Transcript

Just wait a second. No, so I pressed the wrong button. Good morning Councillors, good morning officers, good morning members of the public and welcome and good morning to anybody that's watching us on YouTube channel, I'm sure we should put it branded properly but still. Firstly I will go through the normal procedures, particularly as we have members of the public. There is no fire alarm practice as far as I'm aware or as anybody bothers to tell me but, okay, in the event of the alarm ringing we exit out of the chamber, turn left and go straight out of the fire, exit in front of you, then make your way to the assembly point at the top level of the car park. These meetings have been webcast and obviously members, please turn off your microphones when not speaking, I will let you know if you're transgressing. Apologies, absence, I don't think we've got any, have we? No, there's none. The minutes of the last meeting, are you happy that I signed those? Great, thank you. Patitions, done received, public question time, done received, members question timed, and received, rattling through the agenda here, decorations of interest, a single item. Victor. Thank you, Mr Chairman, I'd just like to declare hold shares in Taylor Wimpy but it's a very small holding and there's no controlling interest, thank you. Thank you very much. And then we come to the main item which is the application for village green status, land that Stokes feels long-ditten. We are today joined by, I was going to say two strangers, but welcome to both of you. We have Dan Williams, the senior countryside access officer, bracket legal definition bracket, great title. Then we introduce the report and do the shepherd is the senior solicitor, bracket, property, bracket. I think that's the end of the titles, Dan, do you want to lead on, thank you. Thank you very much Chairman, I have a short synopsis of the case, if I may, it may be useful to members of the public and to members of the committee, if I go through this and present it, present the report to them, thank you. The County Council is the Commons Registration Authority under the Commons Registration Act of 1965 and the Commons Act of 2006. We administer the registers of common land and of town and village greens as Surrey under section 15 of the 2006 Commons Act. The County Council can register new land as town or village green upon an application. The committee is here asked to consider whether to register the land which is the subject of these applications as a village green. Members will have seen the report and read through it and the substantial annexes which before them in which the matters are discussed in detail, shall attempt to summarise the key point in the report. Specific legal tests that you should be aware of are listed at 6.4 of the state report. The applications of village green status were made by Mr Markersburg Williams, which was the first applicant, reference 1880, on the 14th of August 2017, this was subsequently amended to exclude the southern part of the site owned by Taylor Whimpey, UK Limited, on the 20th of November 2019. The second application from Mrs Amanda Morgan Jones was received to date 17 December 2018. Both of these relate to land north of the A309, west of Woodstock Lane north and incorporate Stokesfield Nature Reserve. Application 1882 extends also to one tree hill to the south and the land is collectively known as Stokesfield. Plans for these areas on the two applications are at Annex A and B of the report and you may also wish to see Annex H where the various bits of land will be referred to as summarised. You'll see on the slide currently upon the screens the two application areas, the 1880 and 1882. There are two affected landowners, the first of these is Eldridgeboro Council and they own the Nature Reserve land and land to the west of the cemetery. Taylor Whimpey and they own land known as the northern quadrant, one tree hill and the cultivated rose garden and you'll see these various areas of land outlined on slide three as I mentioned before. To succeed in registration an applicant must prove on the balance of probabilities the significant number of inhabitants of any locality or neighbourhood within a locality have indulged as of right in lawful sports and past times on the land prepared at least 20 years. Continue up until the date of the application. These are the criteria on which the application must be assessed, it is not for the common registration authority to concern itself with the merits of any other competing uses for the application land whilst determining the application. I shall go ahead now to highlight and re-emphasise a few essential key points. Application 1880, as originally made, was later amended to exclude the southern part of the land owned by Taylor Whimpey from the original application land due to a trigger event which existed on the land, i.e. it had been identified for potential development in a draft development plan, where this is the case registration is prohibited. A subsequent terminating event later occurred on the said land which was the expiration of two years from publication of that draft development plan. A second application was therefore made 1882 to again take the Taylor Whimpey land into account in an application. I should also note Elmer's Borough Council, who were in part of the land, voluntarily registered the majority of their land, i.e. the nature reserve area, which is included in both applications, and this does not include the cemetery land which all parties agreed should be excluded from the registration, and these sections of the land can once again be seen. On the plans in the annexes for it, could we jump forward to slide 3 with that if possible? Okay, that might be used at half at this point, as we can see all the various sections of the land that are being referred to. Can we just jump back to slide 2 as well, thank you. I mentioned then the land voluntarily registered by Elmer's Bridge, and that is the extent of voluntary registration land. Go back to 3 again, that would be great. Parties have also agreed that Wontree Hill met the statutory criteria for registration, but that the Rose Garden area did not. Only the tailor when Peland referred to as the Northern Quadrant remained in dispute. So the council and its common