 |
| 'No obvious signs of defect' - the Park Avenue yew tree |
AN attractive yew tree in Grimsby has been saved from the chop.
An independent appeals inspector has ruled in favour of North East Lincolnshire Council which turned down an a resident's application for the tree in the front garden of a house in Park Avenue to be felled.
The resident appealed but the inspector, Mark Caine, upheld the NELC decision.
In his report, he says: "The tree, a tall and mature specimen, is clearly visible from a number of vantage points along Park Avenue.
"There are numerous other trees growing in the locality, and within front residential gardens.
"These, along with the tree the subject of this appeal, make a positive contribution to the landscaped character of the surrounding area.
"The tree is therefore a prominent feature and provides a good level of visual amenity.
"As such, its felling would erode the visual amenity of the area and give rise to considerable harm to its character and appearance.
"Any reasons given to justify the removal of the tree therefore need to be convincing, and it is to this issue to which I now turn."
He continues: "The tree has no obvious signs of defects, and, whilst it leans to the north and overhangs a driveway, I saw nothing to suggest that it was unstable or dangerous at the time of my site visit."
The inspector noted that flagged surfaces of driveways overlooked by the tree were "slightly raised and uneven", but he says that evidence to indicate that tree roots are to blame is "inconclusive".
He continues: "On the basis of the evidence before me, I am also unable to conclude that parts of the driveways could not be re-laid or resurfaced in such a way, if necessary, to take any roots into account and remedy any potential trip hazard."
The inspector is dismissive about "issues with falling leaves, berries and debris, along with impacts on outlook and light levels to property" which he says are "not uncommon for tree owners".
He states: "While this may create inconvenience, require increased vigilance and result in added maintenance and costs (including the cleaning of cars, carpets and driveways more regularly), such matters are an unavoidable consequence of owning a property adjacent to trees and does not justify the removal of a healthy protected specimen.
"In addition, given the good physiological condition of the tree, I have no substantive reason to conclude that it could not tolerate alternative pruning works.
"This may not totally overcome the appellant’s concerns, but it would help to reduce the volume of berries and the area in which they land.
"In any event, falling leaves, berries and other debris is likely to be seasonal and therefore unlikely to occur to a significant degree all year round.
"Alternatively, the use of car covers could also be explored.
"I therefore have no substantive reason to conclude that the tree poses any imminent health and safety risks that would cause me any particular concern.
"Accordingly, I must therefore give the reasons to remove the tree very little weight.
" I acknowledge the appellant's willingness to replace the tree with a new one.
"However, any replacement would take many years to reach the same stature as the appeal tree and provide a similar level of visual amenity.
"As such, replacement planting would not be sufficient to mitigate the harm that would arise to the character and appearance of the area.
"Accordingly, having considered all matters, I find that the loss of the yew tree would result in significant harm to the character and appearance of the area."
The inspector concludes: "The appeal should therefore be dismissed."
 |
| Staying put - the controversial tree |
No comments:
Post a Comment