Many of the trees proposed for felling are ash trees and are suffering varying degrees ofash die-back. There are 3 other species listed in the applicant's proposals, a willow, a turkey oakand a lime. I believe the willow may be dead but cannot see any acceptable reason to fell theother two in particular the lime which is a perfectly good semi mature tree.So turning to the ash trees, the die-back disease is well documented nationally but these aregenerally large trees, in the range 10-18 metres tall, with still-good canopies and trunks.Undoubtedly many will have existed well before the current Casa Mia was built. They should beconsidered for felling on an individual basis only when and if they become badly diseased and adanger. This judgement can only be made by a qualified arborculturalist. I question whetherthe applicant's Arborcultural Impact Assessment/Method Statement, which has been prepared toaid specific site development plans, provides an appropriate basis to make this judgement outsidethe context of a development plan and following the refusal of two earlier planning applications.If felling of a tree is considered necessary then it should be mitigated by planting another ofsuitable size and species which will restore the lost canopy as quickly as possible just as BCC hasinsisted upon as a condition for granting permission for T5, the large Maple, to be felled in June2020.I am concerned that the applicant has not included in his application any such mitigation measuresfor the trees he proposes felling. I am also concerned that a year has gone by since the T5 maplewas felled and the applicant has apparently failed to provide a new replacement tree as stipulatedin the first growing season, Autumn 2020. Furthermore he is, at this late stage, seeminglyprepared to argue with BCC that the stipulated replacement tree and it's position, a Common Oakto be planted within 5 metres of the original maple, are not what he wants.Events at Casa Mia are not encouraging as regards environmental matters. In 2017 over 50 trees

were felled without BCC permission. In 2018 and 2019 successive planning applications weremade which drew severe objection and uniform push-back from local residents, BCC, theWoodland Trust and other notable conservation groups with the primary focus beingoverdevelopment and corresponding decimation of the tree population on this site. Last year it wasthe felling of the maple with mitigation still apparently unfulfilled. Now it is this application forexcessive tree felling without corresponding mitigation.Any application for tree felling on this site should be contained within a sensible developmentplanning application i.e. one which properly takes into account all the recommendations previouslymade by BCC, the Woodland Trust and the Planning Inspector.

I write as the Chairman of the Bishops Knoll Management Company Ltd on behalf of theresidents of the flats that overlook Casa Mia, Bramble Lane, BS9 1RD and the area from where itis proposed to remove the trees.Two of the trees identified in this schedule are near the entrance to the property which is in aConservation Area, and are overlooked by 20 residents in the Orchard Court block of flats. Theremoval of these trees would expose the Casa Mia dwelling to the aspect of the residents.Potentially, if any future applications were to be submitted to build further houses in the area, ashas previously been done. These also would be exposed to the view of the residents and viceversa. .

Three of the proposed trees border the footpath down to the Nature reserve and would exposethat whole area.15 further trees are also proposed to be removed where there have already twenty trees removedby the Woodland trust due to Ash die back and to remove a further fifteen trees would completelydevastate the area.We view this application as a pre cursor to a later application which could be submitted to buildfurther housing in the area on the estate and should be considered with this in mind. The residentsof Bishops Knoll strongly object to the proposal.James Newby, Chairman, BIshops Knoll Flats, Knoll Hill Bristol BS9 1NR

The Planning Inspectorate's appeal decision rejecting the most recent planning application for thedevelopment of the site stated that;

"The appeal site is located in a tranquil woodland setting within the [Conservation Area]. The sitecontains an existing large dwelling set back in the plot amongst extensive grounds. Theassociated tree cover and vegetation together with the surrounding woodland contribute to aspacious and verdant character."

"Due to the public footpaths that surround the site and its wider grounds, this large dwelling setwithin this extensive plot amongst the surrounding woodland gives it a very individual and uniquecharacter. It is a sensitive site and its attractive setting makes a positive contribution to thecharacter of the CA in this location."

Given that;1. The application includes the felling of a number of very substantial mature trees on theboundary between the site and the Woodland Trust area (two of which are outside the applicant'sboundary line according to the drawing, although the arboricultural assessment submitted with theapplication suggests it may be four - T30, T81, T82 and T96)2. There seem to be no details of any mitigation proposed for the removal of the 20 trees3. The Woodland Trust have recently needed to fell a number of their own trees in the area due todisease4. The felling of field maple T5 on the site boundary was approved in June 2020 (under application

20/02583/VD) with the decision notice stating that a replacement "shall be planted within the firstavailable planting season following the felling of the TPO tree", but the covering letter with thisapplication suggests this didn't occur5. There is a history of a significant number of trees being removed on this site without application(including those investigated under enforcement 16/30130/CONSRV)

it seems this application for additional tree felling should to be treated with significant cautionbecause approval will result in a further reduction in the woodland character of the area.

