Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Bridge of Don couple ordered to undo work after ‘land grab’ claiming ancient woodland to extend back garden

Pamela Horne argued the "neglected" land had been "enhanced" under her ownership since she took it on four years ago.

The Bridge of Don garden extension will need to be removed. Image: Aberdeen City Council
The Bridge of Don garden extension will need to be removed. Image: Aberdeen City Council

An Aberdeen couple have been ordered to return ancient woodland they decided to adopt as part of their back garden.

Pamela Horne and her husband became embroiled in a spat with Aberdeen City Council over public ground behind their home at Middleton Circle.

Mrs Horne argued the “neglected” open land in Bridge of Don had been “enhanced” under her ownership since she took it on four years ago.

She explained that she had removed “hazardous” vegetation and installed bat boxes and birdhouses to help biodiversity in the area.

The red area shows the unauthorised Bridge of Don garden extension. Image: McGregor Garrow Architecture

Mrs Horne argued she had spoken to multiple parties, including the landowner, and claimed she did not get any objections.

She also believed that as the fencing was installed four years ago, she was “immune from enforcement action”.

Why did the council want the Bridge of Don application refused?

In 2019, the homeowner installed a timber fence around the land, along with a gate and small steps to adjust to the ground level change.

She hoped that by adopting the land, she would save it from litter louts and an “encroachment of weeds”.

The matter recently went before the local review body.

New fencing was installed at the extended Middleton Circle garden. Image: Aberdeen City Council

Planner Lucy Greene revealed that Aberdeen City Council did not own the land but was unsure who actually did.

She also revealed that Mrs Horne suggested councillors visit the site to get a better understanding of why the extension was needed.

But, local authority planners stated that the unauthorised extension had resulted in the loss of a valued area of open space.

The couple installed Bat boxes and birdhouses in their extended garden space. Image: Aberdeen City Council

And, they thought the irregular boundary now in the neighbourhood would negatively impact the character and appearance of the suburban area.

Planning chiefs also said the retrospective application should be refused as it went against council policy.

Fears over setting ‘very dangerous precedent’ for other gardens

Councillor Neil Copland believed officers were “spot on” to want the application refused, branding it a “land grab”.

He said: “The applicant has implied that they’ve contacted the landowner, but at the same time they say that ownership is unclear.

“And then they say ‘anyway, you can’t do anything about it because it’s been there for four years’.

“That would tend to suggest they’ve made a land grab and think we can’t do anything about it – well, we can.”

Councillor Neil Copland. Image: Kenny Elrick/DC Thomson

Do you think the homeowner should have been allowed to keep the changes? Let us know in our comments section below


Mr Copland added: “It would set a very dangerous precedent if we allow somebody to grab somebody else’s ground and build on it to suit themselves.

“We simply cannot allow someone to just grab a bit of land and put fence around it.”

Councillors went on to unanimously refuse the application, meaning the couple will have to undo their work.

‘It wasn’t a land grab’

Mrs Horne later told The Press and Journal that it “wasn’t a land grab”, as she actually had spoken to the owners who were fine with the arrangement.

She explained she has had trouble in the past when trees have come down on the site, as the council has been unable to help as it doesn’t come under its ownership.

Mrs Horne argued that the ownership of the plot shouldn’t have been considered a factor in the debate.

The couple are considering whether to appeal the council’s decision.


Read more:

Conversation