Agenda and minutes

Public Rights of Way Committee
Monday, 3rd December, 2018 2.00 pm

Venue: Committee Suite 1,2 & 3, Westfields, Middlewich Road, Sandbach CW11 1HZ. View directions

Contact: Rachel Graves  Democratic Services Officer

Items
No. Item

25.

Apologies for Absence

To receive any apologies for absence.

 

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor S Pochin.

26.

Declarations of Interest

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests in any item on the agenda.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest

27.

Minutes of Previous meeting pdf icon PDF 92 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 10 September 2018.

Minutes:

RESOLVED:

 

That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 September 2018 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

28.

Public Speaking Time/Open Session

In accordance with paragraph 9 of Appendix 7 of the Procedure Rules, members of the public may speak on a particular application after the Chairman has introduced the report, provided that notice has been given in writing to Democratic Services by 12 noon one clear working day before the meeting.  A total of 6 minutes is allocated for each application, with 3 minutes for objectors and 3 minutes for supporters.  If more than one person wishes to speak as an objector or supporter, the time will be allocated accordingly or those wishing to speak may agree that one of their number shall speak for all.

 

Also in accordance with paragraph 2.32 of the Committee Procedural Rules and Appendix 7 of the Procedural Rules a total period of 10 minutes is allocated for members of the public to address the Committee on any matter relevant to the work of the body in question.  Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes but the Chairman will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned where there are a number of speakers.  Members of the public are not required to give notice of the intention to speak, however as a matter of courtesy, a period of 24 hours notice is encouraged.

 

Members of the public wishing to ask a question at the meeting should provide at least three clear working days’ notice in writing and should include the question with that notice. This will enable an informed answer to be given. 

 

 

Minutes:

The Chairman advised that she would invite those registered to speak to come forward to speak when the application was being considered by the Committee.

29.

Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981- Part III, Section 53: Application No. CO/8/34, for the addition of Public Rights of Way, Byley Lane to Carver Avenue, in the Parish of Cranage pdf icon PDF 195 KB

To consider the application for the addition of Public Footpaths from Byley Lane to Carver Lane in the parish of Cranage.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an investigation into an application for the addition of public rights of way from Byley Lane to Carver Avenue in the parish of Cranage to the Definitive Map and Statement. 

 

Under Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the Borough Council had a duty, as surveying authority, to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under continuous review.  Section 53 (3)(c) allowed the Authority to act on the discovery of evidence that suggests that the Definitive Map and Statement needed to be amended.  The Authority must investigate and determine the evidence and decide on the outcome whether to make a Definitive Map Modification Order or not.

 

 The event relevant to the application was Section 53 (3)(c)(i), which required modification of the map by change of status of a right of way:

 

“(c) discovery by the authority of evidence which (when considered with all other relevant evidence) shows:

 

(i) that a right of way which is not shown in the map and statement subsists or is reasonably alleged to subsist over land in the area to which the map relates...”

 

The evidence could consist of documentary/historical evidence or user evidence or a mixture of both. 

 

Where the evidence in support of the application is user evidence, section 31(1) if 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.”

 

If the statutory test failed, the issue of common law dedication could be considered: that was whether the available evidence showed that the owner of the land over which the way passed had dedicated it to the public.  Under Common Law the onus of proof was on the claimant to show that the landowners, who must have the capacity to dedicate, intended to dedicate a public right of way; or that public use has gone on for so long that it could be inferred; or that the landowners were aware of and acquiesced to public use.  There is no fixed period of use, and depending on the facts of the case, may range from a few years to several decades.

 

Cranage Parish Council had submitted an application to modify the Definitive Map and Statement to Cheshire County Council in March 2007 for the addition of footpaths from Carver Avenue to Byley Lane – route A-B-C-D; route A-B-G; route G-F; route E-C and route E-D as shown on Plan No.WCA/016.  The application was supported by 19 user evidence form, 4 of those being minors at the time their evidence was submitted.  The application was made because of the installation of fencing across the paths.

In April 2007 a meeting had been held between representatives of the Parish Council, landowners, the local County Councillor and an Officer from Cheshire County Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

30.

Highways Act 1980 Section 119: Proposal for the Diversion of Public Footpath No. 10 (part) in the Parish of Alsager pdf icon PDF 93 KB

To consider the application to divert part of Public Footpath No.10 in the parish of Alsager.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an application requesting the Council to make an Order under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Public Footpath No.10 in the parish of Alsager.

