Sorry, this video asset has been removed.

Video: The fight to save
a play area from the planners

By Mary Graham

Faced with the threat of losing their home play equipment, three
youngsters have gone into battle with a council, quoting the
Children's Act and Government policy.

Six years ago, the Richardson family, of London Road, Addington,
put up a slide, swings and a trampoline on land which they own,
adjoining their back garden.

Dad, Chris Richardson, claimed he was told that no planning
permission was necessary.

But Tonbridge and Malling Council have written to him this month
saying not only is permission needed, it is highly unlikely to be
granted and he has 28 days to remove it, otherwise the planning
committee will consider further action.

While all councils are well-practised in handling objections,
Tonbridge and Malling officials were probably not expecting lengthy
letters of objections to arrive from Mr Richardson's three
daughters, Maxine, 15, Louise, 12 and nine-year-old Jessica.

Maxine queried the decision, saying how her school had been
following Government policy on healthy eating and regular exercise.
She pointed out that a climbing frame at Addington Park had been
destroyed, leaving it of little use for children to let off
steam.

Louise told officials how she hopes to be a professional gymnast
and practised all her moves on the trampoline. She added that her
dream job is now in jeopardy if the equipment has to be taken
down.

Jessica said she was hoping to invite her friends to play on the
equipment before having a sleepover, an event also in jeopardy.

Louise and Jessica's letters quoted the Children's Act 1989,
stating that where decisions are taken involving children, the best
interests of the children are the paramount consideration.

Mr Richardson said: "These are small bits of play equipment on
land that I own. What I don't understand is why someone from the
council didn't just have a quiet word with me, rather than me
getting a letter saying it has to come down."

Tonbridge and Malling Council said the Richardsons had fallen
foul of planning regulations. Because his land is not within the
residential boundaries of his house, any structure requires
planning consent.

A spokesman added: "It was while undertaking a site visit in
connection with two planning applications being made by Mr
Richardson that a council planning officer noticed the play
equipment.

"As the field lies within the Green Belt there are substantial
planning policy presumptions against any form of development.

"Mr Richardson has been advised of this."