Police called after Christchurch council fell two more protected trees in Druitt Gardens

Bournemouth Echo: Police called after Christchurch council fell two more protected trees in Druitt Gardens Police called after Christchurch council fell two more protected trees in Druitt Gardens

POLICE were called after a council controversially felled two more protected trees in a town centre beauty spot.

Disgusted residents have hit out at Christchurch council after the authority gave the go-ahead for two more trees, protected by preservation orders, to be cut down.

The move has sparked outrage from councillors and residents, with campaigners branding the felling as “an assault on nature.”

Yesterday the chairman of the council’s audit and scrutiny committee promised an investigation into the situation.

Many residents flocked to Druitt Gardens on Friday, with relations becoming heated and one bystander reporting one person with their hand round the throat of another.

Four of the seven trees placed under protection just four weeks ago have been felled.

%brightcove(3166228014001)

TPOs were placed on the trees after a campaign by residents to protect them from felling by Cornfactor developer Renaissance Retirement Ltd.

But on Tuesday, roots were severed during an archaeological dig with the council’s tree officer giving the order to fell the trees for “public safety”.

Elliot Marx, a retired Christchurch resident who campaigned against the felling, said: “450 people wrote to the council opposing the felling of these trees.

“We opposed the felling because they are an important wildlife habitat. This is an assault on nature.”

Alec Trebilcock, 45, a truck driver, added: “If I ignored a tree preservation order and cut down a tree in my garden then the council would have me.”

Sue Newman, a Christchurch historian, said: “They seem to be doing everything they can to spoil Christchurch. This was an eco-system where the trees were integral.”

Bryan Wellstead, who is retired and has lived in the area for 75 years, said: “The council appear to be doing everything they can to spoil this town.”

Grace Tierney-Baker, 22, a support worker, said: “There will be no nature left in Christchurch at the rate things are going. If I had known about this earlier I would have protested. These people don't care. It is all about the money to them.”

Simon Gibb, 26, a care worker, said: “It seems to be all about the money now. Cutting down the trees seems a bit wrong but I don't think there is anything we can do now.”

Norman Cutler, 74, of Somerford, said: “I am very annoyed. They have wrecked this place as it is already.”

Mike Tizzard, 64, a kitchen fitter and amateur archaeologist, said: “They don't care about what anybody thinks. We have had other sites where archaeology has been trashed because of the council.”

Jo Crane, 61, a retired engineer, said: “It stinks. The tree preservation orders are an embarrassment to the council and the developer. It is already over-developed.”

Ward councillor, Peter Hall, said: “It is unbelievable. It has put the whole planning system into disrepute. I am lost for words – so disgusted.

“They’ve been there for 70 years or more and cannot be replaced.”

Cllr Lesley Dedman said: “I am deeply disappointed. This is sacrilege; we have made a huge effort to save these trees and now they are gone.”

Cllr Ray Nottage, leader of Christchurch council, said: “I am saddened by the fact we have lost the trees but I do not think officers have got any alternative in view of public safety.

“I think the damage has to be discussed between the officers and the developer.”

And Cllr Nick Geary, chairman of audit and scrutiny, said the facts of the issue seem to be “self-evident”.

“No councillors have voted to cut any trees down”, he said.

Council response

Neil Farmer, strategic director at Christchurch Borough Council, said developer’s Renaissance contacted the council “concerned” about the state of two more trees.

"Our tree officer went down to inspect the site at first light and saw that the trees were indeed in a dangerous state.

"From a health and safety standpoint, the tree officer recommended felling the trees and I accepted this was necessary.”

He said the developer’s were doing work within the boundary of the site and “have a planning consent which they are entitled to implement within that site.”

"Whilst it is unfortunate that these trees have had to come down, as part of the landscaping of that part of Druitt Gardens, an additional 30 trees will be planted”, he added.

“The council does not anticipate the removal of any further trees however our tree officer and building control officer will be monitoring the work to ensure that the developer complies fully with their planning permission.”

Developer’s response

Robert Taylor, managing director of Renaissance Retirement Ltd, said the latest incident was a “repeat” of what happened on Wednesday.