 

In accordance with section 119(1) of the Highways Act 1980, it was within the Council’s discretion to make an Order to divert a public footpath if it appeared to the Council to be expedient to do so in the interests of the public or the owner, lessee or occupier of the land crossed by the path.

 

Sally Young spoke in objection to the application and stated she had concerns about the proposed width of the footpath and route it was to take and its effect on the enjoyment of the public open space.  She was concerned that the 2 metre width of the path would encourage motorised use and this would lead to accidents with path users.  Work had been carried out on the banks of the brook where the new houses had been built and she asked why this could not be done on this section to allow retention of the present line of the path.

 

The proposed section of Public Footpath No.10 Alsager to be diverted commenced at a junction with the footway extending from the houses to the rear of Swettenham Close and ran in a generally south westerly direction where it connected with an un-adopted section of Hall Drive before continuing southwards towards Public Footpath No.8 Alsager.  At present that section of footpath extended within very close proximity to the Valley Brook, it was narrow with a mud, and in some places, a compacted stone surface.

 

The diversion was proposed in the interests of the public because the legal line of the footpath had been cut across by the meanders of Valley Brook in places and in other stretches ran very close to the banks of the brook.  The proposed diversion would move the path approximately 5-6 metres away from the banks of the brook, which would enable the protection of the public footpath from further erosion.  The new route would be 2 metres wide and have a recycled self-binding aggregate surface.

 

The Committee noted the suggestion received from Ansa, who manage the Public Open Space through which the Public Footpath ran, that the walked line of the footpath be ‘made good’ following the diversion of the path and that a quote had been obtained for the work, which would be funded from s106 developer contributions.

 

The Committee considered that the proposed route would not be substantially less convenient than the existing route.  Diverting the footpath would enable investment in the surface of the Footpath to make it more accessible.  It was considered that the proposed route would be a satisfactory alternative to the current one and that the legal tests for the making and confirming of a Diversion Order were satisfied.

 

The Committee unanimously

 

RESOLVED: That

 

1        An Order be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

31.

Highways Act 1980 Section 119: Proposal for the Diversion of Public Footpath No.2 (part) in the Parish of Eaton pdf icon PDF 136 KB

To consider the application to divert part of Public Footpath No.2 in the parish of Eaton.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an application from Mr Bell of Wheelwrights Cottage requesting the Council to make an Order under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Public Footpath No.2 in the parish of Eaton.

 

In accordance with section 119(1) of the Highways Act 1980, it was within the Council’s discretion to make an Order to divert a public footpath if it appeared to the Council to be expedient to do so in the interests of the public or the owner, lessee or occupier of the land crossed by the path.

 

The land over which the section of the current path to be diverted and the proposed path ran belonged to the applicant.  The section of footpath to be diverted ran through the middle of a cultivation field and on into the grounds and gardens of Wheelwrights Cottage and exiting into pasture land.  The path passed close to the Cottage and at present there was a permissive path in place to the west of the definitive line that followed the garden boundary. The permissive path also ran in very close proximity to the Cottage. 

 

The proposed diversion  - points A-F-G-H-I-J-E on Plan No.HA/135, would be made in the interests of the landowner as it would divert walkers away from the middle of a cultivation field which would improve their land management and away from the Cottage, residential garden and existing outbuildings, thus improving the privacy and security of the property as a whole. 

 

An objection to the proposed diversion had been received from the Open Spaces Society and the Peak and Northern Footpaths Society and East Cheshire Ramblers had submitted comments, all relating to whether the proposed new route would be substantially as convenient as the existing route and on the effect of the embankment and temporary fencing on the enjoyment of the route.  

 

The Committee considered that the proposed route would not be substantially less convenient than the existing route.  Diverting the footpath would improve land management and privacy and security of the property.  It was considered that the proposed route would be a satisfactory alternative to the current one and that the legal tests for the making and confirming of a Diversion Order were satisfied.

 

The Committee unanimously

 

RESOLVED: That

 

1        An Order be made under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to divert part of Public Footpath No.2 in the parish of Eaton by creating a new section of Public Footpath and extinguishing the current path, as illustrated on Plan No.HA/135, on the grounds that it is expedient to do so in the interests of the owner of the land affected by the Public Right of Way.

 

2        Public notice of the making of the Order be given and in the event of there being no objections within the period specified the Order be confirmed in the exercise of the powers conferred on the Council by the said Acts.

