Pleasington tree removal sparks planning row

SILVER birch trees have been cleared from a patch of land sparking a planning row.

Frank Barnes, of Regents Close, Pleasington, cut down the trees on the patch of land he owns behind the three bungalows near the Butlers Arms pub.

But he was shocked when Blackburn with Darwen Council’s tree preservation officer Russell Critchley imposed a replanting order on the land.

According to council chiefs, Mr Barnes was only given permission to thin the trees on the land, not clear them.

But the 75-year-old said that was never the case.

Mr Barnes said: “In 2009, one of the trees was overhanging on the road and a woman damaged her car, so the neighbours asked me to remove it.

“When the tree surgeon had a walk through the wood, he found a number of trees were in a dangerous condition.”

Mr Barnes commissioned a survey of the trees in the wood, which saw a number of them tagged, meaning they needed to be removed, and several more sprayed with a red dye, also meaning they should be chopped down.

He submitted the findings of the survey along with a planning application to cut down the trees and permission was granted.

But work was soon ceased by the council.

It was explained to Mr Barnes that the council did not pay attention to the red dye and so deemed that these had not formed part of its planning approval.

A meeting was held between Mr Barnes, Mr Critchley and two Pleasington councillors, Couns Alan Cottam and John Pearson, at which it was eventually agreed he could cut down the remaining trees that had been marked.

He said: “In May, I received a letter saying I had agreed to replant oak trees, four metres apart, on the land.

“I did not agree to plant any trees whatsoever. But the letter said that, because I hadn’t done so, a replanting order was being imposed.”

Mr Barnes has appealed the order.

Pleasington councillor Alan Cottam said he wanted to see the trees replanted.

He said: “The landowner has gone over the top and cut too many of them down. I would like to see the land replanted.”

Comments(11)

Don't rely on Spellchecker says...
9:39pm Sat 18 Aug 12

There is a ridiculous situation going on in Pleasington with EVERY tree subject to a Tree Preservation Order.

This is just a money making scheme for the Council whereby in order to "trim" a tree (which BTW will grow approx 20ft per year) one has to apply via the Planning Process - and therefore PAY the Council who decide if you are to be allowed to maintain a status quo in terms of height on every single tree in the Village.

In Mr Barnes' case he followed the correct procedure for a group of trees that can only be described as "weeds" - paid the appropriate fee, waited for the due process to take place and acted on the permission granted.

If anyone were to visit this site they would realise - with a tincy wincy bit of common sense - that these particular trees are out of control and have been allowed to "fester" for far too many years and should have been trampled down at birth to avoid this situation 20 years on.

Travelling "Over the Tops" through Pleasington one can see how overgrown the trees are and what damage is being done to the road in winter when NO SUN AT ALL reaches the road surface during the day and all the hedgerows are so overgrown that there is now a serious risk to vehicles travelling down the road.

Trees in the right place are a wonderful part of our heritage and countryside but left to reproduce without proper control are a menace that threaten the ecological system and remove the natural light that we - as citizens - should be entitled to experience.

Good Luck in your appeal Mr Barnes - as a resident of Pleasington I shall be writing to the Council to defend your stance.

(If you should fail - plant the oak trees and I will come and stand on them on two years time.)

Alan Cottam hang your head in shame.

notac says...
9:53pm Sat 18 Aug 12

In my opinion this area is improved and should be left as it is - unfortunately this is a victim of the local councillors personal crusades on trees which does not help the area and people they are supposed to represent .

Darwen Malc says...
11:35pm Sat 18 Aug 12

"Trees in the right place are a wonderful part of our heritage and countryside but left to reproduce without proper control are a menace that threaten the ecological system" says Don't rely on Spellchecker!
Well, no, they are not part of 'our heritage', they are part and parcel of nature. Yes, you can 'control' the spread of them if they were to threaten the balance of nature, but to use the excuse that trees can be a menace because they dont allow light onto the road in winter, or overgrown bushes are a threat and a risk to vehicles, is simply stating that we are superior to nature and everything should go 'mans way'. Then why not go the whole hog, chop down every tree and hedgerow, then birds will have nowhere to nest, feed and rear their young, then that will affect their predators, who will then decline in number, and onwards and downwards we go, so lets hurry it up, eh, lets tarmac and concrete everything, after all, man is Sooooo superior...NOT.

