appendix 1 - summary of reasons for objection to tpo 283 2017 · trusted solicitors & advisers...

APPENDIX 1 - Summary of reasons for objection to TPO 283 2017

�

Trusted Solicitors & Advisers ThomsonHaytonWinkle y

Kendal Office

Director (People and Places)

South Lakeland District Council

DX: 63428

KENDAL I

114-116 Stricklandgate

Kendal

Cum bria

LA9 4QA

T: 01539 721945 F: 01539 740640

W: thwlegal.co.uk

DX. 63410 Ke ndal

Dear Sirs

Our ref: PAEA/CMJ/BR0 0580/3

Your ref: 30.17 . 14 .348 - G Nicholson

21 August 2017

Tree Preservation Order No. 283 2017 - Hillside, Woodhouse Lane, Heversham

We are instructed on behalf of Dr & Mrs Brookes, the owners/occupiers of the property Hillside to which the above Order refers.

Our clients have received your letter of 2nct August informing them that the above provisional

Order has been made in relation to the three beech trees owned by them and situated at the

entrance to their property, as identified within the Schedule attached to such Order.

Our clients wish to make the following representations by way of objection to the making of such Order:-

1. The beech trees in question are about 40 metres high and the oldest is almost 80 years.

2. They are all showing the drooping of branches associated with this species.

3. Some of the boughs are likely to fall in the near future and this would be either onto the

garden ground beneath or onto the highway over which they hang. Consequently there is the potential to cause serious damage to passing vehicles or, more importantly, injury to

vehicle occupants and pedestrians.

4. Roots from the trees will inevitably extend beneath the surface of lhe highway with the

potential to cause damage to it.

5. Our clients seek to minimise the possibility of such accidents and secure a safer, healthy

environment.for all.

6. Having removed the trees the intention is to widen the access to Hillside and to other

properties served by the driveway.

A full list of the Directors and other lawyers in this firm is available for inspection at our registered office and on our website . Thomson Hayton Winkley Limited. Registered in England and Wales No.7033419 Registered office: 114-116 Stricklandgate,

V,,,,..,-4..,1 I /\(l. Ar' II I Jl,,•h..-.. :.-.-..-1 . ...J n - - · · 1- •- - 1 I. . • ' - . r t· ' ,... t • • ' " -

Continued.....

Page 2 of2

Mr DB Brookes

FRCP, London & Edinburgh

We understand the above representations are supported by several of our clients' neighbours.

May we please have your acknowledgement of receipt and an indication as to when our clients'

representations will be considered and a decision reached.

Yours faithfully

Thomson Hayton Winkley

Direct email: [email protected]

Secretary: 01539 815721

Orchard House

Woodhouse Lane, Heversham, Cumbria, LA7 7E'vv1

26 August 2017

Director (People and Places)


South Lakeland House

Lowther Street

Kendal LA94DL

Dear Sirs

Tree Preservation Order No. 283 2017

I am writing to you in support of the objection to the above order made by Dr and

Mrs Brookes of Hillside, Woodhouse Lane, Heversham.

We are the next door neighbours to Hillside and have been concerned for som e time

regarding the safety aspects of the three beech trees adjoining our property and also

the narrowness of the only access point to our property. It would be impossible to

gain access to our property by emergency vehicles with the existing gateway and w-.:

welcome the proposal by Dr and Mrs Brookes to widen it.

We feel that the trees have a negative effect both on our garden and the other area\

of our property where the trees overhang. We are concerned that there are

substantial sized boughs which are sagging and could potentially be a danger ' o

ourselves and our visitors.

We believe that there was an original intention for the three trees to be restricteu nv

size but this has been ignored. We are ourselves very fond of trees but feel that these

have been allowed to grow too large, are completely out of proportion to their

situation and are becoming a health and safety hazard.

Yours faithfully

David Platt

os o

isu

,TH

fL

deC

ivE- '

DJNCIL

'3 o AUG 7.0\7

RE VS & BENS

AKE.LAND

APPENDIX 2 - Letters expressing support for TPO 283 2017


Lowther Street

Kendal

RE: Tree Preservation- Hillside, Woodhouse Lane, Heversham

Having been asked by the occupier of the above property (Mr Brookes) to

provide a quotation to fell two Copper Beech trees and a Cut Leaf Beech,

I offered alternative advice and strongly advised him to retain the trees.

However Mr Brookes seemed intent on removing the trees.

