Issue - meetings

To consider a report from the Director of Culture, Communities and Business Services regarding a claim for a public bridleway at Irongate, Ossemsley, in the parish of New Milton, which seeks approval for a Definitive Map Modification Order for the application route, either under the provisions of section 31 of the Highways Act 1981, or through a dedication at common law.

The Committee considered a report from the Director of Culture, Communities and Business Services regarding an application to record a bridleway at Irongate in New Milton.

The officer showed the Committee a location plan depicting the wider area along with an aerial photograph of the area surrounded the claimed route.

The application had been first received in 2005 and photos of the path were shown from that time. The history and motivations for the application were detailed to Committee and the complexities were explained. Members were shown elevation photos from the path along with the signage that had remained since the application was first received.

An 1871 Ordnance Survey map show the route A-F being available and more recent user evidence showed evidence of use back to the 1950’s with witness accounts being summarised.

Legal tests had been applied and a lot of horse owners are in the local area, but this did not necessarily mean that the path had been used to any extent. The legal test for Section 31 was explained to Members, along with reasons it had not been met.

The Committee received one deputation from Matthew Dale-Harris who spoke on behalf of the land owner in objection to the application. Mr Dale-Harris supported that there had been interruption in the 20 year period as confirmed by the officer. Broader area formally in a single land holding and private permissions were granted later on. Some users owned freehold land with the private easements, but those users should be discounted due to being freeholders and therefore it being a private right of way. Tenants on the freehold land could not be seen as exercising private rights, but Section 62 of Law and Property Act felt to extend leases to easements to enable access.  A number of users felt they had private right of way and should not be included in the user evidence chart.

During questions of deputations, the following points were clarified:

-       Private rights of way more often the case as opposed to subsequent public rights of way, but this could only be determined if it was apparent what the use of the path was for.

During question of officers, the following points were clarified:

-       In paragraph 65, it should read – “whilst the horse riders use the route…..exercise of private right would not contribute”.

RESOLVED:

The application was REFUSED for the reasons set out in the report

Voting:

Favour: 9 (unanimous)

After the item had been completed, Sylvia Seeliger was thanked for her work and dedication over her 22 years of service in Countryside and the Chairman and Committee wished her the very best for her retirement.