VOTE 01 – Permissive Footpath?
As per the most recent email, the group need to vote on Kif & Jean’s proposal to allow a Permissive Footpath along the bottom of Churchway field as an unofficial alternative to the Public Footpath that runs parallel through their property. (Click image right to enlarge).
If you haven’t done so already, please carefully read Kif & Jean’s proposal and the voting rules below BEFORE voting. Any questions re the voting system please contact Joe. Any questions or concerns about the proposal itself then please contact Kif & Jean direct.
You can vote any time from now until midday on Friday 3rd February.
– There is ONE vote per property (i.e. there should be no more than 13 votes in total).
– Any votes not cast by the cut-off time will be deemed as abstentions and will not effect the outcome.
– Although it is a YES or NO vote, you can also add conditions for agreeing or reasons for not agreeing to the proposal (or if you just have suggestions).
Once you have voted, please write these in the comments section below, such ” I agree with the proposal as long as the following happen…” or “I don’t agree with the proposal because…”
You will notice that once you have voted the VOTE button says REVOTE. This allows you to change your mind before the poll closes.
NB: PLEASE SEE BELOW FOR ALL COMMENTS & CONCERNS RAISED BY THE GROUP.
YES – 9
NO – 0
VOTES NOT CAST – 4
- YES 100%, 9 votes9 votes 100%9 votes - 100% of all votes
- NO 0%, 0 votes0 votes0 votes - 0% of all votes
Comments, Conditions & Concerns
MEMBERS WITH SUPPORTING COMMENTS – 6
MEMBERS WITH CONDITONS REQUESTED – 3
MEMBERS WITH SERIOUS CONCERNS – 1
I’ve got no problem with the permissive path, it’s a very good idea!
We agree to Kif & Jean’s proposal to allow a Permissive Footpath along the bottom of Churchway field as an unofficial alternative to the Public Footpath that runs parallel through their property.
I have already spoken to Kif to assure him that I am in 100% agreement with the proposed path.
Seems like a very sensible suggestion. It may decrease the amount of tourists keep cutting across the field and encourage them to use the actual footpaths?
Meant to say ages ago this all fine with us.
I think the concensus is that we don’t really have a problem with it. I think it’s more relevant to neighbours who are residents and we would go with the flow.
A minimum amount of the hedge allowing only pedestrian access should be removed.
The work should be carried out to a high standard and the finished result should be attractive.
Any required signage should be kept to a minimum and be in keeping with the surroundings and probably similar in apprence to exisiting National Trust or coastal path signage.
Steps should be taken to ensure the permissive status of the path is maintained
I agree to the proposal as long as,
a) It remains a permissive footpath and is not widened for vehicular access.
b) The path is not surfaced in any way.
We fully support the proposal as long as the signage is discreet and professional looking and care is made not to damage the cornish hedge more than is needed to fit the kissing gate.
At present unable to support this request for the establishment of a permissive pathway for the following reasons.
A lack of detailed information on
– The potential impact on the field liability insurance
– The path proposed will increase the footfall in the field and walkers will look to extend a footpath along the boundary up the hill to the top of the field a route that is currently NOT a footpath or right of way.
– Has consideration been given to moving the existing drop down for the footpath from the field to Jean and Kif’s property further along the field to just outside their property / land? They could then consider installing a gate that would deter walkers from entering their property.
– Has any discussion been had with the Parish Council?
– Has any discussion been had with Cornwall Council
– Also concerned that there is a danger of the public developing the footpath all around the field boundary
– How will the entrance point through the hedge across the grass verge which is part of the field be developed and maintained.
– Has any consideration been given to fencing off the field to keep the public to the approved footpaths or public right of way. There is already a growing problem of people walking directly across the middle of the field.
– All planned maintenance will need to be a sustainable model.
Kif & Jean will carefully consider and respond to the requested conditions and concerns raised over the next week or so. Once they have responded, please take some time to discuss with them if there are any outstanding issues that you feel need addressing before any work proceeds. Thanks!