I felt the trees are beneficial to wildlife including bats and are of a high

amenity value to the surrounding area. The removal of such trees would

be hugely detrimental to the landscape, as they are in an elevated location

within Heversham village and can be seen from both public highways and

footpaths.

On this basis I contacted Mr Nicholson and requested the trees are subject

to formal protection by means of the placement of a tree preservation

order.

I have been informed this has now been carried out and would urge that

the TPO is confirmed in order to fully protect the trees in the future.

If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me.

Graham Neesham

��

��

��

��

� � �� !��"�#�$ $%�

�� $%&$�� !��%$!��%�

�� '!!�(�"�'�� $%�

�

� �� )�!!�*��&�

�� )!$��(�

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

�� !� ��"��

�� #�� $%%&��

��

��

�

'��

"��

�

�

��

��

��

��

��

�� +��,�-./0��

�� 1��2�

� � �� !��"�#�$ $%�

�� +-�.��( ��/$��"�'�� $%�

�

� �� )�!!�*��&�

�� )!$��(�

�

Graham

I believe the Council has applied a TPO on the copper beech at the entrance to Hillside, Woodhouse Lane

Heversham.

I fully support protection of this magnificent tree, to prevent its removal. I have lived along Woodhouse

Lane for over 20 years and feel it enhances the area considerably, especially as beech are not so plentiful in

this area, particularly copper beeches.

I note that more than 5 years ago, the owner of Hillside applied for and was successful in building the first

of two houses on his land. Last year, a second house was built upon this site. If Planning had considered that

the proximity of the tree to these developments was a problem, then they would not have approved their

building. Therefore any attempt to use this argument in the future would be spurious.

Pat Knowles

High Ground, Woodhouse Lane, Heversham LA7 7EW

��

��

�� 3$!��!%�4� $�(�� $%&$�� !��%$!��%��

�� &��%��5��5�

� � �� !��"�#�$ $%�

�� )*(��'!!�(�"�'�� $%�

�

Dear Mr. Nicholson,

The Parish Council strongly support the Tree Preservation Order on the beech trees at Hillside, Woodhouse

Lane and agree with the comments in the attached email from Andy Hancock at Bergen Tree Services.

Regards,

Malcolm Richardson

Clerk to Heversham Parish Council

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Bergen Tree Services <[email protected]>

Date: 31 August 2017 at 10:18

Subject: Hillside, Heversham

To: "Nicholson, Graham" <[email protected]>

Cc: [email protected]

Graham,

I understand that there has been an objection to the newly created TPO at the above property.

Please accept this correspondence as support for the Order.

We have managed this canopy for the past dozen years or more on behalf of the previous owners of the

property and we feel that the group is a vital part of the village landscape as they are the first structure of

note one sees when leaving the Conservation Area and they are the only remaining significant trees on

Woodhouse Lane since the loss of the large Pine after the winds of 2005.

The loss of the group would be a huge loss to the village and we fully support their retention and protection.

Kind regards

Andy

A.C.Hancock

Bergen Tree Service

��

��

��

��

� � �� !��"�#�$ $%�

�� '!!�(�"�.��(��/$��"�'�� $%��/��0.�

�

Whilst speaking to a neighbour over the weekend learned that it had been deemed necessary to issue what

sounded like an emergency TPO in respect of the mature copper beech tree sited at the properties entrance.

Although I understand this matter only concerns the beech for the moment it seems likely that the thought

processes spawning the destruction of this specimen, will shortly move on and require the other trees

flanking the entrance to this property to be destroyed.

There seems to be a scattering of copper beeches in the village, including a number used as liners when the

Prince's Way was completed and opened. None of those I have managed to inspect appear to be anywhere

near the quality of the specimen at Hillside. I judge it to be older than those on Prince's Way and the bark

and leaves seem to have a colour and a quality not possessed by others. To my mind the difference is so

marked that I wonder if it is not one of the rarer cultivars which were developed in previous years.

Having said all this, I recognise it is essentially a forest tree, it seems to have been just ignored and allowed

to grow rather wildly. I believe this fault, if that is what it be. could largely be rectified by the attention of a

skilled and dedicated tree surgeon.

From my conversation I believe the challenge is to the confirmation of the emergency TPO and I hope your

Council will rise to this rather important occasion and act accordingly.

Sincerely, Alan Pixton MRICS FCIOB.

APPENDIX 3 - Copy of TPO plan

�

appendix 1 - summary of reasons for objection to tpo 283 2017 · trusted solicitors & advisers...

Documents