All Categories - Brown Not Green

Brown Not Green

Thank you

27/8/2019

As well as giving ourselves a collective pat on the back here at BNG HQ, especially to Phillip Plato who did the lion's share of the work over the last few weeks on the DMMO and Reg 19 submissions, we wish to thank all our supporters who have helped us in one way or another.

Thanks to everyone involved who helped us:

Deliver leaflets
Achieve Asset of Community Value status for the land at Lye Green
Submitting evidence for the Definitive Map Modification Order, helping us adopt footpaths
Submit a record number of quality Reg 19 Submissions
Fund our campaign with generous donations
Keep the BNG Committee sane with continued messages of support

Once again I am going to shamelessly use this opportunity to say a massive thank you on behalf of all the community to Phillip Plato who for the last few weeks has worked selflessly 24/7 on our campaign. To see just some of Phillip's output on BNGs official Reg 19 Submission response click here.

Thanks again to everyone for the continued support. We now just need to wait to see what the Planning Inspector has to say.

The BNG Team

Public Rights of Way Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO) – Lye Green

5/8/2019

Do you walk on any of the informal paths marked in bright green? We want to hear from you.
Click picture or here for enlarged map

RE: Public Rights of Way Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO) – Lye Green

You will be aware that BNG successfully applied to have the fields at Lye Green listed as an Asset of Community Value.

Unfortunately, since that Decision was published, the landowner has now started fencing off some of the access points into the land and stopping people using unadopted footpaths that have been in use for decades. BNG feel it is now necessary to seek a Definitive Map Modification Order to get all the six informal tracks adopted as public footpaths, so these paths stay open for the community’s use. Accordingly, we need your help again in providing the appropriate evidence to the County Council to support the DDMO.

There are two different processes depending on whether you have used the paths for:

twenty-plus years
less than twenty years.

Both require completing pre-populated template forms (we have done all the hard work for you).
These forms will need to be accompanied by a signed map of the route(s) that you use. Again, we have prepared all these for you, all you need to do is tell us which paths you walk on and sign the relevant maps that we will provide or you can print off yourself.

Contact us (click here) with the following information:

length of time paths used
which numbered paths used, see map above
name, address and phone number

We can either send digital copies on to you for completion or hand-deliver a pack of printed, collated forms and the relevant maps plus full instructions.

This is a bit involved but we have tried to make things as easy as possible by preparing template forms for anyone, to complete, add, delete, expand upon or modify.

Your evidence will help Bucks County Council decide if the informal footpaths will be dedicated as a public right of way which then means the farmer must then take down any recent fences or obstructions. The County Council MUST make a Modification Order (ie: adopt the footpaths) but only if we can demonstrate that the paths are “reasonably alleged to exist” which can only be proved by us getting enough statements to support our application.

Let's repeat the success of our campaign to have the land listed as an Asset of Community Value.

Please help if you can. Recruit your family and friends.

Thank again for your continued support.

The BNG Team

Intimidation on the Fields of Lye Green

31/7/2019

Since the success of Brown Not Green having the land and woodlands at Lye Green listed as an Asset of Community Value there has been a growing number of reports of intimidation from the landowners where previously there has been none. We have now had reports of over 20 people being approached in the last 2 weeks being told to get off the land.

BNG is not qualified to give legal advice however we wish to give a commentary on this issue for our supporters to take on board and share with their friends and family who use the fields for recreational and commuting purposes.