“Hopefully this is the end of it. Obviously the whole episode is deeply regrettable but the difficulty we have is since the roots have been damaged we can’t not do anything”, he said.

“There is no way I could have prevented it.”

Comments (66)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:15am Sat 8 Feb 14

power_ranger says...

cant they just leaf the trees alone?
cant they just leaf the trees alone? power_ranger

7:57am Sat 8 Feb 14

madM74 says...

So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn!
So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn! madM74

8:00am Sat 8 Feb 14

BIGTONE says...

Were they using chainsaws on the archeological dig? Contractors all over the country are responsible if tree roots get cut on their land especially if they have TPO's on them but apparently not in Christchurch.
Were they using chainsaws on the archeological dig? Contractors all over the country are responsible if tree roots get cut on their land especially if they have TPO's on them but apparently not in Christchurch. BIGTONE

8:19am Sat 8 Feb 14

Carolyn43 says...

Any individual who damaged a protected tree would get a fine of around £2,000, so the developer should be fined £8,000 for four trees. But that would probably only put a minor dent in the profit he's gong to make so he won't care.
Any individual who damaged a protected tree would get a fine of around £2,000, so the developer should be fined £8,000 for four trees. But that would probably only put a minor dent in the profit he's gong to make so he won't care. Carolyn43

8:27am Sat 8 Feb 14

hucky999 says...

Ok so they are protesting! What then if during this bad weather the trees got up-rooted, get a life bloody tree huggers!!!!!
Ok so they are protesting! What then if during this bad weather the trees got up-rooted, get a life bloody tree huggers!!!!! hucky999

8:40am Sat 8 Feb 14

simcal says...

hucky999 wrote:
Ok so they are protesting! What then if during this bad weather the trees got up-rooted, get a life bloody tree huggers!!!!!
Rather like saying, "does not matter if I kill someone, with all the traffic on the road they might get run over". Your logic is flawed.
[quote][p][bold]hucky999[/bold] wrote: Ok so they are protesting! What then if during this bad weather the trees got up-rooted, get a life bloody tree huggers!!!!![/p][/quote]Rather like saying, "does not matter if I kill someone, with all the traffic on the road they might get run over". Your logic is flawed. simcal

9:09am Sat 8 Feb 14

ashleycross says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
Any individual who damaged a protected tree would get a fine of around £2,000, so the developer should be fined £8,000 for four trees. But that would probably only put a minor dent in the profit he's gong to make so he won't care.
But archaeology is a valid defence to this in christchurch, see article. Should be good for archaeologists' employment prospects if this goes national.
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: Any individual who damaged a protected tree would get a fine of around £2,000, so the developer should be fined £8,000 for four trees. But that would probably only put a minor dent in the profit he's gong to make so he won't care.[/p][/quote]But archaeology is a valid defence to this in christchurch, see article. Should be good for archaeologists' employment prospects if this goes national. ashleycross

9:13am Sat 8 Feb 14

ashleycross says...

ashleycross wrote:
Carolyn43 wrote:
Any individual who damaged a protected tree would get a fine of around £2,000, so the developer should be fined £8,000 for four trees. But that would probably only put a minor dent in the profit he's gong to make so he won't care.
But archaeology is a valid defence to this in christchurch, see article. Should be good for archaeologists' employment prospects if this goes national.
Silly me, the article's reference to not prosecuting because the roots were severed during archaeological work appears to have been removed, along with my earlier comment. Anyone got a screen shot from the earlier article?
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: Any individual who damaged a protected tree would get a fine of around £2,000, so the developer should be fined £8,000 for four trees. But that would probably only put a minor dent in the profit he's gong to make so he won't care.[/p][/quote]But archaeology is a valid defence to this in christchurch, see article. Should be good for archaeologists' employment prospects if this goes national.[/p][/quote]Silly me, the article's reference to not prosecuting because the roots were severed during archaeological work appears to have been removed, along with my earlier comment. Anyone got a screen shot from the earlier article? ashleycross

9:34am Sat 8 Feb 14

elite50 says...

