EXECUTIVE – 27 MAY 2003

VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ON THE RIDGEWAY

1. The Ridgeway National Trail is expected to provide a high quality experience for the many thousands who use it every year. However, this is not always the case and major concerns have arisen over the condition of the surface in some places. In October 2002 The Ridgeway Management Group published for consultation a set of improvement proposals that seek to redress the balance. Following a substantial level of response to the consultation the proposals have been revised and are now beginning to be implemented.
2. At the same time there has been a strong lobby seeking the banning of non-essential recreational motor vehicles from those sections of the Trail designated as byway open to all traffic (BOAT) and road used as public path (RUPP) (see Annex 1 for background information). As a direct consequence the Minister for Rural Affairs has taken a personal interest in the issue and has called meetings to assess progress by the Management Group, The Countryside Agency and the six highway authorities.
3. At its meeting on 1 April 2003 the County Council considered a motion from Councillor Brian Hodgson concerning a ban on motor vehicles. The Council adopted the motion in the following amended form:

This Council resolves:

1. to endorse a range of measures being proposed by the Ridgeway Management Group to improve and sustain the surface condition of the National Trail in Oxfordshire;
2. to press the Ridgeway Management Group for a tight and explicit timetable for assessment of the need and efficacy of traffic regulation orders to prevent unacceptable surface damage; and
3. to urge the Executive to confirm that traffic regulation orders will be made on specific sections of the route if there is strong and specific evidence that such orders will be appropriate and effective.
4. This report addresses the issues impinging on and constraining future action, including the use of traffic regulation orders, and summarises the current position.

Surface Management and Improvement Proposals

5. Over the last 30 years various efforts have been made to repair and improve the surface of The Ridgeway. These have largely been piecemeal and have not been backed up by systematic maintenance regimes. One underlying reason for this has been lack of priority for funding by the highway authorities. As a result the maintenance has not kept up with the levels and variety of use and the overall surface condition has deteriorated. In Oxfordshire the backlog of surface repairs on the Public Rights of Way (PRoW) network across the county has been previously reported as an estimated budget pressure of £500,000, a significant proportion of which would need to be targeted at The Ridgeway.
6. In 1997 the Countryside Commission (now the Countryside Agency) produced ‘Meeting the Grade – Quality Standards for National Trails’ a document aiming to ensure that all National Trails are maintained to the highest standards (much higher than the statutory minimum required of the highway authorities for the PRoW network as a whole). A condition survey of the route was carried out in 2002 against this standard. Overall 51% of The Ridgeway fails to meet the required standard for a National Trail, increasing to 61% for BOAT/RUPP sections.
7. Also in 1997 the government responded to the growing concerns over the use of motor vehicles on PRoW by publishing a practical guide to managing the issue. ‘Making the Best of Byways’ sets out measures that highway authorities should take in managing routes with vehicular access. It puts forward a staged approach of defining the problem, clearly identifying the status of the route, undertaking repairs, introducing voluntary restraint and finally, if problems still arise, assessing the need for a traffic regulation order.
8. This national best practice advice has informed the Ridgeway Management Group’s work to date. In this light the Management Group have drawn up specific proposals which aim to:

• clearly identify and properly define the problem;
• develop appropriate maintenance strategies with the Highway Authorities through whose area the Trail runs;
• where required, undertake further experimental work to evaluate possible solutions;
• work with all user groups and landowners to achieve a high quality experience for all National Trail users;
• plan and implement actions to ensure that The Ridgeway National Trail will meet the published surface quality standards.

9. The range of proposals is set out in Annex 2. These include measures to collect good evidence of where and how the damage is occurring; vehicular use surveys; a range of practical measures to resolve local problems, such as working with farmers to identify alternative agricultural access options and the involvement of the motor vehicle user groups and the police. The Management Group is also seeking the funding necessary to begin repairs and ongoing maintenance of the worst sections. Traffic regulation orders to restrict motor vehicles on certain sections are under consideration as just one of the ‘tools’ to finding a sustainable solution for The Ridgeway National Trail.

Management of Recreational Vehicles on The Ridgeway

10. The Ridgeway passes along public rights of way that confer legal rights for motor vehicle users independent of the National Trail designation. Consultations and questionnaires over the years have shown that there is a general dislike of motoring on The Ridgeway, although those questioned were often not aware that vehicles have a right to use much of the route.
11. The Countryside Agency, who are responsible for designating National Trails and fund much of their management, are supporting the Management Group’s approach urging co-operation from users, landowners and local authorities. The Agency has stressed that ‘simple bans on access do not meet the varying interests nor fit well with the history of the route’. This history includes Inspectors rejecting permanent Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs). At the last attempt in 1992 a TRO made by the Secretary of State, that would have banned motor vehicles on Sundays and Bank Holidays, failed at public inquiry on the grounds that it was not justified.
12. There are, however, circumstances in which the use of TROs should and would be considered:

• Temporary TROs are often and routinely used to close a PRoW for a short period to allow work to proceed. This might be repairs to the PRoW itself or because other work is being undertaken, eg excavations for utilities or repairs to adjacent features such as walls, locks etc). Swindon BC recently made such an order on a section of The Ridgeway to enable repairs to the surface where it had become dangerous for the public. Similar orders may be required in Oxfordshire to enable planned repairs.

