This guide is intended to provide basic information for developers and designers about the importance of Public Rights of Way (PROW) which may be affected by development.
PROW are significant recreational assets and offer a means of access to the local countryside as well as shortcuts to local centres. It is therefore important that the aesthetic value of PROW as well as their utility is preserved and, if possible, enhanced.
A development may affect PROW. It is imperative that designers, developers, planners and rights of way officers work in partnership to ensure that PROW are satisfactorily incorporated within the development.
This guide summarises the statutory provisions and best practice relating to PROW and offers guidance and advice on how the adverse impacts of development on PROW can be avoided.
This PPG aims to reduce the need to travel, especially by car, by promoting walking, cycling and public transport. To meet these aims, local authorities are increasingly adopting planning, transport and land use policies, which maintain and improve choice for people to walk, cycle or use public transport rather than drive between homes and facilities which they need to visit regularly.
Circular 2/93 "Public Rights of Way" Annexes C and D
The Government considers that the effect of development on a PROW is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. It asks local authorities to ensure that the effect on a right of way is taken into account.
The Circular also states that:
"Where it is decided to grant permission for development affecting a right of way, consideration should be given at the detailed stage to whether a new line for the route can be provided which would be generally acceptable to the public. The use of estate roads for this purpose should be avoided wherever possible and preference given to the use of made up estate paths through landscaped or open space areas away from vehicular traffic . . .
The grant of planning permission does not entitle developers to obstruct a public right of way. Development, insofar as it affects a right of way, should not be started, and the right of way should be kept open for public use, until the necessary order . . . for . . . the right of way has come into effect . . . While it is not open to question the merits of the planning permission when considering whether to make or confirm an order, it should not be assumed that the order should be made simply because planning permission has been granted . . . However, having arrived at the conclusion that it was right for the planning permission to be granted, there must be good reasons for deciding that an order, which would permit the implementation of that permission, should not be made or confirmed."
Circular 5/94 "Planning out Crime"
The layout, design and location of PROW can have a marked effect on people’s perception of the safety of using the route. Fear of crime reduces the use of PROW.
Good design may reduce this and developers can obtain more advice on this issue from the Police Architectural Liaison Officer.
The Definitive Map and Statement
It is vital that designers, developers and planning officers check and confirm at the earliest opportunity the effect of development upon PROW. This can be confirmed through the Land Search process.
Obstruction of a PROW may lead to enforcement action, prosecution and blighted property.
Design Issues
The needs of disabled people should be catered for at the outset by careful consideration of surfacing, widths and gradients.
PROW on new development sites should provide direct, secure and visually attractive routes. They should be properly considered at the design stage and, wherever possible, preserved on an enhanced existing alignment. Opportunities to improve and extend the PROW network should always be considered.
Narrow paths running between houses and enclosed by close boarded fences are not desirable. These paths are not easily overlooked and therefore can be perceived as a haven for anti social and possible criminal activities. Sharp changes in direction of paths should also be avoided so that no blind spots are created. Such routes may adversely affect householders' privacy and security and appear threatening to users.
Circular 5/94 "Planning and Crime" suggests that:
"Wherever possible, footpaths and alleyways should be wide, clear of hiding spaces, well lit and should follow a direct route."
PROW should be seen as a positive benefit to development schemes and, wherever possible, should be fronted by attractive verge planting and, in urban areas, by dwellings or commercial frontages so as to encourage natural surveillance. In urban situations which are already well lit there may be a case for lighting PROW. The specification for any lighting should be discussed with the Bournemouth Borough Council’s Street Lighting Engineer.
Public footpaths should have a width of 1.8 metres and bridleways a width of 3 metres wherever possible. However, within new development, wider paths are likely to be required. This would reflect the anticipated heavier usage of these paths and would ensure that users of PROW have adequate space to pass each other and that there is a feeling of spaciousness.
When a PROW is replaced or realigned it should be constructed to the same specification as the original, although where there is known to be a potential for greater usage, appropriate surfacing, widening and lighting may be required. In these circumstances, PROW to the Council’s adoption standard are likely to be required. In every case this will be a matter for discussion between the prospective developer, the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and the Highway Authority.
The needs of disabled people should be catered for at the outset by careful consideration of surfacing, widths and gradients.
Applying for an Order
Local Planning Authorities have the power to make a Public Path Order (PPO) under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the stopping up or diversion of public footpaths and bridleways when necessary to enable a planning consent granted by them under Part III of that Act to be implemented.
It is essential that consultation between planning officers, developers and public rights of way officers occur at the earliest opportunity so that the effect on any PROW can be established at the outset. PROW should be left on their current alignment and incorporated into the development as a positive feature. Diversion or stopping up should only be considered where required to produce a satisfactory layout. Where an Order is required, it is likely to take more than 6 months to effect the change on the ground, although simple cases may be completed earlier.
In determining an application the LPA would need to be satisfied that it was necessary (not just desirable or preferable) for the line of the path to be altered to enable planning permission to be carried out. As some public footpaths and bridleways already run across gardens and along driveways it is not sufficient to suggest that because the path runs through the development site it should be stopped up or diverted. The granting of a planning permission cannot be conditional upon a path being stopped up or diverted, and neither does the granting of planning permission constitute permission or serve to close or divert a PROW affected by development.
The LPAs powers to effect a stopping up or diversion Order under Section 257 are only available while the development has not yet started; thereafter any changes can only be made under Highway Act legislation. T
The legislation is framed to protect the rights of the public and it will be necessary for the relevant LPA to advise statutory undertakers and various users and prescribed organisations of any application. This will enable the LPA to get an indication of whether the proposal might be improved or attract objections before determining whether to make an Order. The consent of the statutory undertakers to the changes is necessary and any Order would include a savings clause preserving any rights and interests presently enjoyed by the statutory undertakers in relation to their apparatus, if appropriate.
The LPA would also seek the views of the Highway Authority, which has responsibility for the maintenance and protection of the PROW. The developer would be required to enter into an agreement with the LPA to carry out all works to bring the PROW to the Highway Authority’s required standard, and to reimburse the full cost of any expenses incurred in making up any new lengths of path.
The LPA will normally require any developer requesting an Order to agree to reimburse all of its expenses incurred in connection with the making of the Order whether or not it is confirmed. This includes the diversion of any statutory undertakers equipment which often proves prohibitive.
Temporary Restriction Orders
A PROW can be restricted to allow works to be undertaken or to avoid danger to the public. The restriction must be temporary and allow the re-opening of the original route. Such Orders must not be used in lieu of a permanent Order. The Council administers the Temporary Order, and will require a minimum of six weeks advance notice plus payment of a fee.
Summary
For best practice, follow the check list below:
Take account of national and local planning guidance.
Check if a PROW, claim or anomaly affects the development site.
Consider if new PROW can be incorporated.
Design the layout to take account of any existing PROW.
Leave sufficient time to implement changes to PROW.
Talk to Officers to ensure best practice is followed.
Links:
Contact details
Planning & Transport
Bournemouth Council
Town Hall Annexe, St Stephens Road
Bournemouth Dorset BH2 6EA DX 7615 Bournemouth