Agenda item

(To receive a report from Chris Miller, Head of Environment, which invites the Committee to consider the Public Rights of Way Fees & Charges due to be considered by the Executive Councillor for Economic Development, Environment and Planning between the 5 and 15 March 2024)

Consideration was given to a report from Chris Miller, Head of Environment, which provided the Committee with the opportunity to comment on the public rights of way fees and charges prior to a decision by the Executive Councillor for Economic Development, Environment and Planning between 5 and 15 March 2024. The following matters were highlighted:

·   Changes focused on offering greater guidance and advice to help inform applications so that they may be made more acceptable and allow more efficient service delivery – as rejections of unacceptable or incomplete applications caused the greatest workloads.

·   Fees required updating since the last time they had been reviewed.

·   Most costs to the service were in the form of legal and resourcing matters.

·   Charges were not designed to generate profit.

During consultation of the report, the following comments were raised:

·       Members welcomed the recommendations, particularly highlighting the introduction of the pre-application service where it currently did not exist. Members recognised the significance of having a comprehensive view across public rights of way processes and the benefits of streamlined contact and processes for future applications and emphasised the importance of covering the costs of administering the work as projects progress along the track and through different phases. The following points were highlighted in discussion:

·       Whilst Members were in agreement with the fixed fee approach, citing reasons discussed in the report, it was acknowledged that some charges were subject to a significant increase, recognising that this might raise concerns for service users, especially considering the lack of updates over the years. Nevertheless, Members expressed a favour of adopting a fixed fee over variable charges, recognising that this was simplifying the process and reduced the margin for error in manual fee calculations. Officers supported the notion that the charges, while seemingly high, effectively staggered the costs across different phases and maintained that the approach proposed spread the financial burden for applicants preventing a large sum being due at the end of the process. It was also noted that this was in alignment with practices of other authorities in the wider region. 

·       Members inquired about how the increases in charges and the annual automatic increases would be communicated to the public. Officers explained that albeit there was not a specific communication plan in place, there was intention to publish all fees and charges on the web, allowing service users to review costs before applying, giving assurance that there was great focus on transparency. Furthermore, assurance was given that the increases would not affect those with ongoing applications and clarified that the quoted cost at the start of the application process remained applicable for those.

·       Members sought assurance regarding the ways in which the increased charges would be directed toward the Public Rights of Way Service and asked whether these would contribute to reducing the waiting time for people requesting diversions. Officers explained that with changes in legislation, the government anticipated an increased work volume and level of bureaucracy for the Council which in turn required additional resources. Assurances were given that increased charges would be reinvested to provide these additional resources creating thus a circular position. In relation to the pace and review of the process, these would be closely monitored which in turn was expected to potentially reduce waiting times.

·       Members, acknowledging the implications for service users emerging from the increases in fees, expressed their confidence in the proposed being the optimum way forward and unanimously supported the Recommendations to the Executive Councillor.

RESOLVED

1. That that the Committee support the report and agree the recommendations to the Executive Councillor for Economic Development, Environment and Planning.

2. That comments raised by the Committee be shared with the Executive Councillor for Economic Development, Environment and Planning for consideration ahead of the decision being made.