The beginning of the
twenty-first century cast a dark shadow over England’s ‘green
and pleasant land’. The
seeds had been sown in the late twentieth century but populations were largely
oblivious; unaware of changes that would affect their daily lives.
This fight for a field is
taking place in a typical small town that like so many had seen better days, and
it is a battle that could well be repeated in your town, your community, anywhere!
Like most small towns
major industries had visited but stayed only long enough to deplete what few
natural resources there were. And when they left the townspeople too had found
the energy taken from them. What was the point? Apathy had taken root. Once
Luddites had risked much to save jobs for their town and more recently the
miners had tried, both to no avail. The people were sick and weary of it all.
The High Street was now full of charity shops; and banks; and estate agents with
property to rent. No point in trying: none could better his life or the lives of
family members, so why bother?
It began with a
‘consultation’ meeting. Two local councillors invited residents to discuss
building proposals for the area. One councillor began by saying, ‘Our hands are
tied.’ And the other by giving a detailed description of the ‘beautiful
four-bed-roomed home’ his son had bought in another district! What could be made
of this? Did it mean that whatever local people thought, new houses had to be
built on green open space? Were the residents being advised to move?
Overnight a largely
apathetic, loose-knit community, ties severed by the decline of the mining
industry, woke from its sleep and a new spirit came into being! Long-term
residents shook their heads in some pessimism: we knew this would happen.
They had tried it before, they groaned. Newer residents were shocked and
angry; recent searches made by their conveyance solicitors had revealed none of
this!
The original plan for six
hundred new houses soon rose to nearer a thousand, a virtual new village! But
where were the new roads; extra doctors and dentists; school places and
buildings and all the other facilities to come from? These plans seemed
‘half-baked’ to say the least.
The feeling against the
proposals, already strong in the locality, was further inflamed when a local man
discovered that a covenant existed on this very land. In 1938 an eminent
lady of the town had seen fit to leave the land to the people of the area ‘for
recreation’ and ‘not to be built on’! She had sold the land to the county
council with this proviso ‘in perpetuity’ or so she thought.
The people had always
felt it was ‘their field ‘; they had grown-up knowing it but had forgotten why!
Local people felt ashamed
of a council who could ignore a lady’s dying wish but were also perplexed. Some
in the area also had covenants attached to their homes but did not the council
expressly expect these conditions to be adhered to?
A public meeting was
called with all members of the council asked to attend. Most declined pleading
that membership of the Planning Committee made them legally exempt from
attending. Not true as it turned out! One councillor did arrive and
helped to chair the meeting, reminding everyone, ’we councillors are the
servants of the people. The views of those who elected us should be listened
to’.
But whilst the covenant
gave hope to the people against the new development, it did not offer a plan of
action. A committee was formed mainly at the behest of three ladies who
steadfastly maintained ‘We cannot let this happen’! Others quickly came
forward to offer their help. Donations were collected, readily and speedily, to
fund whatever lay ahead. This non-political group quickly gained vast support in
the area and the council soon became aware that it had a fight on its hands.
People, who
previously barely passed the time of day, now talked to each other and offered
advice. Skills of many differing kinds were offered, and the results were
electrifying!
The council had
under-estimated the strength of feeling engendered by their plans.
And it had misjudged the
powers of communication and research tools that the computer age had given to
ordinary citizens.
Fair Play .
So houses were needed and
government policies dictated they must be built. This designated site was
twofold: part was former farmland, separated from the playing field by an
ancient hedgerow. One part of the site could support new housing, but why
not preserve the green space used by generations of children; land that was at
the heart of the community:-
‘On
the green they watched their sons
Playing till too dark to see,
As
their fathers watched them once
As
my father once watched me.’
‘Forefathers’
by Edmund Blunden.
A ‘moral right’ was in
question here, but could a ‘legal right’ also be found?
