Agenda item

The Rights of Way Officer presented the report which outlined the recommendation.

Francis Morland spoke in objection to the order. Col Nigel Linge, Graham Bennett, James Nevitt and Brian Micklam spoke in support of the recommendation.

Issues discussed in the course of the debate included: the location of the diversion, and its relationship to a scheduled ancient monument and site of scientific interest; the current use and access to the land; that a creation order has no objections to it but the diversion order did; the views of those making representations; the impact of the diversion on those using the existing paths; the views of Historic England; the relationship of the proposals to other roads; the topography of the site; the requirements for improved access and gating; the historical evidence of the access; the location of MOD property and ranges; and the impact of the existing route and the proposals on the current land.

In questioning the officer, the committee clarified; that the process for considering a representation as a formal objection was prescribed by regulation and strictly adhered to; the extent to which the current obstruction had affected access, that only one complaint had been received, and that officers had given this a low priority in relation to addressing obstructions in better used locations; the liability for maintenance of a footpath; that it was not within the scope of s.119 of the Highways Act 1980 to retain footpath rights over part of the bridleway route, but that there were other possible options for this subject to the agreement of both the landowner and Wiltshire Council; and what corrections had been brought to the officer’s attention by the objector.

Cllr Newbury expressed concern as to whether the regulations with regard to considering a representation as a formal objection where being too rigorously applied.

Cllr Christopher Newbury proposed, subsequently seconded by Cllr Pip Ridout, that the officer’s recommendation as set out in the report be approved with the additional recommendation that Mr Wright’s representation be considered as a formal objection.

Having been put to the vote, the meeting unanimously:

Resolved

That The Wiltshire Council Parish of Norton Bavant Path No. 4 (part) Diversion Order and Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order 2015 be forwarded to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs with the recommendation that it be confirmed with the following modifications:

(i)              In paragraph 2 where referring to the rights of Scottish and Southern Energy replace the word “footpath” for “bridleway”.

(ii)            In Part 3 of the Schedule amend the width to read “4 metres from OS Grid ref. ST 90853 44042 to ST 91694 43539 the remainder to be 3.5 metres”.  Amend approximate length to be “1600 metres”.

(iii)           In the event that Order is confirmed, The Wiltshire Council Norton Bavant 10 (part) Creation and Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order, which has attracted no objections or representations, be confirmed.

(iv)          That the representation of Mr A Wright be considered as a duly made objection.

Reason for Decision:

Despite the objection received it is considered, for the reasons given in paragraphs 50 to 58 of the Decision report (please see Appendix D) that “The Wiltshire Council Parish of Norton Bavant Path No. 4 (part) Diversion Order and Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order 2015” continues to meet the legal tests for the making of a Diversion Order under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980.

Additionally, the legal tests for the confirmation of a Public Path Diversion Order, as set out under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980, appear capable of being satisfied and no new evidence has been submitted during the formal objection period which would lead Wiltshire Council to no longer support the making of the Order.

Minor errors in the Order may be corrected by the Secretary of State as modifications.