registration authority must nevertheless be satisfied with this position between the parties. Both applications were made on the basis that a significant number of the inhabitants of any locality or neighbourhood within a locality have indulged as of right in lawful sports and past times on the land for a period of at least 20 years. These applications were supported by substantial amounts of witness statements who claim use through the 20-year period up to the date of the applications. So in terms of the process that was followed as part of this investigation, the public notice relating to the application was on site and in the press, and consultations undertaken in 2021. This attracted three objections and 46 other expressions of support. Following legal advice on the merits of the application, a non-stratchery inquiry was convened with an independent inspector, Stephen Morgan. This took place over six days in April and July last year. At the inquiry, both applicants were represented and only Taylor Whimpy appeared as an objecter. Given the common ground that I've already mentioned, only two key points remained contested. I weathered the qualifying use of the Northern Quadrant outlined in pink purple there. In the slither of land, yes, given the common ground formation, only two key points remained. Whether the qualifying use of the Northern Quadrant and the slither of land took place throughout the qualifying period in 1998 to 2018 and whether the requirements to demonstrate a locality or neighbourhood can be satisfied. So at the inquiry last year, oral evidence was heard on behalf of the applicant from 25 local residents and an expert witness with expertise in interpreting aerial photographs and two of the witnesses on behalf of the objecter. The objecter identified the key issue as whether the whole of the Northern Quadrant had been used for lawful sports and pastimes. They submitted that in the early part of the qualifying period, use was in fact limited to two main tracks which we use like rights of way through the area. However, the inspector considered that the evidence from local residents painted a clear, overall picture of the use of the Northern Quadrant at the contested time and that was not just to people crossing the main tracks at wondering off and taking part in lawful sports and pastimes across the area. The inspector went on to conclude on the basis of the evidence that use of the Northern Quadrant alone on the ballot to probability is clearly satisfied the requirements in section 15 of the Commons Act 2006. He commented that this was the case even though assessing it in isolation is in his view artificial and that the conclusion becomes even more compelling when one tree hill and the Northern Quadrant are considered together as one. The issue of locality and neighbourhood was not in dispute between parties but for an application to meet the statutory requirements an applicant must identify either a locality or both a neighbourhood within a locality and a locality from which the inhabitants are used in the land for qualifying purposes. A locality must be defined by reference to an administrative district division of some kind which is known to law, for example parishes, electoral wards, boroughs, etc. At the inquiry the applicants put the case primarily on the primarily on the basis of two neighbourhoods of Long Ditten and Hinchley Wood, jump on to slide 4. Those are the two areas. In the inspector's view both Long Ditten and Hinchley Wood satisfy the statutory criteria for neighbourhood, being distinctive areas with important community facilities. The evidence in his opinion showed that a significant number of inhabitants of both neighbourhoods had used the areas of one tree hill and the Northern Quadrant for lawful sports and past times throughout the qualifying period. With regard to locality the inspector considered that the appropriate locality is the entire administrative district of the Borough Council within which both neighbourhoods sit. Accordingly then the inspector went on to recommend to you the Commons Illustration Authority is that Application 1882 is amended to exclude the land owned by Elmbridge Borough Council and also to exclude the cultivated Rose area garden. Could we go back to slide 3 again, this might be helpful. And so the application is to cover only one, or the application 1882 would only cover one tree hill and the Northern Quadrant as shown on the plans referred to in my report. So you'll see those in the annexes 1D16A, 1D16C and 1D16B, which are all at Annex F. But that would also include the sliver of land. So on that basis it's recommended that the land in an amended version of Application 1882 is then registered as a tenant for the screen. The inspector recommended to the Commons Illustration Authority that Application 1880 should be treated as effectively withdrawn. My recommendation to members is in accordance with this inspector's conclusion. And Chair, would you like me to read the recommendations out or should we deal with them individually? Yes, thank you. So the recommendation comes in three parts, part one, that the landing application 1882 is amended, set out in paragraph 7.10, my report. And two, that the landing amended application 1882 is registered as a town on Village Green in accordance with Section 152 of the Commons Act. And part three of my recommendation is that Application 1880 should be treated as withdrawn. I should say if members do not agree with any or all of the findings, opportunity may be given to the parties to seek to address the issues as outlined in paragraph 8.2 to 3 of my reports. Alternatively, of course, members may reach an alternative finding based on the facts presented. How they reach such a finding should be clearly outlined in reasons and ministered. Thank you very much. Thank you very comprehensive. Thank you. Quite a complex item and very helpful. I'm sure you've covered this, but it's just a small point. The Slither of Land, which separates, I'll call them the two parcels, don't tell me because more than two parcels, I know, full egress is allowed over that to connect from passage from one, the northern passage to the bottom, passage when I get that right. Yes, physically an individual passing through wouldn't notice any distinguishment, but as an unregistered