I understand it is proposed to redevelop this site for housing. Clearance has alreadytaken place of about 50 trees (not known if any consultation with interested parties took place).This application seeks consent to fell a further 20 trees.

I object to this proposal. The site is surrounded within a radius of less than a mile by importantprotected Conservation Areas including Avon Gorge, Bennett's Patch Nature Reserve, BishopsKnoll Woods, The Downs, Leigh Woods, Old Sneed Park Nature Reserve, Sneyd Park & White'sPaddock Nature Reserve. In such an environmentally sensitive area I think much more effortshould be made to work with the existing trees on the site as so many have already beenremoved. Trees take many years to grow, so offering to plant new ones to replace those cut downdoes not make sense.

Thanks to the generosity & hard work of many national & local organisations, donors & volunteersthis locality has been preserved as a visual amenity managed for the benefit of wildlife, includingmany rare & protected species. There is accessibility for all to enjoy the natural beauty & interest.The Queen's Canopy Scheme amongst many others is encouraging everyone to be aware ofClimate Change & to plant trees, not destry them.

I object to the latest application in full. This is a beautiful part of Bristol with anestablished wildlife that is truly amazing. Unacceptable harm has occurred to the land with theowner already previously removing a significant number of trees without planning permission.

Elm disease has already unfortunately required the removal of a large number of trees by theWoodland Trust. It will take years for planted shrubs and immature trees to establish. In themeantime removing further trees for house building and the like will continue to erode the wildlifeconnection we have in this lovely and popular nature reserve.

I object to the application and request that this amazing area within Bristol be treatedwith the respect it deserves. Casa Mia have already removed numerous trees and a lot without ofthis without planning permission. This application will continue to erode the woodland make anestablished wildlife habitat vulnerable.

As a visitor to Bristol I really look forward to time my spent here and object to even moretrees being removed in CASA MIA.

The area merits its' conservation area status and I request that you continue to protect it for theanimals, plants, trees, residents and visitors AND your local community.

This unique part of the City is refreshing in so many ways with established wildlife habitat andcontrasts to the open space of the Downs. Both are energising at any time of the year, beforeCOIVD and now more so.

I object to this application and effect through loss of established wildlife and habitat forthe area - the owner has already removed a significant number of trees as part of building on thearea. A special part of Bristol such as this must continue to be valued, including the conservationstatus it rightly deserves.

It's not unreasonable to build some more houses on this large plot.In my opinion too many trees have been removed from the site already, and I object to any morebeing felled.

As others have commented there has been a lot of tree clearance already, to thedetriment of wildlife and carbon capture; iwholesale removal of numerous more trees which havetaken decades to grow should be rejected especially given the current climate and all ourresponsibilities to mitigate, wherever feasible.

I am the vice Chair of SPRA ( Sneyd park residents association) and have beeninvolved in managing planning applications in Sneyd park for 15years. I am very familiar with theproperty subject to this application and have dealt with a number of applications made re this overthe last 7 years. The property has been subject to eyewatering amounts of tree felling in the last 7years and much of it has been done completely outside of the City councils planning laws. In thelast month the government Inspector has rejected an Appeal to Build on this land and madedetailed judgement concerning the appropriateness' of developing the plot. This application Iwould suggest is another underhand attempt to clear the site to facilitate further developmentplans. Whilst householders have the right to develop or better their own properties the law is theirto reign in any inappropriate or severely impactive plans which disproportionally affectneighbouring properties or conservation areas. This property falls into that category with itsboundary shared with Sneyd park nature and conservation area.There has to be a limit as to the number of occasions in which applications will be allowed andprecious time and money spent countering them when judgements have already been laid downby Inspectors which set the bench mark as to acceptability in this matter.I ask that this application is rejected.The applicant must surely realise that the area in which he owns a property is a conservation areaand as such is highly regarded and protected. Unsuitable applications will never receive approvalfrom residents or residents groups whilst they threaten the stability of the delicate eco system inSneyd park.

There has been a lot of tree removal at this property without planning permission havingbeen granted and I am therefore objecting to more trees being removed in what is a ConservationArea.

16, Bishops Court,Knoll Hill,Sneyd Park,Bristol.BS9 1NS08.05.21.

f.a.o. Tom Luck

Planning Application 21/02420.VCCasa Mia, Bramble LaneApplication to fell 20 trees.

Dear Sir,

I was delighted last week to read the very thorough and comprehensive refusal for planningpermission to build 4 houses on the Casa Mia site. In the light of the points cited by Mr S. Thomas(the Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State,) I was amazed and distressed this week to seethe application to fell 20 trees at the same site.

