Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 an Application to Register a Footpath on the Definitive Map, Dorothea Quarry, Community of Llanllyfni
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ITEM MEETING PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE 9th July, 2012. TITLE Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 An application to register a footpath on the Definitive Map, Dorothea Quarry, Community of Llanllyfni. PURPOSE To consider whether the Authority should make a Modification Order RECOMMENDATION That Gwynedd Council should make a Modification Order under Section 53(3)(c)(i), Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to register the claimed path on the Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way. If the Committee should decide to make the Order, it is recommended that no liability for maintenance of this path be accepted. AUTHOR Aled Davies Head of Regulatory Department 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report refers to an application to register a public footpath at Dorothea Quarry, in the Community of Llanllyfni. 1.2 The application is made on the basis that the public have walked this path unhindered, continuously and as of right (that is without the landowner’s permission) over a period of more than twenty years. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 In May 2005, an application was received from Mrs Shakespeare on behalf of Talysarn and Nantlle Environmental Group, under Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to register on the Definitive Map a public footpath from Talysarn to Nantlle via Dorothea Quarry. 2.2 The claimed path starts from the existing gate near the roundabout at the eastern end of Talysarn and proceeds in a general easterly direction through an area of reclaimed slate tips, circling around the southern side of Dorothea Quarry and connecting to the unclassified road that leads into the village of Nantlle at the north eastern edge of the quarry hole. 2.3. The claimed footpath is shown between points A-B-C-D on the plan provided in Appendix 1. 2.4 A further claim has been made to register a public footpath around the northern side of Dorothea Quarry which is currently being investigated. 1 However, this particular claim will not be presented to Committee for a further 6 months due to the need for additional research. 3.0 LAND OWNERSHIP 3.1 The section of claimed path between points A and B affects land owned by Gwynedd Council. 3.2 This area of land, which is known to this Authority as Gloddfa Glai, was reclaimed from slate tips as part of a scheme undertaken by its previous owner, Arfon Borough Council, between 1977 and 1979. 3.3 To the west of the claimed path, the Council has provided a park area which includes a circular route around a small lake with seats for the public to use. The circular route is known locally as Trim Trac. 3.4 The section of claimed path between points B, C and D has been successively owned by: Dorothea Slate Quarry Company Limited until February 1973 Anthony Yendle & Dafydd Gwyn Evans Feb 1973 to June 1984 Anne Mary Darlington & David Vincent Darlington 1984 to 1991 Glyn David Small, Gillan Small, 1991 to 1993 & Brian Leslie Harman & Noshir Jal Avari Brian Leslie Harman 1993 to 2005 Capital Landfill Restoration (Bath) Limited 2005 to present 3.5 Landownership details relating to this portion of land is recorded in Land Registry Title CYM238163. 4.0 THE APPLICATION 4.1 In November 2006, a detailed examination of the application was made and the claimed path was walked. During this investigation, it was discovered that the claimed path did not connect to Public Footpath No. 128 at its eastern end as stated in the application but instead, connected to an unclassified road (UCR) at approximately the same position. This is represented as point D on the map provided in Appendix 1. 4.2 A site visit revealed that Footpath No.128 is, topographically, at a lower level than the UCR and passes beneath the UCR through a tunnel directly below the termination point of the claimed path. This means that it is virtually impossible for the claimed path to connect to Footpath No.128. 2 4.3 It is believed that this discrepancy arose because the applicant considered the UCR to be Footpath No. 128. Indeed, a footnote on two photographs provided by the applicant of this particular location on the claimed route clearly demonstrates that this is the case. 4.4 It is considered that this discrepancy does not adversely affect the application, as the claimed path makes a junction with another public highway. 4.5 Further investigation also revealed that extensive use was being made of another path around the northern side of Dorothea Quarry which linked into the claimed path in question thus forming a circular route around the quarry. This particular path became the subject of a further application which was submitted by the Talysarn and Nantlle Environment Group in January 2007. 