Archived decisions

Decision Maker:

Hampshire County Council Regulatory Committee A

Date of Decision:

26^th November 2008

Decision Title:

Application for a Public Path Diversion Order for part of Footpath No.12 in the Parish of Long Sutton

Decision Reference:

Report From:

Director of Recreation and Heritage

Contact name:

Andrew Jones

Tel:

01962 846891

Email:

[email protected]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1) Summary of Decision Area:

1.1. The definitive alignment of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 runs through the centre of a coeducational residential college and it is therefore difficult for staff to ensure the safety of students in their care. An application has been received from the Bursar of Lord Wandsworth College for the footpath to be diverted across farm land to the east of the campus.

1.2. Members are requested to approve the recommendation by Officers that an Order should be made for the permanent diversion of part of Long Sutton Footpath No.12.

2) Legal Framework for the Decision:

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.

3) Summary of Issues to be Decided:

3.1. Officers believe that it is expedient to divert the footpath in the interests of the landowner. The proposed alignment will be no less convenient or enjoyable than the current route, and members are therefore requested to authorise the making of an Order under s119 of the Highways Act 1980 for the diversion of this public right of way.

4) Recommendations:

4.1. It is recommended that an Order be made for the diversion of Footpath No.12
in the Parish of Long Sutton from the current definitive alignment, running between Points A, B, C, D and E, to a new route running between Points F, G, H, J, K and E on the attached plan.

1) Purpose of Report:

1.1. Hampshire County Council has received an application to divert Footpath No.12 in the Parish of Long Sutton, as shown on the attached large scale plan.

1.2. It is proposed that the application for diversion of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 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 that it is expedient that the line of the path should be diverted.

2) Applicant:

2.1. The Bursar, Lord Wandsworth College, Long Sutton, Hook,
Hampshire RG29 1TB

3) Landowners:

Lord Wandsworth Foundation, acting for

Lord Wandsworth College

Long Sutton

Hook

Hampshire RG29 1TB

4) Description of the Routes (please refer to the map attached to this report):

4.1. Current Route

Long Sutton Footpath No.12 commences at Point A (GR 474852 147060), at a junction with the C92 White Hill Road, and proceeds in a generally southerly direction along the college main driveway to Point B (GR 474934 146732). It then continues to the west, following a private access road, to Point C (GR 474778 146738). The route then continues along a footpath leading south to Point D (GR 474800 146360) and thence across fields to reach Point E (GR 474962 145906), at a junction with Long Sutton BOAT No.9 (T246 Frog Lane).

The length of the current route of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 between Points A and E is approximately 1412 metres.

4.2. Proposed Route

The diverted route of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 will commence at
Point F (GR 475072 147028), at a junction with the C92 White Hill Road, and will continue in a generally southerly direction across fields to reach Point G (GR 475094 146734). The path then skirts the main college buildings to reach Point H (GR 475090 146586) before continuing across fields through Points J (GR 475050 146550) and K (GR 475044 146328), to terminate at Point E (GR474962 145906) on a junction with Long Sutton BOAT No.9 (T246 Frog Lane).

The length of the diverted route of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 between Points F and E will be approximately 1150 metres.

The proposed footpath will have a width of 2.0 metres throughout its length.

In general, no structures or barriers will be required on the diverted route, with the exception of Point F where a bridle gate and a set of steps will bridge the difference in height between the field and the C92 White Hill Road, allowing walkers to make the transition from path to road in comparative safety.

The Rights of Way Area Officer (North East) is preparing a Schedule of Works detailing the improvements that will be required to bring the new route up to the standard required for use by the public, and the College has confirmed that they will fund the necessary works.

4.3. Permissive Footpath

If the proposal for the diversion of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 is implemented, the applicant is willing to create a permissive footpath between Points 1 (GR 474876 147060) and 2 (GR475072 147020) on the attached plan, in order to provide an off-road link between the southern end of Long Sutton Footpath No.8 and the new alignment of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 in the vicinity of Point F. The college is willing to enter into a licensing agreement with the County Council to make this permissive footpath available for a period of at least 10 years, and this agreement will be signed by the College before any Diversion Order is confirmed by the County Council.

4.4. For the avoidance of doubt, the traffic survey has indicated that the diversion of the public right of way (Long Sutton Footpath No.12) onto the new route does not significantly endanger the walking public - the provision of a permissive route is not a necessary precursor to the making of an Order, although it is a highly desirable facility that will further improve the safety and enjoyment of the new route.

4.5. The cost 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.

4.6. Both the diverted route of Long Sutton Footpath No.12 and the permissive footpath south of White Hill Road are entirely within the estate belonging to Lord Wandsworth College.

5) Benefits to the Applicant

5.1. Lord Wandsworth College is a coeducational boarding establishment,
and as such the security of the students whilst on site is a primary consideration for both college staff and those walkers using Long Sutton Footpath No.12, which at present passes through the heart of the estate and close to dormitory blocks. The revised route will take walkers to the east of the college and clear of any buildings.