Local amateurs spent long
hours gazing at computer screens; trying to fathom the intricacies of planning
regulations; where were the precedents in law for covenants on such land; how
could limited resources be used to put pressure on the elected council? Many
people were involved, thus many and varied the considerations unearthed! A
veritable Pandora’s Box was once more being opened!
Alongside painstaking
internet research, other avenues had to be explored. No ‘cause’ thrives for long
without publicity; and publicity feeds on events and ‘sound-bites’. A successful
march was organised with exaggerated flag-waving and lurid slogan-banners in
evidence. The local MP made an appearance and seemed most sincere in his
support.
The local press
jumped onto the controversy (it helped sell newspapers) and letters to
the editor began to arrive in shoals. Extra pages were quickly produced to allow
these letters, and sometimes responses from the council, to be published. The
newspaper’s first-ever ‘phone-in’, later a regular weekly feature, demonstrated
a massive rebuff to the council and their plans.
But national press
coverage proved impossible to obtain. This same situation was mirrored across
the whole of Britain. It seemed that everywhere people were banding together to
protect the quality of life they had enjoyed, but perhaps had not fully
appreciated, until it came under threat from developers. And these ‘protests’
had a very short ‘shelf-life’ in the media!
There was to be a long
struggle ahead.
Despair and
Destruction
Despite the best efforts
of many in the community, planners and developers continued to ‘ride roughshod’
over every consideration. From archives delved into on-line, it seemed that ‘the
field’ had long since been ear-marked for sale. A county council meeting with
public and press not admitted had seen the decision to sell being made. The
whole site was then quickly sold to developers and that seemed to be that!
Even more worrying, another new planning application was being submitted.
The plan was to
raise the level of the field. The area as a whole had always been liable to
flooding and the level of the field, (lower than the road alongside it), had
been a ‘fail-safe’ for drainage. Raising the level of the field might be better
for would-be house builders, but what of future consequences for existing
residents?
Everyone was upset by
this. How were residents expected to respond? No-one had any experience of this
kind of engineering work. What made it worse was the fact that these new plans
ran to more than a hundred documents; many of them technical drawings. What
chance did these people have to make informed objections? So far any local
knowledge had been completely ignored. The attitude from ‘higher up’ seemed to
be: we know what is best foryou, so just let us get on with it!
One man who knew a little
about such building works came forward. With his help the committee were able to
draw up a reasonable attempt at specific ‘objections’. A copy of this was then
relayed, mainly by e-mail and used as a check-list by others who wished to
object.
These large-scale
objections from the residents seemed to have been successful when the Full
Planning Committee rejected these proposals. Like always, euphoria was
short-lived! The developers quickly appealed to the Inspectorate and it was
taken out of local hands once more!
As had happened on
previous occasions the people most affected by this were the last to know.
Initially, nearby residents were sent the ‘wrong’ letter by the local council,
and eventually given three weeks to ‘object’ not the normal six weeks. Again,
people with little or no knowledge of such things, were working long hours in
order to submit their views to the Inspectorate.
Suddenly the developers
withdrew their appeal and submitted similar plans to the local council, with
seemingly little alteration from the original! Individual house-building
companies also submitted plans. And so it went on, this game of chess.
How was it that a
community could end up fighting those elected to represent them? A war of
attrition it certainly was! How could a small community hope to win?
Just when it seemed that it could not
get any worse – it did!
A handful of residents
had gone down to the field, puzzled by the activities of workmen near the
hedgerow. Some were to return in tears. Despite its being the nesting seasons,
sections of hedgerow, between the field and the old farm site, were being pulled
out. What took place next was pitiful; parent birds flew back with grubs in
their mouths for their fledglings only to find both nest and young gone!
Angry exchanges took
place on that field. The workmen left the hedge; got back to their vehicle and
sped off, leaving behind the piled up ancient branches of hawthorn, broken nests, eggs, and dying fledglings!
It was the lowest
point of the campaign so far, but gave a ‘spur’ to the determination of all who
witnessed it: we will stop this, whatever it takes!
