St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

Summary

This document is a proposal concerning St John’s Park. It suggests a way the park can continue

to be managed sustainably and for everyone’s benefit; making sure the land can never be used

for inappropriate purposes that might disturb neighbouring properties and upset users.

The reasons why the land is most unlikely to be developed are discussed. The constraints of the

conservation area, tree preservation orders, and the significant weight of the covenants are set

out.

The details of how and why a village green application could be made are considered, and the

effects this could have on the land and its value. The risks of selling to an unknown owner are

identified, along with likelihood of an unscrupulous or absentee landowner causing problems for

neighbouring properties, and the difficulty in preventing this.

The value of the site was assessed by an independent professional surveyor, and his report is

attached as an appendix. This report concludes that the market value of the site is £15,000 as at

July 2011.

A solution is proposed which will allow the land to be managed in future in the way the current

owners originally intended. A group has formed which intends to form a locally-controlled

company or charity which will purchase the land at its market value, will retain the public amenity

for the entire site, and will guarantee not to develop it in the future. Some funding sources have

already been identified, conditional on the land being owned for the benefit of the public and not

by private individuals.

The current owners are invited to support this proposal and to give the new group an agreed

period of time to create the new holding body and raise the funds.

Background

St Johns Park is a wooded park in eastern Ryde. It is in private ownership, and the public have

access to it.

In 2000 the St Johns Park Action Committee was formed with the intention of preventing

development on the site, applying for village green status and seeking funding for purchase of

the land.

The land was purchased by a group of local people from the previous owners, William Pears Ltd.

in September 2000 at auction. Since then the land has been maintained more-or-less as it was

purchased, with some minor repairs, public access unrestricted, and informal clean-up days

involving local volunteers. On-going management issues facing the site are not serious. Although

many opportunities exist for further work if funds allow, no immediate problems exist and the

status quo is satisfactory to most site users and neighbours.

Page

August 2011

B - 2

St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

Status of the land

● The land is a part of the Ryde St Johns Conservation Area. The Conservation Area

Appraisal published in 2011 says “...undoubtedly, the major contribution comes from the

inner parkland. Although the parkland is overgrown and is now predominantly wooded

this open space has an overwhelmingly positive impact on the area.”

● The land is subject to a number of overlapping Tree Preservation Orders, which together

with the conservation area cover all of the land. These orders include: TPO/1988/44

(covers a large number of individual trees in back gardens, many of which overhang the

park); TPO/1988/50 (covers all oak, maple and ash within a central part of the park and

the eastern access) and TPO1994/16 (covers a woodland zone of all species in the

southern part of the park). Additionally the Conservation Area gives protection to all trees

with a stem diameter of 75 millimetres or more across the entire area.

● An application was made for village green status in 2000 but was withdrawn. No

application is pending.

● The site does not include any registered common land. There are no common land

constraints upon it nor can any be created.

● The parkland of St John’s Park is on the IW Council’s Local List of Buildings, Structures,

Parks and Gardens of Architectural and Historic Importance (listed June 2008) because

of the contribution it makes to the character of the area.

● The land is shown as Open Space in the Unitary Development Plan.

● A number of covenants exist upon the land and preclude development.

Analysis

Is the site likely to be developed?

The chances of gaining planning consent for any use class other than open space are essentially

none. This would include any residential, industrial, or commercial use. In the 1970s a few

applications for residential housing were successful, but none were ever implemented and all

have now lapsed. Since that time various applications have been made but all have been

unsuccessful - even on appeal - and the constraints on the site are now significantly greater than

they have been in the past. To obtain consent for such a development would require a number of

major planning policies to be waived. This does on occasion occur, but normally only where

significant benefits can be gained elsewhere. In this case there is no possibility of such gains.

At various times the opinion of the Isle of Wight Council has been sought in this matter, for

example in 2009 when Mike Gildersleeves, the area Planning Officer, concluded in a letter to the

owners “it is highly unlikely that the Local Planning Authority would be able to support any

proposed development for residential purposes.” He added “additionally there would in my

opinion be an avenue for the area of land to be classified as a Village Green if an application

were to be made”. The valuation report made in 2011 (see appendix) also refers to this, with

similar conclusions.

But the planning system does allow landowners to undertake significant works without needing to

apply for consent. These are known as permitted development. In the case of St Johns Wood

this is a more likely outcome.

