E-mail: agt@gardens-trusts.org.uk Web site: www.gardenstrusts.org.uk

11 September 2007

Coast and Open Access Team

Defra

How the County Gardens Trusts can help English Heritage

Zone 1/01

Temple Quay House

2 The Square

Bristol BS1 6EB

Dear Sir

Consultation on proposals to improve access to the English coast

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the consultation arising from these proposals.

The Association of Gardens Trusts was established as a charitable trust in 1993 and comprises 35 County Trusts in England, together with another 9 in Wales. We have over 7,500 members who actively support the care and conservation of our historic designed landscapes, parks and gardens for the enjoyment and education of all ages. The Objectives of the Charity are to promote Gardens Trusts, and through them, the interest, education, appreciation and involvement of the public in matters connected with the arts and sciences of parks and gardens; and to assist in the protection, conservation, restoration or creation of parks and gardens in the United Kingdom for the education and enjoyment of the public.

Although we understand the desire for improved access to the coast and its integration with management of the environment, we feel that these proposals do not address all the issues and have some serious omissions. Further we feel that the questions posed in the document do not allow a full response on the widest possible range of issues.

The Association also considers that the research undertaken by Ipsos Mori does not show a need for more access to the coast, as the current arrangements are not perceived by the majority of respondees to be inadequate. What does appear to be required is better access by public transport (or improved car parking), better signage and information and better maintenance of existing areas. These are local issues which can largely be dealt with through existing mechanisms and legislation.

The Association does not consider that a need or public desire for a coastal corridor has been demonstrated, nor that such a corridor would address the issues for which it is meant to be a solution. We are also concerned that such a corridor, especially if not properly maintained, would prove to be detriment to local economies and to the landscape itself and thus be counter-productive.

We are very concerned that the historic environment has not been considered in these documents.

There is no mention of the historic designed landscapes or indeed historic buildings or monuments around our coast. Many of our historic designed landscapes, including a number on the English

Heritage Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England, adjoin our coast and have been designed to take advantage of this proximity. These important social documents would be irreparably damaged by the imposition of a coastal corridor which would destroy many of the reasons people visit these sites. It would also increase the management burden of these sites with no concomitant benefit.

The proposals underline our members' concerns that more access would disturb the tranquillity and would damage fragile ecosystems and landscape, which for many areas are important factors.

We believe that improved coastal access should be linked to identified need; that all factors, including the heritage value of existing features, be properly taken into consideration; that any solutions proposed could and should be managed by local, elected bodies, properly funded for maintenance and improvements and that proper consideration be given to all stakeholders, not just 'the public'.

The Association trusts that the opportunity to improve access to England's coast will be taken with due regard for local concerns, be integrated within the existing landscape and be sustainable, both ecologically and financially. We would welcome proposals which fulfil these criteria.

Yours sincerely

Mrs Kate Harwood