 

3  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

32.

Highways Act 1980 Section 119: Application for the Diversion of Public Footpath No. 2 (part), Parish of Arclid pdf icon PDF 86 KB

To consider the application to divert part of Public Footpath No.2 in the parish of Arclid.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an application from Mr N Forster and Mr R Pace of Crane Hire Direct Ltd, Old Smithy Garage, Newcastle Road, Arclid requesting the Council to make an Order under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Public Footpath No.2 in the parish of Arclid.

 

In accordance with section 119(1) of the Highways Act 1980, it was within the Council’s discretion to make an Order to divert a public footpath if it appeared to the Council to be expedient to do so in the interests of the public or the owner, lessee or occupier of the land crossed by the path.

 

Public Footpath No.2 Arclid ran across the curtilage of the garage forecourt at Pace’s Garage/Crane Hire Direct.  It was partly obstructed by a large garage and had been for several decades.  The remainder of the route ran across the garage forecourt which was used by heavy crane and other machinery.

 

Mr R Pace of Pace’s Garage/Crane Hire Direct was in the process of selling the land and business.  The proposed new landowner - Mr N Forster, had made the application with the current landowner’s agreement and permission to try to resolve the long standing obstruction.  The land over which the diversion would run belonged to the applicants’ adjacent landowner. Written permission for the proposal had been provided by the adjacent landowner.

 

The proposed diversion would run to the rear of the garage and then turn towards Newcastle Road – as shown on Plan No.HA/133.  Other than the short section of path behind the garage, which was 1.2-1.5 metres wide due to existing constraints, the path would be enclosed by a post and rail fence on the southern side of the route and security fencing on the northern side of the route, with a width of 2 metres. 

 

Separating walkers from the garage forecourt would provide a benefit to the landowners in terms of security and privacy for the business and moving walkers away from heavy plant and machinery would be of benefit in terms of health and safety. 

 

The Committee noted that no objections had been received during the informal consultation process and considered that the proposed route would not be substantially less convenient than the existing route.  Diverting the footpath would resolve a long standing problem and provide a legal, usable route on the ground where none had existed for many years.  It was considered that the proposed route would be a satisfactory alternative to the current one and that the legal tests for the making and confirming of a Diversion Order were satisfied.

 

The Committee unanimously

 

RESOLVED: That

 

1        An Order be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to divert part of Public Footpath No.2 in the parish of Arclid by creating a new section of public footpath and extinguishing the current line, as illustrated on Plan No.HA/133, on the grounds that it is expedient  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

33.

Highways Act 1980 Section 119: Application for the Diversion of Public Footpath No. 29 (part), Parish of Brereton pdf icon PDF 102 KB

To consider the application to part of Public Footpath No.29 in the parish of Brereton.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an application from Ms Briggs of Fir Farm, Brereton, requesting the Council to make an Order under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Public Footpath No.29 in the parish of Brereton.

 

In accordance with section 119(1) of the Highways Act 1980, it was within the Council’s discretion to make an Order to divert a public footpath if it appeared to the Council to be expedient to do so in the interests of the public or the owner, lessee or occupier of the land crossed by the path.

 

The land over which the section of Public Footpath No.29 Brereton to be diverted and the proposed diversion would run belonged to the applicant.  The section of footpath ran along a sealed surface private shared drive and then across a storage yard which was used to store large trailers and immobile old machinery as part of a business need.  The definitive line of the footpath was obstructed in the storage yard.  In line with Cheshire East PROW policy if an obstruction was impractical to remove the landowner was required to apply for a diversion rather then remove the obstruction and also provide an alternative route. A permissive route, which followed the boundary of the yard, had been in place for some time and had been accepted as an alternative route by the public.

 

The landowner had submitted a planning application for a new access road and the proposed new route of the public footpath would run along the southern side of the new access road - Points C-D on Plan No.HA/136, and then along the permissive route from Points D-B. 

 

The Committee noted the comments made by the Peak and Northern Footpath Society and supported by the Open Spaces Society in relation to the exit point of the footpath being moved to further along a very busy road and the Public Rights of Way Officer’s response. 

 

The Committee considered that the proposed route would not be substantially less convenient than the existing route.  Diverting the footpath would remove the footpath from the yard and remove the interaction between users and large vehicles. It was considered that the proposed route would be a satisfactory alternative to the current one and that the legal tests for the making and confirming of a Diversion Order were satisfied.