Page

August 2011

B - 3

St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

The current owners have managed the site with great sensitivity - maybe reflecting the fact that

many of them live adjoining the site and have no wish to destroy the amenity they themselves

enjoy, or to upset their neighbours. However if this changes, an unsympathetic or negligent

owner could legally undertake substantial works to the site without the benefit of consent: or by

neglect, fail to prevent others from doing it. Some of these could only be undertaken for limited

times, or might require other consents. But even for a short time they could prove disruptive.

Examples of activities which could not be prevented, except by the landowner (as now) include:

● A lot of smaller trees (although not all) could be removed, right up to the boundaries,

opening up the park considerably;

● All non-tree vegetation could be removed;

● Tracks and paths could be cut;

● Vehicles could use the site;

● It could be used for storage of equipment or spoil;

● Occasional recreational activities could be undertaken on the site which local people

might find disturbing, such as paintball, off-road driving, camping or outdoor parties.

Are the covenants on the land meaningful?

A number of covenants exist upon the land and preclude development either directly; or by

specifying that the properties require uninterrupted access to the woods from their back gardens.

The beneficiaries are various adjacent properties in East Hill Road and West Hill Road.

Covenants pass with the land and therefore the freeholders of any of the beneficiary properties

could take private legal action to enforce their covenants, even if the agreement is old, or, as in

the case of Cotswold Court in West Hill Road, now applies to an entirely new building.

Example covenant taken from the current Charges Register:

A Transfer of Cotswold, West Hill Road dated 12 July 1949 made between (1) London

and Manchester Assurance Company Limited (Vendor) and (2) Alan James Blundell

(Purchaser) contains the following covenants by the Vendor:- The Vendor hereby

covenants with the Purchaser that the land tinted pink on the filed plan of the above title

shall not be built up upon but shall remain as an Ornamental Garden or pleasure

ground.

Covenant law can be difficult to interpret. Clearly in the past developers, and the current owners,

have made plans to develop the land. They must have been aware of the covenants on the land

and have assumed that these either would not or could not be enforced. However the freeholders

of any of the benefiting properties could, if they were so inclined, take action to enforce a

covenant - or seek a payment to release the owners from that covenant. Many freeholders are

probably unaware that their properties currently benefit from these covenants. If the wood was

under threat and they were to find this out, they may then be interested in taking action,

especially if - as would inevitably be the case - the value of their property was affected.

There certainly is a risk that because of these covenants development would not be possible, or

if it was, it would be after an unpredictable delay and legal costs. This could affect the likelihood

of a developer taking that risk; and almost certainly would be a relevant factor when the value of

the land is calculated.

Page

August 2011

B - 4

St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

Village green status

The campaign to purchase the land in 2000 included a commitment to seek village green status.

In 2000, before the land was sold, a group of local people submitted a village green application to

the Isle of Wight Council - presumably at that time they believed that the site was a village green.

However after purchase the application was withdrawn and has not been progressed.

Changes to the law since the park’s purchase in 2000 have made village green registrations

significantly more common and easier to undertake. Today, just as the campaigners believed in

2000, St John’s Park already appears to fulfil the necessary criteria for such a green to be

registered. These are that:

1. People have undertaken lawful sports and pastimes on it;

2. For not less than 20 years;

3. These people are from an identifiable locality, or of any neighbourhood within a locality

and;

4. They have done so as of right.

Any one of these people can apply to the Isle of Wight Council to register a village green: there is

no cost to do so. All that is necessary is for evidence to be shown that the four conditions are

met. This is usually done by interviews or questionnaires from local people. Sometimes an

enquiry is held, and witnesses are asked to present their evidence in person. If a green is

successfully registered, the landowner then cannot stop the local people from entering all the

land to undertake lawful sports and pastimes - this essentially means that developing the land or

fencing off any part of it becomes unlawful.

It is also possible for the owner of a site to voluntarily register a village green. This process costs

nothing and does not require any enquiry or evidence other than proof of ownership.

To get a village green registered by anyone other than the owner would require some work

gathering evidence, although not much money. The landowners are unlikely to wish to invest

much money in a barrister or specialist solicitor to defend the case, as (given the low chance of

any development) the potential financial benefits to them would be little.

An application could depress the value of the site, and would achieve nothing on the ground. It

also can have the effect of pitting neighbour against neighbour, which can be an undesirable

outcome and would reduce the chance of volunteer and community support in the future. If the

site had a stable future, it might be preferable to encourage local people to become involved with

the site positively, for example as volunteers or ‘friends of’. Many will remember the campaign in

1999/2000 and wonder why such a campaign is needed again.

