Poulton – Chapel St Court
The Regulatory Committee have accepted the claim for a public footpath. I still do not know who or why initiated the correspondence, but still consider that a question about who was responsible for maintaining the pavement is the most likely reason. Assuming no issues, then it should complete the process to be recorded as a PROW around Oct.
Public Inquiry – Ralphs Wife Lane to Station Rd, Banks
Previously I reported that on Wed 18th Oct I attended the first day of the Public Inquiry held at the Village Hall into a claim for a public footpath from Ralphs Wife Lane to Station Rd.
Last time I reported that the Planning Inspector’s report has been published, which states –
‘Conclusions
‘50. Having regard to these and all other matters raised at the inquiry and in the written representations I conclude that the Order should be confirmed with modifications.
‘Formal Decision
51. I propose to confirm the Order subject to the following modifications:
**Change all references to ‘Footpath’ to ‘Bridleway’.
A good result, but an unusual one.
I have now received a copy of the letter from the Planning Inspectorate stating any appeals against the Inspectors decision need to be made by the 9th May.
A further 5 claims were made for public footpaths by North Moels Parish Council, that are awaiting a public inquiry to be held.
Cuerden FP 12 – (site that was previously intended for Ikea)
In Apr 23 I reported that I had objected to proposals for the diversion of Cuerden FP 12 for – ‘The proposals have effectively removed the need to cross one dual carriageway (A6) and replaced it with a need to cross another dual carriageway (A582).’
The site at the end of the M65 in South Ribble District, was originally intended for Ikea, but Ikea then pulled out of the development. In Spring 23 I reported on three planning applications, with comments on the third application as follows -
‘The third application is also on the site intended for Ikea, which is about Cuerden FP 12. This FP presently goes from Old School Lane across a couple fields, across a spur of the A6 (which is the means of getting to the M65). Then around Places for People to reach Craven Drive. Crossing the spur of the A6 is often less than easy because of the volume and speed of the traffic. It is proposed to delete most of the existing FP. This FP has seen few complaints being made about it.
‘In its place they are going to create a BW going from the northern end of Old School Lane to Stoney Lane, with a spur to the middle of Old School Lane. The right of way has been effectively turned through a right angle. I understand the argument that you cannot have a FP or BW going through an industrial unit, and that this is a possible alternative to allow some access. At the northern end of Old School Lane is the A582 – Lostock Lane, which is a busy dual carriageway with only a gap in the crash barriers as a means of crossing the road.’
I have recently received a new plan of the crossing of the A582, which now features a Toucan crossing, so I have withdrawn the objection. Note – A Toucan Crossing is similar to a Pelican Crossing, with additional buttons so that a rider on a horse can press a button without the need to dismount.
I also commented that the bridge over the River Lostock on Todd Ln South has a narrow pavement. The rest of Todd Ln South does have a good pavement. A new footbridge is needed over the River Lostock, but technically this is outside the area being developed. If the developer is contributing money to the local authority for some community type projects, then the provision of a new footbridge should be a potential item for consideration.
I do not know what the BHS has stated in their correspondence with LCC.
Boundary Lane (North), Rufford
I received a copy of a claim made by the BHS which is that Boundary Lane, Rufford should be a bridleway. Presently this route is comprised of Burscough FPs 134 and 135. I forwarded the papers to Roger and Geoff.
Roger states that the route will presently be unusable by equestrians, and that on visiting Ormskirk Library that on looking at old maps he is of the opinion that it was only a FP. Roger has made an objection to these FPs being changed into BWs,
Mawdesley FP 05
I received a copy of a proposed diversion of Mawdesley FP 05
Against the proposed diversion is the reason that most users will probably wish to continue on Mawdesley FP 04 and that the new route will be less convenient.
Possible arguments for the diversion are that the present route is that has poor views because it is between two high fences on either side of the FP for part of the route. It maybe that the new route offers better views than the existing route. It has been a wet winter, with parts of the existing route being muddy in winter. The new route may be on better ground, so ought to be endorsed.
I copied the papers to Rod. I also entered a holding objection whilst we considered the issue.
Mere Ln, Tarleton that extends into Rufford
Mere Ln is presently shown on MARIO as an unadopted highway that is officially without any rights of public access. Tarleton FP 26 goes from Mere Ln towards Nuck's Wood, which infers that some form of public access to Mere Ln should exist, in order to get to this public footpath. I have recently received from LCC a map about a claim to make Mere Ln into a restricted byway asking for comments, but without any other associated paperwork. I wrote to LCC seeking more details. I passed the detail to Roger and Geoff of W Lancs Group.
At the both the northern end and southern end of Mere Ln are notices about 'No Cycling', which seems to infer that access on foot is acceptable. Also a resident towards the northern end of Mere Ln is now claiming that Mere Ln is a private road without any public access.
I also wrote to Tarleton and Rufford Parish Councils, plus the BHS (British Horse Society) enquiring what they knew about this claim, but received no useful information in reply.
An article was include in the recent Area News, but I had no response either by phone or email.
Ken of the Open Spaces Society has made this claim, for which he has good historical evidence, but some more user evidence about Mere Ln would be useful.