6) Benefits to the Public arising from the diversion

6.1. The diverted route (1150m) is significantly shorter than the current footpath (1412m), as sharp changes in direction around buildings have been eliminated. This will make the new route easier to waymark and more obvious to walkers on the ground.

6.2. The diverted route will provide a more `rural' experience, with improved views across fields to the east and south.

7) Consultations with Other Bodies:

7.1. Local Member - Councillor Jonathan Glen
Councillor Glen has been consulted on this proposal.

7.2. Hart District Council
The Head of Legal Services at Hart District Council has been consulted on this proposal.

7.3. Long Sutton and Well Parish Council
The Chairman of Long Sutton and Well Parish Council commented in May 2004 that members would support the proposed route, provided that the need to traverse some 200 metres of White Hill Road could be addressed.

7.4. Rights of Way Area Officer
The Rights of Way Area Officer for North East Hampshire is in favour of this proposal and has prepared a Schedule of Works that will ensure that the diverted route is constructed to a standard suitable for use by the public on foot.

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

7.6. HCC - Environment Department
Environment Department has been consulted on this proposal.

7.7. 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.

7.8. The Ramblers' Association
The Ramblers' Association did initially object to this proposal - the route between Points F and E was acceptable, but they had reservations concerning the long term availability of the permissive footpath link south of the C92 White Hill Road. The Footpath Secretary has since withdrawn his objection (see copy of letter at Appendix 3), on the basis of an HCC traffic survey that indicated that pedestrians would not be put at significant risk if the permissive path was withdrawn. If this circumstance was to occur, Officers have agreed to provide signage linking the southern end of Long Sutton Footpath No.8 with the northern end of the diverted alignment of Footpath No.12

7.9. The Open Spaces Society
The Open Spaces Society response to consultation was similar to that of the Ramblers' Association, but they too have subsequently withdrawn their objection (see copy of letter at Appendix 3).

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

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

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

8) Comments on Consultation Replies

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

8.2. The Ramblers' Association and the Open Spaces Society initially objected to the inclusion of a Permissive Path as a link between existing sections of the Rights of way Network and the diverted route, on the grounds that this right could be withdrawn by the College at any time.

8.3. Both organisations have subsequently withdrawn their objections to the proposal (see Appendix 3), having been reassured by:

a) An HCC Traffic Survey on White Hill Road which confirmed that neither traffic volume nor speed would put pedestrians using this highway at significant risk.

b) The College has agreed to enter into an agreement with Hampshire County Council to license the use of the permissive path by the public for an initial period of ten years.

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:

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

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

c) 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.

9.4. Section 29 of the Highways Act 1980 requires the County to have due regard to the needs of agriculture, forestry and nature conservation when considering the making of public path creation agreements. Officers confirm that there are no adverse effects on these activities associated with the making of this Order.

9.5. Section 69 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 requires the County to have due regard to the needs of persons with mobility problems. This is further reinforced by the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, as interpreted by the Countryside Agency's publication `By All Reasonable Means'. Officers confirm that the requirements of those with limited mobility have been taken into account when developing the Schedule of Works for structures, signage and conditions under foot on the new route. This will require a short set of steps at the northern end, where the diverted route exits onto White Hill Road, but this is consistent with the rural nature of the footpaths in this area, which are unlikely to be used by those with serious mobility problems.

9.6. The Rights of Way Office of Hampshire County Council has published Guidance Notes for landowners who are considering an application for diversion (http://www3.hants.gov.uk/making-changes/diversions.htm), in order to ensure that the diverted route should be no less convenient to use than the existing route and should not adversely affect the public's enjoyment of the path as a whole, and the recommendations contained therein have been taken into account in developing this proposal.

10) Conclusions:

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:

10.1. The proposed diversion will improve the safety of students living and studying on campus.

10.2. The proposed diversion will not be substantially less convenient than the existing route, in that the diverted section F-G-H-J-K-E (1150 metres in total) is slightly shorter than the equivalent section of the current route A-B-C-D-E (1412 metres in total).

10.3. 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 which can be effectively signed.

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

11) Recommendations

11.1. It is recommended that an Order be made for the diversion of Footpath No.12 in the Parish of Long Sutton from the current definitive alignment
A-B-C-D-E to a new route running between Points F, G, H, J, K and E on the attached plan.

Links to the Corporate Strategy

Yes

No

Hampshire safer and more secure for all

_

Maximising well-being

_

Enhancing our quality of place

_

OR

This proposal does not link to the Corporate Strategy but, nevertheless, requires a decision because:

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background documents

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

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

(Quote list of documents here: e.g. list the relevant letters, memos, etc. and their location)

Document

Location

General Correspondence

I:\Recreation and Heritage\Countryside Service\
Rights of Way\Andrew Jones\Diversions\Long Sutton Fp 12

Proposal File

ATJ/Div/Long Sutton Fp 12

IMPACT AREA

IMPACT LEVEL

COMMENTS

WHERE COVERED IN REPORT (Where there are details of how impact could be managed)

Equality & Diversity Impact

None

Crime Prevention (under Section 17)

Significant

College Security and Student Safety will be improved