The timescale associated with such an application is also significant. At present, it can take many

months or even years to determine an application, which meanwhile would be revealed to any

potential purchaser or mortgagee. So the mere act of submitting even an inadequate village

green application is known to be a way to discourage the sale or development of a site in the

short term.

What would trigger a village green application?

An application can be made by any person who uses the site or has used it in the past. So at any

time such a person might choose to do so. At present the landowners allow local people to use

their rights unhindered. What is most likely to provoke somebody to bring forward an application

Page

August 2011

B - 5

St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

would be if these rights were to be restricted or threatened, for example by reducing or stopping

public access to all or some of the park, or by a planning application, threat to sell or similar

public indication that the use of the park might be restricted in the future. It would not be

necessary to stop access to all of the park, or for this to be for any significant period of time.

An application can be made at any time. In most cases, there is a two-year period for

applications allowed after any access restrictions actually come into force, so for example if a

fence were erected to keep the public out of part of the area, so long as an application were

made within two years of this, it could be accepted.

What other future work is possible?

There are various possibilities for grant funding and management of the woodland, but all of

these require a secure and long-term commitment to public access. These include Heritage

Lottery, and Forestry Commission Small Woodlands Grant. A meeting with the Island’s Forestry

Commission forester confirms that the site is still eligible for the English Woodland Grant

Scheme, which pays 80% of the management costs so long as the landowners will agree to

allow public access to the land for ten years (so long as the value of the grant is £10,000 or less -

it is longer for larger sums).

If the landowners were willing to make such an access commitment then funding for enhancing

and maintaining the amenity of the site would be considerably easier to access.

However the existing management of the site appears to be acceptable for most site users.

Grant funding and improvement of the site might not necessarily be the best way forward. The

neighbouring properties may be reluctant to see significantly enhanced public access, or major

clearance, as this could compromise their privacy. Therefore there is merit in leaving the main

body of the site much as it is now, with the possible exception of some path improvements to

enhance wet-weather access, and clearance of dumped garden waste.

The value of the site

In anticipation of the importance of the question of the site value, an independent site valuation

has been commissioned from a chartered surveyor with experience of valuing properties on the

Island. This document is available as an appendix to this proposal.

The surveyor’s assessment of the current market value of the site is £15,000 as at July 2011.

This is the transaction value, and does not reflect any extra costs that might be involved in any

such transaction such as auction or estate agents’ fees, conveyance, or other professional costs.

Clearly this is the opinion of one surveyor, albeit a MRICS. To agree a market price for any

transaction it is common for the vendor to arrange their own valuation from a similarly qualified

surveyor on comparable terms to make a comparison.

Page

August 2011

B - 6

St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

Alternative ownership

Given the ten years since the land was purchased, although good work has been done to

conserve the wood, it has not proved to be a very straightforward matter to transfer the

ownership of the woodland onward and return its value to the current owners.

A chance to address this issue quite quickly and without risk has now arisen. If the opportunity

arises, a group of individuals and organisations with an interest in conserving and

maintaining the park will be willing to form a new managing body to purchase the park at

its market value from the current owners. This would be a locally-controlled company or

charity, with a constitution. Unlike an open sale, this transaction could, if required, include the

introduction of reasonable further protective covenants to ensure that the privacy and security of

the neighbours is preserved, and as the new managing body would intend to maintain the woods,

so long as these covenants were compatible with that then they would not affect the price. It

would also not be subject to agents or auctioneers fees.

To put this arrangement into motion, the prospective new body would require only the security of

an option to buy at an agreed price, for a set period of time. Without this security it would be

unlikely that the new body could be funded, as prospective funders and particularly grant-giving

bodies would have no certainty that the new body could fulfil its objective. An option to buy is a

kind of 'first refusal'. The current owners promise to allow the new group to buy the wood if they

come up with an agreed price on an agreed date. Then the new group goes off to raise that

money with the comfort that if (and only if) they do get the money in time, they will be sure the

owners will sell at the agreed price.

To take advantage of this, the existing owners should announce their intention to pass on the

wood, and agree the option price and an agreed timescale (for example, six months) for the

new group to form a formal body, gather support, raise funds and make a bid. A number of

funding sources for the purchase and ongoing management have already come forward, and

within six months it is highly likely that the matter can be resolved.

How can existing owners stay involved?

The support and assistance of some of the existing owners is likely to prove very helpful to the

success of this venture. After all, they are the ones who have already demonstrated their

commitment to the park for a decade and have a lot of knowledge and experience of the site.

