A sad, sad day

[Storming Norman]

Andrew,

Have you read this:

West Lindsey District Council Local Plan - Home Page

If they are enforcing this plan then you are scuppered. If there is no tree belt mentioned on this then that wording is just the usual stuff you hear every day from councils.

You are currently speaking to the council officials [planning people] and need to speak to your councillor. The officials are only their advisers - it's the councillors who have the decision making power not them.

I noticed this recently when a planning official recommended a very controversial development in our road which was overturned by the councillors who said it did not agree with the local development plan - this is their bible and has to be adhered to.

See if you win this way.

Are you also saying the freeholder has agreed to your use?

[andrew1973]

Its great to see that my situation has sparked such debate, with some great support and some not so great, but I have broad shoulders!! I think I need to clarify the photos here.
The left hand one is my garden after it has just been turfed and the developers have just left this part of the buildling site. The tree belt lies the other side of the low fence at the end of my garden. Of course there are few weeds visible - this was taken in January!!
I can confirm that no trees were harmed / killed. Some were moved to the sides of the belt to provide some screening on either side of what is a very exposed bit of land. The trees are doing quite nicely at the moment.
The tree belt has suffered three and a half years of neglect. Weeds thrive here and horsetail has now infected my raised beds.
The right hand photo was taken earlier in the year after several weeks hard work. At the end of the day this isn't my land, but it has been in a damm site better condition since I started to cultivate it. I guess pdblake's comments present the mindset of my 'neighbours' who also have issue with me using the land - I have something which others don't, so hey, why should I have it at all??? Thanks a lot.

[andrew1973]

...and just to add. The point at the start of this thread was that planning restrictions are a nonsense, even if I bought that land (which I was persuing) then I still couldn't have cultivated it.

[ohbeary]

just a small thought, trees still intact?, good, biodiversity improved?, good, hmm are you actualy doing any harm?, NO, will the neighbours benefit from your hard work?, yes, because you are a happy person who will want to share the fruits of your labours!!, SO get them onside, if you can persuade the councillors that you are doing a good thing then your neighbours can also benefit!, and the council will save on the wages of the poison spraying guy and help to improve everyones lot by not poisoning the environment.......

[pdblake]

I can confirm that no trees were harmed / killed. Some were moved to the sides of the belt to provide some screening on either side of what is a very exposed bit of land. The trees are doing quite nicely at the moment.
The tree belt has suffered three and a half years of neglect. Weeds thrive here and horsetail has now infected my raised beds..

So the raised beds are on your land? Just what are you growing beyond the fence, in the trees then?

Just trying to understand the situation as I get the feeling I might have misread it.

[Hilary B]

...and just to add. The point at the start of this thread was that planning restrictions are a nonsense, even if I bought that land (which I was persuing) then I still couldn't have cultivated it.

As I asked before, whose decision was the 'tree belt' thing, and when (in relation to your use of the land)?
Was the owner aware that it was designated as a 'tree belt', and did he know that it was not supposed to be used for anything else before he allowed you to do things with it? If so, it is him you have the argument with, not the council jobsworths who are enforcing the rules.
There is a patch of land near here which was once a small-but-productive garden. You can still spot the fruit trees, and the gooseberry bush now straggles over the fence beside the public footpath. For the first few years after it stopped being 'worked' there were still veggies growing (looking very self-seeded).
I'd love to sort it out (it may now be beyond my ability) but it ISN'T MINE, so I haven't tackled it.

[andrew1973]

The included photos here give a better impression of what this tree belt would look like ordinarily - these are shot further along from myself. Not really pretty is it?
I have installed four raised beds beyond the small fence at the top of my garden in the tree belt, & I also have one on my property which I had done when we moved in. I built the beds only last year, previous to that it was just a tree belt, I dont want people to think that I just moved in the minute that the developers had built my house. I got so fed up at looking at wasted land (and got the GYO bug big time!!) that I sort of claimed squatters rights.
I guess I knew all along that it would / could come to an abrupt end, but now that it has my irritation is really aimed at West Lindsey Council Planning dept. for their lack of flexibility and short-sightedness.
I hope that this helps?

[Incy]

Looks from the picture as though others are also using this land for sheds, washing lines etc. Are they also being asked to move their belongings?

[Nicos]

Was the tree belt implemented to hide your homes from another building or vice versa????

You could argue that whilst the trees are becoming established that the use of the land could also be cultivated on the understanding you didn't plant within say 3 feet of each tree trunk.And you'd be more than happy to pay a rental say for the next couple of years when the whole situation could be reviewed.
Just a couple of thoughts.....

[pdblake]

Ah, so you have built your plot on the greenbelt then. Then I stand by my first post. It's not your land, simple as that.