Representation by The Parochial Church Council of the Ecclesiastical Parish of Horningsea (The Parochial Church Council of the Ecclesiastical Parish of Horningsea)
- Date submitted
- 23 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Parish councils
Representation on behalf of The Parochial Church Council of the Ecclesiastical Parish of Horningsea (“the Church”) The Church has been served with a notice pursuant to s56 of the Planning Act 2008 as the application is said to affect land in which the church has an interest or may be otherwise affected by this application. The church has registered Chancel Repair Liability (“CRL”) on 13 parcels of land in Horningsea, from land adjacent to the A14 in the South to land at Northfields Farm in the North. The plan attached to the s56 notice does not show which parcels of land would be affected by the development. I have searched the CCWT website to try and locate a plan which identifies the parcels of land by reference to the Land Registry Titles but have failed to find a document which is helpful. I have asked the Save Honey Hill Campaign members of they are aware of any plan which identifies the Title numbers but they could not find such a plan. I have left a message with CCWT to telephone me back with the information but have had no response. This response if therefore based on guesswork as to which parcels of land might be involved. That is a wholly unsatisfactory way to proceed on such an important development. I assumed they are considering firstly the parcels of land closest to the A14. I do not know whether the plan involves compulsory purchase of any parcel of land in which the Church has an interest. I do not know what, if any, proposal the applicant has to deal with the CRL if one of our parcels of land is to be subject to compulsory purchase. I note that the Advice on the planning inspectorate website paragraph 5 and 6 indicates that there should have been communication with the affected land owners etc. The church has had no discussion or communication about the impact of compulsory purchase. I have no idea what CCWT’s proposals would be to deal with the CRL – would they confirm that they must take any land subject to the CRL and therefore the burden of funding repairs to the Chancel of the Church? If they think they would somehow seek to discharge the CRL I do not know on what terms they think they could achieve this – particularly as the CRL has attached to this land for 800 years and is recorded in the 1810 Enclosure Maps as well as being formally registered in the Land Registry. I do not know if the pipelines and lines marked on the plan 4.1 Location and Scheme Order Limits Plan Reg 5(2)(o) affect any of the rest of the 13 parcels of land which are subject to CRL. It is impossible to tell from this plan. If it is the intention of CWWT to acquire the ownership of any of these other pieces of land the comments above apply in a similar way. Does CWWT confirm that any land they acquire is subject to the CRL and they will have the burden of repairing the Chancel of the Church? Do they have any proposals to seek to discharge the CRL and if so on what basis and what terms? In these circumstances the Church must oppose the application as there has been a wholesale failure to explain how the project will impact on the Church’s interest in all or some of the land. There has been no discussion about the impact of compulsory purchase on the CRL and no proposal as to how the CRL could be taken into account.