Village green dispute could be heard at a public hearing

An application has been made to Leeds City Council about whether Pit Hill, at Churwell, near Leeds, should be registered as a town or village green - but the site is in private ownership and they are objecting to the proposals.

Officers from the council are recommending that a public inquiry should be held to held, which is expected to cost over £10,000 to settle the issue. These costs could increase if there is a legal challenge.

Members of the council’s plans panel east will meet on Thursday to decide whether to back the proposals to set up a public inquiry.

A report to the committee says: “The cost associated with a hearing is likely to be in excess of £10,000. This would include the appointment of an inspector for preliminary hearing of half a day to resolve administrative issues and the hearing itself which is likely to last for at least three days, the hiring of a venue, the cost of the inspectors reports, plus officer time for making appropriate arrangements and attending the hearing.”

The site is situated in Churwell and is bounded by the M621 motorway.

Last year the authority received an application from the applicant, Save Pit Hill Churwell, supported by 120 witnesses statements for the registration of the application site as a town or village green.

Since then the parties involved have been unable to find a way forward, councillors will be told.

“The parties involved have been given an opportunity to consider each others representations with a view to agreeing some common ground and to ascertain if there was any further information that would enable the Registration Authority to make a determination as to the status of the application site.

“This correspondence concluded on 1 November 2011 from which is clear that there would not appear to be any common ground and parties involved retain their stated positions as applicant and the objectors.”

A report to committee members says that inorder for an application to be successful the applicant has to prove a number of points including whether a number of members of the public have used the land for sports and pastimes for a period of at least 20 years and that they continue to do so.

The applicants have submitted evidence claiming there has been “a distinct pattern” of recreational activities on the land. The report adds, however, that the landowner says such activities could not have taken place on a continuous basis because the land had been ploughed and was therefore unusable.

The objectors claim the land has been farmed without interruption since the late 1950s and that from the late 1980s into the 1990s it was used for growing seed hay for horses - which is incompatible with recreational use because it is an irritant.

The report adds: “Village green applications are in the main contentious issues and there are many recent examples of appeals being lodged as a consequence of decisions made by registration authorities. It is therefore considered prudent to ensure that all the facts pertaining to an application and any objections thereto are carefully and thoroughly examined.

“This is particularly relevant where there is disputable evidence, or where there is no clear and concise written evidence to be certain that either party is correct in its submissions.”

Council officers conclude that because there is a “fundamental dispute” between the parties as to how the land has been used in the past twenty years further examination of the facts need to take place.

“In view of the legal complexities involved it is concluded that it would be prudent for a public hearing to be held in the interests of transparency and impartiality,” the report to councillors concludes.

[email protected]