Regulatory Committee
Meeting to be held on 11 December 2012
Electoral Division affected:
Lancaster Rural East
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
Claimed Restricted Byway and Bridleway from the A683 (Lancaster Road),
Quernmore, to the junction of Public Bridleway Nos. 36 & 37 Lancaster,
Lancaster City
Claim No. 804/503
(Annex ‘A’ refers)
Contact for further information:
Miss J Mort, 01772 533427
Jennifer.mort@lancashire.gov.uk
Mrs J Elliott, 01772 533442, Environment Directorate,
jayne.elliott@lancashire.gov.uk
Executive Summary
Consideration of the evidence for a restricted byway from the A683 (Lancaster
Road), Quernmore to the boundary of the M6 motorway and evidence for a
bridleway thence to the junction of Public Bridleway Nos. 36 & 37 Lancaster to be
added to the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way, in accordance
with File No. 804/503 .
Recommendation
i.
That the proposal is accepted to add a restricted byway from the A683
(Lancaster Road), Quernmore to the boundary of the M6 (Points A-G) and
continuing as a public bridleway to the junction of Public Bridleway Nos. 36 &
37 Lancaster, (Points G-I).
ii.
That an Order be made pursuant to Section 53(2)(b) and Section53(3)(c)(i) of
the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to add to the Definitive Map and
Statement of Public Rights of Way a Restricted Byway from the A653
Lancaster Road (Grid Reference SD 5027 6426) for a distance of
approximately 1470 metres to where the route turns south east where it
meets the boundary of the M6 (SD 4975 6294) shown between Points A and
G on the Committee plan and to add a bridleway from that point (SD 4975
6294) for a distance of approximately 180 metres to a point at the junction of
Public Bridleways Nos 36 and 37 Lancaster, Lancaster City (SD 4974 6281)
shown between Points G and I on the Committee Plan.
iii.
That, being satisfied that the higher test for confirming the said Order can be
satisfied, the said Order be promoted to confirmation if necessary by
submitting it to the Secretary of State.
Background
Research has indicated that consideration should be given under section 53(5) of the
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to the making of an Order to amend the Definitive
Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way in Lancashire by adding a restricted
byway extending from a point on the A683 (Lancaster Road) to a point where the
route meets the boundary of the M6 shown between points A and G on the attached
plan and by adding a bridleway from point G to the junction of Public Bridleway Nos.
36 & 37 Lancaster, Lancaster City shown between points G and I.
The claimed restricted byway and bridleway is approximately 1650 metres long
extending from a point on the A653 (Lancaster Road) at point A on the plan (grid
reference SD 5027 6426), crossing the M6 motorway by a vehicular access bridge to
the junction of Public Bridleway Nos. 36 and 37 Lancaster at Point I (SD 4974 6281).
On the date of inspection the claimed route was open and useable along its full
length with no barriers or gates across it that prevented or restricted access. No
other public rights of way meet or cross the claimed route but walkers and cyclists
were seen using the claimed route.
As part of an information gathering exercise carried out under the Rights of Way
Improvement Plan for Lancashire the North Lancashire Bridleways Association and
North Lancashire section of the Ramblers Association both identified the claimed
route as an important link into Lancaster that had regularly been used by members
of both organisations but that was not recorded as a public right of way.
At the same time questions about the claimed route's legal status were being asked
by County Council Engineers working on a scheme to link the Morecambe and
Heysham peninsular to the M6 motorway.
As part of that scheme it was proposed to improve junction 34 on the M6 Motorway
and although the majority of the claimed route would remain unaffected by the
scheme it was originally proposed to remove the bridge forming part of the claimed
route (Grimeshaw Lane Bridge) between Points H and I on the plan.
The removal of this bridge would effectively have prevented access from the claimed
route onto Public Bridleway Nos. 36 and 37 Lancaster. Representations were made
by the user groups and the Countryside Service regarding the claimed route. The
County Council agreed that the bridge would instead be replaced.
A Side Roads Order was made on 22 October 2009 (The Lancashire County Council
(Torrisholme to the M6 Link (A683 Completion of Heysham to M6 Link Road)
Classified Road) (Side Roads) Order 2009) which, if confirmed, would have slightly
altered the alignment of the claimed route between Points G and H to allow for the
replacement of the existing bridge over the motorway. The Side Road Order refers to
that section of the claimed route proposed to be diverted as a "private means of
access."
The Side Roads Order remains not confirmed and is held in abeyance pending the
outcome of the more recent Development Control Order for the Heysham to M6 Link
Road which said Order does not affect route A-I at all.
The County Council is required by law to investigate the evidence and make a
decision based on that evidence as to whether a public right of way exists, and if so
its status. Section 53(3)(b) and (c) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 sets out
the tests that need to be met when reaching a decision; also current case law needs
to be applied.
