Hollymeok Road issues
28/06/2016 10:47:00......Posted by Mario Creatura
I've been working with residents and Council officers to get to the bottom of a number of issues that have effected Hollymeok Road in my ward.
There is wide concern in the area that the trees being worked on are protected and should not be touched by developers. This is not the case - although the site is within the Green Belt which has the various restrictions in place sadly this does not relate to the trees.
Here is the Council's full reply:
'I write to confirm the outcome of the conversation had this morning with the concerned local resident of 1 Stoney Cottages regarding the felling of trees on land adjacent to her property and that of the telephone exchange building.
A check of the TPO index identified that TPO no. 25, 1978 protected four individual trees(a Horse Chestnut, a Ash and two Sycamores) in a line along the boundary with the telephone exchange. However, a note on the TPO file stated that all four trees were removed as a result of a storm and no replacement trees were confirmed. It is therefore the view that no formal protection exists for the trees which have grown on this land. The relevant TPO needs to be revoked as it does not protect the trees originally identified on the land.
This message has been conveyed to the complainant and she acknowledges the situation. She has also been informed that the concerns raised about the alleged disturbance of nesting birds and breaches of Health and Safety legislation need to be directed to the Wildlife liaison officer for the Met Police and the Health & Safety Executive, respectively. She stated she had already contacted the police. It was also clarified that Green Belt designation of land in its own right does not preclude the pruning or felling of trees.
Therefore, I seen no reason to make up an enforcement file & visit the land as there is no alleged breach of planning control occurring at the present time by the clearance of trees identified.'
The Council sees no need to progress matters further – unless the situation changes in terms of any unauthorised development. They are aware that residents feel the site might be occupied by travellers in the future but have received no evidence to suggest that this is likely to occur.
I am grateful that they have said they'll maintain a watching brief and will keep in touch with the residents.