Under this proposal, the park would be purchased outright from all the existing owners. All

owners would be offered their share back as a cash sum. So every existing owner who wants to

recover their share of the value of the site will be able to do so at the start of the process. The

exact amount recovered will depend upon the value of the site agreed.

Any existing owner who wishes to continue to be involved in the park would be very welcome to

do so; mindful of course that supporting the new body won't be the same as owning the wood is

now - the idea is that the new body owns the wood itself, rather than individuals owning it in

person as now. This means that the liability and responsibility for the park lies with the managing

body, and the members of that body then decide how it acts, probably though an elected

committee and public constitution.

So an owner who wants to stay involved with the park could choose to donate some or all of their

share to the new body to show their support, or could recover their share of the money, and still

remain involved as a member or committee member.

The purpose of this new managing body is to ensure that the ownership of the park is no longer

associated with private individuals and uncertain futures but with long-term ownership by a non-

profit organisation that volunteers and supporters will be able to join and support at little or no

cost.

Page

August 2011

B - 7

St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

A plan for an orderly transition: further options

●

The possible outcomes for all neighbours to the site if the land is sold to a neglectful or

unsympathetic owner could be serious and long-lasting. If the current owners (especially

those whose properties border the site) wish to ensure that the wood is not developed or

misused after they pass it on, they should give serious consideration to a voluntary

village green registration - in line with the original goals of the St John’s Park Trust. This

is a cost-free and quick process which in contrast to a disputed application would not be

controversial - indeed it would most likely be the cause of local celebration and

congratulations. This would protect the park for the future, and help ensure that it

remains undisturbed as it is now.

●

The independent valuation (appendix to this document) is offered at no cost to assist the

owners in their decisions. However the owners should weigh up whether they need to

take their own steps to ensure that they seek and receive accurate and independent

advice on these matters, at a cost if necessary. There has been much discussion about

the woods for many years, and much of what has been said, even quite recently, is either

out-of-date or mistaken. Clearly the owners are all aware of the importance of the wood,

or they would not have got involved. They will therefore wish to be sure that they have

the correct advice and information available, so that they can make an well-informed

decision. Issues which the owners should be careful to consider include the following:

○ The value of the site - most property has depreciated in value in the last ten

years. Whilst building land has gained some value, the market for speculative

purchases of land with no planning consent has been far less buoyant. It is likely

that the current value of St John’s Park is different from the purchase price in

2000.

○ The likelihood of planning consent being granted. Much has been said about this

in the past, but mostly by those with an interest. A planning consultant would be

able to give an independent view on the realistic prospects of developing this site.

○ The likelihood of a village green application succeeding. This is a technical area

of the law which has changed significantly even in the last few years. Legal

advice on this matter could be sought to test the assertions made in this paper.

○ Any future covenants that the owners might wish to apply to the land if it is sold,

to protect their own boundaries. Obviously such covenants could affect the

market value of the land.

Page

August 2011

B - 9

St John’s Park: a proposal

v1.2

Who is involved with this proposal?

A small group of residents who own and live in properties adjoining the park are making this

proposal. They include:

• Annie Souter (60, Westhill Road).

Joint owner of the park.

• Cat James (7 Somerville, East Hill Road).

Managing director of the Somerville Management Company, resident since 1994.

• Matthew Chatfield (2 Somerville, East Hill Road.

Managing director of the Somerville Management Company, resident since 2003.

Parks & Countryside Manager at IW Council.

Other parties both locally and elsewhere have expressed an interest, but are not willing to be

involved unless the future of the site is secure. If the proposal is accepted then others are likely

to come forward, and it should not be assumed that the people named above will be running the

new body, or personally funding the proposed purchase.

Conclusion

In 2004 the chair of the St John’s Park Trust wrote “it has always been our intention to sell on to

a public or charitable body.” The new owners successfully secured the site and put it into

sympathetic management, but this one aim has yet to be fulfilled; and until now there has been

no obvious way in which it could be. However there are local people who would still be interested

in managing the wood for public benefit, and respecting the regime established by the present

owners. The intention of the owners to sell the wood may be an encouragement for such people

to come forward. A new body could take on the site and those existing owners who wish to sell

could do so, assuming terms could be agreed.

The current owners came together in adversity in 2000, and did a great service to the people of

Ryde St Johns by saving St John’s Park for the future. They have since proven to be good

custodians of the site, as can be demonstrated by the many local people and surrounding

residents who regularly enjoy it. To now offer it back to the open market, or break it up, would be

to undo this good work and effort that the owners, and many volunteers and supporters, have put

into the site over the years. A sale at auction, in particular, would be a risky strategy that could

cause long-term difficulties for those neighbouring the park by delivering the woods to an

unscrupulous or careless owner - to avoid which was the very reason the park was purchased in

2000.