 

The Committee unanimously

 

RESOLVED: That

 

1        An Order be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to divert part of Public Footpath No.29 in the parish of Brereton by creating a new section of public footpath an extinguishing the current path, as illustrated on Plan No.HA/136, on the grounds that it is expedient in the interests of the landowners.

 

2        Public Notice of the making of the Order be given and in the event of there being no objections within the period specified, the Order be confirmed in the exercise of the powers conferred  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

34.

Highways Act 1980 Section 118: Application for the Extinguishment of Public Footpath No. 1 (part), Parish of Holmes Chapel pdf icon PDF 102 KB

To consider the application to extinguish part of Public Footpath No.1 in the parish of Holmes Chapel.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an application requesting the Council to make an Order under section 118 of the Highways Act 1980 to extinguish part of Public Footpath No.1 in the parish of Holmes Chapel.

 

In accordance with section 118(1) of the Highways Act 1980, it was within the Council’s discretion to make an Order if it appears to the Council that it is expedient that a path or way should be stopped up on the grounds that it is not needed for public use.

 

Public Footpath No.1 Holmes Chapel had been registered as an anomaly for a number of years as a short section – points A to B on Plan No.HA/134, had been unavailable since the mid-1990s when the housing development was built and was obstructed by the house and gardens of 16 Lochmaben Close.   It appeared that Congleton Borough Council may have intended to divert this section of the footpath to follow the footway that ran through an area of greenspace adjacent to this property but the legal process was not undertaken.  In early 2018 the owner of 16 Lochmaben Close, Holmes Chapel submitted a planning application for a single story side and rear extension to the property which would further obstruct the definitive line of the footpath.

 

When the houses were built the adopted footway was created, FY342, which the majority of the footpath follows.  This footway is the route which users now follow and ensured that a legal route for the public was maintained.  This subsequently meant that the short section of Public Footpath No.1 Holmes Chapel was no longer required for public use and an extinguishment was sought by the Council to resolve the long standing anomaly and provide clarity to the affected landowner.

 

The Committee noted the objections received from the Open Spaces Society and the Public Rights of Way Officer’s comment that none of points raised had any impact on, or affected the proposal to extinguish part of the Public Footpath No.1 Holmes Chapel.

 

The Committee considered the application and concluded that the proposed extinguishment met the legal tests for the making and confirming of an Extinguishment Order.

 

The Committee unanimously

 

RESOLVED:  That

 

1        An Order be made under section 118 of the Highways Act 1980 to extinguish part of Public Footpath No. in the parish of Holmes Chapel, as illustrated on Plan No.HA/134, on the grounds that it is not needed for public use.

 

2        Public Notice of the making of the Order be given and in the event of there being no objections within the period specified, the Order be confirmed in the exercise of the powers conferred on the Council in the said Acts.

 

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

 

35.

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Section 257: Application for the Diversion of Public Footpath No. 4 (part), Parish of Ridley pdf icon PDF 92 KB

To consider the application to divert part of Public Footpath No. 4 in the parish of Ridley.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an application from Strutt and Parker on behalf of Cheshire Farm Services requesting the Council to make an Order under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to divert part of Public Footpath No. 4 in the parish of Ridley.

 

In accordance with Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the Borough Council, as Planning Authority, could make an Order diverting a public footpath if it was satisfied that it was necessary to do so to enable development to be carried out in accordance with a planning permission which had been applied for or granted.

 

Planning permission had been applied for to convert a barn into two residential properties - planning reference 18/3879N, which would result in the obstruction of the Public Footpath No.4 Ridley by one of the properties. 

 

The existing alignment of Public Footpath No.4 Ridley was currently obstructed by the barn to be converted and the conversion would not be able to go ahead unless the footpath was diverted to preserve the right of way for the public from Whitchurch Road to the fields lying to the east of the planned development.  At present there was an alternative route to enable users to pass the barn along its northern side.

 

The proposed diversion route would move the footpath so that it ran around the western and northern perimeters of the development and on into the pasture fields behind – points D-E-F-C on Plan No.TCPA/054.

 

The Committee noted the comments received from the Peak and Northern Footpath Society and the Public Rights of Way officer’s response to these. 

 

The Committee considered the application and concluded that it was necessary to divert part of Public Footpath No.4 to allow for development to be carried out if planning permission was granted.  It was considered that the legal tests for the making and confirming of a Diversion Order under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 were satisfied.

