Kentish Gazette Canterbury & District
‘a lamentable indictment of our government bodies’
A Local Government Ombudsman inspector has been investigating how the council has been handling the enforcement measures it is meant to be bringing against the logging business.
The site supplies firewood but there have been complaints over many years that trees covered by a protection order have been cut down and caravans and buildings installed without planning permission.
The delays by the city council in tackling unauthorised uses at the woodyard resulted in frustrated residents calling in the ombudsman.
The inspector ordered £500 be paid in compensation to a resident who complained about the lack of action at the rural woodyard, where planning laws are said to have been flouted.
Kent Wildlife Trust, the Kent branch of the Council for the Protection of Rural England, and the Environment Agency have also raised concerns about the damage to the ancient woodland setting.
Just last month the wildlife trust’s planning and conservation officer Keith Nicholson wrote to the city council saying: “This case has become notorious across Kent and the trust’s records show planning breaches started over 15 years ago.
“We have been urging Canterbury City Council for action since 2004 to stop unauthorised use and restore the land at Greengate Farm.”
He also told a resident: “The case is a lamentable indictment of our government bodies. All involved should be ashamed.”
Barrie Gore, of CPRE Kent, added: “The works carried out to date by the occupiers of the wood has resulted in loss of trees, compaction of the ground and destruction of much of the site’s ecological interest.
“A sequence of Google Earth photographs over the past 20 years shows the devastation caused, despite the planning, forestry and environmental regulations designed to protect such areas.
“Sadly, the council failed to act expeditiously and as a result, the works have continued to be carried out, and the damage to the woodland has greatly increased.
“It is unhelpful, to say the least, that the council has an underfunded enforcement department.”
In the findings, the LGO inspector concludes: “The Ombudsman expects councils to properly investigate complaints of breaches of planning control and consider the range of enforcement options open to them.
“There are no set timescales but councils should make their decisions expeditiously. If a council considers it is not proportionate to take action then it should record this decision and be able to explain its reasons.
“The council is at fault as there is evidence it delayed investigating complaints of unauthorised development and in taking enforcement action.”
The payment to the resident, the inspector said, was to “acknowledge the uncertainty” created by the delays.
City council spokesman Rob Davies said: “We accept the findings of the ombudsman and have made the payment that we were required to.
“This is a complicated site and we are actively dealing with the issues, but due to the nature of any potential action, we are unable to comment further at this time.”
It has previously been said that a complicating factor has been the health of one of the occupants of the site.