Management and Maintenance of the Local Path Network Presentation by Linda Mathieson & Brian Watt Environment Section

Paths are for all – walkers, cyclists and horse riders

Background Joint project involving Environment Team, Landscape Services and Structures Section of the Council. Review Focus and Objectives Focus is the rural non-adopted path network. Excludes adopted paths and pavements. The aim is to make effective and efficient use of limited resources – staff as well as budgets. The reasons are to meet Council: - Health and safety/liability responsibilities - Wildlife & Countryside Act/Land Reform – statutory duties and powers.

Path Network: Previous Approach Reactive rather than proactive. No complete asset register of non- adopted paths, sites and bridges. No clear picture of our liabilities. Only a limited number of paths were on an annual maintenance programme and only essential routine maintenance was undertaken. No planned inspection programme for non–motorised bridges. Ad-hoc response to reported problems.

Expected Outcomes Establish a complete non-adopted path, bridge and countryside site asset database. Identify the path/bridge/site priorities for repair works. Efficient use of Council budgets. Clarity and structure for the management and maintenance of paths, bridges and countryside sites. Proactive monitoring and inspection regime. Establish a complaints/hazard recording/action system.

The path network can be made up of a range of different forms of route The path network can be made up of a range of different forms of route. Not all are surfaced paths. Some paths are provided and maintained by land managers or charitable bodies such as this path at Dinnet. Part of the Cairngorms Outdoor Access Trust (COAT) Loch Kinnord circuit. Path at Loch Kinnord

What will be managed and maintained? All paths, bridges and sites that are owned or the Council have an agreement to manage and maintain. A small number of paths that have historically been managed by the Council where there is no formal agreement but considered important as a local asset. A number of bridges on non managed paths will be inspected to ensure they remain safe for public use.

Summary of assets to be maintained 170 local paths totalling 207 kilometres. 3 long distance routes – Formartine and Buchan Way (F&BW), Deeside Way and parts of the Coastal Path totalling 183 kilometres. 160 bridges (majority on the F&BW) 19 countryside sites e.g. Battlehill Woods 23 rural car parks e.g. Cambus o May Car Park

Examples of Path Network Bridges Castle Bridge Huntly (Grade A) Bridge of Alvah (Grade A) Easter Balmoral (Grade A) River Ythan Viaduct

Costing Process Annual essential routine: average 2 grass cuts , surface spraying average once every 2 years, basic planned bridge maintenance Essential Non Routine including: trimming of edge vegetation (trees/bushes), drain clearance, emergency resurfacing, bridges general maintenance, conservation and refurbishment. Upgrade works including: path/site re-surfacing, replacement of path furniture bridge renewals and widening.

Budget availability For Aberdeenshire: £55,000 will be used for essential routine maintenance – grass cuts and surface spraying for the paths not already being regularly maintained. £87,000 to cover the non essential routine works and upgrade of paths. £100,000 to carry out the inspection and minor repair of the bridge assets. A bid for additional capital monies for bridge management was unsuccessful for 2016/17 but we will try again in 2017/18.

Benefits of well managed paths and countryside sites Reduces Council’s liability. Meets statutory duties and powers – Land Reform legislation. Sustainability: active travel, carbon reduction. Economic: supports local business, tourism, quality of life, attractive area to live. Cultural: management of listed bridges, historic route and provides access to cultural sites. Health: reduced NHS costs (estimated that £1 spent on access provision saves £8 in NHS costs). Educational: access to sites.

The Deeside Way is a valuable recourse for both local people and for attracting tourists to the area. It is part of the National Cycle Network(NCN) Route 195 and links to NCN Route 1 that runs from the Scottish Borders to John O Groats Deeside Way

Other Considerations and Implications The limited budget availability: Has implications for the development of new routes, including proposed Core Paths. Limits the further development of the Coastal Path and the retention and extension of the Gordon Way. Requires investigating into other mechanisms to manage and maintain paths and sites.

An example of a path developed using grants from the 2005/2006 Agri-environment fund - LMC Option 15 Access

Local Path Network – Alternative Options What are the options for the future maintenance of paths and expanding the path network and long distance routes in Aberdeenshire? New developments – ensuring that current routes and protected and where possible additional links created. Involvement of local communities – “Friends of Paths Groups”. Working with Community Businesses and Trusts such as the Cairngorms Outdoor Access Trust. Encouraging volunteering. Any further ideas or suggestions

Management of Paths and Countryside Sites Thank you Questions & Discussion Contacts Linda.mathieson@aberdeenshire.gov.uk Brian.h.watt@Aberdeenshire.gov.uk