GATES OR STILE’S WILL ONLY BE LAWFUL AS LONG AS THE REASONS FOR THE INSTALLATIONS ARE SERVING THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE INTENDED.

ANY STOPPING UP OR CLOSING OFF OF RIGHTS OF WAY SHOULD BE CHALLENGED FOR APPROVAL/CONSENT FROM THE APPROPRIATE MINISTER OF THE CROWN

Says Tony Barnertt

AS ALWAYS A WELL THOUGHT OUT COMMENT FROM SANDRA

THE DEFINITIVE PLAN OR MAP IS A LEGAL DOCUMENT WHICH RECORDS PUBLICS RIGHTS OF WAY; HOWEVER IT CAN BE AMENDED BY LAND OWNERS TO PREVENT NEW ROUTES FROM BEING CREATED, AND THUS ESTABLISHED.

THE 1949 NATIONAL PARKS AND ACCESS TO THE COUNTRYSIDE ACT PLACED A DUTY ON EVERY COUNTY COUNCIL IN ENGLAND AND WALES TO DRAW UP AND PUBLISH A DEFINITIVE PLAN OR MAP AND STATEMENT OF PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY IN THEIR AREA.

THE FIRST DEFINITIVE MAPS/PLANS WERE PRODUCED IN THE 1950’s AND USED INFORMATION FROM OLD RECORDS, Map’s ASWELLAS SURVEYS CARRIED OUT BY PARISH COUNCILS TO WORK OUT WHICH PATHS HAD PUBLIC ACCESS AND SHOULD BE SHOWN ON THE MAPS/PLANS.

THE DEFINITIVE PLAN/MAP IS THE LEGAL RECORD OF THE LOCATION AND STATUS OF PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY AND IS CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF THE RIGHTS OF WAY SHOWN ON IT.

THE STATEMENT IS ALSO A DESCRIPTION OF THE RIGHTS OF WAY SHOWN ON THE PLAN/MAP AND SOMETIMES RECORDS THE RECORDS THE WIDTH AND CONSTRUCTIONS (GATES AND STILES) THAT EXISTED AT THE TIME THE MAP/PLAN WAS DRAWN UP.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME CUSTOMARY RIGHTS OF WAY PATHS NOT ON THE DEFINITIVE PLAN.

JUST LIKE ROADS, PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY ARE HIGHWAYS AND AS SUCH ARE PROTECTED BY LEGISLATION.

UNLESS STOPPED UP BY LEGAL MEANS, THEY REMAIN HIGHWAYS EVEN IF THEY ARE LITTLE USED OR NOT OBVIOUS ON THE GROUND, THE MAXIM BEING ONCE A HIGHWAY ALWAYS A HIGHWAY.

HOWEVER, PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY CAN BE MOVED, ADDED TO OR DELETED FROM THE DEFINITIVE PLAN/MAP, BUT THE CORRECT LEGAL PROCEDURE MUST BE FOLLOWED.

THE 1981 CROW ACT REQUIRES THAT THE DEFINITIVE PLAN/MAP AND THE STATEMENT MUST BE KEPT UNDER CONTINUOS REVIEW.

SANDRA HAS SHOWN GREAT CONCERN OVER GATES, SECTION 147, APPLICATION FOR SUCH CONSTRUCTIONS (GATES OR STILES) WILL GIVE ENOUGH INFORMATION ON THE PROCEDURE TO INCLUDE LIABILTY OF THE PERSON PLACING THE IMPEDIMENTS.

LANDOWNERS CAN APPLY TO THE COUNTY COUNCIL TO MOVE OR DIVERT A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY UNDER THE HIGHWAYS ACT 1980, IF THEY CAN SHOW IT IS IN THEIR INTEREST, LIKE MOVING A RIGHT OF ACCESS THROUGH A BUSY FARMYARD OR MOVING A CROSS- FIELD PATH TO A ROUTE AROUND A FIELD EDGE AS LOND AS IT IS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY LESS CONVENIANT FOR USERS.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION IS PART OF THE DIVERSION ORDER PROCESS, SO ANYONE CAN OBJECT TO A PROPOSED DIVERSION IF THEY FEEL IT IS UNSUITABLE.