The threat of prosecution is a hollow one and may well just be an attempt at intimidation.
Trespass is NOT a criminal offence (other than squatting in residential premises or specific types of property e.g. railway premises, airports, foreign diplomatic premises ).
As such the police would be very unlikely to attend even if the landowner called them and certainly would not arrest anyone (unless that person then refused the Police request to leave).
Trespass is a “tort” however and the landowner can bring a civil action against someone for trespass if he/she wanted to spend the legal costs of doing so!
The remedies are usually an award of “damages” to the landowner or an “injunction” preventing the person coming on the land again. Subsequent breach of an injunction would be contempt of court.
Damages would likely be very modest or trifling (but beware legal costs awards could be granted)
However, torts are expensive to bring especially if there is a potential defence.
The most robust defence is to claim prescriptive rights namely that the alleged trespasser has used the land / route regularly as of right openly for over 20 years. Frankly, legal advice that BNG have had is there is little a landowner can do to prevent someone with prescriptive rights exercising them!
Even if the alleged trespasser has not got prescriptive rights (ie he/she has not used the land regularly for over 20 years) he may still claim that he has had “implied consent” (or a licence) having enjoyed open unrestrained use for say 5, 10 or 15 years whatever without complaint or restraint. Open unrestrained use could be implied by there being no keep out notices, no locked gates or non-fenced openings, the presence of well-trodden footpaths or just many others doing it openly too for decades etc.
However, if the landowner asserts there is no consent and asks him/her to leave, they must do so.
NOTE: Fences are currently being put up on the land to close off access to these unadopted paths.
BNG would not recommend confrontation, just say you don’t agree you are trespassing and walk away.
Similarly BNG would NOT recommend tearing down fences that are being put up.
However, BNG are seeking to have various unadopted footpaths on the land adopted as Public Rights of Way and we URGENTLY need to hear from anyone who can give written evidence about the prolonged use of these paths especially if they have used then for over 20 years. Please ask them to get in touch with BNG ASAP so we can take a statement from you. (However, we would NOT recommend repeating this to any landowner/farmer if they challenge you on site please!)

We urge all our supporters to remain polite and courteous in all instances so that we can prove that all the intimidation is in a one way direction only. If you are involved with a confrontation with the farmer/landowner, if you can please record it on your mobile phone and/or write a record of it in the event that BNG wish to take matters further.

Thanks again for your continued support

The BNG Team

A Three-Minute Survey From Brown Not Green

21/7/2019

Please take the time to fill in our survey by clicking on the clipboard.
It only takes three minutes. We need all responses by 31st July.
Thanks, the BNG Team

Success in Listing the the Green Belt as an Asset of Community Value (plus Consultation Dates Extended to August 23rd)

16/7/2019

June and July has been a VERY busy period for the Brown Not Green (BNG) campaign but we have some important news to share with you that illustrates how your support and pledges of money ARE making a difference.

First, we are delighted to announce that we have recently been told that our application to have the fields at Lye Green listed as an Asset of Community Value (ACV) has been APPROVED! This is a very significant development which I will explain later in this message.

Brown Not Green had recently raised concerns with the planning department about incorrect assertions being made by a few Councillors that any letters & written comments made by the public would not be considered to the current Regulation 19 consultation unless they were submitted online or via the Council’s website Portal. These assertions have since been confirmed as INCORRECT. Any form of written comment made by the public (including letters or written statements) and submitted before the deadline WILL be considered and passed to the independent planning inspector.

Finally, (and probably because of the above) the deadline for making comments under the Regulation 19 Public Consultation has just been EXTENDED from 19 July to 23 August 2019.

The listing of the fields at Lye Green as an Asset of Community Value now means that we have demonstrated that the land satisfies the requirements of the Localism Act 2011, namely that the land is widely used by the community for a variety of informal outdoor recreational uses and as such the land “improves the wellbeing of the local community”. This was the burden of proof we had to satisfy under our s.88 application.

The land will now be listed as an ACV for 5 years and this gives BNG the “Right to Bid” for the land. Restrictions will be recorded on the landowner’s title at Land Registry. This means that if the landowner(s) wish to sell the land at any time during the next 5 years, they must give a clear prior 6 months’ notice to Brown Not Green to enable us to arrange finance/loans etc in order for BNG to bid for the land. BNG as a not for profit company, have stated that any purchase of the land would be held in Trust for continued community benefit in order to maintain the status quo; namely to maintain the land in agricultural use whilst also ensuring the community still has access for the many informal recreational uses that have been enjoyed by hundreds of people for decades.

