A landowner has criticized ‘nimby’ locals and criticized a council as ‘terrible’ after being instructed to demolish a series of storage buildings in the woods due to a planning dispute that has been ongoing for six years.
Colin Parsons, 67, says he has spent more than £300,000 developing a plot of land in Adisham Woods, on the outskirts of Canterbury in Kent.
But he now stands to lose a significant sum after a battle with Canterbury City Council ended in defeat.
The crux of the six-year disagreement revolved around planning permission – a belief held by Mr. Parsons that he had obtained, countered by the council’s assertion that the constructed woodland structures did not align with the necessary regulations.
In planning documents from February 2019, it was indicated that no prior approval was required for the erection of a ‘proposed agricultural building’ under the permitted development regulations.
The council received a complaint about the buildings in October 2020, but planning officers concluded in May 2021 that they were acceptable.
But bosses later u-turned and said planning rules at the site were breached, issuing an enforcement notice in 2022.
And, after a lengthy appeals process which went all the way to the High Court, Mr Parsons has now been told he has until November to pull the buildings down – or he could face criminal charges.
Colin Parsons, 67, says he has spent more than £300,000 developing a plot of land in Adisham Woods, on the outskirts of Canterbury in Kent
The six-year row centred on planning permission – which Mr Parsons believes he had – with the council arguing constructed woodland buildings did not meet requirements
Mr Parsons has railed against the decision and says all he and his family ever wanted to do was save the woodlands.
He said: ‘We spent over £300,000 saving the wood. Without people like us investing private money into the woodland, it would have remained neglected, like it was for more than 40 years before we bought our plots.
‘I now have to spend loads of money to take it down, when we were originally granted permission for the buildings.
‘We spent thousands of pounds on the forestry workshops and then three and a half years later the council put an enforcement on us after being told we were living there.
‘We have never lived there, there is no toilet, there are no windows, it is simply to keep the machinery and make a cup of tea.
‘It’s not illegal to build on woodland. Our three buildings that we put permission in for, we met all the criteria when we built them, but we’ve had one campaigner in the village who’s had it in for us and they’ve sided with them.
‘Canterbury Council has been terrible throughout the whole ordeal. It’s devastated us as a family and our mental health because we’ve done our best for the environment, and the way we’ve been treated is disgusting.’
The Parsons have been ordered to tear down the buildings by November 2025 in order to comply with the decision.
They feel that their work to save the woods – with fencing, replanting and routing out the anti-social behaviour – has been undervalued by the council and residents.
Mr Parsons – who runs a specialist road works company – said: ‘They think we want to destroy the woods – it couldn’t be further from the truth. We have undertaken significant replanting to save Adisham Woods.
‘Our work has protected the wildlife – we have saved buzzards, badgers and foxes here. We have deer which visit, because we’ve left brambles out for them.
‘We have rabbits, birds and butterflies, bats and owls, and that’s because our security cameras have stopped the fly-tipping, drug-dealing, badger-baiting and the anti-social behaviour.
Mr Parsons (pictured with wife Tessa) has railed against the decision and says all he and his family ever wanted to do was save the woodlands
The Parsons have been ordered to tear down the buildings in their woods by November 2025 in order to comply with the decision
Planning documents dated February 2019 stated he did not need prior approval to erect a ‘proposed agricultural building’ under permitted development rules
‘The forestry workshops were built so the machinery could be left on site – to improve our carbon footprint. Now, we will have to take our machinery in on heavy vehicles, which is considerably worse for the animals and the environment.
‘And we need these tools to help maintain Adisham Woods.’
Mr Parsons insists that the work is essential to maintain it and help the wildlife, yet he argues residents are reluctant to hear these arguments.
He said: ‘It’s crazy – we try to talk to people and they don’t want to hear it. You can’t even paint your door in the village because people are on to you.
‘They all moaned about the fences, but we made runs for badgers underneath the fences and spaces for foxes too.
‘I’ve had to spend an extra £60,000 on legal fees.
‘But it’s not the money, it’s the principle of it. It hurts me because the buildings were built with pride and we are proud to be looking after the woods.
‘We’re doing it sustainably, it’s hard work but it’s enjoyable.
‘If we go and someone else buys it – it could be the end of the woods.’
Although Mr Parsons has had offers to buy his plots, he wants to look after the area and continue to manage it sustainably.
He said: ‘I’ve got too much pride in the wildlife. I’ve actually got people asking me if I can sell it, but I don’t want to.
‘It makes me angry with the legal system in this country, and it’s run by people with no authority and not looking at my situation and what I’m doing with the community properly.
Mr Parsons insists that the work is essential to maintain it and help the wildlife, yet he argues residents are reluctant to hear these arguments
Mr Parsons says he has been trying to get in touch with the council for two months
‘It’s all well and good for the local people to say the woods will be fine, but then councils across the country used to be able to afford it.
‘Now, most woodland in the UK is neglected. We’re trying to prevent that in Adisham Woods, but this decision is simply the biggest disaster for our work.
‘We want to compromise and take down one building, but we need to keep the other two for our work – but the council will not speak to us.
‘I have been trying in contact with them for well over two months but I have had no response back.’
A spokesperson for Canterbury city council said: ‘In 2019 the owners of several sections of the woodland applied to the council for prior approval to locate buildings, which they said were required for forestry management purposes.
‘Buildings were built at the site, but they were not built in accordance with the prior approvals granted by the council.
‘A planning enforcement notice was served against the unlawful buildings in 2022.
‘The owner exercised their right of appeal against the notices. The appeal was heard by a government Planning Inspector last year. The inspector looked into the case in depth and concluded that the buildings were in fact unlawful and accordingly upheld the planning enforcement notices.
‘In their report, the inspector said “…evidence shows it is more likely than not that the developments were not carried out in accordance with the details submitted with the prior approval applications”.
‘Regarding the impact of the development, the inspector concluded that “…overall, the buildings harm the character and appearance of the area and the local landscape character of the Area of High Landscape Value individually” and said “the buildings are likely to have resulted in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitat”.
‘And the inspector said “I remain unconvinced that appropriate management of the woodland in each case, or the potential benefits set out by the appellants, depend on any of the buildings”.
‘The compliance period for the removal of the buildings is later this year. We would anticipate that the owners will remove the buildings by that date as they will be aware that non-compliance with an enforcement notice is a criminal offence.
‘There is no evidence that the owners have been living in the buildings.
‘The owners are, of course, free to the manage the woodland as they wish and to continue to prevent badger baiting, drugs and anti-social behaviour on their land.
‘We are proud of the fact we have stuck up for local residents and protected ancient woodland, and are pleased our stance was backed by the planning inspector.’
