Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Decision Report :

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1) Summary of Decision Area:

1.1. On 17th July 2008, the Executive Member for Recreation, Heritage & Communities gave authority for Officers to advertise their intention to make a number of Orders to restrict use of certain Byways Open to All Traffic (BOATs) by mechanically propelled vehicles.

1.2. These advertisements have resulted in a number of representations to the County Council which are considered in this report, together with advice received from an Inspector following a non-statutory Inquiry into the proposed extension of an existing Order on East Meon BOAT 42.

1.3. On the basis of public consultation conducted to date and the specific recommendation made in the Inspector's report on East Meon BOAT 42, Officers are requesting authority to introduce Traffic Regulation Orders on selected byways, in order to preserve their structure and character.

2) Issues covered in Report

2.1. In reaching this decision, Officers have taken into account the following guidance and policies:

a) Defra Publication - Regulating the use of motor vehicles on public rights of way and off road (http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/pdf/access/crow/regulating-motorvehicles.pdf)

b) Defra Publication - Making the best of Byways (http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/pdf/access/crow/bestofbyways.pdf)

c) HCC Policy regarding the use and management of Motor Vehicles on Rights of Way and unsurfaced roads in the Countryside
(http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/vehicles-row/vehicles-policy.htm)

d) HCC Policy for the management of Traffic on Hampshire's Public Rights of Way Network and the use of Traffic Regulation Orders
(http://www3.hants.gov.uk/row/making-changes/traffic-regulation-orders/tro-policy.htm)

2.2. If authority is given to make the Orders and a number of TROs are put in place, Officers will ensure that these (and all existing orders) are reviewed every three years, in order to ensure that the reasons behind their introduction are still valid. If this is no longer the case, the TROs may be revoked and the routes reopened to motorised traffic. The results of these reviews will be made publicly available.

3) Recommendation:

3.1. Authority is sought to make an Order for the introduction of a Seasonal Traffic Regulation Order, under section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, on the section of byway listed below, affecting the traffic there specified, and on the grounds there given:

a) Hawkley BOAT Nos. 24 and 26

An Order, under s1(b) and 1(f), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles between 1st November and 30th April each year, on the grounds that it will:

· prevent damage to the road

· preserve or improve the amenities of the area through which the road runs

3.2. Authority is also sought for the making of Permanent Traffic Regulation Orders under section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 on the sections of byway listed below, affecting the traffic there specified, and on the grounds there given:

a) East Meon BOAT No.42

An Order, under s1(a), s1(b) and s1(e), to replace the existing Traffic Regulation Order north of HMS Mercury (which currently applies only to four-wheeled vehicles), to include all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will:

· avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road, or prevent the likelihood of any such danger arising

· prevent damage to the road

· preserve the character of the road where it is specially suitable for use by persons on horseback or on foot

b) Buriton BOAT No.45

An Order, under s1(b), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will:

· prevent damage to the road

c) Chawton BOAT No.10
Farringdon BOAT No.2
Four Marks BOAT No.25

An Order, under s1(b), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will:

· prevent damage to the road

d) Rockbourne BOAT No.32 - east of the Rockbourne Road only Whitsbury BOAT No.19a

An Order, under s1(b) and s1(c), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will:

· prevent damage to the road

· facilitate the passage of any class of traffic (including pedestrians)

e) Fareham BOAT No.125

An Order, under s1(f), prohibiting mechanically propelled vehicles with three or more wheels, on the grounds that it will

· preserve or improve the amenities of the area through which the road runs

MAIN REPORT

1) Contextual Information:

1.1. Officers of the Countryside Service have become increasingly concerned at the level of damage that is being done to the surfaces of a number of Byways Open to all Traffic (BOATs). This degradation arises from an unsustainable level of use by mechanically propelled vehicles, either in connection with agricultural and forestry enterprises or from recreational use by members of the public, and if allowed to continue could lead to irreversible damage to these routes.

1.2. Over the course of the last year, officers have been involved in a continuing dialogue with representatives of the major user groups (walkers, cyclists, riders and motorised users) on a range of measures that could be introduced to prevent further damage to the surface of a number of Byways Open to All Traffic (BOATs) and to improve public safety and amenity. All of the following have been considered for each route prior to the proposal of making Traffic Regulation Orders.

a) Works - feasible measures that could be made to path, adjacent drainage or vegetation which would improve surface to the extent that it could sustain use by all types of traffic

b) Monitor Usage - Area-based staff monitor reports from users and local residents, and consider the effect of short term measures

c) Voluntary Restraint - Request that motorised users voluntarily restrict their activities to reduce the impact on other users, the fabric of the way, and the environment in general

d) Seasonal TRO - Introduce Temporary or Permanent TROs that would restrict use by certain classes of vehicle during the wetter winter months when the surface of the way is most vulnerable to damage

e) Weight Restriction - Impose a limit on the weight of vehicles using the route, regardless of the number of wheels

f) Restriction on certain Classes of Vehicle - Impose a restriction on the type of vehicles that can be used, normally based upon the number of wheels.

