Hampshire County Council ITEM

Regulatory Committee

18 October 2006

Application for a Public Path Extinguishment Order for

Footpath No.16 in the Parish of Pamber

Report of the Director of Recreation and Heritage

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

Orders for the Extinguishment of Footpaths and Bridleways may be made under Section 118 of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, on the grounds that:-

"the path or way is not needed for public use"

Members must be satisfied that it is expedient to extinguish the right of way, having regard to the extent (if any) to which it appears to them that the path or way would, apart from the order, be likely to be used by the public, and having regard to the effect which the extinguishment of the right of way would have as respects land served by the path or way.

1. Summary

1.1 Hampshire County Council has received an application to extinguish Footpath No.16 in the Parish of Pamber, as shown on the attached plan.

1.2 It is recommended that an order be made for the extinguishment of Pamber Footpath No.16 under Section 118 of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, on the grounds that the footpath is no longer needed for public use.

2. Parties to the Application

2.1 The application has been made by Mr Brian Kirby, of 1 College Farm Bungalows, Silchester Road, Little London, Tadley, Hampshire RG26 5EX.

2.2 Mr Kirby is the freehold owner of part of the land crossed by this footpath.

2.3 The remainder of the land crossed by this footpath is owned by Mr F J Inwood of Kinghern Kennels, Silchester Road, Little London, Tadley, Hampshire RG26 5EX.

2.4 Mr Inwood has given his consent to the application by Mr Kirby.

3. The existing route

3.1 Footpath No.16 commences at Point A (GR 462360 159468) at a junction with Pamber Footpath No.15, towards the end of a private driveway to the east of Silchester Road in Little London, Hampshire. It then continues north and east along the northern edge of a field, following a historic alignment that is evident on the Ordnance Survey County Series Third Edition of 1906-10. The definitive alignment then terminates at Point B (GR 462450 159596) on a junction with Pamber Footpath No.17.

3.2 The total length of Pamber Footpath No.16 is approximately 160 metres.

4. Background to the application

4.1 College Farm Bungalows were constructed during the first half of the 20th Century and appear to have slightly obstructed the historic line of Pamber Footpath No.16 at that time.

4.2 The obstruction appears to have been compounded by a more recent (c.1995) extension to No.1 College Farm Bungalows and the construction of a wooden fence to divide this property from an adjoining one. Although planning permission for the extension was granted by Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, no attempt appears to have been made at that time to divert the footpath under the provisions of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990, as amended, in order to avoid the continuing obstruction.

4.3 Officers do not consider that it would be in the public interest to enforce the current Definitive Alignment of Pamber Footpath No.16, which would require the demolition of buildings that now straddle the route.

4.4 Officers do not consider that there would be any public benefit to be gained by seeking to divert Pamber Footpath No.16 onto an alternative alignment.

4.5 The Applicant has agreed to submit a further proposal for the improvement and realignment of Pamber Footpath No.17 and this upgraded path, together with Pamber Footpath No.15, is considered to provide an acceptable alternative to Pamber Footpath No.16.

4.6 The Rights of Way Area Officer (North West) has confirmed that no complaints have been received from members of the public over the last 10 years relating to the obstruction of this footpath. The Network Development Officer has checked the Parish File, with a similar result.

5. Summary of Consultation

The proposal was sent out for formal consultation on 31^st July 2006 to the following representative groups:

5.1 Local Member - Councillor Keith Chapman
Cllr Chapman has been consulted on this proposal. He has responded that his comments will be submitted by the Parish Council on his behalf.

5.2 Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council
B&DBC has been consulted on this proposal.

5.3 Pamber Parish Council
The Clerk to Pamber Parish Council has confirmed that the Parish Council supports the views put forward by one of their members - Cllr Frank Mitchell - in his letter of 1^st August 2006. Cllr Mitchell states that "There seems little to be gained from retaining a path which has fallen into disuse, particularly when the route is adequately served by alternative paths. It is, in my opinion, preferable to maintain well-used paths rather than cling to an overgrown track which is barely navigable."

5.4 Rights of Way Area Officer - North West
The proposal has the support of the Area Rights of Way Officer.

5.5 HCC - Highways Management
Highways Management has been consulted on this proposal.

5.6 HCC - Environment Department
The Environment Department has been consulted on this proposal.

5.7 Hampshire County Archivist
The Archivist did not find evidence of any higher rights shown on historic maps.

5.8 The Ramblers' Association
The Ramblers' Association has been consulted on this proposal and their correspondent has stated "I have no objection to the extinguishment of FP16, as the extra length using FP15 and FP17 is very small and there is no loss of enjoyment".

5.9 The Open Spaces Society
The Open Spaces Society has no objection to this proposal, provided that it is linked to concurrent improvements in the alignment and accessibility of Pamber Footpath No.17

5.10 Land Access & Recreation Association (LARA)
LARA has no objection to the proposal.

5.11 National Farmers Union
The National Farmers Union has been consulted on this proposal.

5.12 Cyclists Touring Club
The Cyclists Touring Club has been consulted on this proposal.

6. Comments on Consultation Replies

6.1 No objections were received to the proposal to extinguish Pamber Footpath No.16.

7. Criteria for Assessment of the Proposal

7.1 There is only one relevant criterion against which the proposal for extinguishment of a public right of way must be considered - is the path or way no longer needed for public use?

7.2 Members must be satisfied that it is expedient to extinguish the right of way, having regard to the extent (if any) to which it appears to them that the path or way would, apart from the order, be likely to be used by the public, and having regard to the effect that the extinguishment of the right of way would have as respects land served by the path or way.

8. Conclusion

8.1 The applicant asserts that Pamber Footpath No.16 has not been used by members of the public since he acquired the property some four years ago and that it is not required for use, as there are alternative routes (Pamber Footpath Nos. 15 and 17) that serve the same destinations.

8.2 The footpath has been obstructed since the mid-1990s, but no complaints to this effect have been received by the County over the last 10 years.

8.3 If Members consider that there is insufficient evidence of a lack of use of the path in question, it would be possible to extend the display period for the Order as made from the statutory 28 days to a longer period of 56 days, in order to provide a higher level of confidence.

8.4 The alternative route may be somewhat longer than the footpath to be extinguished (320 metres, as opposed to 160 metres), but in the context of a rural amenity route this is not considered to be detrimental to the application.

8.5 The County has not received any objections to the proposal from those organisations that were consulted in August 2006.

8.6 Officers are of the opinion that the proposed diversion satisfies the criteria required by section 118 of the Highways Act and that it is expedient for the Council to make an order in that:

8.6.1 Pamber Footpath No.16 is no longer needed for public use, as a combination of Pamber Footpath Nos.15 and 17 will provide an acceptable alternative route once the latter has been cleared and realigned to avoid obstruction by buildings.

8.6.2 The extinguishment of this footpath will not deprive the public of the means of access to points of interest along the length of the path.

8.7 User Groups are prepared to accept the extinguishment of Pamber Footpath No.16, provided that improvements are also made to other public rights of way in the immediate vicinity.

9. Recommendation

It is recommended that an Order be made under Section 118 of the Highways Act 1980 for the extinguishment of Footpath No.16 in the Parish of Pamber, on the grounds that it is no longer needed for public use.

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/EXT/Pamber Footpath No.16
Rights of Way Office, Mottisfont Court, Winchester