Issue - meetings

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 – Part III, Section 53: Application to Upgrade a Public Footpath between Knutsford Road, Chorley and Moor Lane, Wilmslow to Public Bridleway Status (Public Footpath Nos. 29, 15 (Part), 14, 10 (Part), 9 (Part), 27 Par

Meeting: 01/03/2010 - Public Rights of Way Committee (Item 41)

41 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 – Part III, Section 53: Application to Upgrade a Public Footpath between Knutsford Road, Chorley and Moor Lane, Wilmslow to Public Bridleway Status (Public Footpath Nos. 29, 15 (Part), 14, 10 (Part), 9 (Part), 27 Parish of Chorley and Footpath No. 40 (Clay Lane) Parish of Wilmslow); and Application to Upgrade Public Footpath No. 42 (Filter Bed Lane) to Public Bridleway Status, Parish of Wilmslow pdf icon PDF 437 KB

To consider the application for the upgrade of a Public Footpath between Knutsford Road, Chorley and Moor Lane, Wilmslow to Public Bridleway Status (Public Footpath Nos. 29, 15 (Part), 14, 10 (Part), 9 (Part), 27 Parish of Chorley and Footpath No. 40 (Clay Lane) Parish of Wilmslow); and Application to Upgrade Public Footpath No. 42 (Filter Bed Lane) to Public Bridleway Status, Parish of Wilmslow.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee received a report which detailed two applications from The Border Bridleways Associations to modify the Definitive Map and Statement by upgrading a number of public footpaths to public bridleways. 

 

Section 53(2)(b) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 requires that Cheshire East Borough Council shall 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 requiring modification of the map by the upgrading of public rights of way is the discovery of evidence by the Council which, when considered with all other relevant evidence available, shows “that a highway shown in the map and statement as a highway of a particular description ought to be there shown as a highway of a different description.” 

 

This was commonly demonstrated by user evidence. All evidence must be evaluated and weighed and a conclusion reached whether, on balance of probabilities, either the alleged rights subsist or are reasonably alleged to subsist.  Any other issues such as safety, security, suitability, desirability or the effects on property or the environment are not relevant to the decision.

 

Where evidence in support of the application was user evidence, section 31(1) of the Highways Act 1980 applied: -

 

“Where a way … has been actually enjoyed by the public as of right and without interruption for a full period of twenty years, the way is deemed to have been dedicated as a highway unless there is sufficient evidence that there was no intention during that period to dedicate it”

 

This required that the public must have used the way without interruption and as of right: this is without force, secrecy or permission.  Section 31(2) states that “the 20 years is to be calculated retrospectively from the date when the right of the public to use the way is brought in question.”

 

Application No. 1 had been submitted by The Border Bridleways Association in January 2008 to modify the Definitive Map and Statement by upgrading a number of footpaths to public bridleways.  The public footpaths together made up a route from Knutsford Road to Moor Lane.  A further application had been submitted in May 2008 (Application 2) to modify the Definitive Map and Statement by upgrading Public Footpath No. 42 in the parish of Wilmslow, known as Filter Bed Lane.  This footpath ran between Upcast Lane and Clay Lane.

 

Both applications were based on user evidence.  For Application No. 1 user evidence forms were received from 31 individuals and for Application No. 2 user evidence forms were received from 23 individuals.  Nineteen individuals claimed to have used both routes and because of the close proximity of the routes, it had been decided to investigate both applications at the same time.

 

In relation to Application No. 1, the witness evidence submitted showed use of the claimed route on horseback between 1945 and 2007.  Public access on horseback appeared to be brought into question  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41