1.3. Although all of the routes under consideration are public rights of way available for use by all vehicles, the surface material is normally soil or gravel at best and will rapidly deteriorate when subjected to an unsustainable level of use by mechanically propelled vehicles.

1.4. Matters of public safety and enjoyment of the routes have also been relevant major considerations. Although walkers and cycle riders have occasionally recorded their concerns when encountering groups of motorised users, it is the horse riders who have been most vocal in their wish to restrict motorised traffic.

1.5. On 17th July 2008, officers sought authority from the Executive Member for Recreation, Heritage & Communities for Officers to advertise their intention to make a number of Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) which would restrict use of these ways by mechanically propelled vehicles.

1.6. Authority was given to this proposal and legal notices advertising the County Council's intention to make the Orders were placed on site and in the local press in October 2008.

1.7. The publication of the notice of intention to make the Orders drew a considerable number of responses from both sides of the debate, which are listed at Appendix C. This table records the comments, endorsements and objections received from User Groups and members of the Public in the period November 2007 to February 2009, to the proposal to introduce additional Traffic Regulation Orders on selected byways.

1.8. Some of the correspondents listed therein have commented solely on the principle of applying such Orders to the management of Byways Open to All Traffic, whereas others have made specific reference to one or more of the routes under consideration.

1.9. Those in favour of the Orders have tended to be local residents and landowners, although support has also been forthcoming from user groups representing walkers and horse riders. Their views can be summarised as follows:

a) They believe that motorised traffic has degraded the surface of these routes to the point where they are no longer usable in safety and/or comfort by pedestrians, cyclists or horse riders

b) They believe that the safety of non-motorised users, and in particular, horse riders, is compromised where they are brought into contact with motorcycles and 4x4 vehicles on confined routes bounded by steep banks

c) They believe that the character of the route is degraded when historic routes that were traditionally used by pedestrians or pack animals are opened up to motorised traffic.

d) They believe that both flora and fauna will suffer where motorised access is allowed to ancient routes and that these routes should be restricted in order to protect the natural environment.

1.10. Those who are opposed to the introduction of new or extended restrictions have almost always been actively engaged in motorised recreational pursuits and in particular trail riding with off-road motorcycles. Their views can be summarised as follows:

a) They argue that motorised use is already restricted to less than 3% of the rights of way network available to pedestrians.

b) They are concerned that the introduction of new TROs will simply put pressure on the remaining network, and/or lead to an increased level of illegal use by those who ignore, or are unaware of, the newly introduced orders.

c) They believe that the majority of riders are responsible members of groups such as the TRF (Trail Riders' Fellowship) that impose a code of conduct on their members, and that they are being unfairly penalised for the irresponsible conduct of a small number of `cowboys' who are not members of these organisations.

d) They believe that a very small number of local residents have been able to drum up support in the local community simply in order to improve the value of their own properties, where there has been no prior history of opposition to motorised use.

e) They believe that the County Council, as Highway Authority, has a duty to fund the maintenance of these BOATs, rather than restricting use when funds for maintenance are not available, or where damage to the route has been caused by agricultural activities or forest exploitation.

1.11. East Meon 42 : Trial of a holding a Non-Statutory Inquiry Following the contrary representations received in respect of East Meon BOAT 42 the County Council exercised its power to convene a non-statutory public inquiry to look into the cases for and against the extension of the existing order to include the prohibition of motor cycles. This step was considered appropriate in this case both because the route has a high profile (it forms part of the South Downs Way National Trail) and because the case for an extension of the existing traffic regulation order to include motor cycles was very finely balanced. Employing an Independent Inspector to hear evidence from officers and from witnesses for and against the proposed new order enabled the evidence to be tested and resulted in a written report informing our decision in this matter. The Inspector was satisfied that the proposed order should be made. His report has been published on the County Council's website so that all parties have access to the reasons for his opinion.

1.12. This approach was a departure from our usual course of action, The public inquiry was well attended by both supporters and opponents of the proposed order and all those attending contributed fully and positively to the process. Officer received some good feedback after the event and, costs permitting, we would consider taking this approach in similar circumstances in the future.

1.13. The proposals that form the basis of this report are in accordance with the Council's `Policy on the use of motor vehicles on rural rights of way and unsurfaced tracks', and with the Council's `Policy on the Use of Traffic Regulation Orders', and guidance documents issued by Defra (see Para 2 of the Executive Summary).

