Application Details
| Council | BCC |
|---|---|
| Reference | 20/06021/VC |
| Address | 24 Ashley Hill Bristol BS6 5JG
Street View |
| Ward |
|
| Proposal | T1-Dead Eucalyptus - Fell. T2-Sycamore - Fell T3-Bay tree - Reduce height by 3m. T4-Apple tree - Reduce crown by 2m. |
| Validated | 14-12-20 |
| Type | Works to Trees in Conservation Areas |
| Status | Decided |
| Neighbour Consultation Expiry | 22-01-21 |
| Determination Deadline | 25-01-21 |
| Decision | Preservation Order NOT REQUIRED |
| Decision Issued | 25-01-21 |
| BCC Planning Portal | on Planning Portal |
| Public Comments | Supporters: 0 Objectors: 1 Total: 1 |
| No. of Page Views | 0 |
| Comment analysis | Date of Submission |
| Nearby Trees | Within 200m |
BTF response:
OBJECT
Appication allowed:
Observations Consultation complete; one objection as there is no reason for works provided. Reasons are not required in 211 notifications. Following a site visit the dead eucalyptus is evident and should be removed. The remaining trees are small and not visible from the public realm. The works proposed are acceptable. Recommended:
Preservation Order NOT REQUIRED
Our Objection:
There is no evidence presented that the eucalypt is dead, but if it is, then we agree to it being felled. No evidence has been presented why the Sycamore should be felled. In the absence of any evidence supporting this part of the application, it should be refused. In any event, the applicant should be encouraged to replace the trees they are permitted to remove.
Public Comments
on 2021-01-05 OBJECT
There is no evidence presented that the eucalypt is dead, but if it is, then we agree to itbeing felled.
No evidence has been presented why the Sycamore should be felled. In the absence of anyevidence supporting this part of the application, it should be refused.
In any event, the applicant should be encouraged to replace the trees they are permitted toremove.