Agenda item

To confirm the following Tree Preservation Orders:

1. 1 Parham Way, N10
2. St Luke’s Hospital, Woodside Avenue, N10
3. Cascade Avenue, Tennis Courts, N10

The Chair requested that the agenda be varied in order to take items 9 and 10 next.

St Luke’s Hospital, Woodside Avenue, N10

This item was deferred to the next meeting of the Sub Committee.

1 Parham Way, N10

The Committee considered a report seeking to confirm the TPO placed on a tree at 1 Parham Way. Alex Fraser, Arboricultural Officer, advised that a number of TPOs had been implemented at this site – the location of the tree in question was not that as set out in the plan attached report, but was located south of the specimen identified on the plan. An objection had been submitted that a TPO would prevent work being undertaken on the tree, although it was confirmed that permission could be sought in order to carry out necessary works. It was also felt that the distance of the tree from the nearest property meant that damage to the property was unlikely. The specimen was described as a mature ash in good health, with a predicted remaining lifespan of over 40 years. The tree was felt to be beneficial to wildlife and the local amenity.

The Committee noted that the report provided referred to a Lawson Cypress – it was confirmed that this was not the tree under discussion, but was one of the other trees on the site where TPOs had been implemented.

The Committee sought legal advice on making a decision based on a report which referred to a different tree. Serinther Atkar, Legal Officer, advised that the TPO procedure was predicated on consultation; in the event that local residents may not have had the correct information on which to take a view, it was advised that this decision should be deferred and brought back with a correct report. Otherwise there was a risk that the decision could be challenged.

The Committee requested that, when the report was brought back to the Committee, information be provided on the height of the tree and its distance from the closest structural foundations. It was also requested that report title should be updated to reflect the correct location of the specimen in question.

The Committee noted that, as the tree was situated within a Conservation Area, it had a level of protection under the legislation governing Conservation Areas, regardless of the implementation of a TPO.

RESOLVED

That this item be deferred to the next meeting of the Sub Committee.

Cascade Avenue, Tennis Courts, N10

Mr Fraser reported that the TPO had been requested as the site was being sold and may be developed. An inspection of the trees in question had found them to be of high amenity value, in good health and with a predicted remaining lifespan of more than 40 years. Objections had been received on the grounds that the trees were ill-formed, of low amenity value and in an inappropriate location, and a local resident had expressed concern regarding the proximity of one of the trees to their property. It was the view of the arboricultural officer that the trees could be appropriately managed by pruning, both were healthy and the closest tree to the neighbouring property was over 20m away.

In response to a question from the Committee, Mr Fraser advised that the trees were 10-15m in height.

RESOLVED

That the TPO on the trees specified in the report at Cascade Avenue, Tennis Courts, N10 be confirmed.