|Address||Stoke Lodge Sports Ground Shirehampton Road Sea Mills Bristol
|Proposal||Norway Maple "Crimson King" (NW1) Norway Maple (NW2) -light crown-lift and reduction (2m maximum) of the NE lower face of crown. TPO 1192.|
|Type||Tree Preservation Order|
|Neighbour Consultation Expiry||24-06-20|
|Decision||GRANTED subject to condition(s)|
|BCC Planning Portal||on Planning Portal|
|Public Comments||Supporters: 0 Objectors: 26 Total: 26|
|No. of Page Views||0|
|Comment analysis||Map Date of Submission|
|Nearby Trees||Within 200m|
The application has been granted.
There was an application 17 months ago to prune three of these maples and a beech tree in this same Group, G1 of TPO 1192. The request was then to reduce the length of the lower branches by 3 metres. At that time the proposed work was requested to prevent potential damage to existing garden structure and space surrounding outdoor swimming pool. The application this time is perform a light crown lift of two of the maples and reduce by 2 metres the length of the lower branches of the NE lower face of the crown. These trees are of historical importance in Bristol. They have a very high amenity value and they well deserve their TPO status. They are owned by the Council, and hence the residents of Bristol. Performing a crown lift and reducing the length of the branches on one side will spoil their symmetry and reduce their amenity value and detract from their natural shape - all three events would spoil their amenity hugely. The reason for this application is given as "Client feels the crowns of both trees are excessively over hanging their property, particularly the lower portions of crown." It thus seems to be an issue of shade. Surely that is not a good enough reason to damage important TPO trees? If anything shade is a good thing in the light of Bristol's declared climate emergency? These trees should be protected - not pruned to reduce shading over a swimming pool. The trees have been there a long time - likely well over a hundred years - and long before the swimming pool. The Council has long exercised a policy of not pruning trees it owns to reduce shading. To give permission for this crown reduction and limb length reduction would devalue all the decisions they have taken before. In the report written by the Tree Officer in February 2019 he wrote: "The trees are not causing any 'actionable nuisance' (interfering or damaging property) to the applicant's property, nor are they preventing a 'reasonable enjoyment' of the ample size garden.
The reason provided for tree works are to prevent damage to the garden and areas around the swimming pool. No evidence has been provided to show the garden or the pool has been damaged by the subject trees, therefore, this cannot be considered actionable nuisance." The Tree Officer is the expert here, but one has to feel that it is very unlikely that the situation has changed in the intervening 17 months. There are no suggestions made by the applicant of actual or potential damage to the garden structures or the swimming pool. It must just be shade. Please refuse this application.