The Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee met to review and comment on a proposed revision to the Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO) Prioritisation Policy. The aim of the revision is to create a clearer, more consistent, and objective process for handling the substantial backlog of applications to modify the definitive map¹ by prioritising cases with the greatest potential public benefit and those that would reduce property blight. After discussion, the sub-committee resolved to note their comments on the proposed revisions, which will be taken forward to the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee and then to the Executive Councillor for a final decision.

Revision to the Definitive Map Modification Order Prioritisation Policy

The sub-committee reviewed and commented on the proposed revision to the Definitive Map Modification Order Prioritisation Policy. Andrew Fletcher, Public Rights of Way and Access Manager, explained that the current policy, which prioritises cases based on the date they were received, is no longer adequate due to a significant increase in applications. He noted that the service currently has approximately 583 cases, and it would take an estimated 30 years to clear the backlog at the current rate.

The proposed revised policy introduces a weighted scoring framework that considers factors such as public safety, impact on residential properties, and community conflict. The aim is to prioritise cases that offer the greatest potential public benefit and reduce property blight.

During the discussion, councillors raised several points:

• Government Intention to Remove Deadline: Councillors noted that the government had previously declared an intention to remove the statutory deadline for registering historic rights of way² on Boxing Day, and asked whether this change had been enacted. Officers confirmed that no legislation had yet been introduced to give effect to this change.
• Source of Applications: Councillors observed that many applications appeared to have been prompted by the impending deadline and asked whether a single individual or small group had submitted a significant proportion. Andrew Pickwell, Senior Definitive Map Officer, clarified that one person had submitted approximately 400 applications, representing about 69% of the caseload. He explained that many of these applications were the result of a desk-based review of archives, where any indication of a possible right of way led to an application, irrespective of current functional use. He emphasised that once an application was received, the council was duty-bound to investigate it, making the prioritisation policy essential.

• Input from Local Councillors and Parish Councils: Councillors suggested contacting local councillors and parish councils to provide feedback on which cases they considered priorities. The sub-committee noted that such engagement might distinguish between applications of limited practical value and those genuinely needed locally.

  Councillor J L King, Chair of the Committee, said: There may be some that are probably, you know, won't be needed if they're just dead ends or things like that. But there's a risk that we'll get a high positive from every parish saying our ones are top priority.

  Andrew Pickwell, Senior Definitive Map Officer, cautioned that if each parish identified its own top priorities, the council might receive high-priority designations for most items, leaving the council still needing to determine relative priorities. He noted that the proposed policy would provide a consistent framework for this process and included appeal provisions back to the sub-committee. He also confirmed that divisional lists could be provided to councillors to help them locate cases in their areas.

The sub-committee resolved to note their comments on the proposed revisions to the Definitive Map Modification Order Prioritisation Policy.