megilleland Posted January 5, 2011 Author Report Posted January 5, 2011 Will Glenda Powell be there to support us? The Regulatory Committee is meeting as a tribunal to decided a legal dispute between two parties. NFTGAG who claim the land has become a town or village green and Herefordshire Housing, the landowner, who claims it has not become a green. The task of all committee members is to come with an open mind, listen to the evidence and submissions from both parties. Then to decide on legal principles which claim is the more probable.
megilleland Posted January 11, 2011 Author Report Posted January 11, 2011 Just returned from the Regulatory Committee where it was voted to reject the application for a Town Green at Argyll Rise. A disappointing outcome, but the council were far more concerned about extra costs been incurred in seeking advice in the higher courts concerning points of law, rather than supporting the community in its application to save this open space for future use. More detailed information to follow about the proceedings.
megilleland Posted January 16, 2011 Author Report Posted January 16, 2011 Just returned from the Regulatory Committee where it was voted to reject the application for a Town Green at Argyll Rise. A disappointing outcome, but the council were far more concerned about extra costs been incurred in seeking advice in the higher courts concerning points of law, rather than supporting the community in its application to save this open space for future use. More detailed information to follow about the proceedings. NEWS RELEASE IMMEDIATE Thursday 14th January 2011 Contact: Martin Gilleland, NFTGAG chairman Tel: 01432 353971 Email: "Martin Gilleland" <megilleland@hotmail.com> Christopher Whitmey Tel: 01432 860449 Email: "Christopher Whitmey" <cj@whitmey.nildram.co.uk> HEREFORDSHIRE COUNCIL REJECTS TOWN GREEN APPLICATION AT ARGYLL RISE, NEWTON FARM, HEREFORD Newton Farm Town Green Action Group's Argyll Rise town green application was rejected by Herefordshire Council's Regulatory Committee on Tuesday 11 January 2011. Mr Vivian Chapman QC advised the committee it had four options: reject the application, seek a court ruling on the true meaning of a section of the Housing Act 1957, defer or accept the application. Mr Chapman told the committee there was no court ruling on the part of the Housing Act and barristers varied in saying what it meant. On balance Mr Chapman recommended rejection as argued for by Miss Morag Ellis QC on behalf of Herefordshire Housing Ltd. Two councillors urged the Council to get a court ruling on the Housing Act 1957 and voted against rejection. The Council's solicitor had recommended acceptance. "We are extremely disappointed after four and half years of hard work by local residents to protect this open space for prosperity. To see the council's regulatory committee dismiss this application without any real interest and knowledge on the evidence put forward, only adds to the distrust that communities have with local politics" said Martin Gilleland, NFTGAG chairman. "We feel the Council took the cheap way out. NFTGAG can't afford to start a court application." "I much regret the Council's decision not to seek a court ruling", said Christopher Whitmey who assisted NFTGAG. "Whilst the point of law remains uncertain there will be further town green applications up and down the country. A few thousand pounds, spent on a court application now, would save councils and housing associations nationwide many thousands in the future." - ends - NOTES TO EDITORS See the lost Argyll Rise Town Green: http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=52.037874,-2.737741
megilleland Posted January 16, 2011 Author Report Posted January 16, 2011 Following on from the rejection of the application to turn Argyll Rise into a town green it does not look very positive for future open space applications. Nicola Hodgson of the Open Spaces Society has been looking at the proposed government's "Localism Bill" and this is what she is concerned about: Localism Bill is a muddle for open spaces 13 January 2011 We today roundly condemn the Localism Bill, the government’s flagship measure for giving people power to run their own lives and neighbourhoods. The bill is due for second reading in the House of Commons on Monday 17 January. Our general secretary, Kate Ashbrook, says: ‘One of the bill’s most important aspects-the care and future of open spaces-lacks any clear idea of what is needed and is a muddle of conflicting provisions’. Our case officer, solicitor Nicola Hodgson, has analysed the bill as follows. ‘The bill requires every local authority to compile and maintain a list of land of community value in its area, to remain on the list for up to five years, but inclusion on the list appears to offer little protection to the land. If the owner of such land wishes to dispose of it, a community interest group must be given an opportunity to bid. We cannot see how the bill provides any new protection for open spaces which local people enjoy for informal recreation. Indeed, once land is on the list, the owner may be encouraged to consider selling it for development. The purpose of the list of land of community value is not clear. Why does land only remain on the list for five years, and what happens to it after that time? What protection is offered to land on the list?’ Land may be nominated for the list by others but it is for the local authority to decide whether it is included. Since much of the nominated land is likely to be owned by the local authority, how can we be sure the authority will be sufficiently impartial? If the owner of the listed land wishes to dispose of it, a community interest group must be given the opportunity to bid for it, but there is little chance that the group can raise sufficient funds to buy the land, especially if it is at market value based on any obtainable planning permission. We fear that the bill’s provision for payment of compensation to landowners will encourage them to put land of community value on the market. And this bill does not mention the government’s proposed “new designation ….. to protect green areas of particular importance to local communities†heralded in the business plans for the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. How does the bill fit in with those plans? We have called on MPs to ask these and other questions at the second reading debate on Monday 17 January. This bill needs to be rewritten if it is to offer any protection to open spaces which are loved and enjoyed by local people, and if it is to enable and empower those people to play a part in their protection,’ Nicola concludes.
Glenda Powell Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Will Glenda Powell be there to support us? The answer to your question is, I have been told I have a prejudial interest and both sides have said this so I cannot speak for or against this application, and have also been told I cannot be part of the committee together with the Vice Chair as he was a member on Herefordshire Housing Board, and I am a tenant of theirs.
Recommended Posts