Agenda and minutes

(1)       The Panel Members visited the application site prior to the meeting. The visit was attended by the applicant, Mr D Plumstead, Mr P Jones from the Somerston Group of Companies (Landowner), Mr J Burrows (Chairman of Lympne PC) and some half dozen members of the public.

(2)       The Commons Registration Officer introduced the application which had been made by Mr David Plumstead on behalf of the Shepway Environment and Community Network  under Section 15 of the Commons Act 2006 and the Commons Registration (England) Regulations 2008.

(3)       The Commons Registration Officer explained that the task for the Panel was to consider whether it could be shown that a significant number of the residents of a locality or of any neighbourhood within a locality had indulged as of rights in lawful sports and pastimes on the land for a period of at least 20 years.  This meant that the Panel had to consider whether every single test contained in the Commons Act 2006 had been met.  It was not open to the Panel to consider the suitability or desirability of registering the land.  Nor was it entitled to consider the application in the light of any other possible uses to which the land might be put in the event that registration did not take place.

(4)       The Commons Registration Officer said that the applicant had stated that the application site had been used as an airfield before the First World War and had been a frontline operational airfield during the Second.  The land had continued to be used as a civilian airfield until the mid 1970s. During this time and until November 2010 access had remained freely available to local residents, without challenge, for recreational purposes.

(5)       The Commons Registration Officer then said that the application site was owned by Phides Estates (Overseas) Ltd.  Their solicitors, McGrigors LLP had objected on their behalf on the grounds that informal use had not been “as of right” because until 2006 the landowners had erected and maintained notices and fencing, whilst after that year access had been provided on a permissive basis.  Between 1995 and 2006, express revocable permission had been granted to local residents in neighbouring properties.  McGrigors had also argued that use by walkers should be discounted, that any recreational use had been interrupted by extensive engineering and infrastructure works, and that the qualifying area had not been properly defined by the applicant, who had been unable to demonstrate significant use.

(6)       The Commons Registration Officer went on to consider the legal tests for registration. The first of these was whether use had been “as of right.” All parties were in agreement that there had been no question of secrecy.  The main area of dispute was whether use had been by force (i.e. whether use of the land had been contentious). The landowner had claimed that fencing had been in place along the boundaries of the site, together with various notices throughout the entire qualifying period (1990 to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

(1)       Members of the Panel visited the application site before the meeting. The visit was attended by Mr D Plumstead (the applicant), Councillors Mrs R Griffith and A Mayne accompanied by the Clerk, Mrs M McCormick from Hythe TC, Mr C J Capon (Local Member) and some 10 local residents.

(2)       The Commons Registration Officer introduced the application which had been made under Section 15 of the Commons Act 2006.  She confirmed that it was possible in Law to register a beach as a new Town Green, provided that the application passed all of the legislative tests.  She confirmed that the Registration Authority could not take amenity or desirability criteria into account when deciding whether to register.

(3)       The Commons Registration Officer confirmed that the consultation arrangements had been correctly carried out. Hythe TC had stated that it neither supported nor opposed the application but that it wished for a non-statutory Public Inquiry to be held in order to give the residents the opportunity to make their views known.  Mr C J Capon (Local Member) had expressed his support for the application, as had the Hythe Neighbourhood Forum.

(4)       The Commons Registration Officer went on to describe the application site.  The land had been acquired by Shepway DC in 1984 and had been used as a working beach for local fishermen.  The site was now set out differently to the way it had been before.  Formerly there had been 30 huts, but the beach was now used less intensively.

(5)       At this point, Mr J Chambers from Shepway replied to questions by the Chairman and other Members by saying that an area of the site had been fenced off to enable Channel contractors to deal with cyanide contamination on the beach.  The area in question would be capped and have its shingle levels raised.  A number of huts had been demolished and tenancies had not been renewed since March 2010. This was because the District Council intended to develop the land north of the track. This meant that they could only provide huts for 9 fishermen and the Seabrook Sea Angling Association.

(6)       The Commons Registration Officer resumed her presentation by outlining the objections from Shepway DC. These were that the site had not been in continuous use for twenty years as some parts of it had been permanently occupied by huts and boat berths for all or part of the qualifying period; that use had not been by a significant number of local residents; and that use had not been “as of right” as the Council had made intensive use of the land for other purposes. 

(7)       Shepway DC had included 3 statutory declarations in support of its objections. These included the District Council’s Estate Management Officer (Mr P Marshall) who had made many visits to the beach to carry out site inspections.  He had stated that a heavy duty metal gate (with padlock) had been installed in 2002 next to Griggs Fishmongers on Range Road.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

(1)       The Panel considered a report by the Head of Regulatory Services concerning an application by Boxley Parish Council to register land known as Round Wood as a new Village Green. 

(2)       The Commons Register Officer explained that the Parish Council now wished the application to be withdrawn as the Landowner, Kent County Council had offered to voluntarily dedicate a much larger parcel of land.  This land included all of the area of the application with the exception of the parcel of land next to Windfell Close, which was being considered for development.

(3)       The Commons Registration Officer recommended to the Panel that it would be fair and reasonable under the circumstances to allow the Parish Council’s original application to be withdrawn in favour of the determination of the new application.

(4)       RESOLVED that the applicant’s request for the withdrawal of the application to register land known as Round Wood in the parish of Boxley as a new Village Green be agreed.

(1)       The Committee considered a report by the Head of Regulatory Services concerning an application by Dr P Stookes to amend the Register of Common Land for unit CL35 to enable him to exercise the right of estovers (the right to collect firewood) over the whole of Southborough Common.

(2)       The Commons Registration Officer informed the Panel that based on the evidence provided, she was satisfied that the applicant was entitled to make the application and that the owner had consented to the creation of the new right of common.

(3)       RESOLVED that:-

(a)               the applicant be informed that the application to amend the Register of Common Land to register a new right of common has been accepted; and

(b)         the Register of Common Land for Unit CL35 be amended accordingly.