Farington Hall Wood
In July 22 LCC made an order to add a footpath in Farington Hall Wood, with the order being confirmed in Jan 24, but the letter from LCC stating this was dated 3rd May 24, with the path to be known as Leyland FP 62. Things sometimes move slowly in local government. However it is still not shown on MARIO. I intend to have a look again at MARIO in about 10 weeks time, and if still not shown on MARIO to query it with LCC.
Chorley FP 41
In Oct 23 I reported that an application has been made to delete part of Chorley FP 41 as it crosses the garden of a property at the junction Duxbury Manor Garden and Haydock Drive, which looks reasonable. I replied to LCC that this was something that we would not object to. On looking at MARIO one wonders if a previous attempt to divert the northern part of this FP onto an estate road contained an error ?
In June 24 I received confirmation that part of Chorley FP 41 had been deleted.
CO Teams (Zoom) Call
On the 3rd Apr I joined the CO teams call on what is happening regards footpaths, which was mainly CO giving out their message. The topics covered were –
- An update on ‘Do not Lose Your Way’ – the message is that some parts of the country are doing well with researching for possible lost public footpaths, with the inference that some other areas ought to be doing more. It is 6 yrs, 8 mths to the cut off date for claiming public footpaths based on historical evidence.
- In 2024 CO will be arranging four training days about making claims using historical evidence. In Sep 24 one event will be in Leeds and another in Manchester.
- Eugene Suggett (CO) mentioned that hedges and fences are for the benefit of the landowner, so any stile in a hedge or fence should be the responsibility of the landowner.
- If livestock are no longer being kept in a field, then it ought to be possible to request that the stile is recovered, but no test cases have been made to determine how long should livestock be absent before it can be considered that a claim can be made for recovery of the stile.
The rest of the call was taken up with issues affecting the disabled.
- A slide was shown stating that 25% of people have problems with physical barriers like stiles, steps or gates, thus limiting their access to the countryside.
- The guest speaker was Craig Grimes, who became disabled as a result of an accident, who mentioned the following –
- The Yorkshire Dales were the first to classify footpaths with the three categories being: For All, For Many and For Some.
- This has been replaced by a grading system of 1 to 5, based on gradient, surface etc.
- Cattle grids are places where some equipment can cope, but other equipment cannot.
- Routes need to avoid steps, but some equipment can cope with a single step, provided that it is not too high.
- The recent spell of wet weather is causing issues, with equipment more likely to get clogged up.
- In Q&A it was asked, if a path has been flooded for months, as a result of the prolonged spell of wet weather, at what point can the county council be asked to do something about it. The response was that it could be considered to be ‘Out of Repair’, but it is the sort of issue that ‘will provide lawyers with cream buns for years’.
Liverpool Ringway
Members may have heard about the Greater Manchester Ringway, which is a long-distance path with details as follows -
The GM Ringway is 200 miles (322 km) long and falls into four broad sections, each made up of five one-day stages:
The Southern Start-Up
The Exhilarating East
The Noble North
The Western Wind-Down
Each of the 20 stages, which explore all ten boroughs of Greater Manchester, is easily accessible by public transport.
Details can be found at - https://www.gmringway.org/The Greater Manchester Ringway was done with £0.25m grant from the heritage lottery.
Something similar is being considered for the West Midlands. Has such schemes become the flavour of the season ?
I was invited to join a zoom call about doing something similar for Liverpool, with details as follows –
- A joint call between RA and CPRE, with Nick Thompson of the CPRE chairing it.
- Manchester may have had an advantage in having moors to the north and east.
- Aim is to break the route up into sections that link with public transport.
- Need for a varied route, that avoids long sections on canal towpaths or cycle routes on former railway lines, for these places can be potentially boring.
- Need to prepare documents for a grant application
- An initial draft route was shown on screen which would be 187 miles long.
- I commented that road walking around Scarisbrick will not qualify as being part of an attractive route. Cutting out northern Southport, Crossens and Scarisbrick will shorten the route. (Note – From correspondence about the ROWIP I am aware that the western part of W Lancs is a place with a low density of FPs.)
Only time will tell if this project proceeds or not.
General Election 2024
I mentioned this in my last report, but nothing has been heard since about it, until the Election was called. Then CO did issue a few emails, asking members to email candidates with a message about ‘Access to Nature’.
If the RA is seeking better access to woodland, then it needs to issue regular news items about this, and not just mention it in general election years.
I did send an email to the candidates in Lancs for the two main parties which mentioned –
- Photo of a new gate on Carnforth FP 12
- Graph of outstanding issues in Lancs from 2010 to 2023, but adding the comment that no figure is available for 2024, because LCC’s database is no longer able to produce statistics. I added the comment that LCC’s database is over a quarter century old, so ought to be replaced.
- Mention of Little Hoole FP 17 on Knoll Lane (at grid ref SD48232356 – post code PR4 4TB). A report was first made about this stile in Aug 18, and that now the stile is still difficult to use, because the lower platform is missing.
The Labour candidate in the Fylde constituency, Tom Calver was the first one to acknowledge the email, but stated nothing useful in the reply
The Labour candidate in the Morecambe and Lunesdale constituency, Lizzi Collenge was the second one to acknowledge the email, and stated that she is aware that of rights of way issues in the County.
David Kelly
Area Footpath Secretary June 24