Agenda item

REVIEW OF THE BACKLOG OF DEFINITIVE MAP MODIFICATION ORDERS

To receive a report on the backlog of Definitive Map Modification orders.

Minutes:

The Committee received a report on Definitive Map Modification orders.  The Interim Parks, Countryside and Leisure Development Manager reported that the Council currently had a backlog of 82 modification order applications awaiting determination.  The number of new applications being made per year was variable, but over the past eight years it averaged at 7.6 applications per year. At present there are 13 high-priority applications, 33 medium-priority applications, and 36 low-priority applications awaiting determination.  An investment of £200k per year over three years would be needed to clear the backlog up to determination stage.  Beyond that, a further £300k per year would be required to employ extra legal support and open up the routes on the ground.

 

Whilst the clearance of the backlog of Definitive Map Modification Orders up to determination stage within 3 years was possible, it would in all likelihood result in the backlog being shifted along rather than cleared. The service was currently concentrating on high priority applications which were those that provided the most benefit to the community. Considerable parts of the process were out of the Council’s control so it would not be possible to completely clear the backlog within 3 years as it is unlikely that either the council’s Legal services or the Secretary of State would be able to deal with a dramatic increase in orders and the subsequent objections. The service should however ensure that some orders are made this year. The service delivery review will provide the opportunity to review the resources committed to this area of work and to possibly re visit the current statement of priorities.

 

The Council was undergoing review of a number of Services with Amey, who currently had two contracts with the Council to deliver a number of Services including Rights of Way. It had been decided that it was in the Council’s interest to commission out all aspects of Public Rights of Way leaving only those areas that could not be delegated. Amey would be responsible for all areas of the Service including Definitive Modification Orders.

 

In response to a question, the Director, Environment and Culture said that strategy work would remain with the Council after the Service was transferred to Amey, who would be expected to deliver to the Council’s priorities.  The priorities for the Directorate were set by the Executive.

 

During the ensuing discussion the following points were made:

 

·      A Member said that he found the report to be unsatisfactory, and said that firmer proposals were required. 

 

·      That the budget for footpaths for the previous year had been £230k.  This had to cover the maintenance of 3,500 km of rights of way, as well as all the legal work associated with Definitive Map Modification order work.

 

·      A Motion that an exempt report should be provided to the Committee on how the Definitive Map Modification order backlog would be addressed in the contractual arrangements with Amey, was lost.

 

Mr Everitt, a resident of Ledbury, addressed the meeting.  He said that he had submitted four applications for footpath Definitive Map Modifications in 2006 and, bearing in mind both the backlog and the way certain applications were prioritised, it was unlikely that his applications would be dealt with in his lifetime.  He asked whether this was an appropriate level of service that the public should expect from the Council.

 

The Director of Environment and Culture replied that the Service extracted the maximum value for money from the funds that were available to it.  There was scope to improve the existing service, and this was why it was being transferred to Amey.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That:   a)      The Committee expressed its concerns regarding the continued          backlog of Definitive Map Modification Orders.

 

and;

 

b)      That the need for improvement in the resourcing of the Service, both financial and personnel, should be highlighted to the Cabinet Member (Economic Development and Community Services).

Supporting documents: