I object to this application because I am bound to ask - is this work necessary?The Applicant has stated that the trees are not in a Conservation Area but they are - in BrentryConservation Area. Also the trees form part of an important woodland for Bristol - Sheep Wood.Trees in Sheep Wood are subjects of the TPO polygon 1091_R-W1. This is noted in the LA'sConstraints section on the Planning Portal. I do not know the boundaries of this polygon, but, if theAsh tree that is "up for felling" is within this polygon, then it will have to be replaced by another treein the same spot. Also the trees of mixed species that are "up for trimming back" could similarly bewithin the boundaries of the TPO polygon. If they are so then the felling of the Ash and the pruningof the mixed species should be assessed on the "is this work necessary" criterion. I see theapplicant has not alleged that the Ash tree is likely to fall and has not suggested that the trees arecausing structural damage, and has not submitted a surveyor's report, so is the work necessary?If the opinion of the BCC AO is that the felling and the pruning can be done then can thereplacement of the Ash be made a planning condition please?

In its current form, this Application should be rejected, as it is both superficial and inaccurate.

It is inaccurate in as much that, on the Application Form, the Applicant has answered "no" to thequestion "Are you wishing to carry out works to tree(s) in a conservation area?" This is wrong, asthe trees in question are within the curtilage of the Brentry Conservation Area, as can be seen onthis BCC webpage:https://www.bristol.gov.uk/documents/20182/32819/29+-+Brentry.pdf/

As the subject Ash tree and the other unidentified "Group of mixed species" trees are not itemised,or the extent of the work amplified, then it is impossible to accurately assess the necessity for theproposed works.

At the very least, the Application should include a supporting arboricultural assessment whichdetails the total number of trees, their size/species and full details of the extent of the proposedwork.

Also, as the Ash has been identified as being subject to a TPO, are any of the other subject treessimilarly protected by a TPO?

If it can be demonstrated that any trees should be removed completely, then I expect the PlanningOfficer to condition any approval to ensure that suitably sized replacements are provided, in fullcompliance with Bristol's Tree Replacement Standard.

Contrary to the statement in section 4 of the application form, all the trees which are thesubject of this application are located within the Brentry Conservation Area and are part of theancient woodland of Sheep Wood.

While the ash tree is apparently leaning, the application form section 6 states that there are nofears that it will break or fall. However if it is considered necessary for it to be felled, there is noquestion but that it should be replaced according to the Bristol Tree Replacement Standard andthis should be a condition of the work going ahead.

Furthermore there is no information given as to how many trees are involved in the "group ofmixed species" or what their species are, in the part of the application to "Reduce away from endwall of Frances Greeves House to give a clearance of 4 metres". Similarly there is no specificreason given as to why this is now considered necessary. The site location plan merely shows ared line through an indeterminate number of trees.

Given the sensitive nature of the location of the trees concerned and the importance of SheepWood as an ancient woodland within the Brentry Conservation Area, I would have expected to seean arboricultural survey or at least much greater detail of the number of trees involved, their sizeand species and how they will be reduced in size.

I therefore object to the proposed works at the present time without further information beingprovided.