LAND OWNERS USUALLY HAVE TO PAY THE COSTS OF PROCESSING AND ADVERTISING A DIVISION ORDER, BECAUSE THE PROCESS OF DIVERTING A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY INVOLVES PPUBLIC CONSUTATION AND LIASION WITH USER GROUPS TO ENSURE THE PROPOSAL IS ACCEPTABLE, DIVERSION ORDERS CAN TAKE SOME TIME TO COMPLETE.

ANYONE CAN APPLY TO THE COUNTY COUNCIL UNDER THE CROW ACT 1981 TO MAKE A DEFINITIVE PLAN/MAP MODIFICATION AND STATEMENT IF THEY BELIEVE IT TO BE INCORRECT; A ROAD THAT SHOULD SHOWN ON THE DEFINITIVE PLAN/MAP, OR ONE THAT SHOULD NOT, A ROUTE SHOWN AS HAVING THE WRONG STATUS AS A FOOTPATH WHEN IT SHOULD SHOW BRIDLEWAY, OR SHOWING THE WRONG LINE.

EVIDENCE CAN BE EITHER HISTORIC (OLD MAPS, ENCLOSURE AWARDS ETC) OR EVIDENCE OF USE, THE ACCESS AS BEEN USED BY THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, UNINTERUTPED AND WITHOUT CHALLENGE FOR AT LEAST 20 YEARS, THIS PERIOD ETC SETS A PRESUMPTION THAT THE LAND OWNER WAS HAPPY TO DEDICATE THE ROUTE TO PUBLIC USE.

HOWEVER, THE LAND OWNER CAN COMPLETE AND DEPOSIT WITH THE COUNCIL A SECTION 31 (6) BECAUSE HE IS NOT WILLING TO ALLOW PUBLIC ACCESS.

AS A HIGHWAY AUTHORITY HAS POWERS TO TEMPORARILY CLOSE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY UNDER THE 1984 ROAD REGULATION ACT, IT CAN ONLY DO THIS IF IT IS NECESSARY FOR WORKS TO BE CARRIED OUT, AND A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE ROUTE MUST BE PROVIDED FOR THE PUBLIC USE,ACCESS TO PRIVATE PROPERTIES MUST NOT BE OBSTRUCTED.
.UNDER S 14(1) PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY CAN BE CLOSED FOR UPTO
6 MONTHS, REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED AT LEAST 4 WEEKS BEFORE ENCLOSURE, THIS WILL COST £400 + VAT TWO ADVERTS £200, S 14(2) RIGHTS OF WAY DEEMED TO BE DANGEROUS, THE ACCESS TO BE MADE INACCESSABLE COST £300 +VAT.

147 HIGHWAYS ACT 1980; A FARMER OR LAND OWNERS THAT WISH TO PUT UP A NEW FENC OR WALL ACROSS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY (WITH A NEW GATE OR STILE TO MAKE SURE THE RIGHT OF WAY IS NOT COMPLETELY OBSTRUCTED THEY MUST OBTAIN PERMISSION FROM THE COUNTY COUNCIL TO DO SO UNDER S 147 OF THE HIGHWAYS ACT 1980.

EW GATES AND STILE WILL ONLY BE AUTHORISED IF THEY ARE NECESSARY FOR CONTROLING LIVESTOCK, THE FARMER OWNER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING AND MAINTAING THE GATE OR STILE.

IT MUST BE POINTED OUT THAT THE GATES OR STILE’S WILL ONLY BE LAWFUL AS LONG AS THE REASONS FOR THE INSTALLATIONS ARE SERVING THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE INTENDED.

ANY STOPPING UP OR CLOSING OFF OF RIGHTS OF WAY SHOULD BE CHALLENGED FOR APPROVAL/CONSENT FROM THE APPROPRIATE MINISTER OF THE CROWN