An order will only be made if the evidence shows that:
 A right of way “subsists” or is “reasonably alleged to subsist”
or
 “The expiration… of any period such that the enjoyment by the public…raises
a presumption that the way has been dedicated as a public path”
When considering evidence, if it is shown that a highway once existed then highway
rights continue to exist (“once a highway, always a highway”) even if a route has
since become disused or obstructed unless a legal order stopping up or diverting the
rights has been made. Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as
explained in Planning Inspectorate’s Advice Note No. 7) makes it clear that
considerations such as suitability, the security of properties and the wishes of
adjacent landowners cannot be considered. The Planning Inspectorate’s website
also gives guidance about the interpretation of evidence.
The County Council’s decision will be based on the interpretation of the evidence
discovered by officers and documents and other evidence supplied by landowners,
consultees and other interested parties produced to the County Council before the
date of the decision. Each piece of evidence will be tested on the balance of
probabilities. It is possible that the Council’s decision may be different from the
status given in the original application. The decision may be that the routes have
public rights as a footpath, bridleway, restricted byway or byway open to all traffic, or
that no such right of way exists.
Consultations
City and Parish Councils
Both Lancaster City Council and Quermore Parish Council have been consulted and
no response has been received from either, it is assumed in the circumstances that
they have no comments to make.
Landowners / Supporters / Objectors
The evidence submitted and observations on those comments is included in the
section Advice – County Secretary and Solicitor's Observations
Description of Route
Points annotated on the attached plan
Point
A
B
Grid Reference (SD)
5027 6426
5024 6399
Description
Junction with the A683 (Lancaster Road)
Three gated access points into adjacent
fields
C
D
5014 6368
5006 6347
E
4999 6330
F
4994 6319
G
4975 6294
H
4980 6284
I
4974 6281
Gated access point into adjacent field
Two gated access points into adjacent
field
Tarmac access road leading to Davies's
Farm
Three gated access points into adjacent
fields
Claimed route turns south-east at the
point where it meets boundary of M6
Claimed route turns south-west to cross
M6
Parish boundary at the junction with
Public Bridleway Nos. 36 and 37
Lancaster
A site inspection was carried out on 28th August 2008.
The claimed route commences at point A on the Committee Plan (SD 5027 6426) at
its junction with A683 (Lancaster Road) opposite the start of Denny Beck Lane.
The claimed route is immediately apparent from Lancaster Road and gives the
appearance of a well used farm access track. There are no signs indicating whether
the status of the route is public or private and there are no gates or physical barriers
across the route.
From point A the claimed route extends in a southerly direction along an unsurfaced
track. The claimed route is well defined with mature hedges on either side. A grass
strip exists up the centre of the claimed route with compacted earth/stone on either
side and there is evidence of recent and frequent vehicular use.
Shortly before reaching point B the grass strip down the centre of the claimed route
ceases and the surface becomes more potholed. In the proximity of point B there are
three field gates providing access to the fields on either side of the claimed route but
there are no gates across the claimed route.
From point B the claimed route continues in a general southerly direction along a
stone surfaced track. It appears that tarmac and additional stone have been added
at some point in the past to fill potholes. Banked hedges exist on either side of the
claimed route within which there are a significant number of mature oak trees
suggesting the existence of an old hedge line. The claimed route rises gradually
uphill with thick vegetation and hedges on either side and a further field gate
provides access to a field on the east onto the route.
From point C the claimed route continues in a more south-westerly direction again
with sections of grass strip down the centre and compacted stone surface either
side. A few small potholes exist in the surface and there continues to be evidence of
recent vehicular use.
Close to point D a further three field gates provide access to the adjacent fields and
the surface of the route is badly potholed, some of which extend across the full width
of the route and are filled with water.
At point E a tarmac access road leaves the claimed route in a south-easterly
direction providing access to Davies’s Farm (spelled "Davis's Farm" on earlier
maps.)
From point E the claimed route continues in a south-south-westerly direction along a
compacted stone and patchy tarmac surface. Hedges abut the route on either side
but are lower in height providing good views of the woodland to the east and
Lancaster to the west.
At point F a further three field gates provide access from the claimed route to the
adjoining fields.
From point F the claimed route continues in a south-westerly direction dropping
gradually downhill towards the motorway (M6). The claimed route appears to be well
used by vehicles and a supply of hardcore in the grass verge to the side of the route
appears to be being used to fill potholes. Some recent fly tipping partially blocked the
route but on the date of inspection there was evidence that vehicles had recently
negotiated around it.
At point G a metal gatepost is situated on the western side of the claimed route.
There is no evidence of a gate that may have closed across the claimed route but
there is evidence of the remains of a trodden track around the metal post in the
grass verge at the side of the claimed route suggesting that a gate may have existed
across the route at some point in the past.
A further field gate opens onto the claimed route close to point G and looks very well
used by farm vehicles. From point G the claimed route continues in a south-easterly
direction parallel to the motorway. At point H a farm access track leaves the claimed
route providing the only access to Moor Side Farm.
