Question
This month a very large oak tree had to be felled in Earley to help prevent further substantial structural damage done to various properties, some of which were a considerable distance from this tree. The damage to these properties has been very distressing and costly to the homeowners. However, from an environmental and aesthetic point of view, it is also very distressing to many other residents. This is not an isolated instance.
Obviously, such trees can have long reaching impacts stretching decades into the future and can affect many properties quite a distance away. Their preservation is also very important from a Climate Emergency point of view, in their role of sequestering carbon as well as ascetics.
One possible way to reduce the need to fell large, mature trees might be a change of Planning Policy whereby, the impact of trees on or adjacent to planning application properties must be considered in depth where appropriate – perhaps something like a Bat Survey for Trees.
Can the Executive Member for Planning consider this or look at other ways to help to mitigate the need to fell mature trees?
Minutes:
Question
This month a very large oak tree had to be felled in Earley to help prevent further substantial structural damage done to various properties, some of which were a considerable distance from this tree. The damage to these properties has been very distressing and costly to the homeowners. However, from an environmental and aesthetic point of view, it is also very distressing to many other residents. This is not an isolated instance.
Obviously, such trees can have long reaching impacts stretching decades into the future and can affect many properties quite a distance away. Their preservation is also very important from a Climate Emergency point of view, in their role of sequestering carbon as well as ascetics.
One possible way to reduce the need to fell large, mature trees might be a change of planning policy whereby, the impact of trees on or adjacent to planning application properties must be considered in depth where appropriate – perhaps something like a Bat Survey for Trees.
Can the Executive Member for Planning consider this or look at other ways to help to mitigate the need to fell mature trees?
Answer
There has been a number of subsidence cases in relation to mature trees within the close proximity to properties over the last year. Felling of a mature tree due to subsidence is always a last resort and will always only be allowed if there is no suitable measure that can be implemented to protect both the tree and the property.
A number of procedures are in place to ensure that the current and future planning applications carefully consider the proximity of new housing to existing trees. The Trees and Landscapes Team review planning applications and consider how the development would impact on any trees. Where necessary, the Team will serve TPOs on valuable trees that are at the risk of felling.
Developers are required to submit a tree survey and Arboricultural Impact Assessment as part of their planning application, in order to comply with the current policy; which is CC03. Where a tree is protected by a TPO, the applicant will also be required to submit an Arboricultural Method Statement so that the Trees and Landscapes Team can be certain that the development or extension can be constructed without harm to the tree. If it is considered that the proposal will cause harm to the TPO tree and no technical solution will be acceptable, the application will be recommended for refusal.
Furthermore, the most recent draft Local Plan, that we put out for consultation in February last year, included new text within the Policy NE4 relating to the predicted growth of trees when assessing the layout of new development sites. This will help to ensure that new developments provide sufficient space to enable trees to grow and thrive; which is one of the main reasons why we are having the problem with subsidence.
Supplementary Question
We do need to urgently ensure we protect the trees in the Borough so it is good to hear about new developments, but it is also people sticking up inappropriate extensions near trees that seems to be an issue.
An example of the failure I think is the felling of 450 trees over at the Bearwood Estate on the grounds that they were an immediate health and safety risk. I think I am right in saying that the application was submitted urgently, and it was granted on the grounds of an immediate risk, but it took them over a month to even start work. It is difficult to believe that all 450 trees presented an immediate risk given that they cover such a significant area. It is odd that the 2005 and 2015 statutory inspections did not mention it.
One of your colleagues was quoted in the press as saying that “the Council is working to ensure only the required removals have taken place”. That presumably means that an inspection has taken place. So, what is the result of that investigation and what is going to be done to replace the tragic loss?
Supplementary Answer
It certainly was not me that you are referring to that made that statement. What I will do is I will contact the Trees Team tomorrow and Parry and come back to you with an answer to your question.