The developers were
supposedly ‘brought to book’ over this, but although a council resolution was
passed on it, nothing transpired. Let’s face it, any fine imposed, would have
had no effect on developers who stood to make millions out of this land!
Truth and
Lies.
Local legal firms had
been unanimous: they did not want to know! No legal help was forthcoming from
them; they did not wish to be involved. So residents, with the committee as
co-ordinator, were left to explore options as best they could. Legal
considerations were time-consuming and potentially hazardous economically. Which
route to take?
Another way to fight
building proposals had to be found.
Amateur ‘researchers’
soon produced masses and masses of paperwork: Found this website! Might help?
;New legislation about rights of way. Haven’t had time to look yet, but
I printedit off for you!
Trouble was all
these ‘helpful’ websites could always be tracked back to a government
department! And the government’s policy: Build; build;
build!
The first reaction had
been to pursue the covenant. The reasons given by the council that the covenant
‘changed nothing’ were as follows:
The covenant died
with the lady in question.
(Had she realised that when she entrusted them with the land and her covenant?)
She did not own
land either side of the field.
(A legal point.)
The pursuit of the
covenant would be very costly and was ‘a grey area’ in law.
The local MP had brought
into effect an Early Day Motion to Parliament suggesting that the covenant be
respected but this had very little effect on Planners and Developers!
The council were now also
claiming that the site, far from being a community field, was a school field!
This caused surprise and consternation! If so, permission to sell would have
been sought from the Secretary of State’s office. By various strategies these
documents of ‘application to sell’ were eventually acquired. And these documents
were a revelation!
Amongst the usual
questions about usage by community groups was the following:
Question 41
a) Name of local MP
………(given)
b) If the local MP has
expressed an interest does he/she support or oppose the proposed disposal or
change of use?
……… has been consulted on the matter without objection!
This produced total
disbelief! Was he with the people or against them?Could he have been
that duplicitous?
This new revelation was
deliberated over for sometime. This was getting serious. The local press were
contacted and a reporter interviewed the said MP, who was shocked and quick to
allay such damning allegations. He produced evidence of his long-term opposition
to the plans but weakened his argument by adding that ‘documents such as
these should not be in the public domain.’ This seemed a strange comment
under the circumstances!
Confidence was
shaken all round. Committee members began to lose heart, and splinter into
factions with differing ideas of the way forward. Residents were accused of
‘NIMBY’ mentality and that hurt.
Those blinded by profit
could not appreciate the deeper truth. Green space, once built on, would be lost
to their community forever. Children of the future would not learn of the
changing seasons at first hand: climbing trees; finding flowers and leaves;
observing tiny insects; watching birds. And, yes, being scratched by thorns;
falling over tree stumps; being stung by nettles; being caught in rain and even
thunder; splashing in puddles; walking in mud; sliding on ice and snow and
slush; all of which would teach them to cope. Surely this had to be a more
valuable lesson than an expensive visit to a landscaped theme park that could
only offer an unbalanced, sanitised view of Nature? Was it fair to expect future
generations to access ‘countryside’ only by computer and never know what it felt
like? This was the true feeling in the community, but this reasoning escaped the
detractors!
Luckily one committee member came up with a feasible option: Why not register the playing field as
a Village
Green?
Old legislation that
fitted new situations perfectly and was being increasingly utilised. Could it be
done?
Dare this small community
go that far to protect its rights?
>Berlin Wall
The community was
galvanised into action. Questionnaires were hand-delivered and collected. It
seemed very straightforward: prove that this field has been used by the general
public for recreation for over twenty years. One of the original ‘three ladies’
put her name to it, swore an affidavit and the necessary papers were submitted
for consideration towards Village Green registration.
And not a moment too soon!
The school summer
holidays just beginning and overnight all access to the field was removed from
this community! A huge metal fence and gate complete with metal padlock now
greeted residents. What was worse, to three sides of the field, houses were
backed. Local people woke up to find that access from their own
back-garden gates had been blocked off by this fence! They received letters
saying it was going to happen after it already had!
