We have another confirmed diversion to report! Our second confirmed diversion in Kent so far this year, reflecting that Kent is one of the counties where the Rights of Way Officers are realistic and get on with things (something some other authorities could learn from). In both cases there were objections. In one, the objection was withdrawn, and in the other, the matter was dealt with by written representations to an Inspector.
In the written representation case, the path ran through the garden of The Old Rectory at Alkham. If you stood on the path this is what you would see:
You would be standing on the parking area for the house. It would be easy to wave to the owner if he was standing in the kitchen – this is the view of the parking area from the kitchen window.
Of course the path then ran off across the lawn by the seat:
And walkers could be easily viewed from the bedroom as they crossed the lawn.
Some suggested that it did not impact on the property (which had been in the family for many years) and it was true that the diversion was not straight forward but we are pleased that the Inspector weighed our arguments and accepted that the diversion met the statutory tests and should be confirmed.
Another satisfied client for ET Landnet.
We are working on many such applications at the moment, all proceeding at various speeds, and we have several stacked waiting to be pursued when the new “Right to Apply” provisions take effect in July. We will continue to carry out an initial assessment of any diversion proposal anywhere in England or Wales for our fixed fee of £500 plus VAT to give a realistic appraisal to the owner of occupier of land.
Call Michael Wood on 07795 958572 or email Michael at email@example.com to find out more.
Public paths that run through gardens and farm and working yards often have their origins as routes to work which became recorded as public rights of way in the 1950s. Today these bring new issues for those who live and work in proximity to those paths.
The often cited problems about paths through gardens are not overstated. We frequently advise prospective purchasers to avoid houses where paths pass close to their dream house, and increasingly we are working on projects to divert paths as part of the buying process. Paths that affect the privacy and security of the landowner have a significant impact on the value of property and its sale-ability.
The central problem in many cases has been the unwillingness of councils to take diversion proposals forward despite them meeting the statutory tests due to objections from user groups and parish councils where a personal element comes into play. Rather than enable an independent Inspector to weigh up the issues, the council facing the cost of an inquiry will in strained financial times just say “no”.
That problem is about to change and it is set to have a dramatic impact. Councils will now have to to determine applications within a reasonable time and there will be a right to apply to the Secretary of State where a council will not make an order or will not have an order determined if there are objections to it.
The changes are due to take effect in April and we are already reviewing several matters which stalled when councils would not take them forward.
Diversion proposals will still have to meet the statutory criteria so they must not be substantially less convenient to the public and where there is a potential loss of public enjoyment, there must be significant benefits to the landowner to justify the move.
We are carrying out assessments throughout England (where these new rules will apply) under out first view fixed fee scheme of £500 plus VAT so please get in touch if you are thinking of applying to divert that path through your land. Call Michael Wood on 07796 958572, email him on firstname.lastname@example.org or complete the form below and we will get back to you. You can visit our website at www.etlandnet.co.uk.
We diverted the footpath and bridleway at Pitshill (above) so that it could be restored as a family home.
We have recently achieved public path diversions for two clients each with equestrian interests.
In Wiltshire, the bridleway running through this working yard has been diverted as part of a development of farm buildings using planning legislation. At a public inquiry in December we represented the owner and called supporters and expert evidence to satisfy the Inspector that the proposal should be confirmed.
Meanwhile in Devon, and the village of Kings Nympton, our clients breed racehorses and the main paddock was crossed by a footpath which few people used, choosing instead an alternative permissive path that formed the basis of the diversion. Neighbours and the Parish Council were opposed because of the perceived impact on properties near the diversion.
The design for the new path was detailed and a little unusual but reflected the importance of the diversion to the client. It incorporated specific fencing and drainage provisions to address points made by objectors. This was the design plan we produced to the Inspector:
This case was ultimately determined by written representations with the Inspector carrying out an unaccompanied site visit. Where this method can be used it is undoubtedly cheaper for the client. Following the decision to confirm the Order, the new route is now being constructed so that the diversion can take effect.
These two recent cases demonstrate the importance of creative thinking and solutions. The Wiltshire diversion would have taken much longer and met greater challenge had it not been possible to engage the planning procedures for path diversions. We always consider this possibility. The Devon case showed the importance of thoughtful design in a diversion proposal.
We work with a number of equestrian businesses throughout England addressing the particular issues they can have.
