Tuesday 28 April 2015
Media enquiry from Helen Devonshire, Guernsey Press:
I have a media enquiry for the department regarding a planning application.
Concerned members of the public have got in touch with us after planning permission was granted to fell 15 sycamore, beech and oak trees. The location is Craig Gowan, Forest Road, St Martin, (ref: FULL/2015/0072)
They feel that there are too many trees being cut down in Guernsey and feel there is a lack of consistency as they know of another case where an application was made for a tree to be taken down that could not be seen by the main road and it was refused. They are unhappy that one, which appears to be a more significant application, is granted permission, when a minor one was not.
They appealed and said there was also another appeal made against the application. They claim they were told that if more than two appeals were made it would have been refused. Is this correct?
Another comment from one of the family members was that he thought Town planners were over from the UK, and that the whole island would look like Town in the future.
Is the department able to comment on these issues?
Thank you for your help.
Environment Department response:
The Department's decision notice and planning report in relation to application FULL/2015/0072 are published online at: http://buildingexplorer.gov.gg/Northgate/Images/Planning%20Decisions%20PDFs/FULL-2015-0072.pdf
The application was considered on its planning merits in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Law and adopted policy.
The trees that have been approved to be felled are those of poorest condition and a requirement for replanting has been imposed.
The other case mentioned has not been identified and it is therefore not possible to comment on the circumstances of that case. Every planning application must be considered on its own individual merits, including in relation to trees whether they are protected by a Tree Protection Order.
The comments made concerning 'appeals' and the country of origin of planners are both erroneous and in the latter case highly insulting.
ENDS
