An unholy row has broken out over the Church’s bid to fell protected trees in a beauty spot, with fears it will make way for plans to build homes there.

Villagers, two parish councils, and the borough’s mayor have all objected to the Diocese of Canterbury’s “farcical” proposals, which include moving nine trees from the centre of a field to the boundary, and “removing or replacing” two others.

They are currently protected by a tree preservation order (TPO).

The scheme has been put forward by the church’s property arm, Canterbury Diocesan Enterprises Limited, for The Glebe off Church Road in Otham, near Maidstone.

The Church says it needs to move the trees to maintain grazing land, and denies it has plans to develop the field.

The site is next to Parsonage Place, where construction by Bellway Homes is now well underway to build 421 homes around three sides of the village’s 12th century St Nicholas Church.

Permission for that development was only granted on appeal, in the face of massive local opposition, including a petition of 1,600 signatures.

Villagers believe the Diocese’s intention is to clear The Glebe in preparation for its own housing application, however.

It submitted the plot to an earlier “call for sites” by Maidstone council, suggesting the field would be suitable for 29 homes, but that was rejected.

The TPO was put in place earlier this year, despite opposition from the Diocese which said it wanted to bring the land back into agricultural use.

The church has pledged to plant six new trees along the boundary to off-set for any lost.

But villagers are highly suspicious of its motives.

Canterbury Diocesan Enterprises Limited is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance, whose principal activity is that of “acting as project managers for property development, refurbishment and maintenance and acting as property and development consultants, including preparation of drawings for planning applications.”

The Bearsted and Thurnham Society said it had researched the site using Google Earth historic imagery and found no evidence of the land being farmed this century.

It concluded: “Given the total lack of justification for the scheme, it would appear likely that the proposal is no more than a precursor to a future application to develop the land.”

Richard Wingett of Downswood said: “From what I know, the land owners want to develop the land for new housing. They want to move the trees now so that they can successfully submit a planning application for the houses to be built. In effect, they are putting the cart before the horse.”

Jennifer Tournay, also from Downswood, said: “The only reason the landowner wants to move these trees is to enable vehicular access to the land for future housing development. There is also the reduction of natural habitat for the wildlife in the area to consider, as this has been reduced by the ongoing neighbouring housing developments.”

Othan Parish Council “strongly opposed” the application, saying: “The proposal to move the protected trees is farcical as the chances of successfully replanting are slim to none, especially as aftercare will surely be limited.

“This particular field was identified as an important Local Green Space in the Otham Neighbourhood Plan. Nothing has changed, except wire fencing has been erected to prevent access by local people who previously enjoyed walking in this area over a number of years.”

The Diocese has submitted an arboricultural report suggesting relocating the trees could be successful, provided a prolonged watering scheme was carried out.

An expert recommended the trees would need 90 litres of water each, every two weeks between May and September for three years after planting.

Roz Cheesman of Downswood, said: “I cannot believe that the necessary watering regime can possibly be undertaken so regularly for three years. The translocation of such mature trees is highly unlikely to be successful.”

She added: “The felling of trees on this site is abhorrent.”

Downswood Parish Council was of a similar view. It said: “Until a barbed wire fence was erected by the owners recently, this field was used by many residents as a right of way and amenity land.

“The attempt to translocate and fell these ancient trees seems to be a bid to pave the way for further development in the area.”

“Church Road has already been subject to the development of hundreds of new homes. The infrastructure is already insufficient for the volume of homes on one small country lane.

To see planning applications and other public notices for your area, visit publicnoticeportal.uk

“We cannot support the proposed further desecration of our countryside.”

The parish council added: “We note from the expert's report that for each tree 90 litres of water will be required every two weeks for three years after translocation in order to successfully move those trees.

“As there is no water supply to the land in question, we cannot imagine the absentee land owner, who has made their intentions to put the land forward for development perfectly clear, will ensure that care in order to preserve those trees.

“We believe this proposal to be a blatant attempt to undermine the designation of the land as Local Green Space to forward the plans to redevelop. This would totally destroy a beautiful, ancient natural wildlife habitat area, used also for residents' recreation, mental health aid and pure enjoyment. We strongly object to this application.”

Even the Mayor of Maidstone, Cllr Gordon Newton (Ind) who lives nearby, has stepped into the row.

He said: “The formerly grassed and open area had been regularly used by residents of Otham and the adjacent Woolley Road area for years.

“Sharp barbed wire fencing was recently installed to prevent access by the public on the pretence the land was going to be used for grazing sheep. No sheep were ever grazed on the field. I trust that the planning committee will refuse this application.”

Sue Skipp of Downswood said: “This natural tree and meadow landscape has existed for centuries and there is no regard given to nature conservation and biodiversity preservation. There is just a never-ending desire to develop all green space and cash in on land sale. Please do not allow this hare-brained scheme.”

David Hatcher is the chairman of the Chapman Avenue Area Residents Association. He said: “For what purpose are the trees being moved? It’s obviously to facilitate the subsequent development of this site.

“I have lived near this site for the last 40 years and during that time frequently walked the site on dog exercise trips, enjoying the unspoilt landscape.

“Indeed with the approval of the adjacent Bellway development, the Glebe is now the only naturally occurring landscape left between it and the ancient woodland that sits between Woolley Road and Church Road.”

The diocese’s planning application can be viewed here, application number 23/504382.

Rachel Gray lives at the 600-year-old Grade II-listed Old Rectory, next to The Glebe. She argued the field provided the setting to her historic home which should be preserved and not turned into “an empty space with little amenity value or biodiversity, just an expanse of grass with some trees at the edge.”

A “glebe” is an old medieval term for a patch of land that was specifically endowed to the parish priest to provide him with a living.

It belonged to the incumbent of the parish, in this case the vicar at St Nicholas Church, until in 1976, when a change in church law saw the ownership of all Church of England glebes transferred to the Diocesan board.

A spokesman for Canterbury Diocese said: “As part of normal maintenance of the grazing land, a good deal of bramble has been cleared exposing a lot of self-seeded saplings.

“The landowners have worked with Maidstone Borough Council to identify those which should be kept, relocated or felled.

“There are no current plans to apply for planning permission for development.”