However, this designation as an ACV also raises several material planning considerations that we want to put before the Inspector too. Including:

The 13 Green Belt sites being allocated in the new Local Plan for housing are supposed to represent the “worst performing” Green Belt sites in the District. The Land at Lye Green is one of these sites in the emerging Local Plan - (SP BP2). We have long maintained that the Council’s Green Belt site selection methodology was flawed and based on many preconceptions and assertions that were not properly tested. The very fact that the land at Lye Green is now listed as an ACV underlines its informal recreational value (which is one of the few uses encouraged under Green Belt designation) and as such this listing supports our contention that this Green Belt site, at least, has been incorrectly bought forward for allocation for development.
We also assert that now the land is listed as an ACV, it really should be removed from any allocation for development in the Local Plan and it should be retained in Green Belt. This is because any allocation for development is (like the grant of planning permission) only going to add to the land’s financial value and would therefore undermine the very principles of the community’s right to bid afforded under the Localism Act 2011. This principle was adopted following a similar decision passed down in the Court of Appeal last year in the case of Banner Homes vs St Albans City & District Council 2018.
We will be asking the Inspector to consider this precedent and the perverse implications of leaving an Asset of Community Value allocated for development in the Local Plan therefore.

We urge anyone still contemplating making a Regulation 19 Submission under the current (now extended) consultation process to consider this too when drafting their comments to the Inspector!

We are also heartened by the many messages of support and the continuing donations through our CrowdJustice portal to fund the legal & professional fees we are incurring to protect this land and the wider town from the effects of its inappropriate development.

Thanks again for your continued support

The BNG Team

Fisherman's Blues

13/7/2019

The over-abstracted River Chess at Waterside, Photo courtesy of Wikipedia

What follows is an email communication I had with a local resident, an angler, who was overwhelmed by the complexity of putting in a submission to the Local Plan Consultation. It is fairly self-explanatory and I hope it can help others in putting together a submission. His email first, followed by my response:

Hi Dicky,

Many thanks for sending me the example submission in PDF format that I requested. I have read the thing through and it is all way over my head, I am in no way qualified to add anything to this paper.

Would it be OK to just cut everything in this example, and paste in the relevant areas of the official form, thus effectively sending a carbon copy of this example...or would that be a pointless exercise?

I really have no way of coming up with a comparable or even vaguely useful original, I have neither the expertise nor knowledge of the subject matter, so pointless to even attempt it.

Having said that, as a resident of Chesham for forty five years, and an angler and lover of nature, there is one thing close to my heart that I would love to tag on where applicable, but only if in your opinion, it has an actual bearing on things. If I may, I will rumble on a bit about one aspect of our town that will suffer badly if the proposed housing plans go ahead.

When I came to Chesham, the river Chess was a thing of beauty, it's crystal clear water so typical of England's chalk streams was a joy to behold. It held native brown trout, supplemented by escapee rainbow trout from the trout farm in Chesham, and all the other wildlife associated with such habitats. It gave a great deal of pleasure to the residents of that town, and was a huge asset and much admired amenity.

Sadly, for quite a number of years, the flow of the Chess has slowly reduced year on year, until it is now but a shadow of it's former self. It's original springs in Chesham near Lowndes Park dry up earlier and earlier every year, the sparkling stream that ran through the town, full of gently swaying streamer weed that harboured darting trout right in the very heart of Chesham....becomes a dry mud ditch. The trout and other wildlife it supported are obviously long dead and gone, because the periods of non existent flow (or water of any sort) in the first mile or so through the town extend remorselessly.

The river now exists in a recognisable form only from the far side of the town onwards, on it's way to Rickmansworth, and even that is now silted up for much of it's length, with low to zero flow for much of the summer. Now we all know that global warming exists, that subsequent weather changes and so on are responsible for many things, but the fact that our towns river dries up each year is not directly down to that....it is over abstraction from the underground aquifers above and in Chesham that are to blame, abstraction levels that are required apparently to supply the steadily increasing population of the town.

That being so, what will happen if the proposed extra housing in the area goes ahead? If already we do not have enough water in the area to supply the existing population without destroying a large part of the once beautiful river that gave birth to the town, will it disappear completely and permanently, to meet increased water demands? Will the Chess become but a memory, existing only in the minds of the elderly and in old, fading photographs once the population explodes once more? Has any though gone into this? Or are the powers that be proposing to blindly go ahead with plans that have not been thought through sufficiently, and doing so regardless of consequences?

Sorry Dicky, ran on a bit there, but you get my drift. Is any of that relevant or appropriate to be included in my response, added in somewhere or other on that form?

