Agenda item

Councillor Janet Duncan attended as a Ward Councillor in support of the petitioners. 

Concerns, comments and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

• Mr Reeves, the lead petitioner, spoke on behalf of the petitioners.
• The petitioner asked if the idea was out for consultation. That from the letter the petitioner had received he could not see that any homework had been done by the Council, and that resident views had not been obtained.
• Mr Reeves asked if Council officers had considered the residents problems with the path being opened up.
• He asked if the report that requested the ‘stop up’ had been misplaced and asked if the officers had looked into police reports.
• The petitioners felt that they were in no different situation than the Cabinet Member Petition Hearing in October 2011 as the history of the path and reports had not been located.
• That if the path was re-opened then anti-social behaviour would re-commence.
• Residents felt very strongly about this and around 8 years ago there was an attempted child abduction on this path. They had the backing of the police at the time to close this path.
• It was in the public interest to close up the path.

A Ward Councillor spoke and raised the following points:

• The Ward Councillor stated that every single resident, apart from one, on Airdrie Close had signed the petition to request the Council ‘stop up’ the path. The one that did not sign it supported the petition but for various reasons did not sign it.
• Residents had accepted that the ‘stop up’ could only be carried out by a magistrate and asked that the Council supported this.
• As responsible people they should prevent any potential anti-social behaviour and crime, that this path had a history of this.
• That if the footpath was re-opened, could the Cabinet Member consider closing it at 6pm or earlier. This was similar to other paths in the Borough.
• In the past, and currently, there were problems with anti-social behaviour, drug taking and prostitution in the area. It was noted that Police patrols had increased in the area as a result.
• That during the winter the path would be extremely unsafe, particularly in the evenings.
• The Ward Councillor stressed that there was not a demand to open the path up. That money would be spent on something that people did not want.
• The Ward Councillor asked for re-consideration and for the Council to support the residents, and ask that the Council request from the magistrates that this path be ‘stopped up’.

Councillor Keith Burrows listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised:

• Officers in a previous meeting were asked to investigate the history of the path and had found no formal request to ‘stop up’ this path.
• The Cabinet Member stressed the fact that no record had been found to ‘stop up’ the path and therefore as a public highway it could be opened up for use.
• He confirmed that the meeting in October 2011 was adjourned to enable officer to investigate the history of the path as he did not want to make a decision on the path without all the relevant information.
• He asked if the Safer Neighbourhood Teams were area of the issues the Ward Councillor had raised.
• The Cabinet Member stated that the decision to open the path could not be based on demand but the fact that it was highways land.

Officers advised that:

• It was confirmed that this was in consultation.
• Officers stated that the Council did not have the power to ‘stop up’ and this power was with magistrates under the Highways Act.
• The path was used in the past and there was a right for it to be used as it was public highway.
• The Council could recommend to magistrates to ‘stop up’ the path. To do this the Council needed to ensure that the criteria for this recommendation was met.
• Officers did not have any evidence to assure that the criteria could be met in this instance, and did not have any evidence of anti-social behaviour in the area. 
• This path came to officer’s attention as someone had enquired about purchasing the land; the Council had not had an approach to open the path. Council officers then realised that as public highway this path should be opened up.

A letter dated 2 November 1998 from LB Hillingdon was distributed to the Cabinet Member. The Cabinet Member confirmed that the letter stated that the Environment Committee on 15^th December 1998 looked into the closure of footpaths on community safety grounds. The Cabinet Member, therefore, decided to defer the petition in order for this to be brought back to the next petition hearing on 21 March 2012. It was noted that the Committee’s decision on the 15 December 1998 was relevant to this petition. 

Resolved - That the Cabinet Member:

1. Met and discussed with petitioners their request to ‘stop up’ the adopted public footpath.

2. Deferred a decision on this petition and would be re-heard at the Cabinet Member Petition Hearing on 15^th March 2012.

Reasons for recommendation

The recommendation met the Council’s legal obligation as the Highway Authority to protect the rights of the public to use the adopted public highway.

Alternative Options Considered

There were no alternatives to consider as there was not a more commodious alternative route and to stop up the adopted public highway would prevent the public’s use and enjoyment of the highway.