The Highways Committee is scheduled to convene to discuss a range of topics, with a primary focus on an application to modify the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way concerning an alleged public footpath in West Rainton.

Here's what the report pack says will be up for discussion:

Alleged Public Footpath, West Rainton

The committee will consider a report regarding an application to modify the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) to include a public footpath in the parish of West Rainton and Leamside. The path is alleged to run from Public Right of Way (PRoW) 2, The Dene, north through woodland, to PRoW 21, The Red Track.

The report pack includes the following documents:

• Document A - the application.
• Document B - a map of the route location.
• Document C - site photographs.
• Document D - user evidence forms and witness statements.
• Document E - consultation letters and emails.

The report pack says that in April 2023, Durham County Council received an application to add a public footpath connecting FP 2 (The Dene) to FP 21 (The Red Track). The submitted evidence includes user evidence forms, annotated maps, and witness statements. A total of 33 individuals provided user evidence, with 21 users meeting the requirement of 20 or more years of use. Officers selected 11 of these 21 users to provide witness statements. The report pack says that the collected information suggests that the path has been used by the wider community for leisure and recreation purposes for at least 20 years without interruption or obstruction.

Formal consultations were conducted with landowners/occupiers, local councillors, the parish council, and user groups/organisations. The report pack says that West Rainton and Leamside Parish Council (WRLPC) supports the application. Objections were received from the landowner and their legal representative, accompanied by evidence extracts. The landowner's objections are based on the belief that the path is permissive, and that the public's use has been interrupted.

A second consultation was conducted, allowing landowners to comment on secondary witness statements from users. Further objections were received from the landowner's legal representative.

The report pack says that officers are of the view that the legal tests have been met, and that the objector's evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the path has been used other than as of right.

The report recommends that a Definitive Map Modification Order be made to add the public footpath to the Definitive Map and Statement, and to confirm the order as unopposed, or refer the order to the Secretary of State for determination if objections are received.

Background

The report pack says that the alleged public footpath passes over land that was subject to a planning application for fishing ponds in November 2021. The planning application showed the alleged footpath terminating short of FP 21 (The Red Track), which raised concerns among local residents. A member of the Parish Council contacted Durham County Council's Access & Rights of Way Team to determine if the path was an existing Public Right of Way. After being informed that the route did not appear on the Definitive Map, the applicant requested information on how to have a footpath added to the Definitive Map, and a formal application was eventually submitted by West Rainton and Leamside Parish Council in April 2023.

The report pack says that the alleged path leaves FP 2 near The Dene, proceeds over a stile heading north through woodland to a farm access track. It crosses the access track and continues north through more woodland, crossing a small watercourse/stream before emerging on The Red Track and FP 21 via another stile. The surface of the alleged path is predominantly earth and grass.

The route passes over privately owned land that was once owned by the Coal Authority and subject to open cast operations. In January 1994, the Coal Authority submitted a Section 31(6) deposit¹, which expired in January 2000. This deposit established a permissive path which joins the route subject of the application, but it is a different path to the one under consideration.

Legal Framework

The report pack says that under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the County Council has a duty to keep the Definitive Map and Statement under review and is required to make a Modification Order where evidence shows that a right of way subsists or is reasonably alleged to subsist.

The Highways Act 1980, Section 31 states that a way may be 'deemed to have been dedicated as a highway' where 'it has been actually enjoyed by the public as of right and without interruption for a full period of twenty years', unless there is evidence of contrary intention. As of right means without force, without secrecy and without permission.

The report pack also mentions the Human Rights Act, stating that any interference with property rights is in accordance with domestic law and is necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Assessment of the Evidence

The report pack says that concerns regarding the alleged public footpath were raised in November 2021, after a planning application for fishing ponds had been submitted which showed the path terminating short of FP 21 (The Red Track). The formal submission of a user evidence DMMO application in April 2023 called the way into question. The relevant twenty-year period of use is considered to be April 2003 to April 2023.

The evidence submitted consists of user evidence forms and witness statements. A total of 33 individuals submitted user evidence. Out of the 33 users that submitted evidence 21 have the required 20 or more years use with a combined average use of 108 times, minimum of 6 and a maximum of 260 per year. The user evidence is consistent as to continuous use of the way over the relevant 20 year period.

The landowner has argued that this period has not been continuous due to various closures, initially for animal husbandry between 2008 and 2019 and thereafter for woodland management works to be undertaken culminating in the final closure following storm Arwen in November 2021. However, with the exception of 3 of the users who say that they recall a notice/sign that maybe said footpath closed, but are not certain, in relation to tree felling operations which took place during 2020/2021, all of users state that the way was not closed or obstructed by the landowners during the relevant period.

The report pack says that the central plank of the landowner's case is that use by the public was with permission of the landowner and therefore by right instead of as of right. This in turn hinges on the permissive footpath waymarker disc style signage which is said to have been erected by the previous landowner (the Coal Authority) some time prior to 2006 and therefore in place during the relevant 20 year period.

The landowner also suggests that the applicant and the West Rainton Green Group regard the way as permissive.

The land over which the alleged public footpath is located, was owned/leased by the Coal Authority until 2006 and a Section 31(6) deposit, dated January 1994, was made with the council. However, at the time of this deposit, the statutory period which applied was six years, and it therefore expired in January 2000. No further Section 31(6) deposits have been received in relation to the land in question.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

The minutes from the Highways Committee meeting held on 10 November 2025 are included in the report pack.

Items discussed at the meeting included:

• Approval to progress the introduction of a 20mph Speed Zone with associated Traffic Calming features in the form of Speed Cushions, within the Musgrave Gardens estate, Gilesgate.
• Objections received in response to a consultation on an amendment to the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) for Consett.

Councillor Eric Mavin declared a local interest in the Belmont ward and agreed to leave the Council Chamber during the vote on the item relating to the Musgrave Gardens estate.

Councillor S Bowron was present as substitute for Councillor J Stephenson.

Councillor A Schulman was in the chair.