Plan to move our footpaths is dangerous, says campaigners
WALKERS and villagers of South Petherton are campaigning against plans to scrap or relocate their footpaths.
The proposals, which they describe as "dangerous" and "a waste of time and money", would see part of a footpath that runs across the front gardens of several properties along North Street removed.
-
PATH PROTEST: The Protect Petherton Paths Campaign launched in South Petherton last week with support from Valerie Singleton (in sunglasses) of Blue Peter fame who is pictured with local residents and walkers from the South Petherton Walking Group. Picture by Ben Fitzpatrick
-
DISPUTED PLANS: A South Somerset District Council document showing proposed changes to South Petherton footpaths
Another section that is currently inaccessible because it runs into the back garden of a property further down the road would be redirected across a field.
The access to another footpath which runs across fields in the village would be moved further along Compton Road.
The plans have been put forward by Nigel Screen of North Street, Vincent Shutler, of Compton Road, South Somerset District Council and Somerset County Council.
They have been approved by district and parish councils but now face a public consultation after an objection from Brian Herrick of Barcroft Hall.
Ian Greenfield, organiser of South Petherton Walking Group, vehemently opposes the plans and has set up the Protect Petherton Paths campaign.
He claims young children, mothers with prams and the elderly would be forced down the narrow North Street, frequently used by large tractors and agricultural vehicles, to avoid the proposed new footpath route which goes through a "muddy field full of crops".
"It's an accident waiting to happen," he said.
"There are a lot of agricultural vehicles that use the lane and it's dangerous. There seems to be no consideration for the elderly, the young and the disabled. These footpath issues are a waste of time and council tax payers' money."
A large group of walkers from the group met in the village last week and were joined by former Blue Peter presenter Valerie Singleton.
They are also supported by footpath experts Marlene Masters and Tony Wood, former chairman of Curry Rivel walking club.
However, the parish council's path liaison officer Peter Kidner, of Compton Way, supports the planned alterations.
He said: "I'd be the first to admit that it isn't the best solution possible and at first I had concerns, but after engaging with the county council it's a sensible compromise that won't endanger lives.
"Even if the council spent thousands of pounds officially constructing the footpaths through people's gardens, you'd have the residents unhappy and walkers probably wouldn't walk along them anyway. We started reviewing these footpaths in 2004 and I question why Mr Herrick and Mr Greenfield have decided to oppose the plans now.
"Not once have they turned up to parish council meetings to voice their concerns."
He added that the diverted footpath across the field would be fenced and appropriate ground material put in place.
A public inquiry will be held at South Somerset District Council, Brympton Way, Yeovil, on October 12, at 10am.
Comments will be made by both sides and the Planning Inspectorate will make the final decision.
5 Comments
by Brian Herrick, South Petherton
Tuesday, August 31 2010, 2:30PM
“Sir
I refer to your article ¿Plan to move footpaths is dangerous says campaigners¿
It is everyone¿s right to be able to object to a local authority order proposing any change to a footpath. Furthermore if the order does not create a solution that satisfies that objection then a public inquiry organised by the planning inspectorate will decide the outcome.
In this South Petherton case, despite proposals to meet the local authority to seek a solution and alleviate the cost of a public inquiry, they have refused.
It is already accepted by Mr.Kidner that the proposed scheme does not provide the ¿best solution¿. Of course everyone deserves ¿the best solution¿, so a public inquiry it has to be.
Our parish council were made aware of the problem almost three years ago after I attended the parish council meeting. In a letter to the Chairman, Rodger Neve at that time I wrote:
¿On the matter of the footpaths in question, there are obstructed footpaths within your parish upon which parishioners wish to walk. These footpaths are necessary for walkers, the disabled and mums with buggies to avoid the extremely dangerous narrow road in North Street which is being used by cars and high speed agricultural vehicles. Unless this is attended to I feel sure there will be a serious accident.
These obstructions were notified to the parish council in May 2005.Since then there have been many formal applications to remove these obstructions.
The district council has made no attempt to alleviate this problem, instead they have promoted the obstruction. Indeed surprisingly the parish council voted for the extinguishment and diversion of these paths, that action has forced parishioners onto the road and the diversion forced them to avoid land that was and continues to be the subject of planning enforcement. This path is a critical parish to parish footpath network link...
..I would urge you again to start to represent the parishioners as a parish council should do and make representations to the higher authorities to expedite this matter.¿
Just to make matters worse at the time our parish council voted for planning permission being granted to Mr.Screen to build a garden over the existing footpath and completely block it.
Finally the objectors who simply require a reasonable solution do not deserve their views to be described by Mr.Kidner as ¿hogwash¿. Surely it is the role of a Parish Paths Liaison Officer to ¿liaise¿ with walking groups and parishioners to find the ¿best solution¿.”
by Ian Greenfield, South Petherton
Monday, August 30 2010, 12:14PM
“South Petherton Walking Group¿s complaint is that North Street is narrow and that Tractors, Trailers, Trucks and other heavy vehicles, let alone cars, do not mix well with pedestrians on this surprisingly busy little road. How absurd for Rear Admiral Peter Kidner to comment that that the footpath adjacent to North Street and Droveway was there just to enable walkers to avoid a muddy lane many years ago. Please tell me what has changed? During the past 15 years that I have walked North Street and Droveway. It has always been muddy and mucky for pedestrians and in places passable with difficulty, even tarmac gets muddy. Tarmac has made a difference, but then so would re-opening the illegally blocked parallel footpath. During the same 15 year period South Petherton has more and more become a ¿walkers¿ destination, being a starting point for large and small walking groups as well as individuals alike. Walking approximately 110 times during the year, SPWG can bring up to 200 visitors to the area during a month, sometimes in groups of 30 or 40. We are a social group and have a huge following, both active and armchair walkers. Our sole objective is to support the area and we are well placed to point out the dangers. North Street is part of a number of circular walking routes around South Petherton and for the benefit of the Village as a whole, its safe use should be encouraged.
