Agenda item

To consider the application for the diversion of Public Footpath No.39 (part) in the parish of Wincle

The Committee received a report which detailed an application from Mr E Stubbs, Tolls Farm, Danebridge, Nr Macclesfield (the applicant), requesting that the Council make an Order under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Public Footpath No.38 in the parish of Wincle.

In accordance with Section 119(1) of the Highways Act 1980 it was within the Council’s discretion to make an Order 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 current path ran across land owned by the applicant and neighbouring landowners Mr & Mrs Blythe, Pear Tree Cottage; Mr A Hine, Mr D Riley, Mr F Cocker and Mr & Mrs N Heald who owned cottages 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively along Chapmans Row.  All adjacent landowners had registered their agreement to the proposed diversion.  The proposed diversion ran across land owned solely by the applicant. 

The section to Public Footpath No. 39 Wincle to be diverted ran through the property of the applicant, through the property of adjacent Pear Tree Cottage and between the houses and gardens of the properties along Chapmans Row, giving rise to concerns relating to security, safety and privacy.

The proposed new route would follow a south westerly direction along a semi-surfaced track through a pasture field, bypassing a cattle grid by entering the field via a field gate and then rejoining the track.  The new route would have a recorded width of 2m and would not be enclosed on either side.  Of benefit to the public the new route would be significantly more enjoyable as it would pass through a more open and scenic landscape bring users closer to the River Dane and taking away the need to pass between houses and corresponding gardens.  The new route would be shorter in length and easier to navigate having only one surface type and was relatively flat and unobstructed except for a field gate.

The Committee noted that no objections had been received to the proposal and considered that the new route would not be substantially less convenient than the existing route.  Diverting the footpath would be of considerable benefit to the landowner in terms of enhancing the security and privacy of their property.  It was therefore 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.

RESOLVED:

1          That 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. 39 Wincle by creating a new section of public footpath and extinguishing the current path as illustrated on Plan No. HA/044 on the grounds that it is expedient in the interests of the owner of the land crossed by the path.

2          Public Notice of the making of the Order be given and in the event of there being no objections with the period specified, the Order be confirmed in the exercise of the powers 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.