Agenda item

(Darwin Ward)

Report ES10124

Applications had been received on behalf of Tatsfield Bridleways Association under Section 53 (2) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 by London Borough of Bromley and Kent County Council to modify the Definitive Map and Statement to upgrade Footpath 280 that runs in a southerly direction from Grays Road through Grays Farm for a distance of approximately 280m to the Borough boundary and its continuation into Kent through routes SR332 and SR331(part), to bridleway status, based on use by horse riders along this route over a number of years.  This was effectively one claim for a complete route that crossed the boundary between the two Authorities, with the majority of the claimed route lying in Kent.  Following discussion between the two Authorities it was agreed that Kent would carry out the investigation and analysis of the claims in respect of the whole of the claimed route.

Following a period of investigation and analysis of the claims in respect of the route along SR332 and SR331(part) to its junction with Footpath 280, Kent County Council produced a report containing conclusions and a recommendation, attached to the report of the Director of Environmental Services, which was considered by the Sub Committee.

The application for a Definitive Map Modification Order, submitted on behalf of the Tatsfield Bridleways Association, claimed that the route should be defined as a bridleway.  The applicant and witnesses who had submitted evidence were subsequently interviewed and all the map evidence available had been considered.  Kent County Council had concluded that as there was little mapping or documentary evidence in support of the application, the application rested solely on user evidence.  In considering user evidence with regard to the provisions contained within Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980, it was determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the upgrading of these routes to bridleway status.  Kent County Council subsequently contacted London Borough of Bromley to further clarify consultation issues and to note that the claimant had advised Kent that it was her intention to appeal to the Government Office for the North East (GONE) against the decision of the County Council. 

The appeal was duly made and Kent had provided GONE with their comments on the appeal case set out by the Tatsfield Bridleways Association, after having contacted affected landowners both in Kent and Bromley for comments.  Kent County Council’s statement in response asserted that there was no documentary evidence to support the upgrading of the proposed routes and, on the basis of the evidence provided, there was not enough user evidence to substantiate either test. 

In considering the implications of the proposal, in conjunction with the findings of Kent County Council, various questions were asked by Members, in particular in relation to the locked gate along the route.  In response, the Director of Environmental Services’ representative confirmed that should the application be successful, the gate would need to be adjusted to accommodate horse riders.

Having regard to all the available evidence and to the findings of Kent County Council, the Sub-Committee was of the opinion that, on the balance of probabilities, there was insufficient evidence in support of the claims to enable the Council to accede to the request to make the requisite Definitive Map Modification Order. 

RESOLVED that the applicant be advised that the Council takes the view that on the balance of probability, the case in favour of the application has not been demonstrated and that their application has been refused and the applicant be advised of their right to appeal to the Secretary of State.