| |
|
|||
|
||||
|
|
IMPORTANT PLEASE READ This website and forum has been living on borrowed web server time for years. At the end of this month silsden.net in it's present form will cease to exist, BUT there is a new silsden.net in the making, and a new forum, and lots of exciting new things coming to this space. Peter |
back
to Have Your Say !!!! | back to forum index | login
|
sign
up | help
| latest topics | search
Replies in this thread : 12
Author |
Topic : Planning Approval - a room with a tree |
|
| Peter |
This site was approved for the houses shown on the plans but the tree were not shown as being a problem. In reality the canopies were much larger, and the trees have TPOs on them.  The full document news.silsden.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/13_04192_SUB01-APPROVED_PROPOSED_SITE_LAYOUT-4177017.pdf The developers have now put in an application to cut the trees down as they are suffering from "deceased" and surprise, surprise, construction related distress.  The full document news.silsden.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/15_03071_CPN-IDENTIFICATION_TREE_PLAN-4276380.pdf .... and the reality  REFERENCES Bradford planning www.planning4bradford.com/online-applications/ House approval, search for - 13/04192/FUL Trees, search for - 15/03071/CPN |
|
| ginjo |
what a disgrace, do you know whether the town council will be making a decision on it or is it up to Bradford? |
|
| Peter |
The building has been built in the location as indicated by the plans sumitted and the plans were approved by Silsden Town Council and Bradford. The plans for the construction site and the sketch for the trees canopy both understate the extent of the actual canopy the trees have. The application for the trees to be felled is dealt with by Bradford and the public cannot put any comment on the Bradford Planning Portal for this application. |
|
| blob |
Looks like the original topographic surveyor might have recorded radius instead of diameter to me. |
|
| Peter |
Posted on behalf of Paul Yet again this shows how incompetent our Town Council and Bradford Council are. More importantly It stresses how very relevant it is of councillors to visit sites before they are approved. Given that there are TPO’s on site a full arboricultural survey should have been undertaken that includes canopy spread. HOW has this not been done...and if it has been done has no-one viewed it or put any importance on to the Tpo’s. If so why are councils bothering to even put Tpo’s on trees. What does Bradford’s Arboriculture officer had to say at planning level? Why have the trees suffered...when they should have been guarded against any damage whether canopy, bole or roots? This is a complete and utter disgrace. Yet again Silsden is faced with mature trees unprotected and likely to be felled. Our large, important trees in Silsden are been diminished right in front of us. I’m in the process of mapping and documenting all mature trees in our Town and personally will be keeping a strong eye on these matters. If you are interested in preserving our heritage Trees and landscape get in touch. Kind Regards Paul |
|
| HB |
Also we need to question the foundations of the new houses. When the trees are felled the the root system will go under this development, in 5-10 years as the roots rot down an the water uptake from the ground changes it will have an implication on the foundations. |
|
| gazzer |
quotethe plans were approved by Silsden Town Council and Bradford. To be fair to the Town Council they are a bunch of unpaid individuals. Meanwhile Bradford Council employ people in arboriculture and planning who should spot these things |
|
| bandnwire |
If you look carefully at the plan you can see garden D, and there is a distance between the end of the house and the drawn canopy of the tree outline. |
|
| gazzer |
Are these houses built further back than the should according to the plan? |
|
| andytee853 |
I for one would not consider buying any of these properties. I've seen the damage that tree roots can cause and if there were any issues, you'd basically need to rebuild the house! Or in this case demolish and build somewhere else. Unless they have floated the whole house on a thick concrete bed, do not touch them with a barge pole. Also, any survey worth it's money would pick up the fact that these houses are built directly onto the roots of mature trees. Crazy! Aside from the negligence of the councils in this matter, who are the developers because they haven't got a clue. |
|
| andytee853 |
UPDATE: new document on the Council planning application page basically gives permission to remove the trees. The text is below. Application Number: 15/03071/CPN Site Address: The Grouse 31 Keighley Road Silsden West Yorkshire BD20 0EH TPO Number: Proposal: T1 to T4 Sycamores - fell Officer assessment of the application: The trees comprise of large two multi stemmed Sycamore which are visible publicly. There are three other trees but these are of little public significance. Development is near completion and has been built in part under the canopy spreads of the trees. Tree retention and development is incompatible. There will be some impact on public amenity but this can be mitigated through replanting which the applicant has stated that they are willing to do. The Sycamores have a number of structural faults including large bark wounds and included bark. From a structural point of view a TPO is unsuitable and the approved development confirms that a TPO would not be the correct course of action. Therefore removal and replacement is acceptable Representations Officer recommended conditions to be attached to the consent: 1. It is a duty that 5 new trees are planted to comply with the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 within 12 months from the date of felling. The replacement trees should be Mountain Ash (Sorbus aucuparia) should be 12-14 cm girth Heavy Standard, containerised or rootballed, staked and tied in accordance with good arboricultural practice. The trees should be planted in a line, equidistant apart, and to the rear of the newly built houses but at least 1m away from the boudnary wall. If within a period of 5 years from the date of planting a replacement tree is removed, uprooted, is destroyed or dies, another tree of the same size and species should be planted at the same place within 12 months. Officer Recommendation: Not to make a TPO |
|
| Peter |
quoteAre these houses built further back than the should according to the plan? No, the houses are built in the location indicated on the plans. What is very obvious when looking at the plans and the trees onsite is the canopy of the trees as shown on the plans is a total misrepresentation of the actual space occupied by the trees. The misrepresentation is further compounded on the application to fell the trees - see the second diagram on my first post. |
|
| Dave |
They have started cutting them down this morning. |
|
| Replies in this thread : 12 |
|
events sale / wanted general have your say looking for.. skippy greengrass |
|
DON'T FORGET THE SUBJECT IS >>>>>>>> Forums Home > Have Your Say !!!! > Planning Approval - a room with a tree |
|||
|
<< HOME PAGE < RETURN ^ PAGE TOP ^ | ||
 |
|||
|
webenquiries to |
||
05/08/2015 : 15:02:49 
05/08/2015 : 16:04:49 
07/08/2015 : 17:24:07