AN ATTEMPT by residents to protect green space in a Vale of Glamorgan village which has the potential for future housing has been refused.
Hundreds of residents in St Athan said the land at Ringwood Crescent had been used for recreation and sport for years and applied to the council to have it turned into a village green.
The landowners, Annington Developments Ltd, objected to the application, arguing that members of the public already had a right to use the land.
Members of Vale of Glamorgan Council’s public protection licensing committee met to discuss the residents’ application on Tuesday, November 14.
“This is the last green space for [residents],” said Vale of Glamorgan Council ward member for St Athan, Cllr Stephen Haines, in reference to the Flemingston side of the village.
“That land will go. It will become housing and housing in an area where there is not a shop. The poorest people in the community are going to be hemmed in.”
The application by residents argues that the land has been used as a recreational open space since 1938 and for at least the last 20 years. However, the applicants also had to prove that the land was used as of right and not by right.
Use of land as of right means that it is used in secret or by force when that use is not permitted.
Annington Developments argued that use of the land was by right because members of the public were permitted to use it and there were signs on the land which permitted use.
Eversheds Sutherland solicitor, Stephen Jefferson, was acting on behalf of Annington Developments at the meeting.
Mr Jefferson said: “The evidence makes clear that use of the land has been with the landowner’s permission.”
A member of the committee, Cllr William Hennessy, asked the solicitor if Annington Developments intended to build on the land if the application for a village green was refused.
To this, Mr Jefferson admitted that he did not know what the client’s intention for the land.
Vale of Glamorgan Council’s principal lawyer, James Docherty, said officers believed there was enough evidence at hand for them to recommend refusing the application.
Mr Docherty also said that the question of what the landowner intended to do with the land in the future was not relevant in the consideration of the application, and reminded members that an application for a village green was “not there as a vehicle to stop development”.
Another member of the committee, Cllr Michael Morgan, said: “We can’t get sidetracked by the emotion of this. It seems to me quite clear that there is use of this land and it is by right. It doesn’t seem at the moment that there is a threat to remove the land.”
Cllr Ruba Sivagnanam agreed with Cllr Morgan, adding: “I have great sympathy with the residents there… this idea of having [the land] as a village green is an aspirational one.
“However, we have to be guided by the law if we did accept this and if it did go to the independent enquiry it would be at a significant cost.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here