AGENDA ITEM NO 7
BOROUGH OF POOLE
PLANNING COMMITTEE 21st October 2010
OBJECTION TO TREE PRESERVATION ORDER10/00016, St Joseph’s Roman
Catholic Combined School Sancreed Road
- PURPOSE
1.1To advise Members that an objection has been received in respect of Tree Preservation Order 10/00016, St Joseph’s Roman Catholic Combined School. Theobjection relates to the inclusion of a beech tree, identified as T1, within Group 1. The objection remains unresolved.
2.DECISION REQUIRED
2.1That Members confirm the Order without modification.
3.BACKGROUND/INFORMATION
3.1The Tree Preservation Order was made followinga request from the caretaker of St Joseph’s School arising from school treeshaving been severely pruned where they overhung the boundary with 16 Newlyn Way.
3.2 A Tree Preservation Order had previously been made in respect of these trees, in 2003, but was never confirmed. This was apparently because the perceived threatat that time to branches overhanging the boundary with 16 Newlyn Way had been resolved without harm to the health or amenity value of the trees.
The
3.3 Following a site visit by the Council’s Arboricultural Officer four Beech trees within group 1 were identified as being healthy, in good condition, and suitable for protection. This Group of trees is visible from Sancreed Road, Newlyn Way and Northmead Road.The group, including T1, is worthy of protection due to the significant contribution it makes to the amenities of the area.T1 overhangs the boundary with 16 Newlyn Way and may be under threat of excessive pruning, as has occurred to adjacent trees, by the removal of overhanging branches.
3.4 Tree Preservation Order 10/00016 was made effective on 4th May 2010.
3.5 The Tree Preservation Order was made on the following grounds:
These These trees make a valuable contribution to the amenity of the area. They appear to be healthy and in good condition and are a visible feature from Sancreed Road and Newlyn Road.
This TPO is appropriate in the interests of general amenity and in accordance with Part VIII of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Town and Country (Trees) Regulations 1999 (as amended 2008) and the Department of Communities and Local Government's guidance to fulfil a statutory duty.
3.6 The protected trees are in the early stages of maturity and are growing within St Joseph’s
Schoolgrounds. T1 is the last tree on the eastern side of the Group,situated approximately 0.5 metres from the boundary with the objector’s property, and 10 metres from his house. T1 is approximately 13 metres in height, with a canopy spread of 4.5 metres. The extent of overhanging branches is as shown by the dashed line on the TPO plan. A number oflower brancheshave been removed, up to a heightof approximately 7.5 metres. These branches were overhanging the objector’s shed and garden.
4. 4.0 Comments on the points of objection from Mr D. J. Warnock of 16 Newlyn Way
By
4.1Leaves and other debris fall from the tree and has to be cleared away.
Such debris is an inevitable consequence of living in the vicinity of trees. It is not considered that the amount of debris produced by T1 is so excessive and onerous to remove that it justifies the removal of T1 from the Tree Preservation Order.
4.2 Leaves from the tree fall into and block the gutter.
T1 does not grow directly over the roof of the objector’s bungalow, the tree being situated 10 metres away. Leaf fall is for a relatively short duration during the autumn, and entry into the gutters can be prevented by installing gutter guards that are commercially available to prevent this problem.
4.3 Leaves have accumulated between the shed and fence and are causing the rear of the
shed to become rotten.
The shed abuts the school fence and leaves and other debris has accumulated. Removal of T1 from the Tree Preservation Order would make very little difference to the amount of leaves accumulating as there are other trees in the vicinity. The main cause of the problem is considered to be rain water run off from the shed roof. This could be resolved by altering the pitch of the roof, or installing guttering and a downpipe. Alternatively a minor repositioning of the shed would enable access to remove accumulated debris.
4.4 Sap and sticky husks are produced by the tree falling upon and discolouring the patio area beneath.
Husks will be produced during a short period in the late spring only when the leaves emerge. T1 has a small canopy that partially overhangs the patio area.It is not considered that the removal of the quantity of husks produced by T1 is so onerous that it justifies the removal of protection. Covering the patio beneath for the short period when this occurs would also resolve the problem. Aphids on some tree species can produce honeydew secretions that are sticky underfoot. Beech is not a preferred aphid host and it is most likely that this is arising from the adjacent unprotected Sycamore trees, a species that can be prone to aphid infestation.
4.5 The tree blocks out direct sunlight to the garden for approximately 2 hours per day.
T1 grows to the west of the property and will intercept direct sunlight to part of the garden during a period in the late afternoon. T1 is part of a groupand direct sunlight will be intercepted by the other trees within the group. The degree of sunlight reduction is not considered to be so excessive that it justifies the removal of protection from T1. The rear garden is south facing and will receive direct sunlight for most of the day.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
T1
T1 beech is a member of a group of trees that offers a good degree of public amenity. The tree
is causing a number of issues for the adjacent resident. It is considered that measures could
be taken that would mitigate these issues. Reduction of direct sunlight is not so excessive that the protection is not justified.
Report Author: Steve Chamberlain, Arboricultural Officer
Contact officer: Steve Chamberlain (01202 633342)
Background Papers: TPO Plan 09/00016