Need representation at an inquiry or a formal written presentation to your planning or village green authority.
Planning Sanity may be able to help see our representation forum for more details. |
| The following colour scheme applies to docs on this site |
Word Docs | PDF Docs | HTML Docs |
Deregistration of Greens
Briefing on opposing applications to de-register greens
Under Section 16 of the Commons Act 2006 town and village greens can be deregistered, this is though a complex matter which makes it far more difficult to do than simply registering greens in the first place. Prior to the 1st October 2007 applications to deregister were dealt with by DEFRA, since that date control has been passed to the Planning Inspectorate. However in Wales deregistration remains with the Assembly, and they have not at this date published any regulations as to how heir scheme will work. Section 16 sets out:-
16. Deregistration and exchange: applications
(1) The owner of any land registered as common land or as a town or village green may apply to the appropriate national authority for the land ("the release land") to cease to be so registered.
(2) If the release land is more than 200 square metres in area, the application must include a proposal under subsection (3).
(3) A proposal under this subsection is a proposal that land specified in the application (&qout;replacement land&qout;) be registered as common land or as a town or village green in place of the release land.
(4) If the release land is not more than 200 square metres in area, the application may include a proposal under subsection (3).
(5) Where the application includes a proposal under subsection (3)-
(a) the replacement land must be land to which this Part applies;
(b) the replacement land must not already be registered as common land or as a town or village green; and
(c) if the owner of the release land does not own the replacement land, the owner of the replacement land must join in the application.
(6) In determining the application, the appropriate national authority shall have regard to-
(a) the interests of persons having rights in relation to, or occupying, the release land (and in particular persons exercising rights of common over it);
(b) the interests of the neighbourhood;
(c) the public interest;
(d) any other matter considered to be relevant.
(7) The appropriate national authority shall in a case where-
(a) the release land is not more than 200 square metres in area, and
(b) the application does not include a proposal under subsection (3),
have particular regard under subsection (6) to the extent to which the absence of such a proposal is prejudicial to the interests specified in paragraphs (a) to (c) of that subsection.
(8) The reference in subsection (6)(c) to the public interest includes the public interest in-
(a) nature conservation;
(b) the conservation of the landscape;
(c) the protection of public rights of access to any area of land; and
(d) the protection of archaeological remains and features of historic interest.
(9) An application under this section may only be made with the consent of any relevant leaseholder of, and the proprietor of any relevant charge over-
(a) the release land;
(b) any replacement land.
(10) In subsection (9) &qout;relevant charge&qout; and &qout;relevant leaseholder&qout; have the meanings given by section 15(10).
So that is our starting block, but what we are most concerned with is to prevent de-registration, in our favour is the fact that there is a presumption in favour of keeping registered greens. The first task is always to look through what is proposed in fine detail, to see whether the proposal is in the long term better or worse for the local community, it is easy to object for the sake of objection, but sometimes that is not always what is best. That is not in any way to support deregistration, but simply an observation that communities must look closely to see what they want to preserve and what they need in the way of development, for example is this the only way that much needed employment development or social housing can be provided. However, Planning Sanity's job is not to advise on the moral issues of development proposals or even on the need to preserve land, our job is only to guide you through the legal maze and to ensure that you have appropriate representation in the processes.
Unless the proposed land to be deregistered is 200 square metres or less then the applicant has to supply exchange land, arguably of equal size and quality to that of the registered green. as you wil see above there are a number of criteria that must be fulfilled and/or justified. The danger clause is that of 'in the public interests', this could be far reaching and whilst a number of areas that would fall within that criteria are set out, they are only suggestions, other areas of public interest could well be that of the need to develop the site for social housing or leisure facilities.
The process to determine these applications is by public inquiry (or hearing, and occationally only on the papers) in England through the Planning Inspectorate with the Secretary of State making the final determination (in Wales the Welsh Assembly Environment, Planning and Countryside Department and the Minister) after taking into account the recommendations and findings of the Inspector. There have been only one application to judge how the scheme will work, and at today's date there have been no court cases.
Kingston Beach, Shoreham-by-Sea
This was not really a problem for deregistration and even the OSS who made representations did not object to it being deregistered, this was for a number of reasons, first the release land was to house a much needed lifeboat station, next the area of deregistration amounted to only 2% of the registered green, and finally although it was some considerable distance from the existing green a new green over 3 the size was registered as the exchange land. It is interesting in that the Inspector found that te exchange land was too far from the site and had it not been needed for a lifeboat station then that ground would most likely have resulted in a refusal.
I therefore think that applications to deregister are likely to be few indeed, it would have been expected to have seen dozens of applications once the scheme came into force. We shall therefore report more fully once we have more info on how the scheme works.
The Inspectorates guidance note on the inquiry process
The England Regulations The Deregistration and Exchange of Common Land and Greens (Procedure) (England) Regulations 2007
Please do not hesitate in contacting us for help and advise, most of our services are free, although we encourage donations, and we do need to insist on reasonably large donations for representation at inquiries. We are an unfunded organisation and rely on the donations of those that seek our help to keep this service open as the only independent UK wide resource for communities faced with the prospect of inappropriate developments.
© Planning Sanity - August 2008 (can be freely used by local communities within their campaigns.
Publication by third parties is permitted providing acknowledgment of Planning Sanity is given)
THIS CAMPAIGN IS FUNDED FROM YOUR DONATIONS - PLEASE GIVE GENEROUSLY
FUNDRAISING SECTION
