I got a letter from a lovely chap, a long time opponent of the A344 closure and proponent of dualing the A303, who goes by the name of "Vexatious Alan". The epithet isn't because he really is vexatious - it's a bit of a badge of honour in Freedom of Information Act circles that he has got so far up some august body's nose, probably because he was close to exposing some sort of misdoing, they have decreed his FOIA requests are "vexatious" and so they don't need to answer them!
Receiving the letter was a real pleasure as I so rarely get them - letters written by real living and breathing human beings that is. I normally operate in cyberspace, grabbing information here there and everywhere - cutting and pasting it into new documents and blasting them back out into the ether. Having to deal with a typewritten letter was something of a novelty...
...anyway, let's cut to the chase and look at the information "Vexatious Alan" provided. Since November 2010 he has been pursuing English Heritage in relation to pedestrian and cycle access along the route of what has now become the former A344. Back on the 24th November 2010, Loraine Knowles of English Heritage wrote to "Vexatious Alan" to explain the rationale behind the Stopping Up Order for the section of the A344 from Stonehenge Bottom on the A303 and the intersection of the A344 with Wiltshire Byway 12. Loraine Knowles wrote the following on behalf of English Heritage:
"...there was a firm consensus that a stopping up order was more appropriate...
...in view of the clear intention to return the surface to grass. However, the need to provide access for non-motorised traffic had been recognised at that time, and for this reason it had been proposed that a permissive route be provided for pedestrians and cyclists between Stonehenge Bottom and Byway 12."
"We would note that the commitment to provide a permissive route between Stonehenge Bottom and Byway 12 is a requirement of the Section 106 legal agreement signed by the National Trust, DCMS, EH and Wiltshire Council."
Now that is both interesting and puzzling. I'm not a legal eagle but common sense dictates that if the right to drive a motorised vehicle along a stretch of road are removed through the implementation of a stopping up order and a TRO, as were used in the case of the A344, then the right to move along that route on foot, on a bike or on a horse still exist as they weren't specifically removed. So, in one sense, I don't see why a permissive byway was needed as a de-facto substantive byway already existed along the route and continues to exist. But, until someone comes along and can provide the legal view on all this, let's play the English Heritage game for the moment - they have a legal obligation to provide a permissive route between Stonehenge Bottom and Byway 12.
Wiltshire Council in the planning consent for the recently opened visitor's centre imposed a series of conditions that English Heritage were obliged to sign-up to. According to the information provided to me by Vexatious Alan, the last of these, Condition 27 reads as follows:
"No development shall commence until
(i) details of the pedestrian and cycle route along the whole of the A344, including the crossing
arrangements at the A303 (Stonehenge Bottom) and
(ii) a scheme for reviewing such access and crossing arrangements
have been submitted and approved (in consultation with the Highways Agency) in writing by the local planning authority".
"The development shall not be occupied until the agreed works have been completed".
"The scheme for reviewing the access and crossing arrangements...
...shall detail how recommended remedial action will be funded and implemented, including arrangements to provide for alternative crossing points on the A303 and associated access links."
Wiltshire Council recently provided "Vexatious Alan" with a map of what the A303 junction and paths at Stonehenge Bottom should have looked like, before the new visitor's centre was allowed to open. You WILL need to click on this to see it.
"Vexatious Alan" has helpfully highlighted the length of new path that English Heritage were supposed to install and a pre-existing path that English Heritage seem to have removed.
Anyone who has tried to cross the A303, use the new gate and ride a bike up to Byway 12 knows that English Heritage have not done what they were supposed to do.
UPDATE: Having read the original version of this post, an up-to-the-minute STAG member sent me a photo, taken only yesterday, looking back down the stopped up A344. Note the high quality footpath and cycle path - NOT! Interesting to see that the byway - permissive or substantive - with its steel fencing across it, gives the impression of not being a byway at all! Anyone would think that English Heritage were trying to convince people it didn't exist and deter them from trying.
I think that both English Heritage and Wiltshire Council Planning Department have a few questions that they need to answer pretty sharpish and as a matter of public interest. This isn't only important in the context of the A344, but also of considerable importance when it comes to what might happen with the A303 after the planned feasibility study reports.
It seems, if the information above is to be believed and I have no reason to doubt it, that English Heritage cannot be trusted to comply with legal agreements it has willingly signed up to and legal conditions to which it is subject by virtue of the planning process. Furthermore, Wiltshire Council seem to have failed to monitor compliance with the Conditions of the planning consent that THEY imposed.
None of this fills me with a sense that either organisation is to be trusted. With English Heritage it really does seem to be a case that if you give them an inch, they will take a mile. It actually makes me feel somewhat...
No comments:
Post a Comment