 

The Committee by majority

 

RESOLVED:  That

 

1        An Order be made under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to divert part of Public Footpath No.4 in the parish of Ridley, as illustrated on Plan No.TCPA/054, on the grounds that the Council is satisfied that it is necessary to do so to allow development to take place.    

 

2        Public Notice of the making of the Order be given and in the event of there being no objections within the period specified, and on condition that permission is granted for the planned development, the Order be confirmed in the exercise of the powers conferred on the Council by the said Act.

3        In the event of objections to the Order being received and not resolved, Cheshire East Borough Council be responsible for the conduct of any hearing or public inquiry.

 

 

36.

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Section 257: Proposed Diversion of Public Footpath No.4 (part) in the Parish of Cholmondeston pdf icon PDF 96 KB

To consider the application to divert part of Public Footpath No.4 in the parish of Cholmondeston.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report which detailed an application from Mrs McDonald of The Byre, Daisy Bank Farm, Cholmondeston requesting the Council to make an Order under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to divert part of Public Footpath No.4 in the parish of Cholmondeston.

 

In accordance with Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the Borough Council, as Planning Authority, could make an Order diverting a public footpath if it was satisfied it was necessary to do so to enable development to be carried out in accordance with a planning permission which had been applied for or granted.

 

Planning permission had been granted for a single storey side extension, garage conversion and internal alterations - planning reference 18/1947N. 

 

The existing alignment of Public Footpath No.4 Cholmondeston would be directly affected by the development and infrastructure within the planning consent, resulting in partial obstruction of the footpath by the new extension and associated parking arrangements. 

 

The length of the footpath to be diverted commenced at its junction with a stone surfaced driveway and then ran through the back gardens of the properties and on into neighbouring fields – points A-B-C-D on Plan TCPA/053.  The definitive line was currently obstructed by a number of substantial garden fences, a pergola and established hedges and shrubs between points B-C.  There was currently a permissive route on the site which had been used and accepted by the public and which continued alongside the gardens of the property and entered the field between points C and E on the plan TCPA/053.

 

The proposed diversion would move the footpath away from the property; points A-E-D on Plan No.TCPA/053, and allow users to walk directly across the adjacent field instead of taking the definitive route which was a less direct route.

 

The Committee considered the application and concluded that it was necessary to diver part of Public Footpath No.4 to allow for the development approved in planning permission 18/1947N.  It was considered that the legal tests for the making and confirming of a Diversion Order under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 were satisfied.

 

The Committee unanimously

 

RESOLVED:  That

 

1        A Public Footpath Diversion Order be made under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 on the grounds that Cheshire East Borough Council is satisfied that it is necessary to do so in order to enable development to be carried out,

 

2        Public Notice of the making of the Order be given and in the event of there being no objections within the period specified, the Order be confirmed in the exercise of the powers conferred on the Council by the said Act.

 

3        In the event of objections being received, Cheshire East Borough Council be responsible for the conduct of any hearing or Public Inquiry.

 

 

37.

Informative Report - Town & Country Planning Act Section 257: Public Path Diversion Order, Mottram St Andrew FP's 8 & 9(parts) Abandoned Order pdf icon PDF 89 KB

To note the abandonment of an Order for Public Footpath Diversion Order for parts of Public Footpath Nos.8 and 9 in the parish of Mottram St Andrew.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee received an information report on the abandonment of an Order to divert parts of Public Footpaths Nos.8 and 9 in the parish of Mottram St Andrew.

 

The Committee, at its meeting on 5 December 2016, had resolved that an Order be made to divert parts of Public Footpaths Nos. 8 and 9 in the parish of Mottram St Andrew as it was necessary to do so to allow for an extension to Mottram Hall Hotel, an associated diversion of the existing internal road and new service hub and delivery yard in line planning approval 16/2236M.

 

Following a period of uncertainty as to when the development works would commence and the new route constructed it had been confirmed that there had been some restructuring within the parent company of the hotel and the that the development in accordance with the approved planning permission would not now go ahead.

 

As the purpose of the diversion under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 was to enable development to be carried out, where the approved development was not undertaken the diversion was no longer necessary and therefore could not be confirmed.

 

AGREED:

 

That the report be noted.

38.

