Agenda item

The Chairman agreed to Item 4 on the Agenda being taken as Item 2, to allow the speaker to leave early

CC introduced the application as above, which comes to Committee with a recommendation to refuse. The tree has been there a long time and provides significant amenity on Pittville Circus Road. Has negotiated with the owner but is unable to agree on a way forward. Is therefore giving Members the opportunity to discuss and decide the outcome.

Public Speaking:

Ms Lauren Kemple, applicant, in support

Has three main points to make in support of her application: firstly, the tree is deadly poisonous, and she has three young children; secondly, it gives excessive shade, spoiling her family’s enjoyment of their garden; and thirdly, its removal will have little impact on Pittville Circus Road. Has three young children, and is concerned for their safety with the yew tree in their garden; the roots, bark, leaves and berries are all poisonous, even when dried and wilted; a small handful could kill a cow. Anyone who has ingested the poison shows no symptoms; they just die. Children put things in their mouths, and although it is unlikely that they will eat any part of the tree, the outcome would be catastrophic. The dark, dense foliage provides excessive shade in the garden, making the south corner an oppressive, dead area. Would like to plant fruit trees in its place, and would take specific advice on the species to plant. The tree cannot be seen from Pittville Circus Road, being set back from the boundary, and screened by holly bushes. The replacement fruit trees would be in keeping with Pittville Circus Road – rare varieties which would be pollinated by bees and inhabited by insects, making a positive impact on the environment. This tree has a massive impact on her family and anxiety levels. Its removal will be good for the environment, and have no impact on local amenity.

Member debate:

PB: visited the site. Feels very strongly about protecting Cheltenham’s trees – they are important, and the council plays a crucial role in protecting them. Came to Committee thinking he would vote to refuse this application, but having heard the speaker, has changed in mind. From a biodiversity point of view, the yew tree has limited value, and the thought of fruit trees, providing biodiversity, pleasure for the family, and peace of mind is an overpowering reason to permit the application to remove the tree. As long as there is a condition to replace it with fruit trees, will support the application to take it down. Will move to permit.

CH: a few trees down from this tree is another yew tree which is quite magnificent. The hollies in front of the yew tree of this application have caused the side of it not to have much in terms of branches and foliage. Would suggest taking the hollies down, to improve light to the yew. If this was done, the yew might look as fantastic as the one down the road. Large yew trees are quite rare; would struggle with conscience to vote for this tree to be removed, even though it doesn’t look as good as it could hidden by the holly bushes – and might not be as marvellous as the one down the road, if they are removed. Notes the applicant’s concerns about the poisonous nature of the tree, and appreciates that this causes worry and anxiety, but the reasoning in these cases has to be that the tree has been there for 100 years or so, before the houses were built, and that people knew it was there when they moved in. On balance, will go along with the officer recommendation - likes yews.

SW: on Planning View, was reminded of his own childhood; lived in the middle of a wood, where there were several yew trees, one being only a few yards from the house. It was the three children’s favourite tree; they spent many hours climbing it, eating worms and woodlice and probably bits of tree as well! Does not recall any illness from playing around the yew tree, which the owners of this tree can bear in mind and take comfort from. He and his siblings survived. This is a beautiful tree. Will vote with the officers.

BF: has a question for the officer. Noticed on Planning View that there is another yew tree in the next door garden – understands that the application tree is a female and the tree next door a male (or the other way round?). Are they interdependent? Do they need each other for pollination? A close hair cut will help the application tree. There is plenty in most gardens which can kill but not many people are killed.

PT: has a lot of sympathy for young mums, but children have to be taught that they can’t eat certain things in the garden – they have to learn. Was brought up in a garden surrounded by yew hedges, with big berries. Has difficulty in agreeing to this tree being destroyed. People have to learn to live with these things – they are natural, and part of nature. We can’t get rid of everything.

AH: are we prepared to allow children to possibly die and then say they’ve learnt that lesson? The speaker’s points were good enough reason for him – the tree should go, and replacements be planted. It is a no-brainer.

TO: looking at the site, notes the tree in the garden is a male, with no berries; the tree in the neighbouring garden on the left has berries, as does another tree next door. This is a good tree. Will be voting to keep it.

GB: hates taking trees down, and wonders in this case whether it would reduce the poisonous effect as there are other yew trees all around. This is a nice, spacious garden, and there is room for the fruit trees the applicant would like. Is on the fence at present, but leaning towards keeping the tree.

CC, in response:

- There is no doubt that the tree is highly poisonous, but in his experience, people don’t die from ingesting parts of yew trees in urban areas; and it would be very unusual for anyone to try to eat the bark;

- This is a male tree and has no berries; the chances of a child ingesting them in this garden are very slim;

- Fruit trees are more biodiverse, but yew trees can live for up to 1000 years whereas apple trees live for a much shorter time – so in that sense, yew trees are more biodiverse;

- Could condition one replacement tree, not three or four;

- The yew tree is suppressed by holly, but this could be pruned right back to reduce the perception of it being suppressed. It would grow back, and still be a tree to enjoy;

- Female yew trees need male yew trees to reproduce; if this male tree is removed, it would not necessarily mean that there isn’t any pollen hanging around to fertilise neighbouring trees.

Vote on officer recommendation to refuse

7 in support

5 in objection

1 abstention

REFUSE