unfortunately, this meant that there was little that RBWM could do but the case would remain in the statement in case the situation was to change. On the lock, Anthony Hurst explained that the path was under the control of the Environment Agency and was a permitted footpath, there had been an incident in this area of drowning and the Environment Agency were therefore putting in extra fences to make the path safer and more secure.

Councillor Werner commented that it was the only way to get to the island, he asked how confident officers were at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.