Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Dale and Foster.

The minutes of the Rights of Way Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 23 October 2024, as circulated, to be agreed as a true record and be signed by the Chair. 

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Rights of Way Committee held on Wednesday, 23 October 2024, as circulated were confirmed as a true record and were signed by the chair.

Unless already entered in the Council’s Register of Members’ interests, members are required where a matter arises at a meeting; 

a.      Which directly relates to Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (‘DPI’) as set out in Appendix B, Table 1 of the Code of Conduct, to disclose the interest, not participate in any discussion or vote and not to remain in room. Where members have a DPI or if the matter concerns an executive function and is being considered by a Cabinet Member with a DPI they must notify the Monitoring Officer and arrange for somebody else to deal with the matter.

b.      Which directly relates to the financial interest or well being of a Other Registrable Interest as set out in Appendix B, Table 2 of the Code of Conduct to disclose the interest and only speak on the matter if members of the public are also allowed to speak at the meeting but otherwise must not take part in any discussion  or vote on the matter and must not remain the room.

c.      Which directly relates to their financial interest or well-being  (and is not  DPI) or the financial well being of a relative or close associate, to declare the interest and members may only speak on the matter if members of the public are also allowed to speak. Otherwise, the member must not take part in discussion or vote on the matter and must leave the room.

d.      Which affects the financial well-being of the member, a relative or close associate or a body included under the Other Registrable Interests column in Table 2, to disclose the interest and apply the test set out at paragraph 9 of Appendix B before deciding whether they may remain in the meeting.

e.      Where Members have or a Cabinet Member has an Other Registerable Interest or Non Registerable Interest in a matter being considered in exercise of their executive function, they must notify the Monitoring Officer and arrange for somebody else to deal with it. 

NB Any member needing clarification must contact monitoringofficer@northumberland.gov.uk.  Members are referred to the Code of Conduct which contains the matters above in full. Please refer to the guidance on disclosures at the rear of this agenda letter.

Councillor Hutchinson noted that he had a personal and prejudicial interest in item 4 of the agenda, “Alleged Restricted Byway No 65, Parish of Bardon Mill” and would leave the room while the item was discussed and voted upon.

Councillor Hutchinson left the room at this point.

The Rights of Way Committee is asked to consider all the relevant evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of restricted byway rights, over the route of part of existing Public Footpath No 34, from the southern end of BOAT No 45, east of Allensgreen, in a southerly direction to join the U7066 road, east of Penpeugh.

A Bell - Definitive Map and Search Officer, introduced the report with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. Members were asked to consider all the relevant evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of restricted byway rights, over the route of part of existing Public Footpath No 34, from the southern end of BOAT No 45, east of Allensgreen, in a southerly direction to join the U7066 road, east of Penpeugh. 

          Following the report, members were invited to ask questions to the officers, which the following information was then provided:  

·       Public speaking was only allowed in exceptional circumstances and at the discretion of the Chair of the Rights of Way Committee.

·       No members of the public had registered to speak.

·       The 1751 Inclosure Award formed part of the key evidence that the officer used to conclude their recommendation.

·       The officer had not received any further comments following Ashley Shepard’s response to the draft report.

·       The landowners were sent a draft copy of the report, and no further comments had been received.

·       Paragraph 8.13 of the report was highlighted to members, which gave further context to the objection made by W Walton on 15 May 2021.

·       There was no suggestion that the required statutory publicity for the meeting and the reports had not been met.

·       If a definitive map modification order was made, and then confirmed, the gate at Point W would, most likely, be considered a lawful limitation, so there would be no requirement to remove it.

Councillor Hardy proposed to accept the officer’s recommendation as set out in the report, Councillor Wallace seconded this.

Councillor Sharp noted that he would not support the recommendation, as he did not believe that the evidence in the report was satisfactory.

A vote was taken as follows: FOR 5; AGAINST 1; ABSTAIN 0.

RESOLVED that:

                            i.          There was sufficient evidence to show, on a balance of probabilities, that public vehicular rights exist over the route W-X.

                           ii.          The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 would appear to have extinguished the public’s motorized vehicular rights over the W-X route.

                         iii.          The route be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as a restricted byway.

Councillor Hutchinson returned to the meeting at this point.

The Rights of Way Committee is asked to consider all the relevant evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of public vehicular rights, over a route between Hartside and existing Public Bridleway No 2, north-east of Linhope.

A Bell - Definitive Map and Search Officer, introduced the report with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. Members were asked to consider all the relevant evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of public vehicular rights, over a route between Hartside and existing Public Bridleway No 2, north-east of Linhope.

Councillor Hardy proposed to accept the officer’s recommendation as set out in the report, Councillor Bowman seconded this.

A vote was taken and was unanimous.

RESOLVED that:

                           i.          There was sufficient evidence to show that public vehicular rights had been reasonable alleged to exist over the T-U application route.

                         ii.          There was sufficient evidence to show, on a balance of probabilities, that public vehicular rights also exist over the route U-V;

                        iii.          The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 would appear to have extinguished the public’s motorized vehicular rights over the U-V route.

                       iv.          The T-U route be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as a restricted byway.

                         v.          The U-V route be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as a byway open to all traffic.

The Rights of Way Committee is asked to consider all the relevant evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of public vehicular rights

over part of the U3049 road, between a point on the C106 road, south of Alnwick Ford Farm and a point south-west of Dyke Head.

A. Bell - Definitive Map and Search Officer, introduced the report with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. Members were asked to consider all the relevant  

evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of public vehicular rights over part of the U3049 road, between a point on the C106 road, south of Alnwick Ford Farm and a point south-west of Dyke Head. 

Councillor Sharp proposed to accept the officer’s recommendation, with the additional point to include J-K-L into recommendation iii to read “the route J-K-L be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as byways open to all traffic.” This was seconded by Councillor Wallace.

A vote was taken and was unanimous.

RESOLVED that:

                           i.          There was sufficient evidence to indicate that public vehicular rights had been reasonably alleged to exist over the route;

                         ii.          The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 would not appear to have extinguished the public’s motorized vehicular rights over the route;

                        iii.          The route J-K-L be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as byways open to all traffic.

The Rights of Way Committee is asked to consider all the relevant evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of public vehicular rights over part of the U4060 road, between a point on Hillside Road, north of Glencairn, and a point just west of Moor Cottage, and the existence of public footpath rights from this point to existing Public Footpath No 3, east of Gimmerknowe.

A. Bell - Definitive Map and Search Officer, introduced the report with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, and asked to consider all the relevant evidence gathered in support and in rebuttal of the existence of public vehicular rights over part of the U4060 road, between a point on Hillside Road, north of Glencairn, and a point just west of Moor Cottage, and the existence of public footpath rights from this point to existing Public Footpath No 3, east of Gimmerknowe. 

It was clarified that the date of the Rothbury Forest Inclosure Award was 1834.

Councillor Hutchinson proposed to accept the officer’s recommendation, this was seconded by Councillor Wallace.

A vote was taken and was unanimous.

RESOLVED that:

                           i.          There was sufficient evidence to indicate that public vehicular rights had been reasonably alleged to exist over the route H-F;

                         ii.          The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 would not appear to have extinguished the public’s motorized vehicular rights over the route;

                        iii.          The was sufficient evidence to indicate that public footpath rights had been reasonable alleged to exist over the route F-G;

                       iv.          The route H-F be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as a byway open to all traffic;

                         v.          The route F-G be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as a public footpath.

The next meeting of the Rights of Way committee will be held on Wednesday, 26 February 2024.

RESOLVED that the date of the next meeting was confirmed for Wednesday, 26 February 2025.