My very best regards

David

And my response below:

Hello David and many thanks for you thoughtful email late last night.

I am in full agreement with you that the whole process of putting in a submission especially on using the restrictive form supplied goes way over the head of the average man on the street, including me.

The Council perhaps, have not made this easy for us, so that they can push this plan through without protest.

All the more reason why we have to push back on this.

I will disagree with you on one point in your email "I am in no way qualified to add anything to this paper."

Your email is evidence to me that you write eloquently and knowledgeably about issues that are close to your heart.

My suggestion is to forget the form and write a letter (letters are accepted, but take a copy and send it to us) stating at the start of the letter that the suggested form is restrictive, unhelpful and beyond the understanding of the average local resident.

Now attached to my email is the Draft Local Plan (click here and scroll down to Downloads), all 225 pages of mind-numbing twaddle. Now I am not suggesting you read it all, like I have done. I had a broken foot at the time and my lack of mobility meant I sadly had nothing else sensible to do!

But after receiving your email last last night, I quickly opened up the Local Plan PDF and did a search on the word "chalk" and Bingo it comes up three times in the document, most noticeably Section 9.6 Natural - River Character And Water Environment.(Pg 139) Reading on I establish that the relevant clause is Policy DM NP6..(Pg 140)

You are now able to apply everything you wrote so well in your email last night against the Policy DM NP6, disputing the fact that building 500 homes so close the the Chess does not meet the expectations of this policy. The Planning inspector will be looking for key words and will want to know if you think the Policy is sound or not.

A policy is sound if it is:

Positively prepared - without doubt 500 homes will impact the existence of the River Chess so fails on this.
Justified - No evidence has been provided on how the Chess will be protected or that mitigation efforts will work to save the Chess so fails on this
Effective - You could reasonably argue that a holistic approach needs to be taken to save the Chess and piecemeal unconnected development along its length has an overall impact. The Plan fails to demonstrate a holistic effective approach
Consistent with National Policy - The most important Planning Policy document that we must all adhere to, homeowners, developers, planners, Inspectors, everyone is the National Planning Policy Framework.(NPPF) The Local Plan and its policies need to be consistent with the NPPF. Doing a search on "river" in that document shows me that the relevant section of the NPPF is Section 15 Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment. Most specifically clause 170 e) on page 49. Building 500 homes so close to the Chess and impacting its very existence in parts is not consistent with the NPPF clause.

A few things to note, try where possible to use the words I have highlighted in bold. It scores points with the Inspector, however, in our case we will be preceding each of those words with "not" (ie not sound, not positively prepared etc)

You can refer to the removing of Greenbelt status to the land to the North-East of Chesham for 500 homes by its policy number SP BP2 (can be found on page 156 of the Plan).

So it's just like putting a jig-saw together, albeit quite a mundane one but worthwhile nonetheless.

Now if you were to do a similar search on using the another word "carbon" for instance both in the Local Plan and the NPPF, you will find some interesting links, not least that the Local Plan will push up our carbon footprint by 21% which goes against the NPPF and many other national policies. Continue along this vein using issues that you are personally concerned about, traffic, schools, healthcare etc and you will slowly build up your own meaningful submission, With this greater understanding of the process, the info and examples that we provide on our web page on How to Respond will become more understandable and helpful to you.

We do ask all our supporters to add the following paragraph to their submission as it will add more weight to the work and more comprehensive submission that BNG put in:

I am supportive of the Brown Not Green organisation’s initiative to have the land listed as an Asset of Community Value and I feel they speak for me in respect of their objections to the draft Local Plan. Accordingly, I request that any representations made by them at any future examination in public regarding the soundness of this Local Plan be considered as an extension of my own comments herein.

As you can see there are no shortcuts to this process, our beloved Council have made sure of that but as we are finding elsewhere that if we can prove to the Inspector that there are holes in the Local Plan, the Inspector will reject it and our Green Belt may be saved. The more noise we make about these holes the better our case.

Whatever you eventually submit, I am sure it will be the best that you can possibly do and that will be good enough. Please encourage as many of your friends and family as possible to submit their objections to the Plan to.