From point H the claimed route continues in a south-westerly direction crossing a
vehicular bridge over the motorway. The surface of the bridge is tarmac and there
are signs informing users that there is a weight limit of 32 tons and advising that only
one vehicle should cross the bridge at a time.
The claimed route ends on the western side of the motorway bridge where the
claimed route meets Public Bridleway No. 37 Lancaster (Moor Lane) and Public
Bridleway No. 36 Lancaster (Ridge Lane) at point I (SD 4974 6281). Both public
bridleways are signposted from point I and continue as substantial tracks.
As the route is a bounded track it is considered that its width is clear as being
between the boundaries along the track
Map and documentary evidence relating to claimed addition
A variety of maps, plans and other documents was examined with reference to the
claimed route.
DOCUMENT
TITLE
Yates’ Map
of Lancashire
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT & NATURE OF EVIDENCE
Date
1786
Small scale commercial map. Such maps were on sale to
the public and hence to be of use to their customers the
routes shown had to be available for the public to use.
However, they were privately produced without a known
system of consultation or checking. Limitations of scale
also limited the routes that could be shown.
Yates' map was one of the first of Lancashire and won a
prize of £100 offered by the Society of Arts for accurately
surveyed county maps.
As well as recording the primary roads in use at that time
Yate's map showed 'cross roads'. A cross road is generally
accepted as being a secondary road which was neither a
principal road nor a turnpike road, often one which ran
between two main roads. The term was defined by the
influential map-maker Ogilby in the preface to his road
itinerary 'Britannia' in 1675. The title of Hennet's map in
1829 included the term 'cross roads'.
Observations
Shows the claimed route from Lancaster Road (A683)
immediately opposite the road to Denny Beck. It extends
past the property known as 'Moor Side' – but does not
connect to it – and then continues in a more south-southwesterly direction towards but not as far as point I. The
length shown equates approximately to the length of the
claimed route between points A-B-C-D-E-F. The route is
shown on Yates' map as a cross road – as described in the
map key, although no definition of the term is given.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
It can be inferred that part of the claimed route between
points A-B-C-D-E-F existed as a route possibly available to
the public around 1786.
Greenwood’s
1818
Greenwood's map of 1818 is a small scale commercial
Map of
Lancashire
map. In contrast to other map-makers of the era
Greenwood stated in the legend that his map showed
private as well as public roads.
Observations
Greenwoods map of 1818 also shows a cross road from
Lancaster Road along the claimed route in a general
south-south-westerly direction to point G then directly to
point I (rather than the claimed route) where it forks at the
junction of the two routes now recorded on the Definitive
Map of Public Rights of Way as Public Bridleway nos. 36
and 37 Lancaster.
It can be inferred that part of the claimed route between
points A-B-C-D-E-F-G existed as part of a substantial route
for public use around 1818.It linked to the highway network
to the west and to a race ground to the south. Given that
the map was for the travelling public it is considered that
this claimed route A-G was available to the public in
carriages carts and on horseback
Small scale commercial map.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
Hennet's Map
of Lancashire
1830
Observations
Hennet's Map of 1830 clearly shows part of the claimed
route as a cross road from point A on Lancaster Road
(A683) to point G where the claimed route turns away from
the historical line to cross the M6 via the bridge. The cross
road is shown continuing to the junction of the two routes
now recorded as Public Bridleway Nos. 36 (Ridge Lane)
and 37 (Moor Lane) Lancaster at point I. It then shows one
lane continuing towards the City of Lancaster and the other
leading onto Lancaster Moor and the race course.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
It can be inferred that part of the claimed route between
points A-B-C-D-E-F-G existed as part of a substantial
public route around 1830, linking to the highway network
and race ground.
Maps and other documents were produced under the Tithe
Commutation Act of 1836 to record land capable of
producing a crop and what each landowner should pay in
lieu of tithes to the church. The maps are usually detailed
large scale maps of a parish and while they were not
produced specifically to show roads or public rights of way,
the maps do show roads quite accurately and can provide
useful supporting evidence (in conjunction with the written
tithe award) and additional information from which the
status of ways may be inferred.
Tithe Map
and Tithe
Award or
Apportionment
1843
Observations
The Tithe Map for the parish of Bulk was produced in 1843.
The whole of the lane (on its pre-M6 alignment) is shown
on the Tithe Map for Bulk extending from point A on
Lancaster Road (A683) through to point G on the claimed
route then south to rejoin the claimed route at point I at the
junction of the lanes now recorded as Public Bridleway
Nos. 36 and 37 Lancaster. It is numbered 128 throughout
its full length and this number is also allocated to the route
beyond point I which continues towards Lancaster past
Cuckoo Hall (now recorded as Public Bridleway No. 36
Lancaster). No gates or other barriers are shown across
the claimed route.