1.14. The proposed action is also in accordance with the criteria set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, the relevant sections of which are summarised at Para 2 below.

1.15. Importantly, all TROs applicable to Rights of Way and made by Hampshire County Council are subject to a three year cyclical review. If new TROs are applied to the routes in question, they will be considered again in three years time to assess whether the reasons for the TROs still apply. The results of this review will be made available to the public.

1.16. Temporary TROs have been in place on a number of these routes (Hawkley BOATs 24 & 26, East Meon BOAT 42, Chawton BOAT 10, Farringdon BOAT 26, Four Marks BOAT 25, Rockbourne BOAT 32 and Whitsbury BOAT 19a) from December 2007, in order to prevent further damage to the surface. Although there has been some continuing illegal use of these byways by motorised traffic, the restriction has been respected by responsible riders/drivers and the routes are beginning to recover, aided in some cases by reinstatement carried out by Council Officers and local volunteers.

1.17. Authority is therefore requested to make a number of Traffic Regulation Orders for specified Byways, which would come into effect in the Spring of 2009.

2) Legal Framework for the Decision:

2.1 Extract from the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984

Section 1 The Traffic Authority for a road outside Greater London may make an order under this section (referred to in this Act as a `Traffic Regulation Order') where it appears to the authority making the order that it is expedient to make it -

a) for avoiding danger to persons or other traffic using the road or any other road or for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising, or

b) for preventing damage to the road or to any building on or near the road, or

c) for facilitating the passage on any road or any other road of any class of traffic (including pedestrians), or

d) for preventing the use of the road by vehicular traffic of a kind which or its use by vehicular traffic in a manner which is unsuitable having regard to the existing character of the road or adjoining property, or

e) (without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (d) above) for preserving the character of the road in a case where it is specially suitable for use by persons on horseback or on foot, or

f) for preserving or improving the amenities of the area through which the road runs

3) Key Issues:

3.1. As the Highway Authority for Hampshire, the County Council is responsible for the maintenance of public rights of way. In general, the level of funding available for this activity allows for the clearance of vegetation and repairs/improvements on the most popular routes, but the resurfacing of byways open to motorised traffic is an extraordinary expense that can only be undertaken as and when funds permit.

3.2. By definition, a Byway Open to All Traffic is a carriageway, and thus a right of way available for use by vehicular traffic, but one used mainly for the purposes for which footpaths and bridleways are used, i.e. by walkers and horse-riders.

3.3. The Council has recently produced policy statements on the use of Traffic Regulation Orders and the management of `off-road' motor vehicles in the countryside. These policies were the subject of detailed consultation and the latter was drafted with the help of the Hampshire Countryside Access Forum, which includes representatives of the main motorised user groups. The proposed Orders are in accordance with these policies.

3.4. In order to ensure that the rights of way network remains safe, available and accessible to the widest number of users, Officers are therefore forced to consider restrictions on the type of traffic that each route can sustain.

4) Recommendation:

4.1. Authority is sought to make an Order for the introduction of a Seasonal Traffic Regulation Order, under section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, on the section of byway listed below, affecting the traffic there specified, and on the grounds there given:

a) Hawkley BOAT Nos. 24 and 26

An Order, under s1(b) and 1(f), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles between 1st November and 30th April each year, on the grounds that it will:

· prevent damage to the road

· preserve or improve the amenities of the area through which the road runs

4.2. Authority is also sought for the making of Permanent Traffic Regulation Orders under section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 on the sections of byway listed below, affecting the traffic there specified, and on the grounds there given:

a) East Meon BOAT No.42

An Order, under s1(a), s1(b) and s1(e), to replacee the existing Traffic Regulation Order north of HMS Mercury (which currently applies only to four-wheeled vehicles), to include all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will:

· avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road, or prevent the likelihood of any such danger arising

· prevent damage to the road

· preserve the character of the road where it is specially suitable for use by persons on horseback or on foot

b) Buriton BOAT No.45

An Order, under s1(b), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will

· prevent damage to the road

c) Chawton BOAT No.10
Farringdon BOAT No.2
Four Marks BOAT No.25,

An Order, under s1(b), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will:

· prevent damage to the road

d) Rockbourne BOAT No.32 - east of the Rockbourne Road only
Whitsbury BOAT No.19a

An Order, under s1(b) and s1(c), prohibiting all mechanically propelled vehicles, on the grounds that it will:

· prevent damage to the road

· facilitate the passage of any class of traffic (including pedestrians)

e) Fareham BOAT No.125

An Order, under s1(f), prohibiting mechanically propelled vehicles with three or more wheels, on the grounds that it will

· preserve the character of the road where it is specially suitable for use by persons on horseback or on foot

CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION: