THURROCK Council have apologised to Purfleet residents who are furious that trees in a conservation area were cut down by developers without them being consulted.The residents of Church Hollow are outraged that more than 30 trees were cut down last week by a tree surgeon acting for developers Dipping Hollow and their agents Heritage Planning, who are renovating three listed cottages on the street.
Resident Gayle Lawson said: “Apart from it being extremely sad that these trees have been destroyed, it has spoiled the whole look of our road.
“The Council say that some of the trees were diseased but all the tree stumps we could see looked healthy and certainly not diseased!
“We live in a conservation area and many of these trees were protected.
“We received no notification from the Council that this work was going to be carried out.“ Thurrock Council admit that they did give permission for the removal of some trees around the cottages, including ones which were protected by a Tree Preservation Order, however, they say they advised the contractors that the only protected trees which could be removed were diseased ones.
They also say they advised the contractors to leave enough trees to maintain screening from adjoining developments.
However, residents say that they have been left with virtually no screening at all, and they believe that protected trees which were not diseased have been cut down.
Another resident, Anette Connelly, said: "I'm devestated, I've never been overloooked before and now I have flats looking directly into my bedroom window.”
"Where is the evidence that these trees were diseased?
"And even if they were diseased the council still should have consulted us.
She added:"I believe that some of the trees were actually on land owned by residents.
"We want trees replanted immediately!"
The Council has apologised to the residents for the confusion surrounding the removal of the trees, and say that they are looking into whether the contactor’s level of tree removal was in line with their advice.
They also say that they will request a retrospective Tree Preservation Order so they can place a legal duty on the developer for replanting on the site.
However, resident Gill Bray is not happy with just an apology, she said: “I can't find the words, I'm so angry.
“An apology is not enough, there needs to be an investigation into this.
"Its all to easy to cut these trees down and then say sorry afterwards.
"There is now no screening around my property at all.”
Purfleet councillor Andy Smith said: “I'm appalled that the council allowed these lovely trees to be cut down without consulting the residents or myself -the ward councillor.
“I've written to the Council's Chief Executive asking for the whole area to be replanted with the support and involvement of the residents so that they can chose the trees that they would like.
“I'm not at all happy with the damage that has been done but I'm pleased that the council has apologised.
“The most important thing now is to get trees replanted so that residents get a nice and pleasant view back.”
Thurrock Council spokesperson Andy Lever said: “Following the removal of a number of trees from the Church Hollow area of Purfleet, Thurrock Council would like to apologise to local people for any confusion that arose.
“Many of the trees were diseased and needed to be removed, however the process of making this decision left something to be desired.
“The request for the removal of trees came from site meetings on a planning application.
“An assessment was carried out on the trees’ value within the conservation area on behalf of the council by a landscape specialist.
“A number of trees were identified as suffering from sooty bark disease and Dutch elm disease.
“Some of the trees on the site are subject of a Tree Preservation Order, but the removal of diseased TPO trees is allowed.
“The council advised the contractors that around the boundaries there is a mix of trees of varying quality.
“Where possible these should be retained to maintain the screening from adjoining developments and to help reinforce the banks.
“The advice included confirmation of disease and the possible removal and replacement of elms for a more appropriate species.
“We are currently reviewing the applicant’s tree survey and the details of the TPO to assess whether the level of tree removal around the boundary was in line with the Council’s advice.
“The agreement to remove the trees around the cottages was given by the council and although it has become apparent that the specialist was not aware of the TPO, the advice on the value, disease and removal of the trees was the same for the conservation area as it would have been for a TPO.
“Much, if not all, of the work was permissible without an application.
“However a TPO application should have been made for the removal of any preserved trees that were not diseased. T “Thurrock Council is now requesting a retrospective TPO application so it can place a legal duty on the developer for replanting on the site.
“Action has been taken within the department to review the procedures for this service and prevent any further issues of communication in relation to TPOs.”
Thurrock Website
No comments:
Post a Comment