The Schedule accompanying the Tithe Map describes
parcel 128 as Ridge Lane and says that it is owned by the
Surveyors of the Highways for the township of Bulk.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
Finance Act
1910 Map
It can be inferred that part of the claimed route between
points A-B-C-D-E-F-G existed as part of a substantial route
in 1843 and that it was considered to be a public highway
for all purposes and excluded from private ownership at
that time.
The comprehensive survey carried out for the Finance Act
1910, later repealed, was for the purposes of land
valuation not recording public rights of way but can often
provide very good evidence.
Observations
Maps produced under the 1910 Finance Act have been
inspected in Lancashire County Records Office. The whole
of the lane (on its pre M6 alignment) is excluded from the
numbered plots (hereditaments).The above extract shows
the central portion.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
The fact that the whole of the lane is excluded from the
numbered plots is a strong indication that the route was
considered to be a highway, probably vehicular, at that
time and therefore that the section of claimed route which
coincides with that lane (from point A to point G) is still
highway in the absence of any legal stopping-up or
diversion.
The Ordnance Survey (OS) has produced topographic
maps at different scales (historically one inch to one mile,
six inches to one mile and 1:2500 scale which is
approximately 25 inches to one mile). Ordnance Survey
mapping began in Lancashire in the late 1840s with
publication of the 6-inch maps. The large scale 25-inch
maps which were first published in the 1890s provide good
evidence of the position of routes at the time of survey and
of the position of buildings and other structures. They
generally do not provide evidence of the legal status of
routes, and carry a disclaimer that the depiction of a path
or track is no evidence of the existence of a public right of
way.
Ordnance
Survey Maps
6 Inch OS
Map
1848
The earliest OS 6 inch map for this area.
Observations
The edition of the 6-inch Ordnance Survey map published
in 1848 shows the section of the claimed route between
points A and G but continuing to point I across what is now
the M6 and thence to join the general highway network in
Lancaster. The claimed route is bounded by solid lines on
either side suggesting that it was enclosed from the
adjoining land. There are no gates or other barriers shown
across the claimed route. Access is available from the
claimed route to Davis's Farm and Moor Side. It appears
that Moor Side could only be accessed from the claimed
route although it may also have been possible to access
Davis's Farm via Old Parkside.
A benchmark is shown at the point where the access to
Davis's Farm left the claimed route.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
25 Inch OS
Map
The section of the claimed route A-B-C-D-E-F-G existed as
an enclosed lane around 1848.
1891
First Edition 25" map published in 1891 and surveyed in
1889-90 is at the larger scale showing the area in more
detail.
Observations
This map shows the section of the claimed route between
points A-G. It is bounded on either side by solid lines
suggesting that it was separated from adjoining land. The
route is clearly named as 'Grimeshaw Lane'. There is a
solid line across the claimed route about 10 metres south
of point A.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
25 Inch OS
Map
Observations
1913
The section of the claimed route A-B-C-D-E-F-G existed in
1889-90. The solid line south of the junction with the
Lancaster Road indicates that there may have been a gate
across the claimed route at the time.
Further edition of 25 inch map (surveyed 1890-1 and
revised 1910).
The 1913 map shows the section of the claimed route
between points A-G. It is bounded on either side by solid
lines suggesting that it was separated from adjoining land.
The route is clearly named as 'Grimeshaw Lane'. The
above extract shows a solid line across the claimed route
approximately 10 metres south of point A.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
25 Inch OS
Map
The section of the claimed route A-B-C-D-E-F-G existed in
1910. The solid line south of the junction with the
Lancaster Road indicates that there may have been a gate
across the claimed route at the time.
1932
Further edition of 25 inch map. The next edition of the 25inch map was published in 1932 (resurveyed in 1889-1890,
re levelled and revised in 1931).
Observations
The above extract shows part of the claimed route between
points C-D with it named as 'Grimeshaw Lane' on the map.
The map shows the section of the claimed route between
points A-G. There is a dashed line across the claimed
route near point A, possibly indicating a change in surface
where it leaves Lancaster Road.
A boundary stone is marked at point I at the junction with
Ridge Lane (now Public Bridleway No. 36 Lancaster) and
Moor Lane (now Public Bridleway No. 37 Lancaster). The
section of the claimed route between points A-G is
bounded on either side by solid lines suggesting that it was
separated from the adjacent land. There are no gates or
other barriers shown across the claimed route. Access
tracks to Davies's Farm and Moor Side are shown leaving
the claimed route at points E and F.
Investigating
Officer’s
The section of the claimed route A-B-C-D-E-F-G existed in
1931 as a substantial enclosed track.
Comments
25 inch OS
Map
Observations
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
6 Inch OS
Map
Observations
Further edition of 25 inch map.
