Footpath damaged by river erosion unlikely to be repaired

Nicholas Thomas, local democracy reporter

The future of a damaged footpath remains in doubt, with the identity of the landowner still a mystery.

More than 1,500 people signed a petition demanding the rebuilding of the path near the River Ebbw, which connects the Jubilee Park estate and Rogerstone Welfare Ground.

But it is now likely the footpath will stay in a state of limbo, neither officially closed nor repaired, until the owner of the land can be found.

The path was closed in December 2021 when a storm caused “significant loss of bank” at the nearby river.

A section of the footpath eventually “collapsed into the river” – but the possibility of creating a new path slightly further away from the bank is hampered by a large flood wall that has already been built there to protect homes.

Newport City Council said it had “made efforts to locate an owner” of the land, which is not registered to any known owner.

Natural phenomenon

The council claims it does not have a duty to repair the path because “it is not the owner of the land and the loss of the riverbank was due to a natural phenomenon”.

There are also budget concerns, and attempts to find external funding for a rebuild have been “unsuccessful”, according to a new council report.

With no government agency seemingly willing to take on the responsibility for the land, the council imposed a temporary traffic regulation order (TRO) to prevent access.

Controversial

This has proved controversial among locals, however, including 154 residents who objected to the TRO and 1,500 people who signed a petition calling for the path to be restored.

The council is now considering a permanent TRO, but given the strength of local opposition to the path’s ongoing closure, appears likely to row back from closing the route outright.

Cabinet members will meet next week to discuss the strategies available to them, and at this stage favour a middle-ground option that will avoid a permanent TRO but will “advise” the public, via signs, to use an alternative route.

The council warned that imposing the TRO would “most likely not prevent risks as the public will, in all likelihood, keep using the remaining land until this too is eroded by the river”.