In case you are not aware, the applicant has already felled around 50 trees in the last four years.Admittedly some were small, but a number of mature trees have been felled, many withoutpermission. If you view the Google Maps Aerial View which was shot some years ago, you would

find a current view somewhat different.

The site is adjacent to ours and I overlook it. The only trees which will affect my personal view arethe loss of those at the entrance. This is not the first application we have opposed and we haveplanted trees on our own land in an attempt to make the approach to the Woodland Trust sitemore green and leafy. Although it may not for the present directly affect us, if allowed to go aheadit would affect the whole of the Woodland Trust site.

The south western side of the site adjoins the Bishops Knoll Woods (Woodland Trust land.) TheTrust has recently been forced to fell a dozen or so ash trees due to ash die-back. This hasunfortunately had a detrimental affect on the woodland landscape. The proposed felling of afurther 15 trees adjoining this area would further denude the area. I quote Mr Thomas: 'thisextensive plot amongst the surrounding woodland gives it a very individual and unique character.It is a sensitive site and its attractive setting makes a positive contribution to the character of theConservation Area in this location. Given the visibility of...........the grounds from certain points onthe surrounding footpaths, I find the site and the wider open space amongst this wooded area tohave considerable interest to the Conservation Area in this location.' Unfortunately the applicant isin the process of erecting a wooden fence all around the site so that some of this visibility isalready lost. What remains is the canopy of the trees viewed above the fence.

Point 14 of Mr Thomas' findings state: 'The southern part of the site is part of a designatedImportant Urban Open Space (IUOS). However, given this is separated by a boundary fence itdoes not serve a recreation or leisure function as it is not physically accessible to the public.Nevertheless, ............. the undeveloped open character and the dense row of vegetation providesscreening of the rest of the site and links visually to the surrounding woodland. It provides apleasant backdrop to the surrounding footpath and therefore serves a visual and landscapefunction as part of the IUOS and contributes to its open character.' Several of the trees heproposes felling are substantial mature trees, the loss of which would be considerable, and thearea would certainly no longer be 'dense.'

The whole of the woodland area is well used by the public, particularly so during the recentLockdowns. To quote Mr Thomas one more time: 'open spaces which are important for landscapeand visual amenity should be protected.'

We are lucky having wildlife on our doorstep. Badgers, foxes and even deer are sometimes seenas well as the more common squirrels and various species of bird. Such wildlife depends on thetrees and vegetation to be found in the woods and Casa Mia. We also see bats and, although I donot know where they roost, the derelict buildings at the southern end of the site would be asuitable location.

On particular trees, Mr Thomas commented: 'During the appeal process, a tree of identified valueclose to the entrance to the site (Field Maple Tree T5) was confirmed dead following a survey. ....

The Council agreed to its subsequent removal, subject to the replanting of a similar tree within 5metres of its original position. I observed on my visit this tree had been felled.' More than one treewas felled on that occasion and I wonder if T5 has been replaced?

Do you know the area? I would urge you to come and walk around the site; talk to some of thepeople using it.

For all of the above reasons I wish to object to the proposal to fell the trees. The Casa Mia site is avaluable part of the Conservation Area which is Sneyd Park. The character of the area should bepreserved. The applicant has already cleared most of the land. Please do not let him clear more.Rather than fell the trees, please consider putting TPOs on them.

Yours faithfully,

Christine E. Byrne

I object in the strongest possible terms to these fellings. This is just about the mostsensitive area in the Sneyd Park Conservation Area sitting as it does between the Old Sneed ParkNature Reserve and the Woodland Trust Bishops Knoll woodland, and above the Bennetts PatchNature Reserve, commanding a view of Avon Gorge that is truly magnificent. There cannot be aworse place in Bristol to fell a woodland of such importance. Some of Bristol's most iconic treesare on the border between Bishops Knoll Wood and this piece of land. Hundreds of people walkthrough and enjoy these woodland and nature reserve areas every single day. The Application ismasked as a S211 Notice for tree management, but the accompanying Arboricultural ImpactStatement talks of the development of the site, and which tree is requiring felling to build whichdwelling. So in effect these trees are under threat from development, not requiring "management".A Development Application 18/06624/F went to Planning Inspectorate Appeal and was rejected -in significant part due to the impact the development, if permitted, would have had on the sensitivewoodland and the importance of these trees to the whole of Bristol. The Avon Gorge is the greengateway to Bristol. Maintaining that area is done mostly by local residents volunteering their timeand labour in Bennetts Patch, The Old Sneed Park Nature Reserve and Bishops Knoll Wood andthey do not want to lose these trees. Once more we shall rely on the professional expertise of theArboricultural Officer of the Council to protect our natural heritage and our environment.