At the end of April 2022 the Society had objected to a retrospective application to permit this site to be used as a temporary storage area to enable building materials and operatives vehicles to be stored and parked close to the site during the construction of the replacement dwelling at Sandnes .

In refusing that application the case officer concluded: ‘The works undertaken have had a significant impact on the undeveloped, unspoilt nature of the site. The levelling of the site, and building up of the land with hard core has replaced the undulating green field with an engineered, developed area of land which is highly visible from local footpaths due to its elevated position at the top of the valley’

Were this latest application to be granted, it would effectively authorise that work by permitting the engineered, developed area of land to be retained.

We went on to request the LPA to ensure the removal of all the material that had been dumped on this field. But, shortly before the application was due to be determined, it was withdrawn. As a consequence the Society wrote to the Council's Enforcement Team to say:

Now that Appeal Reference APP/K1128/C/22/3302395 has been withdrawn the Society would appreciate your confirmation that action will be taken to ensure that the Enforcement Notice issued on 20 June 2022 will now be complied with within the next 30 days to ensure the site owners:

(i) Remove the storage of building materials

(ii) Remove the storage of demolition waste

(iii) Remove the storage of non-agricultural machinery

(iv) Restore the Land to its previous condition and use as an agricultural field

I look forward to hearing from you.

A few weeks later the enforcement officer wrote back to confirm that he had visited the site on 31 January 'where I was able to confirm that the enforcement notice had been complied with. The only matter outstanding when I visited, was the heras fencing blocking the entrance to the field, which was not part of the notice but was taken down the next day. We now consider the case closed, as all parts of the notice have been complied with.'

That came as some surprise and, after a further site visit by some of our members, we responded: 'There would still appear to be some debris and demolition waste on the site, as well as more Heras fencing than that is needed to simply close off the entrance. I fear there is still much work to be done before it can be said the land has been restored to its previous condition and can again be used as an agricultural field.'

That same day the local Ward Councillor informed us: 'I visited the site yesterday (Tuesday) evening to assess the site, I think I took similar photographs. Having lived opposite the site for several years I know the field well, there is still some quantity of demolition and excavation waste to be removed to get the section to the right of the entrance back down to the previous field level. As you have pointed out. The Enforcement Team have been made aware of this; further work will be needed to meet the requirements of the Enforcement Notice.'

One month later, we were told, nothing had changed.