It was not possible to view all the Ordnance Survey 1:2500
series of maps published in the 1950's that cover the
claimed route. Two maps were found, sheet SD 4963 was
published in 1956 with a revision date of 1955. It shows
part of the claimed route between points E-G as a bounded
route named on the map as Grimeshaw Lane. There are
no lines across that part of the claimed route shown on the
map to suggest that it was gated or otherwise obstructed.
Sheet SD 4962 published in 1956 (revised 1955) shows
'Grimeshaw Lane' from just south of point G to point I but
does not show the claimed route which at this point
crosses the M6 which had not been built at the date of the
map.
1957
It can be inferred that the section of the claimed route E-FG was still in existence in 1955 although sheets showing
other parts of the route could not be viewed.
The Ordnance Survey base map for the Definitive Map,
First Review, was published in 1955 (although the date of
revision was before 1930) at a scale of 6 inches to 1 mile.
This map is probably based on the same survey as the
1928 25-inch map. The Ordnance Survey 1:10560 (6
inches to 1 mile) sheet SD 56 SW was also published in
1957 with the area of the claimed route having been
revised 1930-1945.
This map clearly shows the claimed route between points
A-E as a route bounded on either side by fencing or some
other type of boundaries. The route is named as
'Grimeshaw Lane' on the map. This copy of the 6 inch to 1
mile map was used to draw the Definitive Map (First
Review). The adjoining sheet SD 46 SE was also
published in 1957, this map shows the claimed route
between points E-I. Importantly it shows the M6 motorway
and the realignment of Grimeshaw Lane along the claimed
route between points G-I. The claimed route is shown
crossing the motorway and is named as Grimeshaw Lane.
Between points E-G the claimed route is shown as being
enclosed. From point G to H it is shown unfenced parallel
to the M6. There are no lines across the route indicating
that it was gated or otherwise obstructed.
Investigating
Officer’s
comments
6 inch OS
map
1968
It can be inferred that the whole of the claimed route
existed when the maps were published in 1957.
Importantly it shows the change to the route of Grimeshaw
Lane between points G-I which was a result of the
construction of the M6 motorway.
The Ordnance Survey 1:10560 sheet SD 46SE published
in 1968 with a revised survey date of 1956 – 61 shows the
claimed route between points E-I. Importantly it shows the
M6 motorway and the realignment of Grimeshaw Lane
between points G-I. The claimed route is shown crossing
the motorway and is named as Grimeshaw Lane. The
claimed route is shown enclosed between points E-I. There
are no lines across the route indicating that it was gated or
otherwise obstructed.
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
1:25000 OS
Map
1962
Observations
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
Aerial
Photographs
Aerial
Photograph
It can be inferred that the claimed route between points E-I
was in existence when the map was revised between
1956-61 and that the change to the route that occurred to
accommodate the M6 motorway was made at some point
in the 1950's. (This section of M6 was known to have been
constructed in 1956-8)
The Ordnance Survey 1:25000 Map published in 1962
(fully revised 1910-31 with partial revisions in 1938-50,
major roads revised in 1962) shows the whole of the
claimed route and names it as Grimeshaw Lane. The map
shows the claimed route following the construction of the
M6. In the key to the map the Ordnance Survey shows the
claimed route under their classification 'other roads'.
It can be inferred that the claimed route existed in 1962.
Aerial photographs can show the existence of paths and
tracks, especially across open areas, and changes to
buildings and field boundaries for example. Sometimes it is
not possible to enlarge the photos and retain their clarity,
and there can also be problems with trees and shadows
obscuring relevant features.
1960s
The earliest available example for this location is a black
and white aerial photograph taken in the late
1950s/early1960's and available to view on MapZone.
Observations
A black and white aerial photograph clearly shows the
whole of the claimed route. From points A-G it shows that
the majority of this route is bounded on one or either side
by trees. Between points G-I it shows Grimeshaw Lane
having been realigned to allow for the construction of the
M6 motorway. The M6 appears to have been constructed
up to Grimeshaw Bridge (the claimed route) from the
south. North beyond the bridge it appears that the M6 was
still under construction. This dates the photograph as being
no later than 1958. The claimed route appears to have
been very recently realigned to run parallel to the M6
between points G-H and the bridge between H-I has been
constructed.
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
The claimed route existed at the date of the photograph in
the late 1950s and the diversion of a short section of
Grimeshaw Lane onto the claimed route G-H-I had been
implemented by this time.
Aerial
Photograph
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
Definitive
Map records
Corresponde
nce
Observations
2006
An aerial photograph taken in 2006 clearly shows the full
length of the claimed route between Point A and Point I.
The claimed route existed in 2006.
The National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act
1949 required the County Council to prepare a Definitive
Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way.
Records were searched in the Lancashire Records Office
to find any correspondence concerning the preparation of
the Definitive Map in the early 1950s.
No reference could be found to the claimed route.
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
Parish Survey
Map
Observations
Draft Map
The omission of the claimed route from the First Definitive
Map & Statement was not disputed.
