A community organisation in Grenada has put the country’s Planning and Development Authority on notice of potential legal action over the approval and ongoing construction of a major industrial development in Woodford, St John.
The Woodford Environmental Alliance for Community Transformation has raised concerns about environmental damage, public health risks and failure to follow statutory planning safeguards.
The alliance represents residents of the Woodford area and was established in 2025 to address environmental, health and safety concerns affecting the local community.
Represented by human rights law firm Leigh Day working with Ciboney Chambers in Grenada, the alliance has sent a formal pre‑action protocol letter to the authority setting out plans to seek a judicial review of the decision to allow the development.
The proposed claim challenges decisions relating to the project known as the Rayneau Development, which includes quarrying operations, an asphalt plant, concrete batching facilities and the construction of a jetty in a coastal and residential area.
Parts of the development received planning approval from a General Development Order in December 2025, subject to conditions including the preparation of an Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan (ESMMP) and the undertaking of environmental assessment processes. However, the alliance alleges works began prior to compliance with these requirements and without a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
According to the pre‑action letter, land clearance, road construction and excavation works have already taken place, with reported impacts including:
- Destruction of habitat near to endangered Grenada Doves
- Runoff affecting the Douce River
- Disruption to local infrastructure and farmland access.
The alliance also alleges significant public health risks linked to the project. These include potential air pollution from asphalt and concrete operations and noise, dust and vibration from quarrying activities, particularly given the proximity of homes, schools and places of worship to the site.
The group further argues the development threatens community livelihoods and longstanding use of the coastal area, including local fishing activities, as well as possible damage to archaeological and historical resources identified in earlier surveys.
In its legal letter, the alliance contends that the authority has acted unlawfully on several grounds, including:
- Allegedly withdrawing or failing to enforce a requirement for a full EIA
- Failing to carry out meaningful consultation with affected residents
- Improperly segmenting what is said to be a single, integrated industrial development
- Misusing a General Development Order to authorise a specific project
- Failing to enforce planning conditions, including the absence of an approved ESMMP
- Failing to take into account key environmental, health and cultural considerations
- Failing to apply safeguards required under coastal protection legislation
- Acting irrationally and disproportionately in approving and allowing the development to proceed
On Wednesday 20 May 2026, the alliance requested disclosure of key documents, including decisions relating to environmental assessment requirements, planning approvals and compliance monitoring, and asked the authority to respond within three weeks.
If a satisfactory response is not received, the group intends to commence judicial review proceedings to quash the approvals and require compliance with statutory environmental and planning processes.
The case is being supported by Fund for Global Human Rights’ Legal Empowerment Fund.
Christelene Henry of the Woodford Environmental Alliance for Community Transformation said:
“We have watched our community and environment change rapidly without what we believe are the proper safeguards being followed. We are already experiencing impacts from dust, noise and disruption, and are deeply concerned about what this development means for our health, livelihoods and natural surroundings.
“We have tried to raise these concerns but feel we have been left with no option other than to pursue legal action to ensure the law is properly followed and our community is protected.”
Leigh Day Partner Jacqueline McKenzie said:
“Our clients have serious concerns this development has been allowed to proceed in breach of Grenada’s planning and environmental laws.
“The requirement for proper environmental assessment and community consultation is not optional; it is a fundamental safeguard to protect both people and the environment. This case raises important issues about the rule of law, transparency and accountability in decision‑making.
“Our clients hope these matters can be addressed without the need for court proceedings, but they are prepared to pursue further action if necessary.”
Leigh Day
Land of conflict, we find every reason to fight, but we may end up shooting ourselves in the big toe.This country needs a period of sustained peace to move on.
It is about time that we take action to make people we elect into office know that we will not let them flaunt our law to give their foreign friends a leg-up on native Grenadians.