A PROTECTED tree has thwarted a developer’s attempts to build three new homes in a quiet Poole cul-de-sac.
BCP Council’s planning committee unanimously refused developer Simon Harris’ plans to build one detached and two semi-detached houses on land at 8 Glenmount Drive in Poole because it would mean the felling of a 65ft tree.
The mature beech tree, described as a “visual asset” with it standing higher than the Poole ridge, would be removed due to its placement in between the new proposed properties.
It also has a Tree Preservation Order (TPO).
Planners claimed the tree roots were causing damage to a retaining wall along the pavement which, left unchecked, could endanger residents.
This claim was backed by a council tree officer, who wrote: “In my view, on the balance of probabilities, the tree is likely to be a contributing factor to the damage sustained and is therefore unsuitable for long term retention.”
However, several residents and councillors disagreed. Neighbouring resident Ruth Forester, while supporting the proposed properties, was a vocal objector to the tree removal.
She told the committee: “This beautiful mature tree is more than 25 years old, not 10 years old as the planning application falsely states, it has been here since before I bought my house.
“I’m horrified the developer wants to fell it. The ‘dangerous’ wall referred to in the developer’s structural report can readily be rebuilt without felling the tree.
“[Is] our council really agreeing to fell another mature tree given our imminent climate catastrophe?”
Planning consultant Daryll Howells, representing the applicant, replied: “Evidence has been produced by qualified engineers confirming this tree is causing damage to this property which in turn could endanger life to pedestrians if the retaining wall collapses.
“I assume the wall could be replaced, but the roots of the tree would still be there.”
However, committee members felt there was a lack of evidence provided to suggest the tree was a danger.
Ward councillor Steve Baron said: “I feel to approve this sends out a very dangerous message to developers. TPOs are there for this very reason, to protect the amenity and the environment.”
Cllr Tony Trent agreed, stating: “We too readily sacrifice trees. Sometimes I think there’s almost a policy of ‘if in doubt take it out’."
While members agreed the proposed properties had strong merit, the potential loss of the tree saw the application unanimously refused – but with a hope planners would redesign the development to keep the tree while providing the same homes.
After the meeting, Ms Forester told the Echo she wanted fellow residents to know the council “are willing to listen” to issues on amenity if residents are “willing to fight”.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel