Agenda item

(1)       The Panel noted that Shepway DC (the landowner) had not opposed the recommendation of the Head of Regulatory Services and agreed that, under these circumstances it would not require a less detailed presentation from the Commons Registration Officer than would otherwise have been the case.

(2)       The Commons Registration Officer tabled a revised Appendix D, showing an amended plan of the beach huts, which were recommended for exclusion from the proposed registration.

(3)       The Commons Registration Officer reported that the application had been made by Mr D Plumstead on 12 August 2010 under section 15 of the Commons Act 2006.  The application had been reported to the Regulation Committee Member Panel meeting on 17 July 2012 where the decision had been taken to refer the case to a non-statutory public inquiry in order to clarify the issues.

(4)       The Commons Registration Officer went on to explain that the reason for reference to a non-statutory public inquiry had been that Shepway DC as the landowner had objected on the grounds that the land in question was a working fishermen’s beach.  The District Council had, however, decided not to attend the public inquiry, which had nevertheless needed to be held in order to establish the facts of the case. The Inspector had subsequently produced a report on her findings in February 2014.  

(5)       The Commons Registration Officer briefly summarised the Inspector’s findings. She had been satisfied that use of the land had been “as of right” because, although the landowner had erected signs, their content had not been sufficient to cause informal recreational use to become contentious.  Nor was there any evidence that the landowner had either expressly or implicitly given permission for such use.  The Inspector had also considered that there was sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the land in question had been used for the purposes of lawful sports and pastimes.  She had also concluded that the application land had been used extensively used by inhabitants of the locality of South Ward in Hythe throughout the relevant period (up to May 2010) for informal recreation.  The application had been made in August 2010, well within the two-year period of grace. The Inspector’s conclusion had therefore been that the majority of the land should be registered.

(6)       The Inspector had, however, exempted the fishermen’s huts and winch casings as these had been uses for purposes which were not compatible with recreational use.  As a consequence, she had recommended that no part of the application site upon which a hut or winch casing had stood at any time during the twenty year period to May 2010 would qualify for registration.

(7)       The Commons Registration Officer concluded her presentation by saying that she had carefully considered the Inspector’s report and considered that all the necessary tests had been met in respect of the application land (except for the huts and winch casings).  She therefore recommended accordingly.

(8)       Mr D Plumstead (applicant) submitted a written rebuttal of a statement made by Mr Chambers on the Shepway DC Facebook page.  He then thanked the Inspector and Commons Registration Officer for the immense trouble they had gone to in order to ensure that the right decision was made.

(9)       On being put to the vote, the Panel voted 4 to 0 (Mr Manion having left the meeting) in favour of the recommendations of the Head of Regulatory Services.

(10)     RESOLVED that for the reasons set out in the Inspector’s report dated 21^st February 2014, the applicant be informed that the application to register land known at Fisherman’s Beach at Hythe has been accepted (with the exception of the fisherman’s huts and winch casings) and that the land shown in the updated version of Appendix D to the report be registered as a new Village Green.