THE LONDON GREEN BELT COUNCIL

Minutes of the Annual General Meeting held in Committee Room 5, Palace of Westminster, on 28 Feb 2002.

Present

Mr J Wilkinson MP, President

Mr R W G Smith Vice-Chairman (Potters Bar Society) Mr S R Smith, Treasurer (Enfield Preservation Society)

Mr M Hencke, Assistant Secretary (Old Coulsdon Residents Association)

Representatives from Bexley Civic Society, Soc. for the Protection of Ascot and Environs, Battlesbridge Protection Group, Brindles Wood Residents Association, Carshalton-on-the-Hill Residents Ass., Chiltern Society, CPRE London, Croydon Society, East Coulsdon Residents Assoc, Friends of Epping Forest, Friern Barnet & Whetstone RA, Hatch End Association, lckenham Residents Association, Leighton Buzzard Society, Mill Hill Preservation Soc, Mill Hill Residents Association, North Uxbridge Residents Association and Friends of Hillingdon House Farm, Oak Farm Residents Association, Ottershaw Society, Pembury Society, Potters Bar Society, Sarratt Parish Council, St Albans Community Forest Association, Sevenoaks Society, South Ruislip Residents Association, and Youth Hostels Association (South Region)

Apologies for absence Mr L Holt (Secretary), Miss B Webb and Mrs G Oliver (Assistant Secretaries), Sir Sydney Chapman (Past President), Cyclists Touring Club, Denham Parish Council, Dickens Country Protection Society, Harefield T and R A, Pinner Society, Sane Planning in the South East and Warlingham Parish Council.

Matters arising from previous minutes

Cane Hill Hospital, Croydon, Mt Hancock said that by 1 April the local health authority will have decided which body within its hierarchy will hold the property and what is to be done about its disposd - which he presumed meant sale as a whole or in part. The Coulsdon Forum, which incorporates three local residents' associations, had issued a revised 'planning brief which they considered should replace the planning authority's brief, issued 5 years ago and now considered out of date.

Claybury Hospital It was reported that the Secretary had opposed the appeal on the latest proposal for residential development.

Central Railway Mr Babler reported that a group of around 60 MPs had been formed to oppose Central Railways - many more than from the 7 or so believed to support it. 31 MPs have signed Early Day Motion 223 against the scheme. The Strategic Rail Authority will not release details of its consultants' report and rumours about the Authority's attitude are confusing. However the Authority's new strategic plan says nothing about the scheme. Increase in north-south freight capacity is at the bottom of a list of low priority schemes. Chiltern Railways have a new 25-year franchise including expansion which will not he compatible with Central Railways using the same tracks. Mr Babler confirmed the Vice-Chairman's understanding that the Transport & Works Act would continue to be applicable to the scheme notwithstanding the Government's proposals on planning major infrastructure projects. He added that the route currently favoured by Central Railways went round the south west section of the M25 to Merstham and then in a more or less straight line to Ashford. The President congratulated Mr Babler and NatCRAG on their work in opposing the scheme.

Expansion of Biggin Hill Airport The Secretary has written opposing the appeal against refusal of permission for an aircraft hanger and associated development

Hertsmere Local Plan Mrs M Smith reported that at the reconvened public inquiry the developers had argued that the original 1951 boundary of the Green Belt was not in the right place and it would be better for it to be where it was erroneously drawn in the latest revision. They sought to show, using aerial photographs, that activities inconsistent with the Green Belt were going on on the land in question in 1946. The inspector decided in favour of returning the boundary to its original 1951 position; the developer may now seek to bring the matter before the local authority ombudsman.

Registering a domain name for the LGBC Mr Liffen reported that he had not found a way of registering a domain name without nominating an owner and specifying where the web site would be hosted. He would not have the time to set up and maintain a web site on behalf of LGBC. Several members indicated that their organisations had web sites and there was a general view that LGBC ought to have one. Mr Hencke wondered whether a school might set up a web site for LGBC as an IT project. However, Mr Crow pointed out that projects are finite and it was doubtful that a school could be relied on to maintain a site up to date in the long term. Mrs Lane observed that the web site needs careful design to get the message across in a way that does not put people off. Mrs Habib suggested that a commercial host might also run the site but Mr Liffen said that their charge would be much higher than that for merely hosting it. It was agreed that the Vice-Chairman would contact the web master of the North Mymms Association for advice.

Secondary school and housing at Bromley The Secretary has submitted further objections to this application but Bromley Council have resolved to approve it subject to the London Mayor's views. It is understood that the Mayor has objected.

Towards the London Plan The President reported that the Mayor's Spatial Development Strategy will he unveiled at Romney House on 11 March. He said that it will be interesting to see how far the Mayor is going to be able to impose his strategy on the boroughs. Ms Habib undertook to seek an invitation and attend on behalf of the LGBC.

ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

President's address The President welcomed members to the Palace of Westminster and expressed pleasure at seeing the Vice-Chairman in good health. He sad that the next year was going to be a challenging one for the LGBC. First there would be the task of responding to the DTLR's four consultation papers of which the Vice-Chairman had produced excellent summaries. The President said that for him the worrying points were the transfer of planning functions from the counties to unelected regional bodies, business zones exempt from planning control and the proposed system of parliamentary approval in principle for major projects. Additionally, LGBC would have to cope with the continued activities of Central Railways, the consequences of Terminal 5 at Heathrow and the pressure for housing. The President concluded by wishing the officers and members well for the coming year. In reply to a question from Mr Liffen, the President said that opening of meeting rooms in Portcullis House made it easier to book rooms for meetings. He added that the facilities in Portcullis House were excellent and invited LGBC to sample them for a meeting

Vice-Chairman's Review of the Year The Vice-Chairman said that in view of the late AGM, his report would cover the period up to the end of 2001. The Vice-Chairman regretted that there had only been two meetings in 2001; the written work of the LGBC had continued, but he felt it would be better to meet quarterly and invited the meeting's comments. Membership had remained almost the same throughout the year. The number attending meetings had fallen slightly but was still between a quarter and a third of the membership. Business in terms of casework had been relatively quiet but important issues of policy have arisen in relation to the Government's review of the planning system He was particularly concerned at gaps in the proposed system and in particular the apparent reduced opportunities for organisations such as LGBC to influence the 'Local Development Frameworks' in spite of the lip-service paid to community participation. In conclusion the Vice-Chairman thanked the President and Officers for their staunch support. Mr Quantock said that he thought that quarterly meetings were valuable; half yearly meetings were not really sufficient. The meeting agreed with that view.

Treasurer's Report Membership of LGBC started the year at 134. During the year 5 new members joined and one member decided not to renew membership. The subscriptions of three members - CPRE Oxfordshire (Oxford City Branch), Essendon Parish Council, and River Thames Society (Upper Reaches Branch) - had not been paid and the Treasurer proposed that these three organisations be removed from the membership list. This was agreed nem con. Income decreased and expenditure compared with the previous year but there was still a surplus of £219. 'The accounts were accepted nem con. The Treasurer proposed that the annual subscription remain at £10 was also agreed nem con.

Election of officers There were no nominations for the office of Chairman

The following officers were re-elected by acclamation:

Vice-Chairman: Mr R W G Smith Secretary: Mr L G Holt Treasurer: Mr S R Smith Auditor: Mr A Lim

Assistant Secretaries: Miss B Webb, Mr M Hencke and Mrs G Oliver

The Vice-Chairman said that it would be useful to have another Assistant Secretary to look after the west side of London and asked members to consider putting their name forward.

Other AGM Business

Heathrow Terminal 5 Mr Crow drew attention to an article in the Hillingdon local paper last November quoting the views of a group supporting Terminal 5 because it would enhance prosperity of the arm He noted that the LGBC president was also President of that group and questioned whether this was appropriate given that much of Terminal 5 would be on Green Belt land. The President explained that while he fully supported the Green Belt, he accepted that because of the economic benefits to his constituents, London and, indeed the country as a whole, there were very special circumstances for developing Terminal 5 on the old Perry Oaks Sewage Works. He did not believe that aviation development was inevitably inconsistent with environmental protection but he had campaigned against proposals such as the airport on Maplin Sands and a third runway at Heathrow which he considered environmentally unsound. His support for Terminal 5 was predicated on the necessary surface infrastructure being in place first. The President indicated that if the LGBC considered that his support for Terminal 5 made him an inappropriate President he would, of course, resign. The Vice-Chairman said that LGBC had decided early in the Terminal 5 saga not to oppose the development. The President's position was therefore not in conflict with LGBC policy. Mr Hencke proposed that the meeting express its confidence in and appreciation of the President This was seconded by Mr Myers and agreed by the meeting.

DTLR Consultation Papers on Changes to the Planning System

The Vice-Chairman said that overall the proposals appeared to him to involve a great loosening up of the planning system. Although they did not threaten the Green Belt directly, he considered that LGBC should think more widely and comment on the papers. 'The meeting agreed with this. Mr Myers observed that lack of reference to the Green Belt in the papers was itself a weakness.

Planning - delivering a fundamental change The Vice-Chairman outlined the proposals in the paper for 'Local Development Frameworks' containing core policies and special action plans for certain areas where change was necessary. He said that this left big holes, especially in rural areas, for which there would be no detailed planning. Mr Myers said that he had long considered it a weakness that there was no synoptic view of the London Green Belt, under the new proposals the logical place for it would be in Regional Policy. Several members were against the exclusion of the counties from the planning process, fearing that it would lead eventually to abolition of the county as an administrative unit and lead to decisions being taken at a more remote level. Mr Bitten said it was difficult for people in SW Essex, for example to keep track of what is going on in Cambridgeshire. The Vice-Chairman said he could better accept the exclusion of the counties if the district plans covered everything but they do not Mr Myers thought the changes should not be made until there was an elected regional assembly.

