Meeting Notes
Present
Cllr June Lumley (Chairperson) (JL) - Rochford District Council
Keith Powell (Vice Chairman) (KP) - Business, Maritime Community \ Independent
Angela Hutchings (AH) - Rochford District Council
Paula Chapman (PC) - Rochford District Council
Helen Quinnell (HQ) - Chelmsford City Council
Alexis Corless (AC) - Maldon District Council
Cllr Paul White (PW) - Hullbridge Parish Council
Cllr Glen Dryhurst (GD) - Ashingdon Parish Council
Ken Wickham (KW) - Crouch Harbour Authority
Doug MacEwen (DM) - Crouch Area Yachting Federation
Rachel Fancy (RF) - RSPB
Apologies
Cllr Simon Wootton - Rochford District Council
Matt Mason - Baltic Wharf Distribution
John Lindsey - Environment Agency
Cllr Alan Shearing - South Woodham Ferrers Town Council
Cllr Nick Skeens - Maldon District Council
Absent:
Cllr Mike Halford - Canewdon Parish Council
Cllr Roy Hart - Battlesbridge Business
David Overton - Natural England
No nomination received - Rettendon Parish Council
Awaiting new nomination - Burnham-on-Crouch Town Council
No nomination received - Burnham Chamber of Commerce
Notes
Julie Jakes (JJ) - Rochford District Council
Duration
Not Noted
Note 10/20
Welcome and Introductions
Cllr Lumley welcomed members of the Steering Group to the meeting. It was noted that following the resignation of Cllr. Ager, Cllr P. White had been appointed to represent the Hullbridge Parish Council.
Note 11/20
Notes of River Crouch Coastal Community Team Meeting held on 29 January 2020
The notes of the meeting held on 29 January 2020 were noted and agreed.
Matters Arising
Item 6 – Fambridge to Maldon Rail Link. The actual project later proposed was a different route - to improve the line and continue from Southminster and Bradwell.
Item 4 – National Coastal Trail. PC confirmed that the consultation closed in March 2020 and representations were made by both the District and Parish Councils.
Item 8 – Tourism Forum. PC advised that the Forum had taken place and everyone had been invited to attend.
Note 12/20
Coast to Coast Path
GD gave details of the Essex County Council/Sustrans route from Stansted to Braintree, which had now been extended south beyond Witham and even to Maldon. The intention was for this route to go all the way to Basildon and Southend-on-Sea, thus providing a route along which walkers, cyclists and horse riders could proceed safely.
The current proposal was to use the route from South Woodham Ferrers, starting at the Hullbridge Ford and running through to South Fambridge, using existing footpaths and bridleways. It would cover two coastal communities, including Purleigh. Parts of the old railway track were already in use as a bridleway by Essex Wildlife Trust and there were sections that were just green lanes which could possibly be acquired. It was noted that 370 metres of the route runs alongside the edge of a field and it may be possible to persuade the farmer to gift, sell or lease a 3 to 4-metre-wide strip of land. This would form a beautiful country route, most of which was already walkable, with a stretch of approximately 3 miles that would need to be made into a public right of way.
In response to a question, GD confirmed that this was a separate issue to the sub-group that had been set up to look at public rights of way, but there were links.
Note 13/20
Proposal for Latest Stretch of Wallasea to Burnham Coastal Path
PC reported that, unfortunately, as no-one from Natural England was present at this meeting, a detailed update could not be provided. She stated that following the public consultations that closed in March, there had been numerous objections to all but one section of the route. A Planning Inspectorate visit was now required; this would be extremely difficult to arrange during the current lockdown restrictions and would delay the opening of the path. This also meant that the path could not be promoted until it had been approved by the Secretary of State.
An update from Natural England had been requested and PC agreed to continue to chase for a response and update the Steering Group in due course.
Action: PC to update the Group when a response was received from Natural England.
Post Meeting Note: PC emailed update from Natural England on 15.9.20.
The Chair welcomed Alex Corless (AC) from Maldon District Council to her first meeting of the Steering Group and it was noted that she had replaced Jack Ellum.
AC advised that she had experienced similar problems contacting Natural England. She was also aware that there had been issues with each Section on the route, which had resulted in the need for further investigations. She advised that, prior to Covid, it could take approximately 1 year to arrange a Planning Inspectorate site visit. Also, a significant stretch of the path? came inland due to the location of a caravan site in the South Woodham Ferrers area, which defeated the whole point of sticking to the coast.
HQ advised that there had been no decision yet on the route that they were going to promote in terms of the path to prosperity project. Conversations had taken place regarding the linkages that do not run all the way through in certain area.
GD provided a summary on two submissions he had made, one via Rochford District Council and one separately. The route chosen around Fambridge was a little bit away from the river coast, but a very good compromise. The worst section was from Battlesbridge, through Rettendon towards South Woodham Ferrers, where it moved away from the river and headed north along the verge of a very busy highway. It was also noted that another section runs along the very busy Beeches Road, Battlesbridge.