19501952
The initial survey of public rights of way was carried out by
the parish councils in those areas formerly comprising a
rural district council area and by an urban district or
municipal borough council in their respective areas.
Following completion of the survey the maps and
schedules were submitted to the County Council. In the
case of municipal boroughs and urban districts the map
and schedule produced, was used, without alteration, as
the Draft Map and Statement. In the case of parish council
survey maps, the County Council produced maps covering
the whole of a rural district council area. In this area the
preliminary survey work was undertaken by Quernmore
Parish Council.
The Parish Survey Map and Cards for Quernmore do not
show the claimed route. However, the surveyor of the
public rights of way in Lancaster City did record the
bridleway 36 running from the boundary.
The preliminary survey work was carried out in Lancashire
from the early 1950s. The Draft Map was compiled by
Lunesdale Rural District Council who produced a map of
routes they believed to be public drawn onto a 6-inch
Ordnance Survey map. It was given a “relevant date” (1st
January 1953) and notice was published that the draft map
had been prepared. The Draft Map was placed on deposit
for a minimum period of 4 months on 1st January 1955 for
the public, including landowners, to inspect them and
report any omissions or other mistakes. Hearings were
held into some of these objections, and recommendations
made to accept or reject them on the evidence presented.
Observations
The claimed route was not shown on the Draft Map of
Public Rights of Way. In this instance, there were no formal
objections or other comments about the omission of the
claimed route.
Provisional
Map
Once all these representations were resolved, the
amended Draft Map became the Provisional Map which
was published in 1960, and was available for 28 days for
inspection. At this stage, only landowners, lessees and
tenants could apply for amendments to the map, but the
public could not. Objections by this stage had to be made
to the Crown Court.
Observations
The claimed route is not shown on the Provisional Map of
Public Rights of Way. In this instance no objections to the
omission of the path were made.
The First
Definitive
Map and
Statement
The Provisional Map, as amended, was published as the
Definitive Map in 1962. Legislation required that the
Definitive Map be reviewed, and legal changes such as
diversion orders and creation orders be incorporated into a
Definitive Map First Review
Observations
The claimed route was not shown on the First Definitive
Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way.
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
The claimed route was either not considered to be a public
right of way in the 1950s or was considered by Quernmore
Parish to be a road and therefore not appropriate to be
recorded on the Definitive Map and Statement. It is not
unusual for the surveyor on one side of a boundary to
consider a route to be a road and his counterpart on the
other side of the boundary to record its continuation as a
public right of way. Such a view would be consistent with
the fact that the bridleway Lancaster City 36 is described
as starting from the boundary with Quernmore rather than
from its junction with bridleway Lancaster 37. It is also
consistent with the split in numbering of bridleways 36 and
37 – if there had been no continuation in Quernmore and
the bridleway simply turned a corner at the boundary it is
likely to have been treated as a single route with only 1
reference number.
Revised
Definitive
Map of Public
Rights of Way
(First Review)
Legislation required that the Definitive Map be reviewed,
and legal changes such as diversion orders,
extinguishment orders and creation orders be incorporated
into a Definitive Map First Review. On 25th April 1975
(except in small areas of the County) the Revised Definitive
Map of Public Rights of Way (First Review) was published.
No further reviews of the Definitive Map have been carried
out. However, since the coming into operation of the
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the Definitive Map has
been subject to a continuous review process
The claimed route is not shown on the Revised Definitive
Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way (First Review).
Observations
Investigating
Officer's
comments
The claimed route was not considered to have changed
status by the 1960s.
Statutory
deposit and
declaration
made under
section 31(6)
Highways Act
1980
The owner of land may at any time deposit with the County
Council a map and statement indicating what (if any) ways
over the land he admits to having been dedicated as
highways. A statutory declaration may then be made by
that landowner or by his successors in title within ten years
from the date of the deposit (or within ten years from the
date on which any previous declaration was last lodged)
affording protection to a landowner against a claim being
made for a public right of way on the basis of future use
(always provided that there is no other evidence of an
intention to dedicate a public right of way).
Depositing a map, statement and declaration does not take
away any rights which have already been established
through past use. However, depositing the documents will
immediately fix a point at which any unacknowledged rights
are brought into question. The onus will then be on anyone
claiming that a right of way exists to demonstrate that it has
already been established. Under deemed statutory
dedication the 20 year period would thus be counted back
from the date of the declaration (or from any earlier act that
effectively brought the status of the route into question).
There are no Highways Act 1980 Section 31(6) deposits
lodged with the County Council for the area over which the
claimed route runs.
Observations
Investigating
Officer’s
Comments
Surveyors
Records for
Lunesdale
Observations
1901
There is no indication by a landowner under this provision
of non-intention to dedicate a public right of way over the
claimed route.
The Surveyors Records for Lunesdale were checked at the
County Records Office.