Members considered that LGBC should oppose reduced participation in local plan reviews. Mrs Lane had already had the problem that only one Residents Association had been able to take part in an inquiry and that had been from a urban area with little concern for the Green Belt. Mr Crow thought it would be impossible for small organisations to keep up to speed with the rolling updates proposed. Mr Myers was concerned about the business planning zones which would be exempt from planning control. He also considered that the possibility of third party appeals had been too easily dismissed; statutory consultees, at least, should have the right.

Mr Hancock considered that it would be better, in framing a response, to look at the whole planning structure rather than making a clause by clause analysis. Mr Rogers and Mr Crow suggested writing a general letter not constrained by the form of the questionnaire. This was agreed.

Regional Planning Obligations The Vice-Chairman thought that this paper was the most objectionable of the four because it sought to turn the concept of planning obligations into a development tax. He suggested that LGBC should reject the whole concept and go for option (a) in the paper. There was general agreement for this, Mr Crow observing that the proposals could lead to developers being able to build on the Green Belt if they put up enough money.

Major Infrastructure Projects. Mr Myers said that the weakness of the proposed system was that

Parliament would have to approve a project in principle without the benefit of an inspector's report. The President agreed, saying that MPs need information; they have preconceptions based on broad policies like 'transferring freight from road to rail' and assume that something in line with the policy is 'a good thing' without knowing the local implications. Mr Babler added that sponsors of a project did not even have to give MPs evidence of its technical, operational, and financial viability. This Lack of information was the basis of many MPs' criticism of Central Railways. It was generally agreed that the chances of a SoS refusing planning permission for a project which Parliament had endorsed in principle was remote in the extreme.

Compulsory Purchase and Compensation Mr Babler said that there were some good things in the paper relating to blight. Para. 4.22 says "Compensation where no land is taken should be the same as the compensation the landowner would have received...if part of his land had been acquired.' and para 5. 1 "New primary legislation required to reflect current [blight] realities". He hoped these would help many thousands excluded from compensation by the current blight legislation Mr Rogers said that the Law Commission would report on the subject in a few months and the Government should wait for the report.

Officers reports on new business

The Vice-Chairman had given advice to residents at East Langley on proposals in the Slough Local Plan to remove land from the Green Belt for housing. The inspector had recommended building on this land instead of other places. However there have been many local objections and the inquiry is likely to be reopened on this point

The Vice-Chairman said the DTLR and DCMS had issued a paper setting out 54 statements of intention for the care and management of the historic environment (not a consultation paper). The paper appears to have no special implications for the Green Belt.

The Vice-Chairman recalled that over a long period there had been various proposals to build a bigger stadium, car park and ancillary services on Barnet Football Club's site in the Green Belt. LGBC has objected to the latest ambitious scheme and Sir Sydney Chapman, the constituency MP, had also lodged a strong and detailed objection mainly on Green Belt grounds. Mr Phipps said that people hoped that Barnet would get back into the Football League and invited the LGBC to regard the development as a special case like Terminal 5. The Vice-Chairman, however, considered that there was not the same overriding imperative for the football stadium. Mrs Lane stressed that it was necessary to keep a tight control on sports developments in the Green Belt; around Runnymede there was constant pressure for such developments and the wrong precedent must not be set. Ms P Smith agreed.

The Secretary reported that he had objected to the following applications:

- Residential development at Roding Hospital, Roding Lane South, Redbridge

- Residential caravan park at Waldens Farm, Crockenhill Road, Eynsford, Swanley

- Residential development at Monk's Farm, St Mary's Lane, Upminster

- Radio masts and telephone towers, Sevenoaks

- Residential development at Mountains Farm Lodge, Noble Tree Road, Hildenborough

- Residential redevelopment at the Middlesex & Herts Country Club, Old Redding, Harrow Weald (also on appeal)

- Park & Ride scheme at Green Court Road,/ Goldsel Road, Swanley

- Residential conversion at Swaylands School, Penshurst Road, Penshurst

Other matters raised by members

Mr Phipps mentioned that them had recently been a number of new phone masts in Barnet. The Vice-Chairman said that it was possible to object to these on Green Belt grounds and some have been turned down for that reason. He suggested Mr Pbipps write to the local council about it.

Mr Crow said plans for a football stadium for Hayes Football Club had met with little support. The site was likely to remain an open park with a cycle track.

Mr Crow said that Hillingdon BC is seeking to take Breakspear Cottage and garden out of the Green Belt so that it could be sold. The Vice-Chairman said that the fact that land was Green Belt would not prevent its sale but Mr Myers pointed out that it would make sense if the land in question was 1938 Act land.

THE DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING will be notified in due course.