Instead, the owners now have at last an opportunity to securely pass on the work they have done

and ensure the wood remains in good and safe hands to the collective benefit of all neighbouring

properties, and for everyone to enjoy.

Page

August 2011

B - 10

Page -3-

A VALUATION

ST JOHN’S PARK

WOODLAND BETWEEN

EASTHILL ROAD AND WESTHILL ROAD

RYDE

ISLE OF WIGHT

1.0

Instructions

1.1

I have been instructed by Mr M Chatfield by a letter dated 4^th

July 2011 to undertake a valuation of the subject property.

1.2

The basis of valuation is Market Value as defined by the Royal

Institution of Chartered Surveyors. That is “

The estimated

amount for which a property should exchange on the date of

valuation between a willing buyer and a willing seller in an

arm’s-length transaction after proper marketing wherein the

parties had each acted knowledgeably, prudently and without

compulsion

”.

1.3

The material date of valuation is the date of this report.

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 14

Page -4-

2.0

Assumptions

2.1

The following assumptions are made for which the Valuer will be

under no duty to verify;

(a)

I have not arranged for any investigation to be carried out

to determine whether or not deleterious or hazardous

material has been used in the construction of this

property, or has since been incorporated, and I am

therefore unable to report that the property is free from

risk in this respect. For the purpose of this valuation I

have assumed that such investigation would not disclose

the presence of any such material to any significant

extent. Moreover, I have assumed that this is not land-

filled ground.

(b)

That a good and marketable title can be shown and that

the property is not subject to any unusual or especially

onerous restrictions, encumbrances or outgoings.

(c)

That the property and its value are unaffected by any

matters which may be revealed by a local search and

replies to the usual enquiries, or by any statutory notice

and that neither the property, nor its condition, nor its

use, nor its intended use, is or will be unlawful.

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 15

Page -5-

3.0

Third Party Liability

3.1

This report and valuation is provided for the sole use and benefit

of Mr M Chatfield. It is confidential to Mr M Chatfield and his

professional advisers and Ian Bawdon Chartered Surveyors

accept no responsibility whatsoever to any entity other than Mr

M Chatfield. Neither the whole nor any part of this valuation nor

any reference to it may be included in any published document,

circular or statement, nor published in any way without Ian

Bawdon Chartered Surveyors’ prior written approval of the form

and context in which it may appear.

4.0

Description

4.1

The land comprises an irregular-shaped area of woodland which

extends to approximately 4.6 acres.

4.2

The woodland comprises mainly common Oak with Birch,

Evergreen Oak, Sycamore, London Plain Ash, Fir, Copper

Beach, Elm, Yew and Hornbeam.

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 16

Page -6-

5.0

Drift Map

5.1

The Ordnance Survey Drift Map indicates that the soil in this

area comprises clay to the northern area of the woodland with

marine gravel present to the south.

6.0

Tenure

6.1

I am not legally qualified, but understand that the tenure is a

combination of freehold and leasehold interests.

6.2

I am aware from the Charges Register that there are a number

of covenants in place which prohibit development upon various

areas of the site.

6.3

I am not qualified to confirm if these covenants remain

enforceable.

7.0

Planning

7.1

I have discussed the site with both the Planning Officer for Ryde

and the Tree Department of the Local Planning Authority (LPA).

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 17

Page -7-

7.2

It is confirmed that the whole site is within a Designated

Conservation Area.

7.3

The woodland is protected by three different types of Tree

Preservation Orders (TPO’s).

7.4

TPO/1988/50G1 is a group order dealing with the central area of

the woodland. A group order is a specific type of tree

preservation order usually dealing with a particular specie.

7.5

TPO/1994/16W1 is a woodland order and this covers the

southern section of the woodland. Woodland orders are more

prescriptive and deal with each and every tree present including

those that seed and grow after the order has been legally

executed.

7.6

There are various other additional and individual TPO’s such as

TPO1997/9 that link to single trees within the curtilage.

7.7

I am informed by the local highway authority that there is no

public footpath across this woodland as shown on the dedicated

map. I am aware that the general public walk through this

woodland and have done so for very many years. Accordingly,

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 18

Page -8-

this matter needs to be clarified as public rights of way may

have been established by a prescription.