In a report dated 25th March 1901 (page 87 of the book)
the Inspector states, 'I have made an inspection of
Grimeshaw Lane … this lane is practically in two portions
as follows from Halton Station to the main road a distance
of about 330 yards, and from the main road in a southerly
direction to the junction of Moor Lane and Ridge Lane a
distance of rather over a mile. This road does not appear to
have been repaired by anyone within the memory of man,
except that it has been made a common tipping place for
boiler clinker …. The road is narrow, undrained and almost
impassable for want of attention … so far as the repair of
this road is concerned, I am unable to find that it has at any
time been repaired by anyone except as above stated,
and to place this road in reasonable repair to the width
required by law ..would…cost at least £2000.'
Further reference to Grimeshaw Lane is made on page 91
of the Surveyors Record book but appears to deal with the
section from the A683 heading north to the railway at
Denny Beck.
In neither entry does the Surveyor of Highways state that
the claimed route is not repairable at public expense.
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
A History of
the County of
Lancaster,
It can be inferred from the fact that it was the subject of a
public survey that it was considered to be public in 1901,
no distinction was noted between the section now known
as Denny Beck Lane and acknowledged as publicly
maintainable highway. As the survey was concerned with
the condition and the maintenance costs it can further be
inferred that it was considered to be publicly maintainable.
Although the status is not mentioned the route is referred
to as a 'road'.
An online search of historical records found an extract from
'A history of the County of Lancaster, Volume 8' by William
Farrer and J. Brownbill (editors) published 1914. Pages 49-
Volume 8
50 of the book describing the former township of Bulk. It
reads, 'The principal road leads from Lancaster to Caton,
following the course of the Lune north and east; a minor
road, Ridge Lane and Grimeshaw Lane, takes a more
direct north-east course over the higher ground. In this lane
is a 'plague stone'. It continues to explain that the township
ceased to exist in 1900, part being taken into Lancaster
and the remainder being added to Quernmore.
Online
Search
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
Lancashire
County
Council,
Hampson
Green –
North of
Carnforth
Special Road,
Grimeshaw
Land Bridge
No. 5344
General
Arrangement
Investigating
Officer's
Comments
1957
It can be inferred that the route was, at the time,
considered to be a highway open to all types of traffic,
without a definition of what the term meant but it could be
suggested that the term 'minor road' was distinct from
'private road' and on balance refers to the route being
public.
A copy of the detailed drawings of the bridge to be
constructed over the M6 motorway – known as Grimeshaw
Lane Bridge and forming part of the claimed route between
points H-I was examined.
A site plan was included as part of the drawings which
showed the location of the bridge and 'Diversion of
Grimeshaw Lane'. The hand drawn plan shows the historic
route of Grimeshaw Lane and the diverted route – which
appears to correspond to the claimed route between Points
G, H, I
There is no inference that can be made from this that the
route was public rather than private.
There is no evidence that Grimeshaw Lane was diverted as a highway when the M6
was build.
The claimed route does not cross a biological heritage site or a site of special
scientific interest. It is not recorded as access land under the provisions of the
Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.
Summary
In summary, the claimed restricted byway between points A–G is clearly shown on
all the Ordnance Survey maps examined from 1848 to the current day and its
existence is also shown on early commercial maps published primarily to assist
travellers dating as far back as the late 1700s.
The Tithe Map for Bulk includes the whole of the claimed restricted byway A-G and
describes it as forming part of 'Ridge Lane' which was owned by the Surveyor of
Highways for the Township of Bulk.
Further evidence of its public status can be found in the Survey Records for
Lunesdale dated 1901 where reference is made to the condition of the lane and on
the 1910 Finance Act plans in which the whole of the route is excluded from the
numbered plots giving strong indication that it was considered to be a public highway
at that time.
The claimed public bridleway between points G-I was physically constructed when
the M6 was built in the late 1950s/early 1960s. It is shown on all Ordnance Survey
maps and aerial photographs examined following its construction linking to Public
Bridleway Nos. 36 and 37 Lancaster. It was constructed as a replacement for the
section of Grimeshaw Lane that was destroyed by the motorway construction.
There is no map or documentary evidence examined that suggests that either the
claimed restricted byway or claimed bridleway have ever been blocked or access
denied to the public.
Description of the new path for inclusion in the Definitive Statement if the
Order is to be made
The following should be added to the Definitive Statement for Quernmore, Lancaster
City:
Restricted Byway 20 from a junction with the A683 (Lancaster Road) at
SD 5027 6426 running in a generally south-westerly direction on an enclosed stone
surfaced track to terminate at SD 4975 6294 from where it continues as Public
Bridleway No. 21 Quernmore . Total distance is approximately 1470 metres. Width
as shown on the Definitive Map Modification Order Plan. There are no limitations on
the restricted byway.
