Hampshire County Council ITEM

Regulatory Committee

30 November 2005

Application for a Public Path Diversion Order for

Footpath No.26 in the Parish of Amport

Report of the Director of Recreation and Heritage

Contact: Andrew Jones: Ext 6891 E-mail: [email protected]

Orders for the Diversion of Footpaths and Bridleways may be made under Section 119
of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981,
in the following circumstances:-

"Where it appears to a council as respects a footpath or bridleway in their area
(other than one that is a trunk road or a special road) that,

in the interests of the owner, lessee or occupier of land crossed by the path or way

or

of the public,

it is expedient that the line of the path or way, or part of that line, should be diverted (whether on to land of the same or of another owner, lessee or occupier), the council may, subject to subsection (2) below, by order made by them and submitted to and confirmed by the Secretary of State, or confirmed as an unopposed order,:

(a) create, as from such date as may be specified in the order, any such new footpath or bridleway as appears to the council requisite for effecting the diversion; and

(b) extinguish, as from such date as may be so specified in accordance with the provisions of subsection (3) below, the public right of way over so much of the path or way as appears to the council requisite as aforesaid.

An order under this section is referred to in this Act as a 'public path diversion order'."

Members must be satisfied that the diverted route will not be substantially less convenient to the public, and must have regard to the effect that a diversion will have on the enjoyment of the path as a whole.

1. Summary

1.1 Hampshire County Council has received an application to divert Footpath No.26 in the Parish of Amport, as shown on the attached plan.

1.2 It is proposed that the application for diversion of Footpath No.26 be accepted under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, on the grounds that the diversion is in the interests of the public.

2. Parties to the Application

2.1 The application has been made by Mr H Edmunds of Cholderton Estate, Cholderton, Salisbury, Wiltshire SP4 0DR.

2.2 Mr H Edmunds is the freehold owner of all land affected by both the existing footpath and the proposed new route.

3. The existing route

3.1 The existing route commences at its junction with Amport Footpath No. 25 at
Point A (GR 423990 142440) and proceeds in a generally south and south easterly direction, through the gardens of a private residence and across parkland, to its junction with the C131 Cholderton Road at Point B (GR 424170 142150).

3.2 The total length of Amport Footpath No 26 affected by the proposal is approximately 370 metres.

4. The proposed new path

4.1 The proposed route commences at Point C (GR 423610 142410) on the attached map and proceeds in a generally southerly direction along an
existing farm track to a junction with the C131 Cholderton Road at Point D (GR 423570 142180). On the southern side of Cholderton Road, the footpath recommences at Point E (GR 423570 142170) and continues south to join Quarley Down Farm Lane at Point F (GR 423610 141890).

4.2 The total length of the proposed route will be 235 metres from Points C-D and 270 metres from Points E-F, or a total of 505 metres in all.

4.3 The proposed new route will have a minimum width of 2.0 metres throughout its length.

5. The reasons for the application

5.1 The current route of Amport Footpath No 26 has clearly not been used for some time, in that much of the northern section is overgrown (there is no sign of a footpath as such, other than the odd stile) and a thick belt of trees has grown up along the road verge near the southern terminus of the path.


5.2 The footpath in question does not form a natural link with other paths to
the north and south (as there are no public rights of way leading in these directions), and is overshadowed by alternative routes (such as Footpath No.25 and C131 Cholderton Road) which provide strong east-west links
(see attached overview map of the wider area).

6. The benefits to the public

6.1 Rather than re-open the existing route, which runs close to a private residence, it would be preferable to divert Amport Footpath No.26 to a new, more effective, alignment which can be more easily maintained should the need arise. It would also help to remove a real sense of invasion of privacy felt by both the landowner and users of the current alignment of Footpath No.26.

6.2 The proposed new route will follow an all-weather metalled track that offers good views of the surrounding countryside and which would not be subject to impediment in terms of either stiles or gates.

6.3 In addition, it would provide a useful new link between existing rights of way to the north and east and a number of minor roads to the south and west of Cholderton Lodge on the Hampshire/Wiltshire border .

