| 2025-01-05 |
Stephanie |
This is a rather difficult to interpret application.
There have been various applications to fell Holm Oaks - which ones have been acted upon once consent granted?
There was an Application in 2022 (22/04623) and that appears to be for the felling of a Holm Oak in the front garden, not the back garden. Or it could be 22/01211 when the Holm Oak which was the subject of this Application was also the subject of that one? Trying to make sense of the drawings of the tree locations is problematic as the orientations vary between three applications.
The Sallow (Goat Willow) is behind the garage and allegedly will cause subsidence. As the garage is falling down maybe that has already happened! It is not possible to see how close the Goat Willow is to any stone building, so this is for the AO to judge. But its lack of visibility means that a TPO is very unlikely.
The Chestnut in the front garden is a different story. In 2022 consent was given for this tree to have a lower lateral crown lift to 5 metres on the drive side. It is a slim tree now. But it is not causing any offence. Its true form and contribution to amenity is difficult to asses when there is not a leaf on it to be seen, but its bare trunk and branches can be seen through and above the front hedge, which is not complete, and I ask the AO to consider retaining this tree. So it is that part of this application which is the cause of my objection. It is a front garden tree in a Conservation Area.
There is no obligation to replace a tree in a Conservation Area if it is felled. Some owners of such trees do replace them - with a small ornamental tree more often than not. Arboricultural reports have to be produced to accompany a request to fell a tree with a TPO, but not for a tree in a Conservation Area.
The University of Bristol usually replaces trees it has to fell if they grew in a Conservation Area. Their Stoke Bishop campus is in a Conservation Area.
Position : Objects Comment Submitted
|
BTF Planning Awareness Centre