PC advised that there was a map of the whole England path and a specific link to the objections to Route 34. Links will be circulated with the minutes.
Action: Map and link to be circulated with the final minutes.
Post Meeting Note: PC emailed the links to Members on 15 September 2020 and they have also been included below. To date, the objections to Route 34 have not been published:
PW reported that there was an ongoing project dealing with the collapse of the sea wall adjacent to the Brandy Hole. He had made contact with the contractor and Essex County Council (ECC) to ascertain whether the good quality aggregate being removed from this area could be used to fill in the gaps on the footpath between the Brandy Hole and The Dome. The contractor had advised that this was possible, but ECC had concerns about budget availability.
GD advised that it was possible to walk from South Fambridge to The Dome, but the footpath did require improvement. Hullbridge Footpath No. 8 currently had two breaches, which could be easily filled. The proposed route by Natural England was along the edge of the fields, which was a good compromise.
For clarification purposes, it was noted that Footpath No. 9 ends at the Brandy Hole and Footpath 8 continues onto The Dome.
In response to a question, PW advised that the aggregate was coming from the existing riverbank. There were approximately 200 tonnes sitting on the bank, which had been removed in 2013. Bags of aggregate had then been inserted to restabilise the wall. The current sea wall work was part of an insurance claim. The Environment Agency (EA) were leading on this project. KP agreed that this was worth pursuing.
Action: KP will invite a representative from EA to the next Footpaths Project group meeting to discuss, see 16/20 below.
PC advised that the route for the rest of the Rochford coast (Wallasea through to Southend-on-Sea) had only received one objection. ECC had now commenced establishment works. In response to question, PC confirmed that this route included Wallasea Island, Barling, etc.
Note 14/20
Draw Down of Funds Paper for £12
AH advised that this situation had arisen when a Steering Group Member required a modest amount of money to pay for a meeting room for a project group. RDC was the accountable body, but there was no delegation in place. This paper created a petty cash element – a £20 denomination – which would enable project groups to continue to meet.
The Steering Group formally agreed to the proposal as set out above and in the report.
Note 15/20
Branch Line Railway Project
KP drew the Group’s attention to the notes and advised that it was a different line that had been investigated. The project group had agreed that the proposal did have merit and would have been an excellent project if the second power station at Bradwell went ahead. It was noted that the current lockdown restrictions may have changed the landscape. Unfortunately, the Member of Parliament chose not to put through our proposal and supported the Maldon bid to extend out to Stansted. Therefore, there was no point in the project group continuing further.
KP advised that he did not see the railway as being a priority at present and suggested drawing a line under this project. This suggestion was agreed by the Steering Group.
AC advised that the Maldon District Council project teams were in place and work was progressing as normal on several aspects. She agreed to flag the report to ensure that the teams were aware that this was in the mix.
Action: AC to feedback to the Steering Group if necessary.
Note 16/20
Hullbridge PROW Project Group Terms of Reference and Draft Agenda
KP reported that the terms of reference had been put forward and approved. Unfortunately, due to Covid and the resignation of Cllr. Ager, no further action had been taken. It was suggested that as this was a much bigger subject, it would be better to have a project group looking at footpaths in general, including the Hullbridge PROW.
PW advised that David Wilson Homes had installed a bridleway which ran along the westerly side of their development. They have also carried out field archaeology and tests - all the details and findings were on the Parish Council’s website. A large amount of work had been undertaken at the Kendal Nature Reserve around clearing the area and Ash die back, etc. It was noted that since the start of the Pandemic, Hullbridge had seen a significant increase in visitors to the Crouch for swimming, paddle boarding, boating, etc. Footpath 8 and 9 now needed to link up to The Dome to allow these residents to have safe access to Hullbridge and to help the small restaurant at The Dome. 30 tons of shells had been purchased to enable the footpaths to be made safer and provide better access for everyone.
It was agreed that the Hullbridge PROW group should be enhanced to become a Footpaths Project Group. PW would replace Cllr. Ager and GD should also join the Group, together with Roy Hard and representatives from ECC and the Environment Agency.
AH suggested that the revised terms of reference should be presented to the Chair person for agreement rather than the whole Steering Group and this was agreed.
Note 17/20
Update on Path to Prosperity Project
PC reported that the hopper pilot service had been due to commence during the Summer months to enable visitors to travel in a sustainable way from railway stations. Unfortunately, due to the Pandemic, this service had been postponed. The project had now been extended for a further six months, timetables had been scoped and the hopper service would start eventually, but it was important that the routes followed did not compete with commercial services. As soon as ECC gave the go ahead, posters would be put up at Rochford, Hockley and Rayleigh railway stations.