• Permanent TROs may be used to ‘ban’ certain classes of user and may specify a period of time, for example during certain months of the year. Such orders require careful consultation and if there were substantial objection would normally require a public inquiry to be held. The Management Group has proposed a possible permanent TRO in Wiltshire, which is being pursued with the County Council. Other locations and the use of seasonal TROs are under active investigation.

13. Permanent TROs have a number of drawbacks as a tool to manage vehicular use on The Ridgeway:

• They are expensive in terms of both legal and management costs; research suggests an average figure of £6,000.

• Barriers, signs etc needed would be intrusive features in the high quality landscape of the North Wessex Downs and Chilterns AONBs and alter the historic open character of large parts of the route.

• Enforcement is a police matter and entirely dependent upon the priority they can give to it.

• They may lead to a challenge on human rights grounds unless there is good evidence that they are the only ‘reasonable’ solution.

• It would be difficult to succeed at public inquiry unless it could be proved by the order making authority that it had exhausted all other appropriate options – lack of resources to meet the highway authority duty to maintain may not be a strong defence.

• Provision would still have to be made for private access and agricultural vehicles in many locations and for access by the disabled, including in private motor vehicles.

14. There will need to be a carefully balanced decision on whether a TRO will be appropriate and effective. This is far more likely to be the case for specific sections and to resolve specific management issues than it is for a whole Oxfordshire section of the Trail, as reflected in part (c) of the County Council resolution.

Recent events

15. Countryside Service staff have inspected the whole of the route in Oxfordshire and identified two top priority sections where repairs to the surface are urgently needed for public health and safety. The cost of this work is estimated at £55,000. In addition there are many other sections where work is required, totalling an estimated £244,000. Work on all these sections is required to bring the surface up to an acceptable basic standard regardless in most cases of the question of future traffic regulation orders.
16. At his second meeting with interested bodies on 8 April 2003 the Minister for Rural Affairs looked to the Countryside Agency to take a more proactive strategic lead. The Agency is due to report to the Minister before another meeting in June and has requested further information from the highway authorities. Until its work is complete the Agency recently announced that it would not provide grant offers to highway authorities towards planned work. Consequently practical work to repair the surface is on hold. The Agency has also indicated that it intends to establish a monitoring group of highway authority members and user group representatives.

Financial and Staff Implications

17. A request was received in October 2002 from the National Trails Officer for £25,000 per annum for three years towards the proposed programme of surface repair works in Oxfordshire. This request could not be met from existing budgets for rights of way maintenance, where an ongoing shortfall to meet statutory minimum standards exists. Therefore a budget bid was made as part of the 2003/04 Medium Term Financial Planning process, but this was unsuccessful. A one off sum of £25,000 for 2003/04 has been identified for this purpose from carried forward underspend. It is anticipated that another budget bid will be made for 2004/05.
18. The £25,000 could attract a grant contribution of up to 75% of total costs from the Countryside Agency, which over the three years would meet the estimated cost of work identified. However, the Agency has recently indicated that it will only grant aid at 50% when offers are eventually made, thus reducing the overall extent of work possible, or increasing the sum required from the six highway authorities.
19. Other proposed measures can be met from existing annual budgets for the National Trail.
20. There will be additional pressures on staff in working with the National Trails Team and colleagues from the other highway authorities to deliver the proposed measures, especially the repair works and any permanent TROs. This will inevitably mean that work elsewhere in the county on the PRoW network will be delayed.

RECOMMENDATION

21. The Executive is RECOMMENDED to:
1. note the progress and timetable for the range of measures proposed by the Ridgeway Management Group to improve and sustain the surface condition of the National Trail in Oxfordshire;
2. confirm that Traffic Regulation Orders will be considered for specific sections of the route if there is strong and specific evidence that such orders will be appropriate and effective;
3. press the Countryside Agency to make a grant offer without delay towards identified urgent surface improvement works at a level of 75% in recognition of the national status and importance of the Ridgeway.

RICHARD DUDDING
Director for Environment & Economy

Background papers: The Ridgeway National Trail Surface Improvement Proposals Consultation Draft October 2002 and subsequent revisions.

The Countryside Agency Press Release, 11 November 2002.

Contact Officer: Keith Wheal, Countryside Services Manager. Tel: 01865 810202

May 2003

Return to TOP