Marden in Kent has a number of public paths and clearly a number of people passionate about using them. Its Footpath Group applied to modify the Definitive Map to add a footpath on a track, arguing that the fact that two other paths terminated on the track with no connection between them or other public rights of way meant the track must have always been public.
It based its claim on historic documents, adding a little evidence of use as a back-up to its argument.
Working for the landowners affected by the claim, we argued that the evidence did not support the case, and was contradictory in any event. Whilst some part of the track had been claimed in the 1950s, someone at the time took a clear decision that the route should not be recorded and it was removed from the final map.
For two days in March the evidence was examined and witnesses questioned at a local inquiry. Pleas that “sense” should prevail and that the landowners should agree a path were made but were, of course, not relevant to the Inspector’s decision.
Unusually many of the arguments had been run previously and had failed so the landowners had regarded the issue closed before the claim was renewed based on “new evidence”. The County Council had declined to make an Order but had been directed to do so by the Secretary of State, ultimately ending with the inquiry process.
We are pleased that our arguments against the Order prevailed before the Inspector who decided that the Order should not be confirmed. His finding should be the end of this saga for those involved.
You can read the decision here: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/pins/row/documents/fps_w2275_7_76.pdf
If you are facing a claim or want help with a public right of way issue, diversion or extinguishment, call us now on 0203 086 7657 or email Michael Wood email@example.com for advice.
More details of what we can do for you are on our website http://www.etlandnet.co.uk
Diverting or extinguishing public rights of way. The Deregulation Act 2015 finally receives Royal Assent.Posted: March 27, 2015
“La Reine le vault”. And so the Deregulation Bill finally received Royal Assent yesterday as Parliament was prorogued, and we can finally look to the future regarding the changes provided by this legislation for rights of way procedures.
The most important element for our clients is the provision to give landowners the right to apply for a diversion or extinguishment order and to have the application determined. The current process enables a council simply to decline a request to divert or extinguish regardless of the merits of the case. When fully implemented, the legislation will mean that if a Council does not determine the application, refuses to make a diversion order, fails to submit an opposed order for determination, or simply fails to take a decision within a reasonable time, it will be possible to appeal to the Secretary of State.
The full implementation will take a little while to complete as secondary legislation and guidance will need to be issued. There is, however, a will at DEFRA and with those disparate groups who have been driving the legislation to bring all of the changes into force at the same time, so that provisions such as the right to apply which benefit landowners are not left behind whilst other changes that benefit users are implemented.
We are very fortunate to be working with Mike Walker on our diversion and extinguishment cases, as Mike is directly involved with the implementation process with DEFRA. Together we are looking at some of the good practices already in place with other authorities which aim to speed up the process of application and determination and to see if these can be introduced more widely to make the new legislation work efficiently.
We have a number of cases of existing projects that are ready to be taken forward when the new legislation is finally in place. These are cases where authorities have been unwilling to proceed with a matter because of the likelihood of objections, regardless of the merits of the proposal and the benefit to the landowner.
We anticipate that the new changes will lead to a significant demand from landowners seeking to remedy long standing path issues particularly those that impact on privacy, security and the operation of farming, manufacturing and rural business. We have already developed a number of strategies for the existing procedure and these can be brought into play under the new legislation.
Mike has been involved in drafting the guidance to be applied when diversions out of gardens and working yards are sought, and we are looking to apply this guidance to our current and future projects. As demand for applications is expected to be high, now is a great time to evaluate diversion and extinguishment proposals and to get these projects ready to move forward as soon as the legislation permits.
We realise that landowners can be concerned about the costs they may incur and wish to avoid an open-ended commitment. We will always carry out an initial site visit to evaluate the issues and then prepare a quotation to take the matter forward. The cost of the first visit and evaluation is fixed at £500 plus VAT. The matter can then proceed on a fixed quotation or with a ceiling on fees for each element of the project.
We are also pleased to take on existing projects that may have failed or which are stalled, or those which are awaiting determination or have been referred to the Secretary of State for a public inquiry or hearing.
As always you can check out our website for more information about us and our projects: www.etlandnet.co.uk
Or to contact us complete the form below or call Michael Wood at ET Landnet on 07796 958572 or 0203 086 7657 or you can email Michael on firstname.lastname@example.org