fabinribblevalley says...
10:01am Sun 19 Aug 12

It appears to me that politics are involved in this disagreement. Probably the blue ties of Pleasington ruffling the feathers of the red ties of council. But in my opinion trees should only be removed if a danger to the public.It's very easy to cut a tree down but a long process from replacing it to maturity.

fabinribblevalley says...
10:01am Sun 19 Aug 12

It appears to me that politics are involved in this disagreement. Probably the blue ties of Pleasington ruffling the feathers of the red ties of council. But in my opinion trees should only be removed if a danger to the public.It's very easy to cut a tree down but a long process from replacing it to maturity.

sean_brfc says...
11:10am Sun 19 Aug 12

Get the oak trees planted. And a tree surgeon says they're in bad condition and must be chopped down, what a joke!

buzzinfly says...
12:44pm Sun 19 Aug 12

Have the council implied that the same should be done to the trees that were cut down at the old Bishops house on the top of Billinge. They were blatently cut down, what has become of that issue? Does any one know?

Skookie says...
5:26pm Sun 19 Aug 12

I agree with councillor Cottam the trees should be be replanted, ok maybe a few needed to be removed but not the whole lot of them, and another thing Mr Barnes you should also replace all the holly bushes and shrubs you have ripped up. Those trees where there long before Mr Barnes and the bungalows.

Roversboy says...
11:13am Mon 20 Aug 12

Darwen Malc... Obviously man is soooooo superior, thats why no tree has written to complain, and you have had to do it for them

milano says...
10:10pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Dear Mr Barnes.....Obviously you take hearsay as gospel !!! Trees are the B all + End all according to the gospel of "Cottam n Critchley" . Having previously discussed TREES with this duo , i totally feel sorry for you trying to manage your own property and having to negotiate with the said duo. MR Cottam can' t identify species of trees ( proven ) and MR Critchley tells us that the last T P O officer who worked for BwDBC was wrong in telling me that some trees were in "DECLINE" . Who's telling the truth Mr Critchley ??? Mr Barnes....gud luk wi thi appeal n ask fer awl discussions t b put in writin fore ti acts...From a wound up Darrener

Open_Mind says...
3:56pm Tue 21 Aug 12

Don't rely on Spellchecker wrote:
There is a ridiculous situation going on in Pleasington with EVERY tree subject to a Tree Preservation Order.

This is just a money making scheme for the Council whereby in order to "trim" a tree (which BTW will grow approx 20ft per year) one has to apply via the Planning Process - and therefore PAY the Council who decide if you are to be allowed to maintain a status quo in terms of height on every single tree in the Village.

In Mr Barnes' case he followed the correct procedure for a group of trees that can only be described as "weeds" - paid the appropriate fee, waited for the due process to take place and acted on the permission granted.

If anyone were to visit this site they would realise - with a tincy wincy bit of common sense - that these particular trees are out of control and have been allowed to "fester" for far too many years and should have been trampled down at birth to avoid this situation 20 years on.

Travelling "Over the Tops" through Pleasington one can see how overgrown the trees are and what damage is being done to the road in winter when NO SUN AT ALL reaches the road surface during the day and all the hedgerows are so overgrown that there is now a serious risk to vehicles travelling down the road.

Trees in the right place are a wonderful part of our heritage and countryside but left to reproduce without proper control are a menace that threaten the ecological system and remove the natural light that we - as citizens - should be entitled to experience.

Good Luck in your appeal Mr Barnes - as a resident of Pleasington I shall be writing to the Council to defend your stance.

(If you should fail - plant the oak trees and I will come and stand on them on two years time.)

Alan Cottam hang your head in shame.
20 ft a year.....are you stupid

based on your figure the tree that was planted in the back of my family home garden by my great grandad over 100yrs ago should be taller than the new Shard building in London.

You're having a laugh

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree