Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) which sets out alternative options for Policy 2 of the Trees and Woodlands Strategy for Members to debate.  Policy 2 of the Trees and Woodlands Strategy lays out criterion where tree works will not be carried out to Council-owned and Hertfordshire Highways trees.

The report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) set out alternative options for Policy 2 of the Trees and Woodlands Strategy for Members to debate and the implications of those options.   Policy 2 of the Tree and Woodland Strategy laid out criterion where tree works would not be carried out to Council-owned and Hertfordshire Highways trees.

The Chairman then reiterated the options and asked the Committee to be mindful of the financial implications of any change to the policy.

Councillor M.Cowan then suggested six points based on the principle of giving at least as much weight to the living conditions of residents as to the preservation of trees.

The six points were:

1.         When a street tree significantly interferes with light from a street light, or the sightline of a Council CCTV camera, the presumption should be to prune the tree.

2.         When the effect of a tree is to make a resident want to keep a light on for the majority of the day to ensure sufficient light to a living room, then the presumption should be to prune the tree.

3.         When the tree is a rare example of a native tree or makes a significant contribution to the landscape, the presumption should be to preserve the tree.

4.         In all cases the presumption should be to prune the tree, not to remove it, unless absolutely necessary.

5.         If the decision is likely to be to allow significant pruning or removal of a tree, other than one which is dying, the views of close neighbours should be sought before a decision is reached.

6.         There should be a mechanism for appeal against a refusal to prune to remove a tree.

With regards to the initial point the Tenants’ Panel Representative, R. Read enquired as to how Officers would know there was a problem with a street light.  Officers replied that there would be reports from members of the public, their tree contractor Maydencroft Rural and via Tree Officer inspections.

Concerning the second point, the Head of Planning advised the Committee that light levels were subjective. Subsequently, it could be difficult to ensure consistency if they could not be measured.  Moreover, thinning the branches of a healthy tree often did not work and cutting down healthy trees to improve light to properties would set a precedent.

The Chairman agreed and added that Officer’s decisions could be challenged, whereas with an appeal, each case could be taken on its own merits.

Members suggested that an instrument could be used to measure light.  The Corporate Director (Planning, Protection and Governance) suggested that this would still be subjective and whatever scale was used, someone could argue against it.

Some Members suggested the SAD (Seasonal Affective Disorder) criteria for light and officers agreed to look into this, although this option would involve Officers going into resident’s homes unless the equipment was supplied to the resident.

With regards to the fifth point, it was noted that this was already covered in the policy with regards to trees in Conservation Areas or the Estate Managed area only. 

Regarding the last point and the mechanism of appeal, the Committee acknowledged that it would improve transparency, protect Officers from criticism, allow Members to take a broader view with Officer Support and that Ward Councillors ought not to sit on the appeal panel. 

The Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) advised the Committee that Officers would look into options for an appeal panel and bring them back to the next meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee reconsider the additional points raised in the meeting in respect of Policy 2 of the Tree and Woodland Strategy, in particular the creation of an appeals panel, at the next meeting of the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee and following that recommend its decision to Cabinet for approval.