Estates Surveyor to report.
- to report an update on the current position regarding the objection made by the Council, as landowner, against the application received from the Scholes and Thorpe Action Group (STAG) under section 13 of the Commons Registration Act 1965, in respect of Council owned land in Thorpe Hesley.
Minutes:
Further to Minute No. 28 of the meeting of the Regeneration and Asset Board held on 12th July, 2006 and Minute No. 78 of the meeting of the Cabinet Member for Economic and Development Services held on 17th August, 2006, consideration was given to a report, presented by the Asset Manager, updating the Board on the current position regarding the objection made by the Council, as landowner, against the application received from the Scholes and Thorpe Action Group (STAG) under section 13 of the Commons Registration Act 1965, in respect of Council owned land in Thorpe Hesley.
The following issues were raised:-
- the Council acting as the Objector, Landowner and the Registration Authority
- instruction to the Council’s approved partner solicitors to act on its behalf
- the Council’s defence
- referral to a non-statutory public inquiry
- the outcome of the inquiry and any recommendations in respect of the defence of any future applications
- legal costs, and funding thereof
- the Oxford case
- national problem
- maintenance responsibilities
- timescale
- staffing resources
It was noted that the outcome of this application would set the principles for any future applications which the Council would have to abide by.
Those present discussed the need for a strategy and/or policy for dealing with any future applications in the event that that the Council lost this case.
It was agreed that there was a need to identify what fallow land the Council owned, and what it would cost to fence and erect signs, and also a need to survey, review and map all the small pockets of land in housing estates
Reference was also made to the implications of the Council being both landowner and Registering Authority and the need to consider if there were options to delegate these responsibilities elsewhere.
It was agreed that this issue should be included on the Council’s Risk Register
Resolved:- (1) That the issues raised in pursuing this case be noted.
(2) That a further report be submitted to the next meeting of this Board on the progress of the case, together with clarification of the legal and financial issues, and including an outline of the anticipated timescale.
(3) That, as part of the Council’s submission, it be made clear to the Action Group, that if the Group was successful, then the Council would not maintain this area.
(4) That the issue be included on the Council’s Risk Register
(5) That the outcome of further investigation of the issues raised (including a survey across the Borough of other sites and the implications should the decision be made against the Council) be incorporated in to the review of Community Buildings; the investigations to include a systematic trawl of all estates with the assistance of the Neighbourhoods Directorate.
(5) That consideration be given to the formulation of a strategy and/or policy for dealing with future similar applications.
(The Chairman authorised consideration of the following item in order to review the membership of the sub-group and ensure continuity of its work/progress.)