7.8

There may be an opportunity to consider a sub-division of the

woodland into units that are then sold onto those dwellings that

front either Easthill Road or Westhill Road, Ryde. This would be

a material act of development under the Town & Country

Planning Acts because land would then become domestic in its

usage. The local planning authority have informed me that they

would resist most strongly any attempt to split up this area of

woodland and award a change in use. They intend to use all

the powers available to them in retaining the status quo.

8.0

Planning History

8.1

I have examined the planning file at the offices of the Local

Planning Authority. There is a long history of applications, most

of which originate from the 1960’s.

8.2

TCP/11692/R granted outline planning approval for the whole

site but detailed permission was never applied for and this

application time expired.

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 19

Page -9-

8.3

TCP/11692F involved the erection of 38 semi-detached old

people’s bungalows. It was refused.

8.4

TCP/11692G involved the construction of 2, four storey, blocks

of flats containing 49 units. This application was also rejected.

8.5

TCP/11692H was made in October 1997 for the erection of 15

detached bungalows with garages. This application was

refused.

8.6

TCP/11692J was an application for 17 blocks of two storey flats,

each block containing 4 flats making 68 flats in total. It was

refused. TCP/11692L was submitted in May 1994 for the

construction of 2 family houses with garage space. This was

refused.

8.7

TCP/11692M involves an application for a single three storey

house which was an attempt to establish development rights in

principle. This was refused.

8.8

The main reasons given for refusing development rights on this

site were;

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 20

Page -10-

(1) The area has not been allocated for residential

development.

(2) The development plans have required that the existing use

is to be maintained.

(3) The vehicular access onto Westhill Road is not of a high

quality.

(4) The existing sewage system is considered inadequate to

deal with the pressures of new development.

(5) Any new dwellings would be an undesirable intensification.

8.9

The sewage capacity is an important point. For some years,

local authorities have required detailed calculations where there

is a fear that new development would demand capital

expenditure by way of drainage improvements. I recently

undertook a scheme in the west of the Isle of Wight where it was

proven that the existing system was at more or less full capacity

and a private sewer had to be requisitioned. It was a small

length of new sewer with no legal complications but it cost

£100,000.

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 21

Page -11-

Any private purchaser of this land would not have rights of

compulsory acquisition. I am not of the opinion that the local

authority would serve compulsory purchase notices to assist a

local developer and accordingly it would only need the owner of

one parcel of land along the length of any new private sewer,

should it be needed, and matters would be stopped dead in their

tracks. The market will acknowledge this.

8.10

The local planning authority declare that the new Island Plan will

seek to tighten, not relax, control over woodland within existing

urban settlements and high importance will be placed upon the

response from statutory consultees such as English Heritage

and English Nature.

9.0

Marketability

9.1

From a commercial perspective, it is difficult to establish how a

financial gain may be realised from the ownership of this

woodland.

9.2

The planning history is self-evident and, even after two appeals,

there has been no meaningful approval save for one permission

issued on 23^rd August 1977 which was never invoked and one

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 22

Page -12-

permission in the 1960’s which also time expired. Since then,

local planning authorities have tightened their approach to what

they view as public amenity space and particularly tightened

their view where woodland is concerned within existing urban

settlements. There is far more effective liaising now between

statutory consultees than there used to be and with issues over

existing sewage capacity, the effect on demand, even from the

most optimistic of property developers, will be severe. It is

evidentially difficult to perceive where and when any money can

be made from this protected woodland.

9.3

Conversely, with the planning history so clearly stated, there

may have been in the 1980’s and 1990’s an opportunity missed

in serving a purchase notice upon the LPA.

9.4

If, for example, a compulsory purchase order was served on the

owners of the site by the Isle of Wight Council then I cannot

reasonably envisage that any hope value for development in

assessing the compensation to be paid would be allowed either

by the Council Surveyors or, if it was ultimately necessary, the

Lands Tribunal.

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 23

Page -13-

9.5

The woodland cannot in my view be forested commercially and I

see no meaningful chance of being able to charge a levy for

persons walking across it.

9.6

There are some small grants available for woodland ownership

but they are few and far between and do not involve any

significant sums of money.

9.7

I therefore conclude that it is difficult to perceive the benefit of

ownership. Liabilities are present such as the risk of a tree

falling onto property owned by an adjacent owner and thereby

causing damage.

9.8

Although it might take quite a lot of money in legal fees it is often

in my experience possible to amalgamate and simplify a quite

complicated previous history of tenure with covenants.

9.9

Property values have generally fallen quite sharply since 2008.

Ultimately, and under the present parlous state of the property

market generally, I can only reasonably envisage demand from

parties with an interest in maintaining this land as an area of

accessible woodland used by the local populace.