South Petherton Walking Group do not make war on Farmers or Landowners. This so called ¿footpath¿ sport in which Peter Kidner engages serves only to benefit his own ego. One moment Peter Kidner wants to reopen the footpath parallel to North Street, and next, after being befriended by the two main landowners affected, i.e. Developers Nigel Screen and the Shutlers there is now a distinctive change of point of view. Kidner¿s encouraging the isolation of agricultural land to extend an ¿alleged¿ garden or creating an impractical ¿Pony Paddock¿ certainly whiffs of collusion. Looking at the drawings in the press, the land being isolated definitely gives the impression of two very, very large building plots being created.
I was at the Parish Council meeting when you, Mr Kidner, stood up and declared to all, your interest in this particular proposed footpath diversion and that you were ¿proud¿ to be supporting your developer friend, ¿Nigel Screen¿ in the diversion of this footpath as you thought it was a good idea.
Never once have you considered children, mothers, buggies, our older folk, ramblers or walkers who struggle with increasing traffic in North Street and Droveway on a regular daily basis. Your preference is to bully others into submission to get your own way, and then hide behind your Parish Council, District Council and County Council friends when the going get tough.
Perhaps it is time to get a sensible outcome.”
by P.G., South Petherton
Friday, August 27 2010, 8:18PM
“I have no axe to grind over this issue it does not affect me but what does affect me is the local parish council and their representatives.
I understandably expect that they deal with matters on our behalf honestly and in accordance with local policy.
Clearly in this instance matters have not been attended to correctly and certainly not with any parity.
I have been quietly following our local issues and since Mr.Kidner was appointed by the parish council as our Footpath Liaison Officer there has been a complete collapse in harmonious relations between villagers, he has divided us.
I note from Mr.Turnbull's letter that Mr.Kidner has already been relieved of his duties on an earlier occasion and now surprisingly the parish council has re-engaged him.
I honestly believe the best thing would be that Mr.Kidner stood down and allowed someone else who can demonstrate the ability to liaise properly to take his place. Hopefully then harmony would reign and embarrassing issues like this for the village would cease.
On a completely different level I have also checked with the Open Spaces Society and Ramblers and both their policies on this issue in particular are against what Mr.Kidner is proposing, yet he purports to represent them.”
by P.G., South Petherton
Friday, August 27 2010, 8:15PM
“I have no axe to grind over this issue it does not affect me but what does affect me is the local parish council and their representatives.
I understandably expect that they deal with matters on our behalf honestly and in accordance with local policy.
Clearly in this instance matters have not been attended to correctly and certainly not with any parity.
I have been quietly following our local issues and since Mr.Kidner was appointed by the parish council as our Footpath Liaison Officer there has been a complete collapse in harmonious relations between villagers, he has divided us.
I note from Mr.Turnbull's letter that Mr.Kidner has already been relieved of his duties on an earlier occasion and now surprisingly the parish council has re-engaged him.
I honestly believe the best thing would be that Mr.Kidner stood down and allowed someone else who can demonstrate the ability to liaise properly to take his place. Hopefully then harmony would reign and embarrassing issues like this for the village would cease.
On a completely different level I have also checked with the Open Spaces Society and Ramblers and both their policies on this issue in particular are against what Mr.Kidner is proposing, yet he purports to represent them.”
by Geoff, South Petherton
Friday, August 27 2010, 7:04PM
“Mr Kidner appears to have a selective memory. I have certainly attended a Parish meeting a few years ago when this debacle first commenced. Driven by a landowner (your friend, Mr Kidner) who decided to convert agricultural land to domestic use and affect the footpath in the process).I made the original complaint.
It was very clear to me then that the Councils in this area (Parish, District and County) have a less than even handed way of making decisions.
The "waste of Tax payers money" did not appear to concern Mr Kidner when Taunton Court was full (over a number of days) with Council Officers (all at taxpayers expense) whilst he nitpicked over the Barcroft Hall Gates.
We do, of course, already have an existing footpath which would allow walkers to avoid the narrow (and dangerous) section of North Street (Droveway). It has been illegally blocked for a number of years now.
Perhaps Mr Kidner would like to have a chat with his friend Mr Screen and get him to remove the blockages to the existing Path. Also, Mr Waddleton (Rights of Way SDDC) to find out why his Dept has been sitting on it's hands on this matter.
The truth is this issue has little to do with diverting a footpath for the good of walkers. It has everything to do with a Landowner illegally closing a path because, after converting agricultural land into a garden with the resulting value to his property (all with support by the Councils) it does not suit his purpose to have a footpath through it.
The Councils have Policies and Regulations they are supposed to adhere to in these matters. The day they start doing so will be the day I start listening (and believing) that they are competent to carry out the function they are supposed to.
Considering Mr Kidner and Mr Screen's involvement in building a "gravel pavement" in North Street (paid for by the Council) which dovetails nicely with the planned diversion. (To the advantage of the Landowner) You will forgive my somewhat sceptic view of local Councils ability to show parity and objectivity in these matters.
A full Inquiry into all Council operations and function (including detailed analysis of individual Officers and Councillors) is required.
As this is unlikely to occur, we can at least be clear that this Diversion will undoubtedly go through. Mr Kidner will continue to be a selective hypocrite. Certain Landowners will retain their "special" relationship with the Councils.
Twas ever thus.”