An ancient woodland that was once revered for its healing springs has become a “poisoned chalice” for its owner – who says he was “misled” into buying the land.
John Tomlinson, who owns Spring Wood in Gaywood, had hoped to build an eco-lodge within the 6.5-acre plot after the previous owner signalled this would be possible.
But any hopes of developing the land have since been dashed.
The former accountant, who lives on the Gold Coast of Australia, is now facing thousands of pounds in annual maintenance costs to keep it safe for the public.
And his prospects of finding a buyer to take the woodland off his hands are likely low.
Mr Tomlinson revealed his dilemma at a public inquiry this week, which was triggered after he attempted to block two footpaths through the woods from being officially recognised.
His objections to the routes, both only about 150m long, could be seen as a last-ditch attempt to prevent it from becoming completely open to walkers.
But the community surrounding the woodland has fought back and demanded that Government officials keep Spring Wood accessible for all.
Both sides had their say during a hearing at South Lynn Community Centre which was presided over by a Planning Inspector – an official from the Government department that rules over rights of way disputes.
‘GREEN OASIS’
Spring Wood is sandwiched between two housing estates, with Springwood High School to the west and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital to the east.
It has been used as a cut-through for at least 60 years, but probably also for centuries before that.
The woodland is within an area known as the Gaywood River valley, which features a rare chalk stream that rises near Derby Fen before flowing out into The Wash at Lynn.
Mr Tomlinson bought the woodland in 2010, with the understanding he would be able to build an “eco-friendly house” within it for £48,000.
The following year, he explored whether it was possible to erect a fence around it.
His pre-application, submitted to West Norfolk Council, sparked a huge amount of concern locally.
It led John Loveless, a well-respected local councillor who has since died, to intervene, calling the woods a “green oasis between two estates”.
He informed Mr Tomlinson it had long been used by the public to walk through, according to statements made during the hearing.
Residents, fearing their woodland could be blocked off, subsequently applied for a Tree Protection Order to be imposed upon the woods to prevent any risk of development.
And later in 2016, residents also applied for two footpaths through the woods to be added to Norfolk County Council’s official map of rights of way.
FOOTPATH FIGHT
A row over the footpaths culminated in a public hearing this week after nearly a decade-long wrangle.
The routes were confirmed in 2022 by the county council, but Mr Tomlinson has objected to the paths.
Planning inspector C.L Tregembo presided over the case, with about 30 residents in attendance in support – while Mr Tomlinson spoke via video-link from his home in Australia.
Cllr Rob Colwell, who represents Gaywood, spoke on behalf of the community and presented their case for why the footpaths should remain open.
He highlighted that nearly 60 people had come forward, providing evidence that proved it had been used by the whole community for at least 60 years.
He believed this was more than adequate evidence to meet the requirement of proving 20 years of continuous use.
“People have exercised their right of way without secrecy, have never been stopped and have never seen any signs warning it was private land,” Cllr Colwell said.
“The amount of evidence is indisputable.”
Mr Tomlinson conceded that the woods had been used by walkers for years – but he contested the approval of two separate routes through the woods.
He argued only one footpath should be confirmed and told the inspector the evidence presented was “inconsistent”.
The landowner called for evidence of use from retirees and dog walkers to be discredited, suggesting this did not equate to evidence of use as a footpath.
He told the inspector he had been “misled” when he bought the land and that he “understood the risk to the public walking through the woodland”.
This has resulted in him spending thousands of pounds on the maintenance of the woods to ensure it is safe.
“I hope we can work together and look after the woods for the local community,” Mr Tomlinson said in his closing statement.
Despite the day-long hearing, his justification for his initial objections to the footpaths remained unclear.
His acceptance that rights of way existed through the woods led one resident to brand the whole debacle a “waste of time and money”.
Following the hearing, Ms Tregembo will deliver her verdict in the coming months.
