False 'village green' claims made on car parks and beach huts

19 December 2011

Campaigners exploiting planning rules by claiming beach huts and car parks are village greens to halt developments are costing taxpayers millions of pounds, council leaders warned today.

Many councils say these vexatious claims are not only hitting taxpayers in the pocket, but that they also prevent new affordable housing and stop job creation.

At present, campaigners can argue any piece of land is the village green if they claim that it has been used for sport or recreation for over 20 years. They then approach planning authorities with their claims, and these can even be made on pieces of land which already have planning permission.

Whilst councils are keen to protect genuine village greens and pieces of community land in local areas, a high proportion of the applications are simply used as delaying tactics to prevent new affordable housing or much needed regeneration.

Recent cases include:

* A site proposed for “village green” status in St Austell, Cornwall, included beach huts and a car park. In their report, the inspectors in Cornwall said that neither the beach huts nor the car park fitted the criteria for a village green. The inspectors concluded that the application failed and therefore should be rejected by the planning authorities.

* In Beadnell in Northumberland, a residents group there had placed a “village green” application on a brownfield site which had been used for storing fishing nets. A public inquiry finished on 28th November and the costs for lawyers will have to be picked up by local taxpayers. A decision is expected in January.

* Poole Council has received two “village green” applications in the past year – one which was rejected with the other still ongoing. So far the council has spent £75,000 of taxpayer's money on legal and staffing costs – with the potential for a further £30,000 should the remaining application go to Judicial Review.

Although many claims are later refused, the process costs councils large sums in legal fees whilst also stopping regeneration in areas which badly need it. Unlike councils however, the cost to those making the “village green” application is minimal.

There are legitimate ways in which people can have their say on development through the planning system and this is the approach that they should look to take. The Government is reforming the planning system which should increase local decision making on development further by allowing them to develop their own 'local plans'.

In response to a Government consultation on village greens, the Local Government Association is calling on the Government to give councils more powers to tackle “malicious, vexatious and incomplete proposals at an early stage in the process”. This means allowing councils to quickly identify frivolous claims, with the ability to claim back costs from these applications.

The LGA would also like an end to the situation where a village green application can even delay developments which have planning permission and have begun building work. The Government has proposed closing this loophole, which has the support of the LGA.

Cllr David Parsons, Chairman of the LGA Environment and Housing Board commented:

“Councils are keen to protect genuine village greens and community land in their neighbourhoods. However, the idea that a beach hut or car park constitutes a village green is clearly ridiculous.

“The right balance needs to be reached between looking after genuine village greens and the provision of affordable housing, services and jobs which local areas badly need. Councils are reliable and can be trusted to perform this function effectively.

“Unfortunately, millions of pounds of taxpayer's money are currently being spent by councils processing “village green” applications whose primary aim is to prevent development.

“Councils are ready to transform and regenerate local areas, but these long delays are preventing job growth and new affordable housing in our local communities.

“The LGA is glad the government is consulting on this and hope they take on board the concerns of councils. It is important that councils are given reasonable powers to quickly identify false applications and claim back the costs from these.”

Notes:

* For more information, please see the Defra consultation on 'The registration of new town or village greens'. Please go to: http://www.defra.gov.uk/consult/files/110725-village-green-condoc1.pdf

Case studies:

Cornwall County Council

* A local resident made a submission regarding Carlyon Bay in St Austell, Cornwall back in 2003. This was made on the basis that a piece of land had been used for 20 years or more for legitimate sports and pastimes, and therefore should be classified as the village green.

* Part of the land put forward for classification as the 'village green' included beach huts, the cliff faces and a car park.

* In their report, the inspectors said that “it would be necessary to omit” the beach huts and cliff faces from the application, because this did not qualify as land. They went on to reject the application.

* They went on to state that since the car parks were used for parking, they couldn't have been used for an unbroken 20 year period for recreation – and therefore also would have to be removed from the application.

Northumberland County Council

* In Beadnell, a group called Save Beadnell Association has been set up and has lodged a village green application with the council. This has been made on a brownfield piece of land with plans to build three houses.

* The group claim that the land was used for sport and recreational purposes, but in reality it had been used for storing fishing nets.

* A public inquiry finished on 28th November, running for six days. This involved lawyers' fees which will have to be paid for at the expense of local taxpayers. A decision is expected in January.

Borough of Poole Council

* The Borough of Poole has received two applications in the last year, one of which has been determined (the application was unsuccessful), and the other for which is awaiting determination. The one that was determined cost the Council around £70,000, including staff costs and legal bills, and a further £5,000 defending the threat of judicial review – should judicial review be allowed, there could be a further cost of approximately £30,000.

* The applications related to land already designated for park or recreation purposes. One was prompted following an application for development on a recreation ground, which was subsequently refused at the planning stage.

Pembrokeshire County Council

* Since the implementation of Section 15, a Welsh Unitary council [Pembrokeshire County Council] has received 5 applications to register land in its ownership as a common or town/village green, which relates to 2.478 ha. The Council has also lost 0.638ha (with 1.84 ha pending decision) of land that had been purchased many years before to provide social/affordable housing, employment sites and other facilities required by the wider community.

* For example, two recent applications relating to Council-owned land alone has meant the loss of capital receipts estimated to be in the order of £400,000.

* This Council is concerned by the way Section 15 of the Commons Registration Act 2006 has impacted on the Council's ability to utilise land purchased with public money for public benefit, and particularly the way that the statutory provisions have been interpreted by the Courts (many judgments pre-dating the 2006 Act) and provide precedents for the operational consideration of the legislation.

* For example, as a consequence of the introduction of Section 15 of the Commons Registration Act 2006 a South West Shire County [Devon County Council] have experienced approximately a fourfold increase in the number of applications.

Wycombe District Council

* Slate Meadow – the Council own 2.7 ha of land that forms half of a 'green buffer' between Woburn Green and Bourne End. The land was largely 'scrub' and had long been held for potential additional housing. It had been identified in the Local Plan as Safeguarded Land for future development.

* The Council did not adequately 'police' the land (with fencing/signage) and turned down an offer from the Parish Council to lease it as playing fields. Subsequently, in 2004, local residents, mounted a Village Green campaign and were successful, 'freezing' it for all time.

Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council

* A development [Coatham Enclosure in Redcar] in a North East English Unitary [Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council] was blocked after being granted planning permission following an application to declare the land as a village green.

* The scheme would have delivered around 340 dwellings, as well as community facilities including a new leisure centre, medical centre, retail units, visitor centre and youth centre.

---

Press releases, papers and documents published on this page are the intellectual property of an organisation unrelated to Central Lobby. We promote their parliamentary and political campaigning activities as they are subscribers to the Central Lobby service.

As such, Central Lobby does not edit, endorse, or attempt to balance the opinions expressed on this page. The content of press releases and other such types of content are the responsibility of the originating organisation.