Agenda item

A report was presented on an application for the addition of a Footpath from Garstang Road to Black Bull Lane through Harris Park, to the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way, as shown on the Committee plan attached to the agenda papers between points A-B-C-D.

A site inspection had been carried out in September 2021.

A variety of maps, plans and other documents had been examined to discover when the route came into being, and to try to determine what its status may be.

It was reported that map and documentary evidence in support of the application was limited, with no map and documentary evidence supporting the use of the route applied for between points C to D. In addition, the amount of user evidence received was too low to be considered representative of the public at large and to evidence sufficient use beyond trivial and sporadic from which to infer dedication by the owners.

County Councillor Burrows queried whether the small amount of user evidence received was due to the fact that the route had been blocked off. It was explained to Committee that, as there was insufficient map and documentary evidence, the county council needed to find evidence of a dedication of a public right of way, prior to the route being blocked off, which had to be representative of the public at large and of sufficient quality. The amount of user evidence received was an indication of whether or not the landowner acquiesced to the dedication of dedicate public rights.  For routes being used by members of the public, a landowner had the option of letting this continue, they could give users permission to use the route or they could do something to stop the use of the route by the public, i.e. they could take action to make it clear they were not prepared to dedicate. The concept around the length of time was that this must be long enough to allow the landowner to be in a position to make a decision on whether or not to dedicate public rights.

County Councillor Swarbrick queried whether the application may have been an attempt to create a safe route to Queens Drive Primary School and asked whether Committee could deviate from the Recommendation in the report, in order to facilitate this. Committee were informed that they were required to consider specifically whether public rights existed or not and that whether the public wanted to use the route or not could not be taken into account. A separate process would be used whereby it may be considered that no public rights existed but that the county council had reason to create those rights.

As it had been over 10 years between the time the route had been closed off and the date the application had been received, together with the lack of user evidence, County Councillor Howarth proposed that the Recommendation in the report be approved.

County Councillor Hennessy asked whether the county council could ask members of the public for user evidence. It was noted that, although the applicant had been asked to clarify the evidence submitted, it was for the applicant, not the county council to seek more user evidence. However, should the application be rejected, the applicant would be able to appeal the decision or to submit another application containing more user evidence.

Having considered all of the evidence discovered, Committee were informed that a dedication of a public footpath along the application route could neither be deemed under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 nor inferred at common law. Accordingly, Committee was advised to reject the application and not to make an Order adding a public footpath to the Definitive Map and Statement.

Resolved: That the application for the addition on the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way of a footpath from Garstang Road to Black Bull Lane, be not accepted.