Informative Report - Highways Act 1980 Proposed Diversion of Public Footpath No.16 (part) in the Parish of Wilmslow pdf icon PDF 74 KB

To note the remaking of a Public Path Order for part of Public Footpath No.16 Wilmslow to reflect a change in the relevant administrative boundary.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee received an information report on the remaking of the Public Order for part of Public Footpath No. 16 Wilmslow to reflect a change in the relevant administrative boundary.

 

The Committee, at its meeting on 11 June 2018, had resolved that an Order be made to divert part of Public Footpath No.16 in the parish of Wilmslow.  The Order was made on 2 August 2018 and referred to the diversion being in the parish of Wilmslow.  However since the time the Definitive Map and Statement was produced the administrative boundary for the footpath had changed and a new Order was required to be made to show the correct parish boundary, which placed Public Footpath No.16 in the parish of Styal.  Statutory consultations would be repeated once the new Order had been made.

 

AGREED:  That

 

1        the report be noted; and

 

2        the existing Order be abandoned and a new Order be made.

39.

Informative Report - Highways Act 1980 Proposed Diversion of Public Footpath No.12 (part) in the Parish of Lower Withington pdf icon PDF 75 KB

To note the remaking of a Public Path Order for part of Public Path No.12 Lower Withington to reflect a change in the alignment of the diverted path.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee received an information report on the remaking of a Public Path Order for part of Public Footpath No.12 Lower Withington to reflect a change in the alignment of the diverted path.

 

The Committee, at its meeting on 12 March 2018, had resolved that an Order be made to divert part of Public Footpath No. 12 Lower Withington. Following the formal consultation on the Order, 3 objections had been received to the alignment of the path between points A-E-F-G, as shown on Order Plan No.HA/120/A.

 

In order to resolve the objections the applicant had agreed to change the alignment of the path to the other side of the hedge - revised alignment of the path detailed on Plan No.HA/120/B between points A-E-F.  Statutory consultations would be repeated once the new Order had been made.

 

AGREED:  That

 

1        that the report be noted, and

 

2        the existing Order be abandoned and a new Order be made.

40.

Informative Report - Town & Country Planning Act s.257, Public Path Diversion Order, Peover Superior Footpath No. 4 (part) pdf icon PDF 75 KB

To note the change of planning application reference against which the Public Path Order for the diversion of part of Public Footpath No.4 Peover Superior will be made and confirmed.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee received an information report on a change to the planning reference against which the Public Path Order for the diversion of part of Public Footpath No.4 Peover Superior would be made and confirmed.

 

The Committee, at is meeting on 10 September 2018, had considered an application to divert part of Public Footpath No.4 Peover Superior which had been made in response to enforcement action taken by the Council to stop any further construction of an agricultural barn in a position that did not comply with the approved planning application 16/2695M and resolved that an Order be made to divert the footpath to enable the construction of the barn to be completed.

 

Subsequently, as well as choosing to divert part of Public Footpath No.4, the applicant had submitted a new planning application to seek permission to allow the completion of the barn in its existing position in order to comply with the planning enforcement requirements.   As a result of this, the diversion Order would now be made and confirmed in reference to the new planning application 18/5249M should the planning permission be granted.

 

AGREED:

 

That the report be noted.

41.

Uncontested Public Path Orders: Change to Scheme of Delegation pdf icon PDF 105 KB

To note that the delegation is now in place for the determination of uncontested Public Path Order applications by the Executive Director of Place in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Committee.

Minutes:

The Committee received an information report on the change to the scheme of delegation for the determination of uncontested Public Path Orders applications.

 

The Constitution Committee considered the proposal to amend the scheme of delegation, at its meeting on 20 September 2018, and resolved “that Council be recommended to approve that the scheme of delegation be amended to enable the Executive Director Place to determine, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Public Rights of Way Committee, any Public Path Order applications that are not contested or contentious at the pre-order consultation stage.”

 

The recommendation was considered by full Council on 18 October 2018 and it was resolved that “approval be granted for the scheme of delegation to be amended to enable the Executive Director Place to determine, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Public Rights of Way Committee, any Public Path Order applications that are not contested or contentious at the pre-order consultation stage.”

 

The Constitution has been amended accordingly and the Local Scheme of Delegation under the cascade principle enabled the Public Rights of Way Manager to make the delegated decision.  The Public Rights of Way Committee would be informed of decisions taken under the delegation.

 

AGREED:

 

That the report be noted.