Application Details

Reference 20/05935/VP
Address Prabhu Krupa Villa Passage Road Henbury Bristol BS10 7FE  
Street View
Proposal T1 Ash - Fell. T4 Ash - Dangerous Fell. T5 & T6 Ash - Fell. T7 & T8 Ash - Fell. T9 Ash - Fell T10 Ash - Fell. T12 Sweet Chestnut - Reduce lateral limbs of lower canopy by up to 2.5 metres on all aspects TPO 184.
Validated 09-12-20
Type Tree Preservation Order
Status Decided
Neighbour Consultation Expiry 16-02-21
Determination Deadline 03-02-21
Decision GRANTED subject to condition(s)
Decision Issued 02-02-21
BCC Planning Portal BCC Planning Portal
Public Comments Supporters: 0 Objectors: 2    Total: 2
No. of Page Views 0
Comment analysis   Date of Submission
Nearby Trees Within 200m

BTF response: OBJECT

 

I am concerned that the Applicant has requested felling of Ash trees "ahead of Ash dieback" disease. Yet the Application form states that a tree/some trees are diseased. What is the case here? It is a complicated application.

National policy is that Ash trees are not felled ahead of Ash die-back. Indeed they should only be felled even with Ash die back when and if they are dangerous. In anticipation of Ash die back (some trees are resistant) succession planting of another species should be practised, not wholesale felling please.

If the trees have ADB and if as a consequence of the disease they are dangerous then felling is the only option.

My comment on this TPO Application as is before - hence its reproduction above - save that in addition for those trees that have a TPO there is even more reason not to fell them if they are not diseased, and to condition replacements if they must go because they are dangerous. It is not legal to fell TPO trees in anticipation of them causing a problem.

Public Comments

on 2021-01-23   OBJECT

CPRE Avon and Bristol objects to this application.The trees bordering Passage Road, the A4018, which are subject to this application are of vitalimportance, particularly for two reasons:1. They provide mitigation for the elevated level of pollution caused by the continual high volumeof traffic of all kinds along the A4018 which is a main highway into Bristol to and from themotorway complex to the north and the Cribbs Causeway shopping centre and associated leisurefacilities, as well as the site of Bristol zoo and the surfing centre at Easter Compton. T1-3 are neara regularly used bus stop and pedestrian crossing, such that cars, buses and lorries areaccelerating and pulling away on this stretch of road. The speed limit also increases at this pointso that all vehicles will be accelerating as they pass the row of trees in this application.It is vital that as many mature trees as possible are retained in this area to combat pollution,especially as the planned A4018 road "improvements" will remove a number of mature trees onthe other side of Passage Rd adjacent to the Westbury Fields retirement compex.2. The trees provide a vital link between the areas of woodland on either side of the A4018 whichmake up much of the Brentry Conservation Area. This is an important corridor for birds flying toand from the Blaise Castle estate and across the Sheepwood ancient woodland. Apart from thewell documented value of all trees, healthy ash trees are of particular importance and sycamoresare important for insect life.The reason given on the application form for felling the healthy ash trees is "All ash treesoverhanging road to be felled ahead of ash dieback concerns". This is most definitely not anacceptable reason and such trees should instead be regularly monitored for signs of diebackbefore felling is deemed necessary.The other major objection to this proposal is that there is no indication in the application of any

plans to replace the trees which are to be felled. This is a major omission and full details should begiven of the number and species of replacement trees for those which have to be felled becausethey are deemed to pose a danger.

on 2021-01-03   OBJECT

I am concerned that the Applicant has requested felling of Ash trees "ahead of Ash die-back" disease. Yet the Application form states that a tree/some trees are diseased. What is thecase here? It is a complicated application.National policy is that Ash trees are not felled ahead of Ash die-back. Indeed they should only befelled even with Ash die back when and if they are dangerous. In anticipation of Ash die back(some trees are resistant) succession planting of another species should be practised, notwholesale felling please.If the trees have ADB and if as a consequence of the disease they are dangerous then felling isthe only option.

My comment on this TPO Application as is before - hence its reproduction above - save that inaddition for those trees that have a TPO there is even more reason not to fell them if they are notdiseased, and to condition replacements if they must go because they are dangerous. It is notlegal to fell TPO trees in anticipation of them causing a problem.Thanks