Agenda item

To consider a report on the investigation into the alignment of Public Footpath No.12 in the parish of Hough

The Committee received a report which detailed an investigation into the alignment of Public Footpath No.12 in the parish of Hough.

Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 placed a duty on the Borough Council to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review.  Section 53(3)(c) allowed for an authority to act on the discovery of evidence that suggested that the Definitive Map needed to be amended.

An investigation had been carried out into the alignment of Public Footpath No.12 in the parish of Hough as a result of a query by the landowner of a field where part of the footpath ran.   As part of an enforcement procedure the landowner had questioned whether the footpath actually ran on their land as there were discrepancies between the Definitive Map and the early stages of the Definitive Map process.

The contention over the existence and exact route of the footpath had been simmering for many years, with path users experiencing problems since the mid 1980s.    In 1986 planning permission, which had been refused by Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council, was granted on appeal for Quarantine Kennels at Hollies Farm.  The existence of the footpath must not have been disclosed by this process as the kennels were constructed over the footpath, obstructing the route.  It was at this point that it came to light that the original path recorded on the Definitive Map was anomalous as there was a gap between the end of the adopted highway and the commencement of the footpath adjacent to Hollies Farm, which made enforcement to remove the obstruction complicated.

In 1994 research was undertaken into this anomaly and a modification order was made and confirmed which recorded an additional length of path - number 12A, linking footpath 12 to Birch Lane adjacent to Hollies Farm.  In 1995 the landowner had inquired about diverting Footpath No.12. However negative comments were received from consultation undertaken and works order was issued to re-open the path by the installation of three stiles, signage and waymarking. 

Further problems were reported in 1996 and 1997 about the route not being clearly marked as the existing waymarking was on the wrong side of the hedge.  Further waymarking work was issued and on inspection the path was usable.  In 1999 there was another complaint about a locked gate and a fence obstructing the footpath.  When inspected by the maintenance officer the path was found to be available.  At a meeting with the Public Path Officer the discrepancies between the route shown on the Definitive Map and available on the ground were discussed.  Theyreferred to part of the path that ran along the access drive to Yew Tree Farm and then crosses the boundary into the adjacent field.  The Definitive Map showed the path continuing on the Yew Tree Farm side of the boundary and not entering that particular field at all.  This matter was looked into by the Public Path Officer with reference to internal documents that formed the process of compiling the Definitive map in the 1950s and they wrote to say that the preliminary documents recorded the path in their field and that the Definitive Map was in error.

In successive years problems have been reported mostly relating to route finding and the need for waymarking.  The Maintenance and Enforcement Officer had been to visit the site on many occasions and had come into conflict with the landowners who believed that the path did not run in their field but on the southern, Yew Tree Farm side of the boundary. The latest attempt to enforce the line of the footpath earlier this year had led to the investigation to determine the true line of the path.

Section 53(2)(b) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 required the Council to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review and make such modifications to the Map and Statement as appear requisite in consequence of the occurrence of certain events.  One such event is 53(3)(iii) which was:

“the discovery by the authority of evidence which (when considered with all other relevant evidence available to them) shows that there is no public right of way over land shown in the map and statement as a highway of any description, or any other particulars contained in the map and statement require modification.”

The relevant evidence in this case was the records produced by the Parish Council and the County Council in the process leading up to the production of the Definitive Map.  The first stage of the process was for each parish to survey and record the routes which they believed to be public in their areas.  Local user groups also undertook the same process.  The maps and descriptions produced were know internally as the ‘walking surveys’.  These surveys were then sent to the County Surveyor’s department where they were collated and some re-checked on the ground. 

The walking survey records the footpath leaving the track leading to Yew Tree Farm and entering the adjacent field.  Barbed wire obstructions are recorded being at the entry and exit to this field.  The Draft Map shows the path in this same position.  The provisional Map, which was the next stage in the process, shows the path slightly slewed to the south and partly to the southern side of the boundary and partly running along it.  The error, or rather inaccuracy, in drafting at this stage probably led to the continuation of the error on the Definitive Map, which compounds the movement of the path in a southerly direction into Yew Tree Farm land.

A local resident, who lived at the Hollies in the 1950s, was interviewed and recalled that the path ran past the Hollies along a cart track but that it did not continue into the farmyard at Yew Tree Farm but turned 90 degrees into the adjacent field and continued along the hedge to join the access to Yew Tree Farm after the next boundary.

The report concluded that the evidence showed that the original intention of the surveys recorded by the Parish Council had evolved and become slightly distorted purely by the map drafting process.  There was no administrative history to the alignment changes.  This was supported by evidence from a local resident with personal knowledge of the Hollies and the area during the period when the Definitive Map was initially being drawn up. 

It was considered that on the balance of probabilities there was sufficient evidence to prove the existence of a public footpath along the route A-B on Plan No.WCA/006 and to prove that no public right of way existed on the line C-D.  It was therefore recommended that in line with the requirements of section 53(3)(c)(iii) the Definitive Map and Statement be modified accordingly.

The Committee considered the evidence presented in the report and the concluded that on the balance of probabilities the requirements of section 53(3)(c)(iii) had been met and that the Definitive Map and Statement should be modified to show the route A-B as Public Footpath No.12 Hough and delete the line C-D.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)       An Order be made under Section 53(3)(c)(iii) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to modify the Definitive Map and Statement by showing Public Footpath No.12 on the route indicated between points A-B on drawing number WCA/006 and not on the alignment C-D.

(2)       Public notice of the making of the Order be given, and in the event of there being no objections within the specified period, or any objections received being withdrawn, the Order be confirmed in exercise of the power conferred on the Council by the said Acts.

(3)       In the event of objections to the Order being received, Cheshire East Borough Council be responsible for the conduct of any hearing or public inquiry.