Public Access Strategy - Review & Analysis Planning Workshop

Following the Audit stage of the work, a stakeholder workshop was held at the Summerlee Industrial Heritage Centre, Coatbridge.  A wide cross section of participants attended, including local user and community groups, farmers and land managers, and representatives of key agencies including North Lanarkshire Council, Lanarkshire Health Board, voluntary groups etc.  The workshop was informally structured, with participants spending most of the time working in groups.  A number of sessions were held, focusing on:

• developing a vision for access
• identifying 'nightmare' scenarios
• discussing key strengths and weaknesses
• highlighting priorities for action
• community resources and groups to support access locally

The group's vision for access, related to providing access for all.  Many participants felt that in parts of the area, access is already well provided. There was also recognition that there has been improvement in access over the last 20 years.  It was also suggested that there is a good variation of paths in some areas and that the paths are available to a wide range of users.  It was proposed that these strengths could be built upon.  Areas of strength identified were:

• Barons Haugh,
• new paths in Monklands area,
• Kilsyth,
• Forth and Clyde Canal and
• the North Calder Heritage Trail.

In terms of suggested approaches, people were generally in favour of creating new paths (links between existing paths, safe routes to school, easy to walk routes).  The need for safe cycle routes was highlighted and it was suggested there is particular need for cycle path provision through towns.  Local neighbourhood networks incorporating circular routes and points of interest were proposed.  It was also suggested that there is a need to integrate paths by linking networks and providing mixed-use routes.  At the same time, improving the management and maintenance was also viewed as a priority for action.

The need for consultation with the public and landowners/managers was raised repeatedly.  Some participants felt it necessary for the strategy to undertake a survey to establish demand and the needs of local communities.  All of the groups made a long list of people and groups whom might be interested or who should be involved in an access strategy.  As well as consultation, the suggestion of community involvement was noted in terms of 'community ownership' (local people playing a role in looking after paths.)  There was recognition of the conflicts that arise between land owners/managers and users and it was suggested this could be effectively addressed through consultation and responsible access.

The lack of awareness of paths in the area was attributed to low levels of promotional material.  Suggestions were made about how this might be overcome, including the use of the internet, maps and leaflets that could provide the approximate timing of walks and difficulty grading.  Quality of signage was reported to vary across the area.

All of the participants were concerned about vandalism and fear for safety, particularly in urban areas.  Common problems include broken glass bottles, tyres, burnt out cars and farmer's gates and fences being damaged and left unsecured.  There was consensus that, to address vandalism and improper use of paths, it is necessary to educate people in responsible access through schools and youth organisations.  Concerns were also expressed about the loss of green space/paths to developers, particularly on sites for housing and golf courses.  Participants felt that access should be planned in relation to housing development.

Concern arose over funding and the need to allocate resources to priorities.  Specific priority areas identified by the group included: