Here is a summary of the items scheduled for discussion at the Highways Committee meeting on 10 July 2025. The main item for discussion was a report regarding an application to modify the definitive map and statement for three public footpaths in Esh. The committee was also scheduled to review the minutes from a previous meeting.

Esh Definitive Map Modification Application

The Highways Committee were scheduled to consider a report regarding an application to modify the Definitive Map and Statement concerning Public Footpaths 41, 42 and 47 in Esh¹. The application, which was initially submitted in 2017 by Ms Harbron of the British Horse Society (BHS) and later taken up by Sylvia Briggs, requests that Footpath 41 be upgraded to a public bridleway, and Footpaths 42 and 47 be upgraded to a restricted byway.

Footpath 41 runs from Broadgate Lane west to Hagg House, where it meets Bridleway 33 and the northern end of Footpath 42. Footpaths 42 and 47 run south from Hagg House, crossing the B6302 (Cockhouse Lane) towards Flass.

The applicant's argument is based on historical documentary evidence, primarily a 1763 Inclosure Act and accompanying Award, which describe two historic routes. The applicant contends that the current status of these footpaths is incorrect and that they should be recorded as a restricted byway, as these rights were established through an Act of Parliament over 250 years ago.

The report pack included a summary of objections to the application, which were received from landowners at Esh Hall and tenants of the industrial units and farmhouse at Hagg House. The objectors raised concerns that the upgrade would potentially encourage criminality due to unlocked gates, allowing users to access the routes via motor vehicles, and that it would affect the security of their properties and businesses.

The report addresses these concerns, stating that objections based on potential or past criminal activity cannot be considered a reason for refusing the application. It notes that past incidents of crime had taken place while the routes were designated as footpaths, and that upgrading the status would not make it any easier for motor vehicles to use the routes. The report also suggests that suitable gates could be installed to prevent unauthorised use.

The report also addresses the landowners' claim that the application evidence does not meet the criteria for making a Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO). The report argues that the evidence does support the application, as it shows that the routes are shown as having the wrong status.

The report also refers to the physical characteristics of the routes, such as the presence of mature hedgerows and a hard surface at the start of Footpath 41. The landowner cited previous open cast mining and stated that they laid the hedgerows themselves. The report clarifies that the physical characteristics of the routes are of little evidential value and that the applicant's comments are merely observations.

The report also discusses the widths of the paths, which were set out in the Inclosure Award as thirty-three feet, commodious enough to drive cattle, and ride a horse or drive a carriage or cart and pass safely.

The report also addresses the objector's argument that the council has a responsibility not to jeopardise the interests of residents or businesses and to assist in the prevention of crime. The report states that the police are the authority with primary responsibility for detection and prevention of crime, and that correcting the status of the application routes has no bearing on criminal activity.

The report includes a review of documentary evidence in support of the application, including:

• The 1763 Inclosure Plan and Award
• A Plan of Edward Smythe's Allotment
• Greenwoods Maps from 1820 and 1850
• The 1839 Plan
• A Flass Hall Estate Plan From 1846
• Ordnance Survey Book of Reference
• First Edition Ordnance Survey 1856
• Plan of the Western Coal District of Durham and Northumberland 1861 by John Thomas William Bell
• Second Edition Ordnance Survey: 1897
• Finance Act Plan 1910
• First Definitive Area Survey Prior to 1952 Definitive Map, Ordnance Survey 1:10,560
• Coal Authority Restoration Plan

The report concludes that Footpaths 41, 42, and 47 are historic routes created through The Parliamentary Inclosure Act in 1763, with rights commensurate with Bridleway (No.41) and Restricted Byway (No.42 and 47). It states that there is no evidence that these rights were ever extinguished or diverted and so still exist.

The recommendation was that the Committee agrees to make a Definitive Map Modification Order the route currently designated as Footpath 41 and as Restricted Byways, the routes currently recorded as Footpaths 42 and 47 under the provisions of section 53(3)(c)(ii) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981².

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

The committee was scheduled to review the minutes of the meeting held on 15 April 2025.

The minutes include a discussion regarding a proposed one-way system, no entry signs and traffic calming measures on Ash Crescent, Seaham. The Strategic Traffic Manager, Dave Lewin, provided a presentation detailing the proposals, which aimed to address issues of reduced carriageway width due to on-street parking.

Following public consultations, an objection had been received from a resident, who suggested alternative measures and questioned the necessity and cost of the one-way system and speed cushions.

Councillor Sterling noted that traffic could flow more freely if parking was limited to one side of the road. The Strategic Traffic Manager responded that the proposed scheme had been carefully considered and the introduction of double yellow lines would displace vehicle parking for residents to other areas. Parking bays would be marked on the road to discourage vehicles from parking on the footpath.

The committee resolved to set aside the objection and endorse the proposal, in principle.