Home

Was this is a crime?

The trees are now replanted but did the owner of 1, Lower Oxford road know that there were tree preservation orders on the original trees before he cut them down?

Almost 3 years ! on we still await the answer.

 

Latest story :

 

One year on, the clock is ticking - say Councillors

My Comments printed in the Sentinel 24th Jan 2005

Two Basford  councillors have asked residents to join them in calling on Newcastle Borough Council to ensure that the felled trees in Lower Oxford Road are replaced before the end of March. The trees were axed a year ago (Jan 16th - 17th 2004) and a Tree Replacement Order was imposed by the council, following pressure from Cllr Simon Tagg and local residents (Feb 17th 2004). This instructed that 10 mature trees should be replanted during the next planting season, the deadline for which is 31st March, just over 2 months away.
Councillor Simon Tagg said, "We contacted the council at the end of last year to ensure that they had informed any new owner of the Tree Replacement Order. However when we chased this up with the council last week, they had received no reply from the owners. We are now reaching 'the crisis point'- the owner should be making plans to replant, Residents have said, and the Planning committee agreed, that those trees that were cut down last January should be replaced in this planting season. We are adamant that this should happen before March 31st."
Fellow councillor Ian Matthews said, "We are urging local residents to join us in writing to the chief executive of Newcastle Borough Council, calling on him to enforce the Tree Replacement Order, ensuring that the trees are replanted within the next two months. We are using this first anniversary of the felling of the trees to say we want the trees back!!"

 

Pervious stories on this subject :

 

Buyers ordered to replant trees

Article in the Sentinel Monday 3rd December '04 on the issue of replanting the trees.

Reminder order has been sent to the owners of a piece of land where protected trees were cut down. The move comes after councillors became concerned that new owners of the property in Lower Oxford Road, Basford, would be unaware of a replacement order.
Ten trees were felled at the property on Lower Oxford Road, in Basford, earlier this year after the owner at the time, Nick Banner, was told by Newcastle Borough Council that they did not have a protection order on them. It was not until the 100-year-old trees had been floored that the council realised their mistake and issued Mr Banner with a replacement order. But the property was auctioned off in October.
Conservative group leader, Simon Tagg said he contacted the council after the auction asking for officers to send a reminder order to the new owners.
Mr Tagg said: "I contacted the council to request a reminder be sent to the new owners detailing the deadline by which the trees that were hacked down in January must be replanted by law.I have received confirmation that a reminder letter was sent out restating the details of the order and stressing the deadline for replanting."
"I have watched this situation closely and I'm pleased a reminder letter has gone out, and have requested further inquiries be made as the deadline for replanting approaches.This should leave any new owner in no doubt as to the obligation they have taken on by buying this property."
A spokesman for the borough council said: "An order has been sent out in the last couple of weeks just reminding the owner of the property to carry out the replacement planting by the next available planting season." The trees have to be replanted by the end of March 2005.
 

 

I was there and I voted!

Letter printed in the Sentinel Monday 23rd August '04 in response to incorrect claim that I have gone quiet on this issue.

In reply to the letter, Why's Simon Gone quiet? (Aug 12th) the writer asked what I was doing when Newcastle's Planning Committee gave permission for a 6 bedroom house on the land where trees were hacked down in Lower Oxford Rd, Basford. I was at the meeting and spoke against this development and voted against it. The Sentinel chose not to print my comments.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people from Lower Oxford Road who wrote in to object and I share their disappointment at the way the Planning Committee voted. It is now important the replacement trees are planted as the owner is required to do by law - that's what I will be working for in the coming months. The Trees should come first

 

 

Planning Application 1, Lower Oxford Road

You may be aware that the Council as received an application for outline planning permission for 6 two bedroom ‘units’ in the garden of 1, Lower Oxford Road. The decision on this is due to be taken by Council Officers.

As it was Council Officers that made the original ‘error’ in relation to the cutting down of trees on that site I believe that this issue should come before Councillors on the Planning Committee. Therefore, as your local Councillor along with my colleague Councillor Glennis Deakin I have called this into the planning committee so that elected Councillors can make a judgement on this application in the interests of people in Basford.

Apparently local Lib Dem Councillors have also called this in but have made a mistake when filling in the form!

 

A start is made to righting this wrong

The Planning Committee on Tuesday 17th Feb over-turned the Councils policy in relation to the felling of the trees at 1, Lower Oxford Road. The Council wanted to deal with the planting of the trees along side a planning application for development from the owner - who hacked the original trees down. The committee resolved that;

A full investigation be carried out into the murky events surrounding the felling of the trees.

A tree replacement notice be served immediately, specifying species, size and planting locations.

As the local Councillor who fought for this issue to be brought to the Planning Committee with the intent of changing the Council policy, which I and many local resident thought was too accommodating to the owner and his plans for the site, I am please with the out-come which is the first step to righting this wrong. I can assure you I will be keeping my eye on future developments.

 

Copy of letter I submitted to every member of the Planning Committee on 17th Feb. 2004

17th Feb. 2004

Dear fellow Councillor,

Tree Removal - 1 Lower Oxford Road

Please accept this letter concerning the above and consider it before making your decision.

I believe there are 2 issues concerning the removal of the trees;

1. The tree removal over the weekend of 16th to 18th Jan. 2004 was unauthorised as no permission was sought or given to remove the trees.

The information that the Council supplied to the owner of 1, Lower Oxford Road about whether the trees were covered by a TPO was incorrect, but this was not the only source of information open to the owner as a land search carried out on Dec. 12th 2003 revealed that the trees were covered by a TPO (the council has confirmed this). This was passed on by the surveyor to the owner’s Solicitor who have confirmed to me that they then did their job properly. Which is the most they could say to me legally.

Under normal circumstance the Council states that they would investigate legal proceedings against the owner and / or tree contractor, but say the likely defence offered in this case could be that they were informed by the Council the trees were not covered.

In the light of the fact that a land search revelled the TPO’s on the trees well over a month before they were cut down this defence seems rather shaky to say the least.

All this could be cleared up by an investigation. I’m sure you are aware destruction of trees with a TPO carries a £20,000 fined - that's how serious an act it is.

2. The Council states that the owner is responsible for replanting the trees 'under the relevant act' and that in normal circumstances, a tree replacement order would have been served. However the Council intents to ‘hold off’ serving this because the owner is shortly to be making a planning application for a development on the land.

In the light of point 1. why should the Council be so accommodating to the owner?

The reason the Council officers give for doing this is that the owner is ‘amenable’ to carrying out the required replacement planting but in his letter to the council of 22nd Jan. 2004 confirming his willingness to co-operate the owner states that he wants to 'make sure the that trees are replaced in accordance with his development on the site.'

The residents and myself would like to see the replacement trees to take priority over any development and I believe holding off serving the order to replace the trees just invites the owner to 'push' for more than he his entitled from this site. A tree replacement order issued immediately (rather than a landscape condition placed on a planning application) by the Council (even if the trees cannot be planted in this planting season) would reassure local residents. I believe this committee should consider this course of action tonight. The trees should come first.

Yours sincerely,

Councillor Simon Tagg

 

Send mail to Simon Tagg with questions or comments about this web site.

 

Published & promoted by Simon Tagg, Civic Offices ,Newcastle-under-Lyme. Staffordshire.

Simon Tagg  2009