No words can convey the
impact of this! Letters to the MP; councillors; even the developers produced the
same response: This is now private land. The fencing
stays!
Children who played
happily for hours on the field during the summer months had nowhere to play
except back-streets and small gardens. Teenagers were ‘moved on’ by the police,
yet in the past, there had been no trouble. The playing field had been ’safe
territory’ for all: well-observed from adjoining homes and spacious enough for
many activities to take place simultaneously with any football matches.
Surveys in America had
shown that ‘loss of green amenity’ caused mental and physical health problems to
residents. To have had ‘space’ and ‘lose it’ is especially detrimental on the
level of ‘visual amenity’ alone. The only ‘visual amenity’ left now was a
foreboding fence, described in the local press as the town’s ‘Berlin Wall’.
It was a very
depressing summer.
Knights in
Shining Armour!
The townspeople had long
felt ‘right’ to be on their side. But the battle between good and evil is an
arduous one! They were well aware of their legal shortcomings. The application
for Village Green status had been made but ‘objections’ would surely follow!
These ‘objections’ would be backed by strong legal teams, hardened professionals
who were expected by both council and developers to earn their fees! Many felt
that this was where the battle would be lost. And so it might have been, but for
Fate’s intervention!
A happy coincidence led
to a tentative offer being followed up. A new ‘contact’ was made easier by the
discovery that a resident’s son worked at the local university. And even more
amazingly in an office in close proximity to this target!
Village Green legislation
in this context was relatively new and ’untried’. This attracted a
lecturer-in-law who considered it to be a suitable project for his students to
tackle. The ‘spin-off’ meant that legal advice and valid steps to take could be
fed-back from the students and might prove helpful.
Early readings of
the progress so far by ‘amateurs’ cast considerable doubt for a successful
outcome, as the lecturer explained to the young man who had timidly approached
him: ‘Moral misdemeanours’ were not necessarily ‘illegal’. But
smaller points of procedure caught his trained legal eye. Maybe there was hope
left.
‘Objections’ to the
Village Green strategy duly arrived and brought dismay to the committee. There
were three objectors: those who had owned the field; those who now
owned the field and one from a councillor who had first ‘consulted’ with them!
(‘Our hands are tied’!) Pages and pages of legal terms, which made little sense
and seemed less to do with the ‘twenty years of community use’, and more to do
with desperate ploys to justify the sale of said field! A legal minefield to
the unwary!
The objection from the
councillor was easily answered. The councillor made no attempt to disprove
community use of the field. Instead he used glowing terms to describe how much
more wonderful facilities would be on the new estate when it was built! It
seemed that trees removed would be replaced by similar species in a landscaped
wonderland that would include ‘street art’ and statues! (‘That’ll give the
youngsters something to do’, remarked a lady from the committee!) New football
pitches and even a new school were promised! But little space for community use!
Other ‘objections’ were
more contentious. The evidence of ’locality’ was questioned and the term ’as of
right’ frequently contested. Claims continued that it was a ‘school playing
field’ and never meant for public use and furthermore signs to that effect had
been displayed and vandalised over the years. No resident could remember any
such signs; no-one had ever been cautioned for ’trespass’. And hundreds had
marched to the field but not one was arrested!
What was this: a
photograph of a prohibition sign, not at the main entrance, but at one of the
side-entrances to the field and dated 1999! Had it really been there? No-one
remembered seeing it. One resident saw the photograph and was astounded! His
house stood right next to this entrance, and was clearly visible on this
photograph. Also visible was his new fence erected four years later than that
and he still had receipts to prove it!
What was going on? Had
‘signs’ been superimposed on to recent photographs? Surely not!