madM74 wrote:
So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn!
Oh, they did!
It worked just fine the first time so if you have a winning formula just keep using it!
I have a big tree in my front yard, it blocks my view. I think that I will dig down around it to look for archaeological remains from ancient Britain that could be there.
This could be the start of a treeless Britain.
[quote][p][bold]madM74[/bold] wrote: So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn![/p][/quote]Oh, they did! It worked just fine the first time so if you have a winning formula just keep using it! I have a big tree in my front yard, it blocks my view. I think that I will dig down around it to look for archaeological remains from ancient Britain that could be there. This could be the start of a treeless Britain. elite50

9:52am Sat 8 Feb 14

ashleycross says...

elite50 wrote:
madM74 wrote:
So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn!
Oh, they did!
It worked just fine the first time so if you have a winning formula just keep using it!
I have a big tree in my front yard, it blocks my view. I think that I will dig down around it to look for archaeological remains from ancient Britain that could be there.
This could be the start of a treeless Britain.
How long will it take for the echo to set a filter to stop comments with the word archaeology( and attendant misspellings). Have to wait until one of the reporters teenagers wakes up to help them, so could be some time!
[quote][p][bold]elite50[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]madM74[/bold] wrote: So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn![/p][/quote]Oh, they did! It worked just fine the first time so if you have a winning formula just keep using it! I have a big tree in my front yard, it blocks my view. I think that I will dig down around it to look for archaeological remains from ancient Britain that could be there. This could be the start of a treeless Britain.[/p][/quote]How long will it take for the echo to set a filter to stop comments with the word archaeology( and attendant misspellings). Have to wait until one of the reporters teenagers wakes up to help them, so could be some time! ashleycross

10:11am Sat 8 Feb 14

Crank says...

This was not legitimate archaeology. A planning condition on the permission was nothing was to be started prior to a written agreement about archaeological investigation. None has been made. No professional archaeologists did this or would do this. The developer simply trenched out under the trees and claimed it was for archaeological work. You don't do archaeology like that! And developers commission archaeologists not do it themselves or say they are! Please see this excuse from developer, in tandem with council, as a cover-up. Don't be taken in by it.
This was not legitimate archaeology. A planning condition on the permission was nothing was to be started prior to a written agreement about archaeological investigation. None has been made. No professional archaeologists did this or would do this. The developer simply trenched out under the trees and claimed it was for archaeological work. You don't do archaeology like that! And developers commission archaeologists not do it themselves or say they are! Please see this excuse from developer, in tandem with council, as a cover-up. Don't be taken in by it. Crank

10:14am Sat 8 Feb 14

Huey says...

Crank wrote:
This was not legitimate archaeology. A planning condition on the permission was nothing was to be started prior to a written agreement about archaeological investigation. None has been made. No professional archaeologists did this or would do this. The developer simply trenched out under the trees and claimed it was for archaeological work. You don't do archaeology like that! And developers commission archaeologists not do it themselves or say they are! Please see this excuse from developer, in tandem with council, as a cover-up. Don't be taken in by it.
They should get special branch to investigate
[quote][p][bold]Crank[/bold] wrote: This was not legitimate archaeology. A planning condition on the permission was nothing was to be started prior to a written agreement about archaeological investigation. None has been made. No professional archaeologists did this or would do this. The developer simply trenched out under the trees and claimed it was for archaeological work. You don't do archaeology like that! And developers commission archaeologists not do it themselves or say they are! Please see this excuse from developer, in tandem with council, as a cover-up. Don't be taken in by it.[/p][/quote]They should get special branch to investigate Huey

10:21am Sat 8 Feb 14

Turtlebay says...

What is the point of Tree Preservation Orders if anyone can ignore them with impunity?

The Council officers are ignoring them and the contractors are doing the best they can to make the trees dangerous, thus the need to destroy them!

How would the contractors feel if we all started damaging their equipment because it suited our purposes? We would be arrested and jailed for that.

Why aren't those who ordered the trees cut down, in jail?
What is the point of Tree Preservation Orders if anyone can ignore them with impunity? The Council officers are ignoring them and the contractors are doing the best they can to make the trees dangerous, thus the need to destroy them! How would the contractors feel if we all started damaging their equipment because it suited our purposes? We would be arrested and jailed for that. Why aren't those who ordered the trees cut down, in jail? Turtlebay

11:20am Sat 8 Feb 14

mytown1 says...

