PLANNING COMMITTEE 28 September 2004
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PLANNING COMMITTEE th 28 September 2004 PLAN NUMBER: APPLICANT: DATE RECEIVED: 2004/0253 Mr & Mrs Mallinson 03/03/2004 WARD/PARISH: CASE OFFICER: 8 WEEK DATE: Newbarns Charles Wilton 27/04/2004 Tel: 01229 894938 LOCATION: 3 Inglewood, Barrow-in-Furness PROPOSAL: Felling of two sycamore trees situated at the back of the group of three and subject of Tree Preservation Order 1972 No. 1 LOCAL PLAN: No specific policies. SUMMARY OF MAIN ISSUES: There are three rather elongated sycamores situated within close proximity to each other. Removal of two will allow remaining tree to develop into a reasonable specimen. NON MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS: REPRESENTATIONS: The Occupiers, Inner Lodge Convent, Rating Lane, Our Lady’s Chetwynde School, 28, 26 Infield Gardens, 49, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 63, 65, 67, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83 Croslands Park, 1- 8, 10 Croft Park Grove, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 Inglewood, Barrow in Furness all informed. The Occupier, 65 Croslands Park, Barrow-in-Furness “Thanks you for your letter of 9th March, specifically directed to potential tree works at 10 Inglewood but identifying similar applications for 8 adjacent properties. In total they concern a band of trees which are public amenity, lying between and predating both the Inglewood and Croslands estates. In 2001 similar and significant tree works were approved and carried out for several of the present applicants. In some cases, these new applications seem to seek further work on the same trees. Page 1 of 77 PLANNING COMMITTEE th 28 September 2004 May I ask that, as then, the applications be considered in the light of their collective, overall effect, in order that whatever may be permitted is carried out in a similar fashion across the woodland, with regard to its overall future, safety, skyline and continuity. I understand that you will obtain an independent expert opinion on the level of work that will best meet these objectives” CONSULTATIONS: OFFICERS REPORT: There were four sycamore trees, which occupy the southern end of the rear garden. One of these sycamores contained a substantial area of rot. These findings were confirmed by the Council’s arboricultural consultant. The advice was that the tree was dangerous. In such situations the Council’s consent is not required. The tree was felled on this basis. This work has been carried out. The applicant had proposed to reduce the crowns of the remaining sycamores by 35%. The sycamores are growing fairly close to one another. This will result in increasingly tall, spindly trees. Lopping the trees as originally proposed would achieve little other than disfiguring them. Were only the better of the three sycamores retained it would allow the remaining tree to develop a better shaped canopy. The applicant has followed this advice and amended his application to propose the felling of two of the three remaining sycamores. This achieves the improvements to the natural lighting of the applicant’s house and garden which they desire while not harming the amenity value of this woodland belt and according with good arboricultural practice. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that consent be GRANTED. Page 2 of 77 PLANNING COMMITTEE th 28 September 2004 PLAN NUMBER: APPLICANT: DATE RECEIVED: 2004/0252 Mr & Mrs Williams 03/03/2004 WARD/PARISH: CASE OFFICER: 8 WEEK DATE: Newbarns Charles Wilton 27/04/2004 Tel: 01229 894938 LOCATION: 5 Inglewood, Barrow-in-Furness PROPOSAL: Works to trees protected by Tree Preservation Order 1972 No. 1 – Felling of ash tree, and removal of large limb over hanging outbuilding, together with 3 lower branches to the horse chestnut tree closest to boundary with 7 Inglewood. LOCAL PLAN: No specific policies. SUMMARY OF MAIN ISSUES: Ash tree poor specimen cramping development of adjacent better trees, removal of lower branches of horse chestnut will reduce the weight and risk of fracture. NON MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS: REPRESENTATIONS: The Occupiers, Inner Lodge Convent, Rating Lane, Our Lady’s Chetwynde School, 28, 26 Infield Gardens, 49, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 63, 65, 67, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83 Croslands Park, 1- 8, 10 Croft Park Grove, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 Inglewood, Barrow in Furness all informed. The Occupier, 65 Croslands Park, Barrow-in-Furness “Thanks you for your letter of 9th March, specifically directed to potential tree works at 10 Inglewood but identifying similar applications for 8 adjacent properties. In total they concern a band of trees, which are public amenity, lying between and predating both the Inglewood and Croslands estates. In 2001 similar and significant tree works were approved and carried out for several of the present applicants. In some cases, these new applications seem to seek further