It was noted that funding of approximately £8K was left for each District to help deliver the aims of the project and the local authorities had agreed to commission a digital trail app. A formal tendering process and interviews had been held and the contract had been awarded to Go Jauntly at the end of August. Now working jointly with Maldon District Council and Chelmsford City Council to produce standalone trails that start and finish in each District, thereby promoting the River Crouch as the destination. It was suggested that Go Jauntly be requested to attend a future meeting to give a demonstration. PC also agreed to attach a copy of the suggested routes to the final minutes.
Action: PC to contact Go Jauntly regarding a future demonstration and attach a copy of the routes to the final minutes.
Post Meeting Note: Update from PC - The Go Jauntly routes are still being finalised as, unfortunately, there was an issue with the Hullbridge to Battlesbridge route. Now creating a route from Rochford Town using the River Roach instead.
It was noted that currently the App was not well populated for this area. It was a free App to download and there was also a payable premium service, but this was not being encouraged or endorsed. The App contained some good functionality and the company was well placed to enable additional elements within the App. AC advised that the most important aspect was the marketing side and it was noted that ECC had been given a pot of money from the project to set up a centralised marketing group that would steer the marketing approach. There would be a separate landing page off the Visit Essex website.
HQ reported that there were several issues on their very small section of the path. Work was taking place in the background with regard to promotion and getting the trails up and running for South Woodham and Battlesbridge. Six trails would be put on the App throughout the County; concentrating on South Woodham first. Meeting with the Open Spaces Officer and the Warden from Marsh Farm Country Park next week to finalise some of these issues. One of the main challenges was the lack of immediate facilities and the ability to support local businesses along the South Woodham stretch.
In response to a question regarding whether there was scope for commercial participation, i.e. sponsorship, AC advised that this may be an opportunity that could be looked at in the future.
RF confirmed that slabs have been laid for the porta loos, but further work had been halted due to the Covid situation. PC and RF to keep in touch as this project develops.
It was noted that the Beagle mud dock site in Paglesham was now a scheduled monument and there will be blogs etc. that could be linked and accessed via the Go Jauntly App. AH confirmed that there would be lots of Beagle information coming out over the next few weeks as we head towards the October half term. RF advised that the Beagle viewpoint was now in place and the Beagle trail was up and running.
JL expressed her disappointment that the Beagle Project had not been able to proceed as originally programmed.
Note 18/20
Any Other Business
Water Safety on our Rivers
KW advised that the Harbour Authority was concerned at the number of users on the River and considered it was now becoming extremely dangerous. Open swimming was taking place, quite legally, but not always with the correct safety measures in place. There was a need to highlight the fact that more people were using the waterways that do not understand the dangers of tidal water. The intention was to put up some notices, but the ground was controlled by Essex Highways. Attempts to contact them over the last two months had not been successful, so the notices had not been placed yet. There was a need to highlight to the Group the dangers of the strong currents running through the River Crouch and assistance from Parishes, etc. was required to cover the safety aspect.
As she was a County Councillor, JL declared an interest in this matter and advised that County Council Members had the ability, via Member enquiries, to get a response within 10 days and suggested that a better approach would be via County Members for Hullbridge and South Woodham. KW agreed that this would be a better way forward and suggested that PW take this on board. DM clarified that he had already contacted Cllr. Massey on the City Council and a request had been put into Essex Highways. Therefore, the South Woodham side was adequately covered.
Action: PW to liaise with the Hullbridge Parish Council Clerk and contact the relevant County Council Member for the Hullbridge side.
PW agreed that safety was paramount and suggested that a large notice could be placed in the Rose Garden which was adjacent to the slipway. He agreed to speak to the Hullbridge Parish Council Clerk about this matter. KC reported that this location had been considered, but it was felt that a better site for the notice was near to the car park.
Action: PW to discuss this matter with the Parish Clerk.
AC advised that the Blackwater Estuary had experienced similar problems and suggested a suitable digital campaign across the Districts’ social media platforms could be an effective way to communicate with the public. JL requested that PC arrange to get a safety message out via the District Council.
Action: PC to arrange for a suitable river safety message to be issued via social media.
AH confirmed that the Council had strong links with the Coast Guard, Essex Fire & Rescue and the RNLI, all of whom had lots of materials that we could disseminate. She agreed that we should always be promoting safe visits to the coast.
Essex 2020 (Steam)
PC advised that this month Essex 2020 was focussing on the coast, i.e. maritime and waterways activities. The Essex Coastal Forum would like to hear about any activity, virtual or otherwise, that may be taking place.
Action: PC to send details to the Group via a separate email.
Post meeting note: PC sent email on 15.9.20.
Note 19/20
Date of Next Meeting
It was noted that the AGM would be taking place on 24 November and it was suggested that the Steering Group could meet prior to the AGM. It was therefore agreed that the Steering Group would meet at 10 am and the AGM would commence at 11:15 am.
Action: JJ to issue the necessary calendar invites and PC to amend the website accordingly.