I would like to bring this back to what are the council doing/saying. Firstly it was the weather, then a dig.On the 8/2/14 Cllr Cottage Blogged that "I am of the opinion that councillors did nothing wrong in applying TPO's". Is he now saying that by the councillors putting TPO's on the trees there could have been? Would a guess be that we are now looking at the councillors to blame for this? Had they not put TPO's on the trees then all of this would not be an issue? Surely not. whilst he says he will meet with officers to discuss matters on Monday I would suggest he also meet with his colleagues after this Blog!
I would like to bring this back to what are the council doing/saying. Firstly it was the weather, then a dig.On the 8/2/14 Cllr Cottage Blogged that "I am of the opinion that councillors did nothing wrong in applying TPO's". Is he now saying that by the councillors putting TPO's on the trees there could have been? Would a guess be that we are now looking at the councillors to blame for this? Had they not put TPO's on the trees then all of this would not be an issue? Surely not. whilst he says he will meet with officers to discuss matters on Monday I would suggest he also meet with his colleagues after this Blog! mytown1

12:13pm Sat 8 Feb 14

brian74 says...

Has Christchurch Council LOST the respect of all its residents?
90% of the Highcliffe residents i spoke to had no faith in the planning office that was responsible for the trees.
From personal experience i have found the dept responsible for the trees create arguments to avoid residents enjoying their home life but when it suits them ANY TREE can be felled.

There are far too many TREES with TPO’s what are suddenly felled in VERY suspicious circumstances and i NOW URGE THE RESIDENTS to DEMAND legal action, the same legal action that we as residents are threatened with.

The new development of bungalows on Chewton Common Road, at the rear of St Marks Primary in Highcliffe - I was told that the trees were so badly damaged during construction that they had to be felled. Is this true?

At Highcliffe Castle, Christchurch Council wanted to fell trees to improve the vista! Yet told a Highcliffe resident that they could NOT fell their tree to improve their vista as it was a public amenity despite being in their back garden! Have the trees been felled?

And now Druitt gardens – the fact is it had a TPO, a legally enforceable document, if Christchurch Council Tree Officers cannot work out the root plan of a tree then they should be investigated for incompetence and dealt with. The Council or the developer is not above the law so if enough of us demand an independent government enquiry then it will happen.
How many more trees are felled in suspicious circumstances?

Demand action and complain to your local government ombudsman, call 0300 061 0614 or through the web site http://www.lgo.org.u
k/publications/fact-
sheets/complaints-ab
out-trees/
Has Christchurch Council LOST the respect of all its residents? 90% of the Highcliffe residents i spoke to had no faith in the planning office that was responsible for the trees. From personal experience i have found the dept responsible for the trees create arguments to avoid residents enjoying their home life but when it suits them ANY TREE can be felled. There are far too many TREES with TPO’s what are suddenly felled in VERY suspicious circumstances and i NOW URGE THE RESIDENTS to DEMAND legal action, the same legal action that we as residents are threatened with. The new development of bungalows on Chewton Common Road, at the rear of St Marks Primary in Highcliffe - I was told that the trees were so badly damaged during construction that they had to be felled. Is this true? At Highcliffe Castle, Christchurch Council wanted to fell trees to improve the vista! Yet told a Highcliffe resident that they could NOT fell their tree to improve their vista as it was a public amenity despite being in their back garden! Have the trees been felled? And now Druitt gardens – the fact is it had a TPO, a legally enforceable document, if Christchurch Council Tree Officers cannot work out the root plan of a tree then they should be investigated for incompetence and dealt with. The Council or the developer is not above the law so if enough of us demand an independent government enquiry then it will happen. How many more trees are felled in suspicious circumstances? Demand action and complain to your local government ombudsman, call 0300 061 0614 or through the web site http://www.lgo.org.u k/publications/fact- sheets/complaints-ab out-trees/ brian74

12:14pm Sat 8 Feb 14

brian74 says...

Has Christchurch Council LOST the respect of all its residents?
90% of the Highcliffe residents i spoke to had no faith in the planning office that was responsible for the trees.
From personal experience i have found the dept responsible for the trees create arguments to avoid residents enjoying their home life but when it suits them ANY TREE can be felled.

