Agenda item

CC introduced the application to remove the whole horse chestnut tree, which takes up the whole front garden of the house.  It has a TPO, so the recommendation is to permit, subject to a replacement tree of a more appropriate nature being planted in its place.

Public Speaking:

None.

Member debate:

BF:  surely it would be unwise to plant a replacement tree in the same spot; the residents could end up with the same problem in 70 years.

AH:  would like to make the case to keep the tree.  It has been there substantially longer than the buildings, and is one of very few trees in the area.  Cheltenham is known for its trees; they are part of the town’s heritage.  This is a healthy tree, and cannot agree with it being ripped away.

MC:  doesn’t like chopping down beautiful trees, and this has been there for ever.  But has been on site and read the officer report; this tree has a few problems.  The report talks about removing and replacing the tree, saying that it would have to be removed in 15 or so years anyway; if a tree is planted in its place now, it will be reasonably mature in 15 years.  Will be sad to see it go, as it is beautiful tree; wouldn’t normally support its removal.

SW:  is a great tree lover, and will be sad to see this tree removed, but it does carry disease.  It was there before the houses, before the current residents moved in – so it could be said that if they didn’t like the tree, they shouldn’t have moved in.  However, CC wouldn’t recommend the removal of a tree without good cause.  This tree is diseased and far too large for the site.  Will vote for it to go, though reluctantly.  Will be happier if something more suitable is planted in its place.

LS:  the report states that the horse chestnut has leaf miner. Is no expert in lepidoptery but the issue is the health of the tree, and there isn’t enough detail about this in the report.  Is it likely to fall down, to fall on the house, will it recover from the leaf miner or not?  Is it part of the eco system, or terminal for the tree?  This is an important consideration, and is uncomfortable if a precedent is set to take trees down at the first sign of disease.

HM:  supports SW.  CBC is fortunate to have a professional, dedicated tree officer who does his best to support and preserve trees wherever he can.  If he says it should go, it should go.

CC, in response:

-       horse chestnut leaf miner is a perennial problem, causing the leaves of the tree to turn brown and crispy.  It will look healthy and verdant in Spring and early Summer next year, but will quickly lose vitality.  It will not get better.  It won’t fall down, and if left, could live for another 10-20 years, having no canker, decay or bleeding canker;

-       the issue with the tree is mostly an amenity problem.  It doesn’t look nice in its current situation.  If it was in the Promenade and the leaves were swept away in Autumn it could last longer, but in this case, the neighbours cannot be expected to do this, and the tree will therefore be colonised by the leaf miner moth again next Spring and every year after;

-       the tree is older than the house, and one of the reasons why he has been brought this application to committee is to demonstrate the importance of how and where trees should be retained in new developments.  If there had been one or two fewer units, this tree could have been kept;

-       if a new tree is planted now, it should be of an appropriate size and contribute to the ecology of the area.  A hawthorn would be ideal – flowers in the spring, popular with birds and insects, nice autumn colours;

-       regarding the suggestion that if the home-owners don’t like it, they shouldn’t move in, that is fair comment, although in this case the occupier of the house isn’t the owner;

-       it is a shame to remove the tree; there are few trees in the area, and a new tree won’t have such an impact, especially in the Spring;  despite this, feels that the time is right to remove the tree;

-       has looked at the comments of the Trees Officer when the site was developed, but these were thin on the ground.

GB:  if Members agree to its removal, will there be a condition to replace it with a different species?

Vote on officer recommendation to permit

11 in support

1 in objection

2 abstentions

PERMIT