Fears illegal land clearing could become quarry: Cayman News Service

(CNS): Both the Department of Environment and the Department of Planning have expressed concerns about ex post facto land clearing applications and excavation of parts of native bush and forest alongside Queens Highway in Eastern District, which may actually be used for quarrying and not just for agricultural purposes as claimed.

According to the agenda for Wednesday’s Central Planning Authority meeting, applicants Joanna West and Linett Smith will appear in court to explain the scope of the works, which appear to have continued at the site even after an enforcement notice was issued in June last year.

In another ex post facto application for an area near the Salina Reserve, the DoE noted that while portions of the site have been human-modified, the remainder is environmentally sensitive primary dry scrub and dry forest habitat that, due to its proximity to the Salina Reserve, is within the blue iguana’s geographic range.

Last October, after the enforcement notice was issued, DOE researchers visited the site and found that more land had been cleared than the two-acre plan submitted for planning, and work was still continuing.

“We are concerned about this application and that it does not reflect the scope of work being done at the site,” DOE scientists said in a filing with the planning department. “DOE conservation officers visited the site in October 2023 and witnessed multiple trucks loaded with topsoil and rock leaving the site.”

The Department of Environment referred the video of the construction work on site to the Planning Department and noted that despite the enforcement notice, “construction on site is continuing” and that “the clearing and excavation work being carried out represents an unauthorised quarry rather than simple land clearing activity. Given the extent of the excavation and the amount of soil and rock leaving the site, we consider it unlikely that this is for agricultural use.”

The Department for the Environment urged the CPA not to approve this ex post facto application because the practice of clearing the site and commencing construction before planning permission had been granted and the advisory body had commented was “very concerning” as it deprived any opportunity for constructive input and feedback on best management practices, retention of ecologically valuable plants or mitigation measures to protect the environment (including protection of endemic species such as the blue iguana) and minimise impacts on neighbouring landowners and the wider area.

The Department for Education recommended that the application be refused, saying: “Ex post facto applications are often made in response to enforcement action; the frequency with which such incidents occur ex post facto may indicate that there are insufficient measures to prevent work being carried out without the relevant consent.”

It comes after it was revealed another post-event land clearing application had been granted planning permission between the Salina and Colliers reserves and could become the subject of another legal dispute between the National Conservation Council and the CPA as Reported in CNS recent.

In that case, the ex post facto application was filed by local attorney James Bergstrom and his firm, Bon Crepe. The CPA approved the permit based on its own opinion that there were no adverse impacts and did not refer it to the NCC, even though the DOE had clearly stated that the blue iguanas faced significant threats.

In the latest application, an adjacent landowner also opposed the application and raised similar concerns, as the parcel only benefits from an undefined 6-foot easement and the activities on the parcel appear to imply more intensive operations than agriculture. The adjacent landowner submitted pictures to illustrate their concerns.

The planning department said in an analysis written for the CPA that it, too, was concerned about the extent of the cleanup.

“Given the scale of work on site, with multiple trucks removing topsoil and rock, we do not consider this to be simply land clearing for agricultural purposes. If the use is considered to be quarrying then the applicant would be required to carry out the necessary survey work under section 9(4),” the planning department said.

Please see Wednesday’s agenda CNS Library.