Hampshire County Council ITEM

Regulatory Committee

3 September 2008

Application for a Public Path Diversion Order for Footpath No.2

and part of Footpath No.1 in the Parish of Braishfield

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.2 and part of Footpath No.1 in the Parish of Braishfield, as shown on the attached large scale plan.

1.2 It is proposed that the application for diversion of Braishfield Footpath No.2 and part of Footpath No.1 be approved 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 landowner and of the public.

2. Parties to the Application

2.1 The application has been made by Mr & Mrs J Swayne, 7 Megana Way, Braishfield, Romsey, Hants, SO51 0QD.

2.2 Mr & Mrs Swayne are the freehold owners of the land over which section A-B-C of the current route passes and over which section D-E of the diverted route will pass.

2.3 Mr Timothy Meyrick of Pucknall Farm, Braishfield is the freehold owner of the land over which section E-F of the diverted route will pass. Mr Meyrick is aware of the application made by Mr & Mrs Swayne and has given his support to the diversion of the routes in question.

3. The existing routes and proposed diversions

3.1 Current Alignment

3.1.1 Braishfield Footpath No.2 commences at Point A (GR 437512 124322), at a gate giving access to a private garden, and initially runs in a northerly direction to Point B (GR 437510 124344). It then continues in an easterly direction, along the southern edge of a hedge, to a junction with Braishfield Footpath No.1 at a stile at Point C (GR 437634 124350).

3.1.2 The length of the current route of Braishfield Footpath No.2 between Points A and C is approximately 145 metres.

3.1.3 The section of Braishfield Footpath No.1 affected by this proposal commences at Point C (GR 437634 124350), at a stile on a junction with Braishfield Footpath No.2, and runs in a south easterly direction across a pasture field to Point F (GR 437674 124302).

3.1.4 The length of the current route of Braishfield Footpath No.1 between Points C and F is approximately 62 metres.

3.2 Proposed Alignment

3.2.1 The diverted route of Braishfield Footpath No.2 will commence at Point D (GR 437518 124316), on the eastern end of the U67 Megana Way, and continue in an easterly direction across a field to a gate at Point E (GR 437636 124326).

3.2.2 The length of the diverted route of Braishfield Footpath No.2 between Points D and E will be approximately 120 metres.

3.2.3 The diverted route of this section of Braishfield Footpath No.1 will commence at Point C (GR 437634 124350) and continue in a generally southerly direction along the eastern side of a hedge to Point E (GR 437636 124326). It will then cross a pasture field to rejoin the definitive alignment of Braishfield Footpath No.1 at Point F (GR 437674 124302).

3.2.4 The length of the proposed diversion between Points C, E and F will be approximately 68 metres.

3.2.5 The proposed footpaths will have a width of 2.0 metres throughout their length.

3.2.6 The costs of processing the Diversion Order, plus any works necessary to bring the new footpath up to a standard suitable for use by the public, will be met by the applicant.

4. Background to the application

4.1 The Definitive alignment of Braishfield Footpath No.2 between points A and B originally ran along the eastern border of the property known as No.7 Megana Way. The garden of this property has since been extended into the adjoining field, however, and walkers now feel a perceived sense of invasion of privacy when faced with having to cross the grounds of a private residence.

4.2 It is proposed that the diverted route of Footpath No.2 should continue the east-west alignment of Megana Way and follow a property division that now exists along the alignment D-E.

4.3 The alignment of Braishfield Footpath No.1 will be amended slightly to accommodate changes in the junction with Footpath No.2, which will migrate from Point C to Point E.

5. The benefits to the public

It is felt that the proposed changes to the alignment of Fareham Footpath No.42 will benefit the public in the following respects:

5.1 The diversion of this footpath will remove a perceived sense of invasion of privacy likely to be experienced by members of the public when they find that the right of way passes through a private garden and close to a residential building.

5.2 The public are already using a diagonal cross-field route between Points D and C, in order to avoid the dogleg through Point B. By replacing the stile at Point C with a gate at Point E, a more logical route can be produced which improves access to the network both north and south of the junction, and this can be recorded on the Definitive Map.

5.3 Existing stiles will be replaced with gaps or gates, in order to improve access for those with limited mobility, and the ground between Points C and E will be drained to improve condition under foot.

6. Summary of Consultation

The proposal was sent out for formal consultation on 23^rd June 2008 to the following representative groups, with the request that any comments should be submitted to the County Council within a period of six weeks:

6.1 Local Member - Councillor Alan Dowden
Councillor Dowden has been consulted on this proposal.

6.2 Test Valley Borough Council
The Senior Transportation Engineer has confirmed that TVBC has no objection to this proposal.

6.3 Braishfield Parish Council
The Clerk to Braishfield Parish Council has confirmed that members support this change.

6.4 Rights of Way Area Officer
The Rights of Way Area Officer for Western Hampshire is in favour of this proposal and has prepared a Schedule of Works that will improve access and amenity along the diverted route.

6.5 HCC - Highways Management
Highways Management has confirmed that they have no objection to this proposal.

6.6 HCC - Environment Department
Environment Department has not commented on this proposal.

6.7 Hampshire County Archivist
The County Archivist has confirmed that there is no evidence in the historic records of the existence of a route of higher status on or near this alignment. Rights of Way Officers have also inspected the Ordnance Survey County Series plans from the 1860s onwards, with a similar result.

6.8 The Ramblers' Association
The Ramblers' Association has not commented on this proposal.

6.9 The Open Spaces Society
The Open Spaces Society has confirmed that they have no objection to this proposal.

6.10 Land Access & Recreation Association (LARA)
LARA has confirmed that they have no objection to this proposal.

6.11 National Farmers Union
The National Farmers Union has confirmed that they have no objection to this proposal.

6.12 Cyclists Touring Club
The Cyclists Touring Club has not commented on this proposal.

7. Comments on Consultation Replies

7.1 Of the responses received from the consultation exercise, all are either in favour of the proposal, or have no objection to it.

8. Criteria for Assessment of the Proposal

8.1 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.

8.2 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.

8.3 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:

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

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

8.3.3 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.

9. Conclusion

Officers are of the opinion that the proposed diversion satisfies the criteria required by section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 and that it is expedient for the Council to make an order in that:

9.1 The proposal for diversion of Braishfield Footpaths No.2 and part of No.1 is in the interests of the public, as it will provide a natural extension of the public highway east of Megana Way with the minimum of impediments to those with limited mobility, and in the interests of the landowner, as it will improve the privacy and security of the residents of
No.7 Megana Way.

9.2 The proposed diversion will not be substantially less convenient than the existing route, in that the diverted section A-D-E-F (188 metres in total) is slightly shorter than the equivalent section of the current route A-B-C-F (207 metres in total).

9.3 The proposed diversion will not affect the enjoyment of the path as a whole,
as it will remove a perceived sense of invasion of privacy and provide a clear, level path with improved access to both northern and southern extensions of the network.

9.4 The Rights of Way Area Officer for West Hampshire has devised a Schedule of Works detailing those changes that will be required to bring the diverted route up to a standard suitable for use by the public and these will be implemented by the applicants at their expense.

9.5 It is unlikely that there will be any increase in the cost of maintaining the route at public expense.

10. Recommendation

10.1 It is recommended that an Order be made for the diversion of section A-B-C-F of Footpath Nos.1 and 2 in the Parish of Braishfield from the current definitive alignment to a new route running between Points A, D, E and F on the attached plan.

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/ Braishfield Footpath Nos.1 and 2
Rights of Way Office, Mottisfont Court, Winchester