The local press withdrew
support. More houses built: more papers sold! Their reporters were under
pressure. The mammoth task of amalgamating evidence to prove the
community’s claim of twenty years continued usage had to be carried out by
word-of-mouth! And be presented to the lecturer and his students within two
weeks!
Not in their wildest
dreams did these representatives of a community anticipate the response they now
received! Letters and old photographs poured in: a comprehensive record of
generations of community activity on that field! Letters from people who had
spent their childhood in the area and since moved; letters from children of all
ages with anecdotes and drawing; poignant letters from older people with loving
memories of days gone by. It was overwhelming! Special days vividly remembered:
Victory Day party; Silver Jubilee celebration; Sports’ days; and times of
celebration. Then: learning to ride a bike; sledging; treasure hunts; walking
the dog; and so it went on to simple finding of ‘a lot of ladybirds’! Nostalgia
swept through the community. The field had played a big part in each life: but
only under threat was this realised! Wasn’t that always the way?
Legal arguments were put
aside as this mass of evidence was collated. It was no easy task to make a
logical cohesion from it. These numerous letters had to be divided up into
sections. Those from children were included first; then letters from adults with
photographs alongside where thought most relevant. Rebuffs regarding legal terms
were written in detail as best as could be achieved by the group.
The bulging file of
evidence and separate package of videos and CD’s were presented to the
university lecturer and his students. With great trepidation, the assembled
members, chosen from their community, awaited their reaction.
A hush fell over the
lecture room as the reading and analysis took place. The reaction from these
students was beyond all their hopes! Lecturer and students, (as lawyers are wont
to do), became huddled in animated groups dissecting sentences, quoting
precedents and examining specific points of procedure. The small committee had
become invisible! Legal minds withdrew into a world of their own!
The session became alive!
How had a bunch of amateurs achieved so much and in so little time? Each person
there wanted to help with legal responses to the objections. Ideas were put
forward: many ways to make use of this wealth of evidence. The only downside
was these suggestions meant more re-arranging and more re-writing of the
‘amateur’ arguments. More midnight oil to burn!
The lecturer himself,
once noncommittal and seemingly pessimistic about their chances of success was
now suggesting a leading barrister! He was sure she would want to help!.
A huge weight was lifted
off the shoulders of the stalwart workers that night. Now they, too, like their
protagonists, had a legal team behind them. Guidance that had been so elusive
and for so long, had come their way! Fate surely had stepped in!
Guidance from
above.
Next morning found the
lecturer as good as his word! Not only had he rushed off legal notes ‘off the
top of his head’ but he had also contacted the lady barrister. A meeting was on!
This barrister was
high-profile, her opinions often sought by the media on issues of national
importance. Surely this local ‘skirmish’ would be beneath her? Her legal office,
like the council chamber before, was very imposing. As they waited for her,
their thoughts went back to that first occasion.
The committee had felt
the council designed their committee room that way on purpose! The clerk had
told their representative to speak for five minutes only; then a red
light would flash before the microphone switched off! There had been a reminder
that only ‘material considerations’ specific to the plan were allowed: no
mention of the covenant! That was of no concern to the planning department!
Three people were sat
at a higher level with tables and individual microphones. Below them a
semicircle arrangement was arrayed for other members of the Planning Committee.
A large screen displayed plans under discussion. Behind the semicircle the
public were allowed to sit. No member of the public could speak from these
benches; and only persons who had specifically requested the privilege would be
called to the front to do so. A place to the right of the assembled council was
set aside for those brave enough to try! On the left was seating reserved for
the Press. The whole experience had been an ordeal.
It had been unsettling
and unnerving. Whilst waiting for the agenda to reach their particular ‘planning
proposal’, the assembled residents showing their support for their ‘speaker’,
had witnessed a bizarre scene. A man from the public bench stood up in disgust.
He had not been called to speak on his particular issue. Yet he had applied to
do so, and he began to shout out his grievances!
