Meeting documents

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Ray Bryan and Keith Day.

Councillor Kevin Brookes attended as a Reserve Member.

There were no declarations by members of disclosable pecuniary interests under the Code of Conduct.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 16 August 2018 - to follow.

The minutes of the meeting held on 16 August 2018 were confirmed and signed.

Public Speaking

There were no public questions received at the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 21(1).

There were two public statements received at the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 21(2).

Petitions

There were no petitions received at the meeting in accordance with the County Council’s Petition Scheme.

To consider a report by the Senior Definitive Map Officer.

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director – Highways and Emergency Planning setting out details of an application to divert part of Footpath 6, Gussage St Michael at Ryalls between points A-B-C-D, as shown on Drawing 17/33 accompanying the report.

With the aid of a visual presentation, the basis for the application and what it entailed was  explained. Photographs and plans were shown to the Committee by way of illustration, showing how the footpath was being proposed to be diverted within the grounds of Ryalls; its current character and setting within the landscape and showing, particularly, where the footpath crossed a Grade II Listed packhorse bridge over a winterbourne seasonal stream, and the points between which it ran; and the characteristics and dimensions of the alternative route now being made available for the public, demonstrating what arrangements had been made by the applicant to provide an alternative means in accessing between points A-D.

The owner had made the application to reduce the intrusion and inconvenience he considered that the current route of the footpath imposed. The alternative route - which had been instigated, installed and financed by the applicant ahead of determination of the application - went some considerable way to alleviating the situation which currently affected him. Accordingly, the proposed diversion was therefore beneficial to the landowner in how Ryalls was able to be managed and maintained, by improving privacy and security.

The Committee noted that the applicant had purchased Ryalls from the current owner of the neighbouring property Hawneferne, in 1989.  The land search undertaken then had, mistakenly, shown Footpath 6 running through Hawneferne’s land. This error had only come to light, some15 years later.

The applicant had previously made, and withdrawn, a Definitive Map Modification Order application to modify the Definitive Map and Statement. The applicant considered that the alternative route proposed by the current Public Path Diversion Order application was wholly reasonable and acceptable to those who wished to use the route.

Officers explained that the proposal met the legal criteria for Order making, but did

not meet all the tests for Order confirmation. Whilst the alternative route was slightly shorter with improved accessibility and would not result in a path that was substantially less convenient to the public, the consultation responses indicated that the diversion would have a significant effect on the enjoyment by the public of the route as a whole. Part of the attraction of the route was to be able to traverse an exceptionally rare example of a historic packhorse bridge in the setting in which it was found. Objections to the formal consultation process had been made on that basis .

Similarly whilst there was no adverse effect on the land over which the new route ran,  concerns had been raised about the effect of the proposed diversion on the adjacent landowner at Hawneferne, with an objection being made on that basis too.

As all the relevant tests were not met for confirmation purposes, the officer’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

To answer any questions received in writing by the Chief Executive by not later than 10.00am on Monday 3 September 2018.

There were no questions raised by members under Standing Order 20(2).