There are far too many TREES with TPO’s what are suddenly felled in VERY suspicious circumstances and i NOW URGE THE RESIDENTS to DEMAND legal action, the same legal action that we as residents are threatened with.

The new development of bungalows on Chewton Common Road, at the rear of St Marks Primary in Highcliffe - I was told that the trees were so badly damaged during construction that they had to be felled. Is this true?

At Highcliffe Castle, Christchurch Council wanted to fell trees to improve the vista! Yet told a Highcliffe resident that they could NOT fell their tree to improve their vista as it was a public amenity despite being in their back garden! Have the trees been felled?

And now Druitt gardens – the fact is it had a TPO, a legally enforceable document, if Christchurch Council Tree Officers cannot work out the root plan of a tree then they should be investigated for incompetence and dealt with. The Council or the developer is not above the law so if enough of us demand an independent government enquiry then it will happen.
How many more trees are felled in suspicious circumstances?

Demand action and complain to your local government ombudsman, call 0300 061 0614 or through the web site http://www.lgo.org.u
k/publications/fact-
sheets/complaints-ab
out-trees/
Has Christchurch Council LOST the respect of all its residents? 90% of the Highcliffe residents i spoke to had no faith in the planning office that was responsible for the trees. From personal experience i have found the dept responsible for the trees create arguments to avoid residents enjoying their home life but when it suits them ANY TREE can be felled. There are far too many TREES with TPO’s what are suddenly felled in VERY suspicious circumstances and i NOW URGE THE RESIDENTS to DEMAND legal action, the same legal action that we as residents are threatened with. The new development of bungalows on Chewton Common Road, at the rear of St Marks Primary in Highcliffe - I was told that the trees were so badly damaged during construction that they had to be felled. Is this true? At Highcliffe Castle, Christchurch Council wanted to fell trees to improve the vista! Yet told a Highcliffe resident that they could NOT fell their tree to improve their vista as it was a public amenity despite being in their back garden! Have the trees been felled? And now Druitt gardens – the fact is it had a TPO, a legally enforceable document, if Christchurch Council Tree Officers cannot work out the root plan of a tree then they should be investigated for incompetence and dealt with. The Council or the developer is not above the law so if enough of us demand an independent government enquiry then it will happen. How many more trees are felled in suspicious circumstances? Demand action and complain to your local government ombudsman, call 0300 061 0614 or through the web site http://www.lgo.org.u k/publications/fact- sheets/complaints-ab out-trees/ brian74

12:26pm Sat 8 Feb 14

UKIP4U says...

Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council.
UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch
Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council. UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch UKIP4U

12:34pm Sat 8 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Before they go any further they should get an expert with no vested interest to advise on the whole farce
Before they go any further they should get an expert with no vested interest to advise on the whole farce kalebmoledirt

12:58pm Sat 8 Feb 14

Yankee1 says...

power_ranger wrote:
cant they just leaf the trees alone?
They haven't twigged that thought. But they may eventually get to the root of the problem.
[quote][p][bold]power_ranger[/bold] wrote: cant they just leaf the trees alone?[/p][/quote]They haven't twigged that thought. But they may eventually get to the root of the problem. Yankee1

12:59pm Sat 8 Feb 14

brian74 says...

I have just started a petition on the governments web site - titled' DRUITT GARDENS FAILED'

It calls for an independent inquiry to establish any wrongdoing.

it will take up to 7 DAYS to verify and publish - PLEASE look for it and sign up if you agree.

http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/

Or will UKIP start a petition as well and assist the residents of Christchurch.
I have just started a petition on the governments web site - titled' DRUITT GARDENS FAILED' It calls for an independent inquiry to establish any wrongdoing. it will take up to 7 DAYS to verify and publish - PLEASE look for it and sign up if you agree. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/ Or will UKIP start a petition as well and assist the residents of Christchurch. brian74

1:00pm Sat 8 Feb 14

royeveleigh says...

Deliberate damage to the trees by the contractor and the council has let them do it
Deliberate damage to the trees by the contractor and the council has let them do it royeveleigh

1:01pm Sat 8 Feb 14

ekimnoslen says...