Without a word,
all the councillors rose as one, and withdrew from the chamber! Like a court
scene from ‘Alice in Wonderland’, they half-expected the Chief Planning Officer
to give the order: Off with his head! A timid clerk was then sent in to sort
out the problem whilst the councillors were kept out of harm’s way! Then it
ensued that the man in question was correct and the mistake had been made by the
council!
The meeting with the
barrister was not like that, thank goodness! The lecturer had given them a good
reference. The lady barrister was greatly impressed by the determination of this
group. They had demonstrated a commitment to the community they represented,
remained true to their original vision and worked towards it openly and
honestly. She admired them for that and shared a passionate interest in
environmental issues, as they knew.
She quickly grasped their
situation and reeled off legal jargon that was appropriate! Was this womanspeaking in English? They struggled to follow her arguments. This was way
above their heads! But she was readily reassuring and not officious. She
simplified her reasoning somewhat and set them tasks that would be helpful in
responding to some of the more contentious criteria. More questionnaires to
deliver: was there no end toit? The valiant members found some of
her requests puzzling; but they were more than willing to follow her guidance.
Seasons come, and seasons
go, and so it was in that town. Local elections came and went, producing
surprising changes: a larger turnout amongst voters and the loss of overall
control from the previously ‘invincible’ council. Democracy at work!
The fencing remains an
eyesore to the community; but not one brick has been laid on the playing field!
The weight and complexity
of the evidence they had finally submitted meant that dates given for a response
also ‘came and went’! And nothing happened!
‘No news is good
news’ became the much-quoted adage amongst the townsfolk. And it seems they were
right to feel confident. This long wait for the expected public inquiry was not
only punctuated by a generous letter from their MP, praising the group for their
efforts so far, and offering suggestions for the way forward. He now agrees that
the building proposals are no longer a ‘done deal’. Has he reallycome down from
his fence? If so the field is not irretrievably lost!
‘What exactly are our
chances?” an anxious participant asked.
“I think we have more
than a fifty percent chance of winning!” The lady barrister replied.
Considering legal
reticence those seemed to be very good odds!
Moral Lessons for
Modern Times.
England may never again
be the ‘green and pleasant land’ it once was. But maybe, just maybe, some oases
of green space will remain forever.
This is the hope of one
town; one community; a single group of people who have followed their hearts
against all odds.
To date, not one brick
has been laid on the field. Residents are still patiently awaiting the public
inquiry which will, at last, allow their voices to be heard. There is no fear
amongst potential ‘witnesses’ from the community as they had given truthful
accounts of their activities held on that field over the years.
But win or lose, people
who had rarely written a letter before; never spoken in public before; had no
knowledge of Planning or Law; found that if they persevered all things were
possible. New friendships have been formed; neighbourhood ties have been
strengthened, the community is at one with itself once more.
Elderly people, formerly
wary of ‘computers’ now knew what ‘information technology’ meant! It is possible
that, at this very moment, new searches about pension rights; recipes; even
knitting patterns; are taking place! And e-mails are flourishing!.
Children knew that their
elders had supported them and they understood why. And these youngsters were
proud of their own contributions, given in the straightforward way that only
children can achieve. But more importantly, these ‘future citizens’ have seen
the ‘coming-together of a community’; a precious lesson that perhaps will
sustain them through future battles that they must surely encounter.
The local paper continues
to be the recipient of letters on many topics and with many differing points of
view. It no longer records only local sporting news; it has begun to function
fully as a news source for the community.
Politicians, at all
levels, have experienced a sharp reminder of the power of the ballot box. They
were forced to take their standing in the community more seriously; no more
relying upon apathy amongst the electorate of the town!
Like many former pilgrims
the people have survived the pits and temptations of their journey. Even through
the Slough of Despond! And three good women had never wavered, trusting that
good sense would finally prevail!
The fight for the field
is far from over.
But for this small
community isn’t a victory already theirs!
Editor's
Note.
I hope that Petra's story
of what is happening in her own home town will encourage any readers facing
similar battles with their local council.
