The planning inspector will decide whether an enforcement notice ordering the removal of unauthorised holiday accommodation from a protected Green Belt woodland should be overturned.
A four-day planning inquiry has been held into the future of the Jacob’s Wood site in Silsden, where Bradford Council is seeking the removal of several holiday-let buildings, concrete bases and access roads.
The council issued an enforcement notice earlier this year after becoming aware of the development in 2025. It also ordered the landowners to plant 300 trees to repair what it described as damage to irreplaceable ancient woodland.
The site, which already contains converted farm buildings used as holiday accommodation, is owned by company AZARA GIDA SAN.VE TIC.LTD.ŞTI., which has appealed the notice.
Representing the appellant, Mr Henderson argued the company was an “innocent party” that purchased the land after the development had already taken place.
He told the inquiry the holiday-let buildings had been installed by previous owners around 2020, meaning the council was out of time to take enforcement action under planning rules that applied at the time, which required notices to be issued within four years of substantial completion.
Bradford Council disputed that timeline, arguing work appeared to still be underway when enforcement officers visited the site in 2025.
Opening the council’s case, Howard Leithhead described the development as “audacious”. “That it was carried out in an area with so many designations is extraordinary,” he said.
“The site is located in an area of Green Belt. More broadly Jacobs Wood is a designated Local Wildlife Site and an Ancient Woodland and is within the zone of influence of the South Pennine Moors Special Protection Area.”
One ground of appeal that planning permission would likely have been granted had an application been submitted was withdrawn before the inquiry began.
Mr Leithhead said: “It is difficult to see how the appellant could ever have thought it could obtain planning permission for the development.”
The inquiry also heard evidence about invoices from O’Neill Construction dated 2020, which the appellant says prove holiday pods were delivered to the site that year. However, no representative from the company attended the inquiry to give evidence.
Council enforcement officer Daniel Speedy said he visited the site in 2025 after receiving reports of the development and believed construction work was still ongoing because the buildings were not habitable and construction materials remained on site.
Mr Henderson argued the new owners had simply been refurbishing buildings that had fallen into disrepair since their installation several years earlier.
He also defended the absence of the holiday pods from a 2024 sales brochure prepared by estate agents Carter Jonas, saying it was unlikely an agent would advertise buildings that lacked planning permission.
Mr Leithhead responded by pointing out the brochure did advertise Moss Bank, another holiday let on the site, despite it also lacking planning permission.
Planning Inspector Paul Hocking will now consider the evidence before issuing a decision on the appeal in the coming weeks.
