A Ramsden forestry track has won prior approval after an Inspector accepted that the existing route was unsuitable for heavy woodland machinery. The decision concerns Hawthorns on Broomwood Lane, Ramsden Heath, near Billericay in Essex, where Chelmsford City Council had refused the proposed private way.
Inspector C Shearing allowed appeal 6008937 on 15th October 2026. The track is intended to support forestry operations across land that includes mature oak woodland. For nearby households, an important part of the dispute was how timber extraction vehicles shared an existing access that also served two homes.
I would read this as a decision about evidence of operational need, rather than an automatic entitlement to a better track. The owner showed what forestry was taking place, why the current route caused problems and why suggested alternatives had not been shown to resolve them. The Inspector also assessed the proposed route’s siting and construction.
Why the Ramsden forestry track was needed
The wider site covers around 11.5 hectares and includes dense pedunculate oak woodland. The decision describes thinning operations intended to improve crop-tree health, extract timber and move towards a wood pasture landscape. Chelmsford accepted that the land was being used for forestry, with a 2025 felling licence forming part of the evidence.
The existing access runs down the eastern side of the site before turning sharply west. It is largely unmade and becomes narrow in places, including a section between a ditch and a hedgerow. Photographs showed damage from forestry vehicles, muddy edges and flooded trenches, giving the Inspector evidence beyond a general assertion that access was inconvenient.
The case for the Ramsden forestry track also concerned the practicalities of moving a tractor and trailer or articulated timber lorry around tight corners close to homes. A nearby resident supported concerns about damage, hazardous log storage and lengthy obstruction of residential access. The Inspector’s own site observations supported the evidence.
Chelmsford suggested that upgrading the existing track, providing passing places and managing vehicles differently could remove the need. However, the Inspector found no substantive evidence showing that those measures would be reasonable in this location or would avoid the proposal entirely. The position of the existing route and the site’s constraints mattered.
An imperfect access did not defeat the case
The new route would still require forestry vehicles to use the shared northern entrance to reach the highway. That constraint did not mean the development was unnecessary. The Inspector found no apparent reasonable alternative because it was the only existing highway access. A proposal did not have to solve every movement difficulty to address a demonstrated need.
The Ramsden forestry track decision also distinguishes current forestry operations from the site’s former agricultural use. The agricultural activity had apparently ceased around 30 years earlier. The Inspector was not satisfied that historic sharing of the access established its suitability for today’s machinery and movements. A low frequency of accidents or conflicts was not decisive either.
The council was concerned that the route might actually serve a recently approved replacement house. A track had previously been removed from that proposal following landscape and Green Belt concerns. Shearing nevertheless assessed the information before the appeal and accepted a present forestry need, even if a replacement house could hypothetically use the route.
Two planning questions had to be answered
The appeal used England’s forestry permitted development provisions in Part 6, Class E of the GPDO. These cover qualifying private ways reasonably necessary for forestry purposes. The decision therefore addressed both whether the proposal qualified for that route and whether its siting and means of construction were acceptable for prior approval.
For the Ramsden forestry track, Shearing concluded that it was “reasonably necessary for the purposes of forestry”. The route would predominantly follow an existing clearing among established oaks and turn west behind mature trees. Glimpses from an eastern bridleway and nearby homes would not make it visually prominent in the Inspector’s assessment.
Its limestone aggregate finish was considered consistent with a forestry setting. Compliance with Forestry Commission guidance for forest roads and tracks was not disputed. The Inspector also found no substantive evidence of other matters, including adverse woodland effects, that made the siting unacceptable, and no reason to reject the proposed construction method.
What the approval means for woodland owners
The Ramsden forestry track approval relates to application 26/00306/AG and its submitted details. Class E’s conditions, including a five-year implementation period and compliance with approved details, apply. Shearing declined an additional materials condition because the submitted materials had already been identified and found acceptable.
Beyond the Ramsden forestry track case, I would start with the actual forestry activity and the movements it requires. Evidence of vehicle sizes, route restrictions, damage and the effect of reasonable alternatives can explain need more convincingly than a preference for a new surface. This appeal does not establish that every woodland access proposal qualifies.
The full official decision contains the site-specific reasoning and approval. Our agriculture and equestrian planning section provides wider rural context, while the GPDO guide explains the broader permitted development framework. Forestry and agricultural development should be checked against their respective provisions rather than treated as interchangeable uses.
0 Comments