Agenda item

The purpose of this report is to advise members of the current situation in respect of confirmation of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) in Vicarage Close, Chatteris.

Kimberley Crow presented the report to members and drew their attention to the update report which had been circulated.

Members received a written representation, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, read out by Member Services from Ingrid Holliday, in support of the Tree Preservation Order. Ms Holliday stated that she understands that following the Council’s decision to apply a Tree Protection Order on the Sycamore tree, granted late last year, whose roots are in her garden (13 St Martin’s Road), the future of this tree is now in jeopardy, as an objection has been raised by an interested party and referred to this meeting for its further consideration. She wished to reiterate that primarily and what should be of significant importance for this committee’s consideration and deliberation right at its onset is the fact that, as I am sure members will already know but the objector may not, is that nationally, significant numbers of Sycamore trees are suffering and dying from various pathogen causing diseases, including leaf spot (cristularia depraedans), tar spot (rhytisma acerinum) and the potentially more damaging, sooty bark disease, cryptostroma corticale, which is a fungal disease and can cause wilting of the tree crown and eventual death of the tree and can also lead to maple bark disease which is transferable to humans.

Ms Holliday expressed the view that the Sycamore is a tree that is now in danger and, therefore, worthy of protection, conservation and care and should not be allowed to be destroyed or damaged wantonly even though its leaves and charming helicopter seed pods have a tendency to become a nuisance and fall onto cars and driveways. In her understanding, the objector had, late last year, collected some fallen branches that fell into Vicarage Close after a few particularly windy days but, in her view, these were not of any significant size to cause any material or structural damage and indeed, these were put over her fence into her garden where they remain, should anyone need to inspect them.

Ms Holliday expressed the opinion that the Sycamore tree contributes to the countryside’s rich tree biodiversity, adding sanctuary to bats, bees and local birdlife and the aesthetic value of the landscape and help to “bed in” and provide interesting views, colour and texture for local houses to enjoy. She questioned what could be of greater value than to teach young children to watch the tree renew itself each spring and to see local birdlife making nests in a beautiful tree at the bottom of the garden and in what better way can such values be imparted to children and grandchildren to respect, conserve and value nature if trees are chopped down just to prevent people from needing to wash their cars and tidy their lawns and driveways of leaves.

Members asked officers the following questions:

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that when she visited the site, she thought she was seeing things and she has listened very carefully to the points made by the owner of the tree, however, in her opinion, the tree should have been maintained to a higher standard by the owner over the years. She made the point that the tree is covered in ivy and if a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) is added to the tree she has no objection but, in her opinion, in a few years’ time, the tree will be totally dead and will have to be removed. Councillor Mrs French added that when that time comes the owner of the tree is going to have to submit a planning application to have the TPO removed.

·         Councillor Connor referred to the presentation screen to review the photographs of the tree. He expressed the view that trees are not known to be healthy if they have ivy on them and, in his opinion, the tree does not appear to have had any removal of the ivy whatsoever.

·         David Rowen stated that the Council’s Arboricultural Officer has carried out an assessment in terms of its impact and amenity and has recommended the making of the TPO with the knowledge that there is ivy on the tree. He explained that if the officer had any concerns with regards to the long or short-term health of the tree then the recommendation to confirm the TPO would not have been made.

·         Councillor Marks asked who actually owns the tree as the lady who submitted the written representation stated that the roots go under her garden into her property, but it did not actually sound as though she owns the tree. He added that the written representation also makes reference to the suggestion of a management plan for the tree, and he questioned how a management plan can be in place if you are not the actual owner of the tree.

·         Councillor Connor stated that the representation also intimated that she may own it because the objectors have thrown all of the branches back into her garden.

·         Councillor Marks asked for part of the written representation to be read out again. Member Services stated that it reads’ I understand that following the council’s decision to apply a tree protection order on the sycamore tree, granted late last year, whose roots are in my garden, 13 St Martins Road, the future of this tree is now in jeopardy’.

·         Councillor Connor stated that it still is not clear.

·         Councillor Mrs French added that it is only the roots of the tree are in the lady’s garden and questioned why somebody else who lives in the road would trim the tree and then throw the branches back into the lady’s garden if it does not belong to her.

·         David Rowen explained that the documentation on the case file, albeit not 100% categorical proof, appears to indicate that Mrs Holliday, the lady who submitted the written representation is the owner.

·         Councillor Mrs French asked whether the lady requested that the TPO was added to the tree last year. David Rowen stated that it is the officers understanding that it is the same lady who requested the TPO.

·         Councillor Marks stated that he finds it most confusing that the lady also wants to introduce a management committee to look after the tree and it is either her tree or it is not.

·         David Rowen stated that the Council’s Tree Officer has assessed the tree and believes it to be of merit to deserve a Tree Preservation Order and the committee needs to make a decision as to whether it agrees with that recommendation or not. He added that with regards to whose tree it is or the long-term management plan of the tree are secondary issues and the main aspect for the committee to consider is whether the tree is worthy of a TPO or not in accordance with the Arboricultural Officer’s recommendation.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that the Tree Officer is the expert, and she expressed the view that if the tree is not dead then it is likely to be dead soon. She added that if the owner of the roots wants to preserve it and wants to have a management committee then that is her choice. Councillor Mrs French added that she would hope that in a few years’ time the owner is not going to have to submit a planning application to either cut it down or chop it up.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Benney stated that he visited the site with Councillor Mrs French, and he expressed the view that the tree is not one of stature and it does not bring any benefit to St Martins Road. He stated that the objector who lives at number 3, in his view, does have make a fair point but he has listened to the written representation and the lady could be a little more proactive with regards to the maintenance of the tree by removing the ivy to make the tree last longer. Councillor Benney stated that there is an objector, a supporter and an Arboricultural Officer who has confirmed that the tree is worth keeping but he does not have strong views with regards to the tree either way but the lady who lives at the property wants to keep the tree on her boundary and he has concluded that the tree probably does need to have a TPO.

·         Councillor Purser expressed the view that by looking at the tree in its current condition it is likely to come down soon anyway and adding a TPO is a waste of time.

·         Matthew Leigh made the point to members that as part of the process the Arboriculturist undertakes a significant number of considerations to determine whether or not a tree is worthy of protection. He added that one of those considerations is the life expectancy which is broken down into 5 categories, with when considering the tree in this case and taking into account the presence of the ivy, the Tree Officer has indicated that the tree will have a life expectancy of between 20–40 years. Matthew Leigh added that the ivy will potentially cause harm and difficulties to the tree, however, the ivy could be removed tomorrow and that then becomes a moot point. He stated that if the tree does begin to become unwell, then there maybe works which can be undertaken to mitigate that. Matthew Leigh made the point that should the tree die then an emergency application can be submitted and there is a timescale of 5 days for that to be considered.

·         Councillor Purser asked whether there is any information as to whether the tree has been tested to see if it does have any health issues. David Rowen explained that detail is not known, however, the Tree Officer has assessed the tree in its current condition.

Proposed by Councillor French and seconded by Councillor Mrs French and agreed that the Tree Preservation Order be CONFIRMED.

(Councillor Benney declared, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that he is a Member of Chatteris Town Council but takes no part in Planning)

(Councillor Marks declared in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct of Planning Matters that he attends Chatteris Town Council meetings although he is not a member of the Town Council, but he leaves the room when planning matters are discussed)