7. Summary of Consultation

The proposal was sent out for formal consultation on 16^th August 2005 to the following representative groups:

7.1 Local Member - Cllr Patricia West
The proposal has the support of Councillor West

7.2 Test Valley Borough Council
TVBC acknowledged receipt of the consultation letter, but no further comment was received

7.3 Amport Parish Council
The proposal has the support of Amport Parish Council

7.4 Rights of Way Area Officer - Central
The proposal has the support of the Area Rights of Way Officer

7.5 HCC - Highways Management
Highways Management has no observations to make on this proposal

7.6 HCC - Environment Department
The Environment Department has no comment on this proposal

7.7 Hampshire County Archivist
No objections - 19^th Century mapping shows the current alignment of Amport Footpath No.26. The Archivist did not find evidence of any higher rights shown on historic maps

7.8 The Ramblers Association
The Ramblers Association has no objection to the proposal and the Local Group Secretary can see definite advantages in the new route

7.9 The Open Spaces Society
The Open Spaces Society has no objection to the Proposal

7.10 Land Access & Recreation Association (LARA)
LARA has no objection to the Proposal

7.11 British Horse Society
No response to consultation

7.12 British Driving Society
No response to consultation

7.13 National Farmers Union
The National Farmers Union has no objection to the Proposal

7.14 Cyclists Touring Club
No response to consultation

7.15 Trail Riders Fellowship
The Trail Riders Fellowship has lodged an objection to the proposal

7.16 All Wheel Drive Club
No response to consultation

8. Comments on Consultation Replies

8.1 Comments received from user groups as a result of the consultation exercise have, for the most part, been favourable, with only one sustained objection to the proposal (Trail Riders Fellowship).

8.2 Sean Fosberry, on behalf of the Trail Riders Fellowship, has confirmed that he is opposed in principle to the loss of any historic route. He accepts that the new route has advantages for the walking community, but believes that the existing route should be cleared and that the two should co-exist to the greater benefit of the community. It has not been possible to offer a modified solution that would allow the diversion proposal to proceed unopposed.

9. Criteria for Assessment of the Proposal

9.1 The Council, as a Highway Authority, has the power to make a Public Path Diversion Order, if it is considered expedient to do so in a particular case.

9.2 Section 119(2) of the Highways Act 1980 requires that a Diversion Order should not be made unless the new termination point is substantially as convenient to the public as the existing termination point.

9.3 Section 119(6) of the Highways Act 1980 requires that a Diversion Order should not be confirmed unless the new path or way will not be substantially less convenient to the public in consequence of the diversion and that it is expedient to confirm the order having regard to the effect which:

9.3.1 the diversion would have on public enjoyment of the path or way as a whole;

9.3.2 the coming into operation of the order would have as respects other land served by the existing public right of way; and

9.3.3 any new public right of way created by the order would have as respects the land over which the right is so created and any land held with it.

10. Conclusion

Officers are of the opinion that the proposed diversion satisfies the criteria required by section 119 of the Highways Act and that it is expedient for the Council to make an order in that:

10.1 The proposal for diversion of Amport Footpath No.26 is in the interests of the public, as it will provide a wider and more convenient all-weather route for walkers.

10.2 The proposed diversion will not be less convenient than the existing route. Although the new route (505 metres) will be longer than the previous alignment (370 metres), it will connect with different points on the footpath network and therefore provide a more logical pattern when viewed in a wider context.

10.3 The proposed diversion will not affect the enjoyment of the path as a whole, as there will be improved views south along the length of the proposed alignment.

10.4 The surface of the track onto which Footpath No.26 will be diverted is such that it will require minimal maintenance at public expense.

11. Recommendation

It is recommended that an Order be made for the diversion of Footpath No.26
in the Parish of Amport from the current route to a new alignment running from
Point C (GR 423610 142410) to Point D (GR 423570 142180) and from Point E (GR 423570 142170) to Point F (GR 423610 141890) in the interest of the public.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and which have been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of the report.

NB the list excludes: (1) published works and (2) documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act:

File: ATJ/DIV/Amport Footpath No.26
Rights of Way Office, Mottisfont Court, Winchester