Public Bridleway 21 as a continuation of Restricted Byway 20 Quernmore, adjacent
to the eastern boundary of the M6 motorway at SD 4975 6294 in a south-easterly
and then south-westerly direction crossing the M6 via Grimeshaw Bridge to
terminate at a junction with Public Bridleway Nos. 36 and 37 Lancaster at
SD 4974 6281. Total distance 180 metres. (All distances and compass directions are
approximate) Width as shown on the Definitive Map Modification Order Plan. There
are no limitations on the public bridleway.
County Secretary and Solicitor's Observations
Information from Supporters
14 User Evidence forms have been submitted in support of this claim. The forms
indicate knowledge and use of the route on horseback for up to 32 years, 31 + (3),
21-30 (3), 11-20 (5), 0-10 (3). 12 of the users indicated that they also used the route
on foot and 7 stated use on a bicycle.
The users all indicated that the route has been used for leisure and a number of
those that had walked it stated that they used the route to walk their dogs. The users
all believe that the route has followed the same line
None of the users report having been stopped or prevented from using the route and
have no recollection of signs or notice being on the route. Seven of the users
indicated that there had at one time been a gate on the route at point E and three of
those stated that there had also been a cattle grid, but they all agreed that these did
not prevent use of the route.
Information from Others
Consultations have been carried out with all of the adjacent landowners and no
written objections have been received. The tenant of Hudson's farm referred on
correspondence to the fact that on occasions when moving stock across the route it
can be blocked for small periods, but never exceeding fifteen minutes.
The lane shows as outside adjacent landownerships
Assessment of the Evidence
The Law - See Annex 'A'
In Support of the Claim
Map and documentary evidence
User evidence
Against Accepting the Claim
No specific evidence against
Conclusion
It is proposed that this route is already a highway for public use being an old
vehicular route along A-G which should now be recorded as a restricted byway as
any mechanically propelled vehicular rights will have been extinguished by S67
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act. At the southern end however, the
old highway has been crossed by the M6 and a new route created which it is
proposed has been used on horseback for sufficient length of time such that
bridleway rights exist along it.
There is no express creation of a highway and therefore Committee is requested to
consider the evidence and apply the tests under which a highway dedication may be
inferred at common law or deemed under S31 Highways Act 1980
Section A-G.
There is the user evidence but it is suggested that there is also significant
documentary evidence of this section being part of an old all purpose highway from
the nineteenth century if not before. It is suggested that the way the route is recorded
on the commercial maps , the Tithe Map and Finance Act documentation all sit
consistently with each other and are evidence of it already being, by 1818, a known
public highway route on balance for all vehicles. It is advised that an inference may
be drawn on balance of its dedication many decades ago.
The Summary of the Executive Director for Environment indicates that officers
applying their knowledge about these maps and documents are advising that this
route was recorded in the way it was because it was a public highway route and on
balance was for all traffic including wheeled vehicles.
Whilst it is suggested that the highway on section A-G was for all types of vehicle, it
isd advised that the provisions of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities
Act 2006 will apply and in particular S67 whereby existing public rights of way for
mechanically propelled vehicles were exitiguished unless certain exceptions applied.
It is advised that no such exceptions are known to apply to this route and those
rights will have been extinguished. This would leave the old all purpose highway now
only able to be recorded as a restricted byway.
It is suggested that the map and documentary evidence is strong and that bridleway
use more recently supports its higher status but it may be considered that this is use
many decades after this route first became a highway.
Section G-I
It is suggested that the old highway line continues across the M6 but the construction
of section G-I was not sufficient to be a diversion of public highway rights which, it is
suggested, already existed on the Lane. Instead this new section of route provided a
route which was used by the public on foot and on horseback and on pedal cycle
and this use has continued over sufficient time so that the committee may consider,
on balance, that bridleway rights can be inferred as dedicated at common law. The
owner of the sub soil has acquiesced in this use and the committee may consider
from all the circumstances that a bridleway has come into existence in law.
As Common Law inference of dedication from use when an owner is not known can
sometimes be a concern, Committee may also consider S31 Highways Act 1980.
The Committee may consider that this use as of right for twenty years, with the route
being called into question by the application, with no evidence of an owner's lack of
intention to dedicate, satisfies on balance the criteria of S31 such that dedication of a
bridleway can be deemed.
Taking all the information into account Committee may on blanace consider that
there are restricted byway rights subsisting on section A-G and bridleway rights on
G-I and that the recommendation be accepted.
Risk Management
Consideration has been given to the risk management implications associated with
this claim. The Committee is advised that the decision taken must be based solely
on the evidence contained within the report, and on the guidance contained both in
the report and within Annex A included in the Agenda Papers. Provided any decision
is taken strictly in accordance with the above then there are no significant risks
associated with the decision making process.
Alternative options to be considered - N/A
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985
List of Background Papers
Paper
Date
Contact/Directorate/Ext
All documents on Claim File
Ref: 804/503
Various
J Mort, County Secretary &
Solicitor’s Group, Ext:
33427
Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate
N/A