mobile phone link image
jobs page link image
follow us on facebook follow us on twitter
00  Month

Footpath to be diverted after development

Created on 12/06/2019 @ 10:52
SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

By Elgan Hearn, Local Democracy Reporter

Plans to divert a length of footpath in Churchstoke will be discussed by councillors on Thursday because it lies on land which will be built on.

Members of the Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee will hear that footpath 65 needs to be moved.

The report states: “The applicant for the proposed diversion of the footpath is Miss G Delves who bought the house known as “The Firs” and associated land from the council.

“The surrounding farmland remains part of the Churchstoke Firs Council Farm Estate.”

On October 5, 2017, planning permission was given to build three detached properties, with vehicle access and associated works at The Firs. The pathway diversion was part of the plans at the time.

The new path is proposed to be 114 metres which would replace 109metres of path 65. A pre-order consultation was held over a year ago in May 2018.

The report adds: “Churchstoke Community Council has no objection provided the landowner of the neighbouring property over which the new route is planned, is content with the proposal.

“The tenant of PCC Farms Estate initially objected to the proposed diversion of footpath 65, as he felt that it would result in users of the footpath walking through the area in which he feeds sheep.”

The report continues to state that these problems have now been solved and the objection withdrawn.

The report also says that the Ramblers Association had no comments and that Hugo Van-Rees of PCC Farms Estate supports the diversion.

The report says: “The diversion is considered to be primarily in the interest of the applicant, as the diversion is needed to allow her to implement the planning permission that has been granted.

“Given that and the proposal meets the legal criteria for making a diversion order, it is proposed that it be made.

“If it is opposed then unless significant new information comes to light, it is proposed that the Order should be submitted to the planning inspectorate for determination.”

icnn logo