Slither of Land, between the Elbridge Land and the Taylor-Wimpy Land. Okay, thanks. Just on the plan, it looks one way and it's noticeable. Thank you very much. Members, now it's over to you, Ernest. Thank you, Mr Chairman. First of all, I'd just like to say it's not really a matter of interest, but it possibly could be interpreted by some. My first house was within a few yards of this site in between 1962 and 1965, when we lived in Longdon. I note that this whole situation has been running since about 2017, if not before, and therefore it has a very strong history in terms of the application and how it's been dealt with. It's also unusually, for us anyway, been subject to a public inquiry. I think we are aware, and have been aware on similar things in the past, that decisions on this are actually a matter of legal fact, and the committee doesn't really have a great deal of discretion. I also note that the residents are very much in favour, and obviously the Borough Council, on which I used to serve. So, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm sure most other members probably, I'm quite satisfied with the report that's been made, with the decisions that are being recommended, and I can only support what's on the order paper. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ernest. Appreciated. Members? John. Next. Yes, thank you, Chairman. The only question I wanted to ask, and this may not be relevant, is the upkeep of this if it was permitted. Obviously, as a town councillor, we upkeep our local town green. Has there been any sort of liaison with the two boroughs, who is going to look after an application has gone through, or indeed if some of the sports provisions, for example, may want to build something on it, is there a responsible agent already committed? Well, from the point of view of the county councillor's commerce registration authority, that is merely about recording the rights. It doesn't place any kind of a duty upon us, the maintenance, or indeed even a duty of enforcement, I understand, Judith may be able to add something to that, but we will have certain powers, but there is no duty of maintenance placed upon us. So anything you'd like to add to that? Yeah, just to add to that, the responsibility of maintenance would remain with the landowner. Registration is village green, doesn't alter that. So the landowner being... It's at Elmbridge Borough Council of the Northern section, then, until Wimpy up the southern section. The current just come back on that and ask, are they aware of that? I mean, I'm hoping they would do, obviously, but they're aware that they may have some responsibility because afterwards. Sorry, well, yes, the position as landowners wouldn't change. I think the landowners would be aware of the position on that, but it wouldn't be our responsibility to advise them of that. As Dan said, our responsibility is just to consider this application for registration as a commons registration authority. And to just pick up your point, John, I assume then the other part of the question was about applications to build on it. Again, that's not with... We are just registering. We are not the planning authority, per se, in relation to any application on that land. Yes? Yes, that's correct. An application... If it was registered as a village green, an application would need to be made under the Commons Act, and that would go to the Planning Inspector for determination. So it has an extra layer of protection once it's a village green from building on it. I think I was just looking at repercussions that would happen after we accepted it, if we accepted it, just to make sure that I was clear where we were going. Understood. Katherine. Thank you, Chair. I agree with Ernest. I think it's a very complex subject, Daniel. I think you've done an excellent job of explaining the different paths that the different bits have gone through, and I think we're all probably actually quite glad it went to an inspection because I think it's done a lot of the complex review for us, which has made the situation much easier. I have one question, which is again not necessarily related to being registered as a village green, but obviously the slither of land is unregistered land. What does this decision do to the status of that land? Does it still leave it as unregistered so Elne Bridge could claim that land if they chose to do so? Yes, the registration as the town of village green doesn't have any impact upon land ownership, so if somebody wished to go in and register for that land, they would presumably have to present relevant evidence to land registry, and that probably remained the same, but it wouldn't have any impact upon its status as town of village green, should it be registered as such. Thank you. I just wanted to confirm. Thank you. Yes, very good point, and I agree, totally agree with you on the plan I did ask Dan, put it up for. If only for my benefit, but I can give everybody else's as well, so I totally agree. Anybody else got any views? Thank you for that members. Now, and usually we will need to go through each item on the item points one, two, and three, and vote on those individually, so the first one is item one that the land in application 81882 is amended as set out in paragraph 710 of the report. Members, are you in agreement of that? Thank you. The land in amended application 1882 is registered as a TVJ, as against the TVJ, in accordance with section 15, two of the Commons Act 2006. Members, are you in agreement with that? Finally, that application 1880 should be treated as withdrawn. Members, are you in agreement with that? Again thank you. That is unanimous on all occasions. Members, thank you. That is the end of that report. When I first looked at that, I wondered, why is the train from France coming here, and I couldn't understand, but hey, that's just me. That's the end of today's meeting, and thank you very much indeed for both of you. It's very helpful and very interesting. Thank you, members of the public. Thank you for coming. I hope that you found that helpful and informative. I appreciate you coming, and I take note of the pointer on the signage for the visitors' parking. I will raise that. Anybody on YouTube? Thank you very much for joining, and that's it, and thank you very much, and goodbye. [BLANK_AUDIO]