4.6 Although a number of individuals claim to use both routes, it is intended for each application to be considered independently and on its own merits. However, it is possible for each Order, if they are indeed made, to be published simultaneously. 5.0 EVIDENCE 5.1 Under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980, where a path has been used by the public by right and without hindrance for a full term of twenty years without any overt action by the landowner to prevent this, then it is assumed that the path has been dedicated as a highway. 5.2 The applicant has stated that the field gate at point A was padlocked in 2005. This area of land is in the ownership of Gwynedd Council. However, after a short period the padlock was removed. 5.3 Thus, for the purpose of this claim, under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980, the right of the public to walk the claimed path was first brought into question in 2005 when the gate was padlocked. The period of use to be considered under Section 31 is therefore 1985-2005. 5.4 The application is supported by 34 Statements of Evidence. The bar chart provided in Appendix 2 summarises the claimed use as indicated on the Statements. 5.5 From examining the evidence, 29 claimants state they have used the path for the requisite period to be sufficient to give rise to presumption of dedication as a public footpath. 5.6 The claimants state that the gate at point A was never locked until 2005. They also state that they were never challenged by either the present landowner or the previous landowners of both areas of land, until Gwynedd Council locked the field gate which accessed their land in 2005. The claimants believed that the path was a public footpath. 3 5.7 In March 2008, 11 claimants were interviewed on their usage of the path. Nine of those interviewed stated that they had never seen any signs or were challenged while using the path. Two claimants stated that there were signs present, but these were aimed at the divers and the vehicles accessing the lake. 5.8 Of those interviewed, one claimant remembers that there was a dog patrol that would walk around Dorothea Quarry. This lasted 3-4 months shortly after the Quarry closed in 1971. 5.9 In July 2011, the Council’s Legal Officer and a Public Rights of Way Officer interviewed a selection of the claimants to ensure that what they had claimed was accurate, and to establish if they would be prepared to attend a public inquiry to give evidence if required. 6.0 LANDOWNER’S VIEWS Gwynedd Council 6.1 In June 2005, the Resources Directorate of Gwynedd Council contacted the Public Rights of Way Section of the Council having been served a notice by the applicant stating that an application had been made. The Directorate initially stated that it had no objection in principle to the claimed path but expressed doubt as to whether a public footpath could be claimed as the Directorate considered the area to be open to the public and any paths within were deemed to be permissive. The Directorate also confirmed that the gate at point A was locked. 6.2 The Resources Directorate replied to a further consultation carried out in August 2007 by restating that it believed that the applicant could not claim a public path on land which was open to the public by permission. 6.3 Whilst it would appear that Trim Trac, which is located at the western end of the Council-owned site, has been created for public recreation, there appears to be nothing to suggest to the public that the land to the east, upon which the claimed path runs, is an area of open land for the benefit of the community. Indeed, the claimants appear to have used the path in the belief that it was a public path. 6.4 In September 2011, the Municipal Section of the Council who now have responsibility for this area of land stated that it had no objection to the claimed path crossing its land. Capital Landfill Restoration (Bath) Limited (“Capital Landfill”) 6.5 In July 2005, Spratt Endicott Solicitors, the legal representative for Capital Landfill Restoration (Bath) Limited at that time, raised an objection to the proposed path, having received notice of the application. In July 2007, Kidd Rapinet Solicitors contacted the Rights of Way Section stating that they acted on behalf of Capital Landfill Restoration (Bath) Limited. 4 6.6 In a letter dated 7th September 2007, Kidd Rapinet Solicitors confirmed their objection to the claimed path in response to a consultation carried out by the Public Rights of Way Section in August 2007. The objection was made on the following grounds:- i) there has been no uninterrupted use of the claimed path over the claimed period of use, ii) notices had been erected making it clear that that the land was private property and/or that no public rights of way existed, iii) CADW had expressed concerns about any footpath passing the Beam Engine due to it having been vandalised on a number of occasions, iv) the presence of large boulders, trees subject to Tree Preservation Orders, undergrowth and steep inclines made it very difficult if not impossible to walk the claimed path south of Dorothea Quarry.