Thanks for reading this far.

Dicky

How to Respond to the Draft Local Plan by July 19th

2/7/2019

The pressure is on Chesham and the surrounding areas' residents to make a response submission to the Chiltern & South Bucks Local Plan by the looming deadline of Midnight July 19th.

The process seems over-complicated and the Council have not made it easy or intuitive on their website to know what needs to be done. (Ref: https://www.chiltern.gov.uk/planning/localplan).

Here at BNG, we have tried to remove some of the mistique around submitting a response by giving you an idea of what needs to be said and how. Check out our new How To Respond web page for full guidance on getting a meaningful response in on time.

We all need to play our part in preventing this daft ( I mean draft) Local Plan becoming a reality. Please make a submission and encourage as many of your friends and families to do the same. We need to make as much noise about this as possible so that the Planning Inspector gets a real sense of the anger around this Local Plan.

Thanks for your continued support.

Th BNG Team

An Online Presentation of the BNG Open Meeting held at the Memorial Hall Ley Hill June 5th, 2019

7/6/2019

If you weren't able to make it into the Memorial Hall on Wednesday Night....

CLICK HERE FOR NARRATED SLIDE SHOW

yourChesham June 2016 Magazine articles

5/6/2019

The latest situation regarding the Draft Local plan gets excellent coverage in this month's edition of yourChesham magazine. Click here for the articles.

Public Meeting - Wednesday, June 5th at 8pm

30/5/2019

At Ley Hill Memorial Hall HP5 3QR
Re: THE COUNCIL’S NEW LOCAL PLAN

South Bucks and Chiltern District Councils are preparing to publish their Emerging Local Plan. The Local Plan will then be submitted for formal scrutiny by an independent Inspector at a future public inquiry.

Lobbying councillors is now irrelevant and the campaign is now dependant on what legal evidence and planning issues the community can submit to an Inspector.

The Local Plan still includes:

removal of all the land at Lye Green from Green Belt status
(initial) plans for 500 homes, plus a community hub
5,000 sq ft shop
15 gypsy traveller pitches

All this will affect the town of Chesham.

The Council has also only recently announced removal of twelve villages from Green Belt including Botley & Ley Hill. This is disappointing, but our campaign is far from over!

PLEASE COME TO THIS MEETING AND TELL OTHERS WHO MAY BE INTERESTED TO FIND OUT;

WHAT BNG ARE DOING TO PROTECT OUR LOCAL GREEN BELT & THE TOWN
HOW TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS TO THE INSPECTOR AND WHY YOU SHOULD
WHAT YOU CAN DO TO HELP

The community will shortly have just 6 weeks in which to make final comments on these unsustainable proposals once the Draft Plan is published. This is your last chance to persuade the Council of their folly before we get into the formal consultation/Public Planning Inquiry process.

FUNDS
We also need to raise more money as we have now retained expert consultants to advise and comment on issues of Landscape Quality, Green Belt, Sustainability, Traffic & Air Quality. In addition, we have retained a barrister from Landmark Chambers to represent us at the future Planning Inquiry Examination in Public.

Please make any donations to BNG via the methods on our website.
please visit: www.brownnotgreen.com/fundraising

LEAFLET VOLUNTEERS
Our campaign would be nothing without our ever-willing cohort of leaflet volunteers. This is a small band of very dedicated individuals who have worked tirelessly distributing leaflets around the Chesham neighbourhoods. We are always looking for extra volunteers who wish to play a role whilst getting fitter and healthier at the same time! We are particularly keen to hear from volunteers in the Eksdale Avenue and White Hill areas of Chesham. Can you help? Contact us via the website if you can.

SOCIAL MEDIA VOLUNTEER REQUIRED
We urgently require an individual who can pick up social media responsibility for the Brown Not Green Campaign. Although we have our webmaster and email communication roles covered, a lack of time and expertise mean we are not maximising our communications over social media. We need someone who would be prepared to take on full responsibility for feeding our social media outlets to get our message out to as many people as possible. Might ideally suit a graduate who wishes to add another skill set to their CV. All applications considered. Please contact us via the website if you can help in this area.

Thanks again for your continued support.

The BNG Team.