On seeking advice from environmentalists all over the country I have been told that an ecological survey should have been carried out and if necessary damage mitigation measures put in place. I am also informed the local councillors should act and assess what has been done to the land. I know you have recently claimed I am vexatious for mentioning the damage to this Local Wildlife Site/protected amenity land, so if you refuse I shall have to go back to them all publicly and explain the situation.
The legal position – Planning application implications:
Councils can refuse permission or require retrospective ecological surveys and mitigation.
They may impose conditions or request biodiversity offsetting or habitat restoration.
Please could you arrange the ecological survey and the local councillor reports.
Many thanks for your email. Members of Planning and Highways Regulation Committee resolved to defer and delegate the grant of planning permission on 15th August 2024, subject to the applicant entering into a S106 legal agreement to secure contributions towards Open Space in accordance with adopted development plan policies. Once the process of the legal agreement is complete, planning permission will be formally issued.
Haven’t the lazy, useless, lying LibDems already done enough damage to this Local Wildlife Site/protected amenity land without cutting down yet more trees? Yet more planning corruption at LibDem run Stockport Council with the full connivance of the Monitoring Officer, Vicki Bates, the Chief Executive, Michael Cullen and the Head of Planning, Emma Curle.
They lie and say the site is being improved/tidied up.
This was how the land was, untouched since the 1960s, home to bats, owls, dormice and other protected creatures.
This Local Wildlife Site/protected amenity land has not been improved or tidied up. Why would Cllr Mark Roberts or Cllr Angela Clark lie through their teeth and say it has?
Are they taking kickbacks to put housing on this protected site? This was how it looked before it was improved and tidied up.
Dear Mrs Oliver,
Public Question to the Council Meeting
I refer to your public question that you submitted to the 3 April 2025 meeting of the Council Meeting which was as follows:-
Temporary in planning terms is 28 days. When will the scruffy trailer dumped on visual amenity land/Local Wildlife Site at Padden Brook be removed? Local people have been asking the LibDems about this for many, many months and only received an incorrect answer in response tweezered out of them.
As you were not in attendance, it was agreed that a written response would be provided.
I have now been passed the following response which I have been asked to circulate to you:-
As previously advised by officers from the planning service, the trailer is on site to assist the landowner with clearance of detritus and we are advised that it will be removed once these works are completed. The trailer is not development requiring planning permission and is not covered by the 28 day temporary permission, as this relates to the use of land.
We remain satisfied that the response you have been provided is correct.
Cllr Angie Clark and Cllr Mark Roberts
Local Wildlife Site / Protected Amenity Land Considerations
Local Plans may have specific policies requiring additional scrutiny.
Activities that could harm biodiversity or visual amenity might still be controlled or restricted, even if they don’t need planning permission per se.
If the works involve heavy clearance, vehicle access, or risk to protected species/habitats, that could trigger the need for consent.
In the UK, disturbing amenity land with a chainsaw could be an offence depending on the specific circumstances, including the ownership of the land, local regulations, and the nature of the disturbance. Here are some key considerations:
1. Ownership and Permission
Private Land: If the amenity land is privately owned, using a chainsaw without the landowner’s permission could be considered trespassing and criminal damage.
Public Land: If the land is publicly owned (e.g., managed by the local council or government), using a chainsaw without authorization could lead to legal consequences, especially if it damages property or disrupts the public’s enjoyment of the land.
2. Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs)
Many trees, particularly those in conservation areas or on amenity land, may be protected by Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs). Cutting down, lopping, or damaging these trees with a chainsaw without permission is an offence. Breaching a TPO can lead to a fine of up to £20,000.
3. Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
If the disturbance affects wildlife, such as nesting birds, bats, or other protected species, you may be in violation of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. This legislation protects many species, and disturbing or destroying their habitats could result in criminal charges.
4. Noise Nuisance
Using a chainsaw in a way that causes excessive noise could also breach local noise regulations, leading to complaints and potential fines. This could be considered antisocial behaviour if it significantly disrupts the peace of nearby residents.
5. Environmental Damage
Any action that causes environmental damage (e.g., pollution or harm to natural features) on amenity land could lead to prosecution under environmental protection laws.
