I broadly support this application with the proviso that work is only carried out ondamaged or deseased trees. Trees that are perfectly healthy should not be trimmed for the sake ofCCTV cameras.I hope that if the work is carried out that there is someone from BCC on site at the time enforcingthe TPO requirements. TPO's are given for a reason. History on this site shows a blatant disregardfor any TPO. Once cut the branches cannot be replaced

Please respect the parkland.

I support the application for badly needed maintenance to the Stoke Lodge trees. Thishas been lacking for several years and it is pleasing that something may now be done. However,the following provisos are important:Pruning should in all cases be the minimum possible for the protection of the tree only.Trees with TPOs should be treated with special care and only pruned if they are in immediatedanger.If the leaseholder has requested certain cutting work because of inconvenience e.g. to their CCTVcameras, then that cutting should not be done because it is not for the health of the tree. We havealready had at least one example of this of branches being badly lopped back. This fact should betaken notice of as it was witnessed.Infill with new trees of appropriate species should be insisted upon and planted as soon aspossible.

There is broad support in the community for appropriate tree maintenance at StokeLodge, and we welcome Council officers investing their expertise.

However, it is understood that works to the sycamores at the corners of the maintenance hut, BCC77003 and 77004, may have been added at the request of the current tenant, Cotham School, toimprove the view from their surveillance cameras. The school has publicly stated that it will leavethe site if the land is registered as a Town or Village Green; the TVG process is currently underway and may be resolved next year. Please note that there will be nothing to prevent the schoolcontinuing its tenancy post-TVG registration, but currently its stated intention is to opt for using analternative location. Given these circumstances, the claim that reducing the branches of thesetrees is 'to prevent damage' would have to refer to a real and imminent risk of actual damage if it isto result in cutting the branches of a protected tree. Several branches were ripped off one of thesetrees earlier in 2020 by an individual who I understand identified himself at the time to a witnessand said that he was clearing the view for the camera (this information was provided to BCCenforcement officers). I trust that Council officers will consider carefully what work is reallyrequired to these trees and not carry out any unnecessary work to clear the view of cameras thatmay soon (and could now) be moved.

I fully support the replacement of the dead oak tree BCC192455 under either this application orapplication 20/05387/VP and understand that officers intend to replace it as close as possible(within 5-10 metres) to the original Oak so that it has the potential to achieve its full field form andstature. This is a really welcome investment in this historic parkland estate for future generations.

I request that the Stoke Lodge tree preservation order records are updated as a matter of priority

following this work, as several TPO trees are or will be missing from the current maps - given thevarious hazards to the Stoke Lodge trees from mowing and unauthorised branch removal, it isimportant that the protected status of these trees is clear to all.

On the whole I agree with this application where a tree has died it should be replacedwith the same variety, but with Ash Die Back currently on the increase it may be advisable toreplace with something different. Large trees overhanding the highway should only be cut backcarefully where they are likely to cause damage to people or traffic - they are an important barrierto pollution.I totally agree with Bristol Tree Forum's suggestions and particularly in the cases of T7 and T8 anytrimming of these trees should be monitored very carefully under close supervision as a branchhas already been torn off to facilitate better access to the CCTV camera - branches cannot bereplaced!

Where a tree has been proved to be diseased or dying, then it should be removed butimmediately replaced with an identical tree. The boundary of this Parkland should be maintainedwith trees and bushes as at present.