The Creation, Extinguishment and Diversion of Public Rights of Way as Part of the Dualling of the A421 Between Milton Keynes and Junction 13 of the M1 Motorway (Cranfield & Marston Moretaine, Aspley & Woburn)
To consider the need for public path orders to be made under the Highways Act 1980 to create, stop up and divert a number of public rights of way affected by the dualling of the A421 between Junction 13 of the M1 motorway and the Eagle Farm roundabout in Milton Keynes.
The Committee had before it a report regarding the need for path orders to be made under the Highways Act 1980 to create, stop up and divert a number of public rights of way affected by the dualling of the A421 between Junction 13 of the M1 motorway and the Eagle Farm roundabout in Milton Keynes.
There were no representations under the public participation scheme.
The Committee considered the proposals and in summary discussed the following:
· The proposed new cycleway stopped at point Z on Appendix 4 and continued as Aspley Guise Footpath No. 34. The Definitive Map Officer explained that a further continuation to the cycleway had been identified which would carry along eastwards around Junction 13 to eventually connect up at the Amazon site on Prologis Park, Marston Gate. However, this continuation route was purely aspirational and would require Council funding.
· A Member stressed the need to provide such a link for cyclists given the barrier which Junction 13 currently imposed and referred to the enhancements to the footpath provided as part of the recently approved Prologis Park planning application. The Definitive map Officer explained that the provision of a link had been raised with the Transport Strategy Team.
· Members concurred with the suggestion that an ‘informative’ be added regarding the provision of a link at Junction13. It was also stressed that those Members who cycled should be consulted on any proposal and that the adoption of a policy could be used to attract S106 monies.
· The Definitive Map Officer explained that there was no continuation of the proposed new cycleway to the west of Cranfield Road at point T on Appendix 2 but, again, it was hoped that this could be forthcoming in the future.
· Non-use of a footpath had not been sufficient to justify extinguishing it in the past. The Definitive Map Officer stated that should someone object to the proposed stopping up of a path because they believed it would be used in the future then the Council would have to have regard to that as would the Secretary of State. Planning inspectors appointed by the Secretary of State had certainly decided in the past that a footpath could be used in the future and should therefore be retained.
· Should the proposal to stop up certain routes be rejected by an inspector then a budget was available to retrofit gaps in barriers to allow those persons who wished to do so to cross the A421.
· The A421 was a barrier and the existing crossings were not practical and very dangerous. The footpaths which approached the road were unused for this reason. Installing a new footbridge at point C was therefore of benefit.
· The provision of a fence on the road side of the proposed new footpath/cycleway running to the south of the A421 to provide a protective barrier. The Definitive Map Officer explained that the path was set back approximately 16 meters from the edge of the road. He understood there would be a continuous highway safety barrier but did not know if there would be an additional fence to prevent people from straying off the path and on to the highway verge before reaching the dual carriageway. A ward Member asked for the inclusion of such safety fencing in some form be included as an ‘informative’.
· A comment on the value of stopping up the footpath between points J to K on Appendix 4 as, although the path lead nowhere, it could be used for dog walking.
· A Member raised the possibility of an underpass under the A421 at points J-K on Appendix 4 rather than breaks in the barriers to allow pedestrians to cross. The Definitive Map Officer stated that providing a bridge would probably have been cheaper but, due to cost, it had been proposed to stop up J-K.
· There was no legal obligation on the Council to provide a bridge or underpass to enable a crossing where a footpath met a highway.
· The nature of the Highways England objection was discussed.
On being put to the vote Members voted unanimously for approval.
that the making of a public path order under Section 26 of the Highways Act 1980 to create a public footpath and cycleway (Aspley Guise Footpath No. 35) between the Cranfield Road overbridge (point T on the plan attached at Appendix 1) along the edge of the extended highway land purchased for the dualling works via points B-U-V-W-X to its end at point Y close to Junction 13 of the M1 motorway be approved.
that the making of a public path order under Section 118 of the Highways Act 1980 to stop up parts of Aspley Guise Footpaths Nos. 1 and 2 between points A-B and C-G on the plan attached at Appendices 2 and 3 respectively and Hulcote and Salford Footpath No. 10 and Aspley Guise Footpath No. 32 (between points J-K and K-L respectively) as shown on the plan attached at Appendix 4 be approved.
that the making of a public path order under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980 to divert part of Aspley Guise Footpath No. 2 from the line H-I to the line X-I and to divert part of Aspley Guise Bridleway No. 25 from the line C-D-E-F to the line C-V-F via a new bridleway bridge as shown on the plan attached at Appendix 3 be approved.
4. that the Committee’s strong support for the provision of a cycling link at Junction 13 and the installation of safety fencing to form a protective barrier for the proposed new footpath/cycleway running to the south of the A421 be made known to the relevant parties.
- 08 The Creation, Extinguishment and Diversion of PROW - Dualling of A421, item 165. PDF 1 MB
- 08 Appendix 1 - A421 Plan v3, item 165. PDF 882 KB
- 08 Appendix 2 - ASG FP1, item 165. PDF 2 MB
- 08 Appendix 3 - ASG BW25 + FP2, item 165. PDF 2 MB
- 08 Appendix 4 - H&S10 + ASG 32, item 165. PDF 1 MB
- 08 Appendix 5 - Local RoW Network, item 165. PDF 2 MB
- 08 Appendix 6 - Legal and Policy Considerations v3, item 165. PDF 98 KB
- Appendix 1 - A421 Plan v3, item 165. PDF 882 KB
- Appendix 2 - ASG FP1, item 165. PDF 2 MB
- Appendix 3 - ASG BW25 + FP2, item 165. PDF 2 MB
- Appendix 4 - H&S10 + ASG 32, item 165. PDF 1 MB