Property Address: St John’s Park - Woodland between Easthill Road and Westhill Road, Ryde, IOW.

Client:

Mr M Chatfield

Ref No. U6012739

Date:

8^th July 2011

I C J Bawdon BSc MRICS MEWI

B - 24

Title Number : IW48825

This title is dealt with by Land Registry, Weymouth Office.

The following extract contains information taken from the register of the above

title number. A full copy of the register accompanies this document and you

should read that in order to be sure that these brief details are complete.

Neither this extract nor the full copy is an 'Official Copy' of the register. An

official copy of the register is admissible in evidence in a court to the same

extent as the original. A person is entitled to be indemnified by the registrar

if he suffers loss by reason of a mistake in an official copy.

This extract shows information current on

4 JUL 2011 at 12:34:07 and so does

not take account of any application made after that time even if pending in the

Land Registry when this extract was issued.

Title Number

: IW48825

Address of Property

: land on the west side of East Hill Road, Ryde

Price Stated

: £25,555

Registered Owner(s)

: KEITH JOHN GENTLEMAN of 22 West Hill Road, Ryde,

Isle Of Wight PO33 1LG

RITA LAWRENCE of Apartment 8, Vista Marina, East

Hill Road, Ryde, Isle Of Wight PO33 1LS

TONY EVELYN HAYDEN SMYTHERS of 30 West Hill Road,

Ryde, Isle Of Wight PO33 1LQ

CHRISTINE ROSSALL of The Oaks, 56 West Hill Road,

Ryde, Isle Of Wight PO33 1LW.

Lender(s)

: None

B - 26

Page 1 of 4

This is a copy of the register of the title number set out immediately below,

showing the entries in the register on

4 JUL 2011 at 12:34:07. This copy does

not take account of any application made after that time even if still pending

in the Land Registry when this copy was issued.

This copy is not an 'Official Copy' of the register. An official copy of the

original. A person is entitled to be indemnified by the registrar if he suffers

loss by reason of a mistake in an official copy. If you want to obtain an

official copy, the Land Registry web site explains how to do this.

A: Property Register

This register describes the land and estate

comprised in the title.

ISLE OF WIGHT

The Freehold land shown edged with red on the plan of the above

Title filed at the Registry and being land on the west side of

East Hill Road, Ryde.

The mines and minerals are included.

B: Proprietorship Register

This register specifies the class of title and

identifies the owner. It contains any entries that

affect the right of disposal.

Title absolute

(11.10.2006) PROPRIETOR: KEITH JOHN GENTLEMAN of 22 West Hill

Road, Ryde, Isle Of Wight PO33 1LG and RITA LAWRENCE of Apartment

8, Vista Marina, East Hill Road, Ryde, Isle Of Wight PO33 1LS and

TONY EVELYN HAYDEN SMYTHERS of 30 West Hill Road, Ryde, Isle Of

Wight PO33 1LQ and CHRISTINE ROSSALL of The Oaks, 56 West Hill

Road, Ryde, Isle Of Wight PO33 1LW.

(27.03.2001) The price stated to have been paid on 21 March 2001

was £25,555.

(11.10.2006) RESTRICTION: No disposition by a sole proprietor of

the registered estate (except a trust corporation) under which

capital money arises is to be registered unless authorised by an

order of the court.

C: Charges Register

This register contains any charges and other matters

that affect the land.

The land is subject to the provisions of Sir John Simeons Leasing

Act 1861.

The land edged and numbered 1 in blue on the filed plan is not to

be built upon but is to remain as an Ornamental Garden or Pleasure

Ground and is subject to rights of user and enjoyment.

A Transfer of Egremont Guest House, East Hill Road dated 17 June

1949 made between (1) London and Manchester Assurance Company

Limited and (2) Benjamin Bowring and Marjorie Bowring contains the

following covenants by the Transferor:-

"AND the Transferors for themselves and their successors in title

hereby covenant with the Transferees and their successors in title

for the benefit of the land hereby transferred that no building of

any kind whatsoever shall at any time hereafter be erected or

built upon St John's Park, Ryde, Isle of Wight, or any part

B - 27

Page 2 of 4

C: Charges Register continued

thereof."

The parts of the land affected thereby are subject to the

following rights which are granted by Transfers of various

properties in East Hill Road and West Hill Road:-

"FULL liberty and authority to maintain a gate in the fence

dividing the land hereby transferred from St John's Park, Ryde

aforesaid being the land tinted pink on the filed plan of the

above title and the right for the Transferees at their pleasure of

ingress egress and regress in and through the gates of St John's

Park aforesaid.

