Decision details

A report was presented on the proposed diversion of part of Arkholme Footpath 4, Lancaster City.

The Committee noted that a request had been received from the owner of Willow Cottage, Main Street, Arkholme for an Order to be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Arkholme Footpath 4 in the vicinity of Willow Cottage, Arkholme.

The Committee noted that the proposal, if successful, would divert the footpath to run around the outside perimeter of the applicant's garden, the purpose of this being to improve privacy and security for the applicant.

It was noted that the necessary consultation with the statutory undertakers had been carried out and that, as at the time of writing the report, no adverse comments on the proposal had been received.  However, since that time, the Ramblers had expressed concern about two aspects of the proposed alternative route, which had also been noted on the Chair's site visit.  These were:

·  As the proposed route E-F-G, as shown on the plan, ran along the lowest level with the land on the opposite side being no lower, this could have led to flooding unless there was either adequate drainage, or the level of the path was raised slightly, making it above the level of the adjacent land on the south-east. 

·  The width of the section of the proposed route C-D, as shown on the plan, was currently around 1.1m wide and was constrained by the applicant's beech hedge on the north side and the neighbours new beech hedge on the south.  The applicants had agreed to ensure the section was 1.5m, although this was considered to still be narrow.

In relation to the flooding issue, David Goode informed the Committee that this could be addressed by ensuring that the path was not certified (making the diversion take full effect) until it was in a fit state, including provision for drainage.  The Committee noted that this was standard practice.

In relation to the proposed route C-D, David informed the Committee that although the applicants had agreed to ensure the width was 1.5m, this would require considerable additional maintenance.  It was pointed out that the usual minimum width was 2m and the Committee were asked whether they considered that the width should be extended to 2m, and whether this was/was not substantially less convenient than making the width 1.5m.  It was noted that if Committee decided to require 2m width then if the land owner did not agree to the 2m then the Order would not be made and the matter would be referred back to the Committee. 

County Councillor Henig objected to the proposal due to the water level issue on the path.

However, it was proposed and seconded to increase the width of the section of path C-D, from 1.5m to 2m.

Resolved: 

(i)  That an Order be made under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Arkholme Footpath 4, from the route shown by a bold continuous line and marked B-E-F-G to the route shown by a bold dashed line and marked B-C-D-E-H-J-G on the plan, and that the width of the section of the path C-D, be 2m;

(ii)  That in the event of no objections being received, the Order be confirmed and in the event of objections being received and not withdrawn, the Order be sent to the Secretary of State and the Authority take a neutral stance with respect to its confirmation.

(iii)  That provision be included in the Order such that it is also made under Section 53A of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to amend the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way in consequence of the coming into operation of the diversion.