work on the same trees. Page 3 of 77 PLANNING COMMITTEE th 28 September 2004 May I ask that, as then, the applications be considered in the light of their collective, overall effect, in order that whatever may be permitted is carried out in a similar fashion across the woodland, with regard to its overall future, safety, skyline and continuity. I understand that you will obtain an independent expert opinion on the level of work that will best meet these objectives” CONSULTATIONS: OFFICERS REPORT: There are five trees at the bottom end of the applicant’s rear garden. The finest of the trees are two horse chestnuts, which are located along the rear garden boundary. No work is required to one of those trees but the second has a heavy lower limb. This is growing out over out buildings to a property Croslands. The branch because of its length and weight would be vulnerable to breaking off. The advice is that this should be removed. Three low level branches are also proposed to be removed to balance the tree. These works are modest in nature. Forward of these trees are two ashes and one sycamore. None of these trees are good specimens though removing one or both ash trees would help the sycamore develop a better shape. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that consent be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: Condition No. 1 The Planning Authority must be notified in writing at least seven days beforehand, of when the works to trees authorised by this permission are to commence. Reason To ensure that the work is carried out in an orderly and satisfactory manner. Condition No. 2 The works hereby approved (with the exception of the approved felling) shall only be carried out during and between the months of October to March. Reason To minimise the risk of damage and disease. Page 4 of 77 PLANNING COMMITTEE th 28 September 2004 PLAN NUMBER: APPLICANT: DATE RECEIVED: 2004/0251 Mr & Mrs Smith 03/03/2004 WARD/PARISH: CASE OFFICER: 8 WEEK DATE: Newbarns Charles Wilton 27/04/2004 Tel: 01229 894938 LOCATION: 9 Inglewood, Barrow-in-Furness PROPOSAL: Works to trees protected by Tree Preservation Order 1972 No.1 - 20% thin of lowest limb, removal of 2nd and 4th lowest branches to horse chestnut, 20% reduction of crown on house side only to sycamore tree. LOCAL PLAN: No specific policies. SUMMARY OF MAIN ISSUES: Modified application will allow trees to develop a better shape and minimise danger of limbs breaking off in high winds due to undue weight. NON MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS: REPRESENTATIONS: The Occupiers, Inner Lodge Convent, Rating Lane, Our Lady’s Chetwynde School, 28, 26 Infield Gardens, 49, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 63, 65, 67, 69, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83 Croslands Park, 1- 8, 10 Croft Park Grove, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 Inglewood, Barrow in Furness all informed. The Occupier, 65 Croslands Park, Barrow-in-Furness “Thanks you for your letter of 9th March, specifically directed to potential tree works at 10 Inglewood but identifying similar applications for 8 adjacent properties. In total they concern a band of trees, which are public amenity, lying between and predating both the Inglewood and Croslands estates. In 2001 similar and significant tree works were approved and carried out for several of the present applicants. In some cases, these new applications seem to seek further work on the same trees. Page 5 of 77 PLANNING COMMITTEE th 28 September 2004 May I ask that, as then, the applications be considered in the light of their collective, overall effect, in order that whatever may be permitted is carried out in a similar fashion across the woodland, with regard to its overall future, safety, skyline and continuity. I understand that you will obtain an independent expert opinion on the level of work that will best meet these objectives” CONSULTATIONS: OFFICERS REPORT: There are two trees situated within the applicant’s rear garden, a sycamore and a horse chestnut. A 35% reduction was proposed to both trees. The horse chestnut has a well shaped crown and reducing this would disfigure the tree. I explained to the applicant that I could not support such measures. The tree would however benefit from a 20% thin of its lower limb and the removal of its 2nd and 4th lowest branches. As well as reducing the risk of fracture it would provide space for an adjacent, smaller tree to develop. The sycamore has grown a little one sided being drawn up unevenly by the horse chestnut. The proposed reduction of 35% was excessive. A modest 20% reduction to the tree on its house side will help bring the tree back to a balanced shape. The applicant has amended his proposal accordingly. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that consent be GRANTED subject to the following condition: Condition No. 1 The Planning Authority must be notified in writing at least seven days beforehand, of when the works to trees authorised by this permission are to commence.