NOTE: The land tinted pink referred to is edged and numbered 1 in

blue on the filed plan.

A Transfer of Cotswold, West Hill Road dated 12 July 1949 made

between (1) London and Manchester Assurance Company Limited

(Vendor) and (2) Alan James Blundell (Purchaser) contains the

following covenants by the Vendor:-

"The Vendor hereby covenants with the Purchaser that the land

tinted pink on the filed plan of the above title shall not be

built up upon but shall remain as an Ornamental Garden or pleasure

ground."

NOTE: The land tinted pink referred to is edged and numbered 1 in

blue on the filed plan.

A Transfer of Spencer House, West Hill Road dated 27 June 1957

made between (1) London and Manchester Assurance Company Limited

(Transferor) and (2) William Charles Williamson (Transferee)

contains the following covenants:-

"THE Transferor for the benefit and protection of the land hereby

transferred or any part or parts thereof and so as to bind St

Johns Park (tinted pink on the filed plan of the above mentioned

title) into whosesoever hands the same may come hereby covenants

with the Transferee and his successors in title the owners or

occupiers for the time being of the land hereby transferred that

the Transferor and the persons deriving title under the Transferor

will not erect or set up or permit to be erected or set up any

messuage or building whatsoever upon St Johns Park aforesaid

except such buildings as shall be consistent with the enjoyment

thereof as an ornametal garden or pleasure ground."

NOTE: The land tinted pink referred to is edged and numbered 1 in

blue on the filed plan.

The land is subject to the following rights granted by a Transfer

of the property adjoining to the south of the land hatched blue on

the filed plan dated 6 March 1972 made between (1) London and

Manchester Assurance Company Limited (Transferor) and (2) Edward

Roy Lewis (Transferee):-

Together with a right of way for the Transferee and his successors

in title at all times and for all purposes for the benefit of the

land hereby transferred along over and upon such roadway as the

Transferor may construct within the period of eighty years from

the date hereof upon the land edged blue upon the said plan

annexed hereto.

NOTE: The land edged blue referred to is hatched blue on the filed

plan.

The land is subject to the following rights granted by a Transfer

of Eden Lodge, East Hill Road dated 15 September 1993 made between

(1) Oatfield Properties Limited and Micah Properties Limited and

(2) Summerhouse Estates Limited:-

"TOGETHER WITH the following rights:-

1.1 The free and uninterrupted passage and running of water soil

B - 28

Page 3 of 4

C: Charges Register continued

gas and electricity from and to the property hereby transferred

through and along the drains sewers pipes and cables now laid or

to be laid hereafter within eighty years from the date hereof

which period shall be the perpetuity period applicable to this

Transfer (hereinafter called "the specified period") under or

through other premises now or heretofore belonging to the

Tansferor

1.2 A right of support shelter and protection for the property

hereby transferred and such easements and rights together with

ancillary provisions as shall be reasonably necessary and

appropriate to preserve the for the benefit of the property hereby

transferred the existing amenities thereof PROVIDED ALWAYS that

the Transferor shall not become entitled to any easement or right

of light or air or other easement which would restrict or

interfere with the free use of adjacent and neighbouring property

of the transferor or any person deriving title under it for

building or for any other purpose."

The parts of the land affected thereby are subject to the leases

set out in the schedule of leases hereto. The leases grant and

reserve easements as therein mentioned.

(01.12.2000) The land is subject to the following rights reserved

by a Transfer of the land in this title dated 12 October 2000 made

between (1) William Pears Limited (Transferor) and (2) Lysette

Phillips (Transferee):-

"For the benefit and protection of the remainder of the land

comprised in Title number IW40195 (hereinafter called "the

Retained Land") the Transferor reserves to itself for the benefit

of the Retained Land all rights of light, air, rights of way, use

and enjoyment of the land hereby transferred now or presently

enjoyed over same and all other easements and rights now or

hereafter belonging to or enjoyed by the said Retained Land or any

other neighbouring land or buildings over or against the property

hereby transferred"

Schedule of notices of leases

30.10.1935

Land on the east side of

29.08.1862

Edged and

West Hill Road

1000 years

numbered 2 in

from 29.8.1862

blue

NOTE: The Lease comprises also other land

30.10.1935

Land on the east side of

29.08.1862

Edged and

West Hill Road

1000 years

numbered 3 in

from 29.8.1862

blue

NOTE: The Lease comprises also other land

End of register

B - 29

Page 4 of 4