Rush, The Trees (Development Control Presentation Camelot TPO 4 March 2014)

The following is the presentation I gave tonight as the Borough Councillor for Chisnall Ward (Heskin, Charnock Richard and Coppull West) regarding a planning application (13/01226/TPO) to fell 18 trees (which after discussion and site visits became 17, then 13, then 8) protected by a Tree Preservation Order, at the site of the former Camelot Theme Park

Start by thanking Chair

May I start by thanking the officers for their time and efforts in working with the developer in reducing the number of trees that are the subject of this application from 17 to 8, however…

Reading through the officer's report I have the following comments:

Paragraph 11 States “The trees in question mainly comprise Leyland Cypress”, yet of those recommended for felling only 1 is a Leyland Cypress the other 7 being trees native to the UK.

Paragraph 19 makes a statement that mature trees are suppressing the younger ones and must therefore be removed to protect the younger smaller trees, this made me think of "The Trees" by the Canadian Rock Group, Rush and I never imagined getting the opportunity to recite rock lyrics in the Council Chamber, so I am going to use the opportunity…

There is unrest in the forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas

The trouble with the maples
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade
                                                                                                Musical Interlude / guitar solo

There is trouble in the forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the maples scream 'Oppression!'
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights
'The oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light'
Now there's no more oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe and saw

Back to the officers’ report…

Paragraph 15 – States the electrical supply can be isolated from the former theme park whilst retaining power to the industrial units without felling any trees.

Felling of the trees is only required to remove redundant switchgear to prevent it from becoming a potential target for theft and vandalism – this implies that thieves can remove the switchgear without having to fell any trees

If this is not the case then it suggests, to me, that the trees themselves are preventing theft. If this is not the case then I suggest the thieves be gainfully employed to remove the redundant switchgear, as they can do so without felling any trees!

I remain in principle opposed to the felling of trees that have been afforded the protection of a TPO, for anything other than them being dead, diseased or dying however can accept that in the interests of good woodland management there is, on occasion, a time when trees need to be felled; however this application is not on the basis of ensuring good woodland management, it is for convenience, as stated in Paragraph 15 the electricity network to existing business can be maintained and the site can be made safe without the felling of any trees.

If the decision of this committee is to approve the felling of the 8 trees then can I request that the replacement tree planting referred to in condition 4, is entirely of native species and of no fewer than 8?

Under TPO law (1990 Town and Country Planning Act Section 106) replacement trees will automatically be covered by the TPO, if the replacement trees are removed by the landowner or die at any time after being planted, a duty applies on the landowner to plant another of appropriate size and species. Can an informative be added to the decision notice to make this clear and avoid doubt in the future?

Tree planting provides for the amenity of a site and its surroundings, now and into the future, TPOs protect this amenity. Any new planting required, if this decision is approved, should therefore take place exclusive of any other development that might take place in this area, is it possible for this to be included within the decision, to avoid the planting of these replacement trees being subsumed within what might be a larger scale development?

Thank the committee for listening