Get real. Developers only consideration is profit bearing in mind that the company directors are unlikely to live in Christchurch.
It is of concern that unelected council jobsworths have such powers of destruction. Even if their decision is found to be flawed nothing will be done.
I heard the other day that God dreams of being elevated to the status of public servant some day!
Get real. Developers only consideration is profit bearing in mind that the company directors are unlikely to live in Christchurch. It is of concern that unelected council jobsworths have such powers of destruction. Even if their decision is found to be flawed nothing will be done. I heard the other day that God dreams of being elevated to the status of public servant some day! ekimnoslen

1:06pm Sat 8 Feb 14

muscliffman says...

So actually any TPO (Tree Preservation Order) is utterly meaningless - now we all know how to get around them - thank you Christchurch Council we and all future developers will doubtless follow your fine enlightening example.

This whole episode is unbelievably disappointing and surely it brings this Council into very serious disrepute. I trust the 'old boys' network will not prevent a full unhindered Police and Public investigation, whilst residents would be well advised to consider all the alternatives to their current hapless (at best!) Councillors and the entire Council Administration - I anticipate UKIP could do very well from this.
So actually any TPO (Tree Preservation Order) is utterly meaningless - now we all know how to get around them - thank you Christchurch Council we and all future developers will doubtless follow your fine enlightening example. This whole episode is unbelievably disappointing and surely it brings this Council into very serious disrepute. I trust the 'old boys' network will not prevent a full unhindered Police and Public investigation, whilst residents would be well advised to consider all the alternatives to their current hapless (at best!) Councillors and the entire Council Administration - I anticipate UKIP could do very well from this. muscliffman

1:12pm Sat 8 Feb 14

O'Really says...

Barbarians.
Barbarians. O'Really

1:38pm Sat 8 Feb 14

shaft says...

simcal wrote:
hucky999 wrote:
Ok so they are protesting! What then if during this bad weather the trees got up-rooted, get a life bloody tree huggers!!!!!
Rather like saying, "does not matter if I kill someone, with all the traffic on the road they might get run over". Your logic is flawed.
They should have watched the lorax. This bad man hope they don't plant asda's. So does this mean there's free wood going.
[quote][p][bold]simcal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hucky999[/bold] wrote: Ok so they are protesting! What then if during this bad weather the trees got up-rooted, get a life bloody tree huggers!!!!![/p][/quote]Rather like saying, "does not matter if I kill someone, with all the traffic on the road they might get run over". Your logic is flawed.[/p][/quote]They should have watched the lorax. This bad man hope they don't plant asda's. So does this mean there's free wood going. shaft

1:49pm Sat 8 Feb 14

Ms daisy says...

A full enquiry is required with halt to any more activity on this site and those who may have acted irresponsible held accountable.
A full enquiry is required with halt to any more activity on this site and those who may have acted irresponsible held accountable. Ms daisy

2:03pm Sat 8 Feb 14

UKIP4U says...

brian74 wrote:
I have just started a petition on the governments web site - titled' DRUITT GARDENS FAILED' It calls for an independent inquiry to establish any wrongdoing. it will take up to 7 DAYS to verify and publish - PLEASE look for it and sign up if you agree. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/ Or will UKIP start a petition as well and assist the residents of Christchurch.
UKIP members attended the planning meeting where the planning board voted in favour of the TPO's, the meeting was packed with groups supporting the preservation of the trees. UKIP christchurch are doing all they can to assist the residents of christchurch and for all of you who would like to see what they are doing call into the UKIP office at 50 Bargates op.the british legion.
[quote][p][bold]brian74[/bold] wrote: I have just started a petition on the governments web site - titled' DRUITT GARDENS FAILED' It calls for an independent inquiry to establish any wrongdoing. it will take up to 7 DAYS to verify and publish - PLEASE look for it and sign up if you agree. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/ Or will UKIP start a petition as well and assist the residents of Christchurch.[/p][/quote]UKIP members attended the planning meeting where the planning board voted in favour of the TPO's, the meeting was packed with groups supporting the preservation of the trees. UKIP christchurch are doing all they can to assist the residents of christchurch and for all of you who would like to see what they are doing call into the UKIP office at 50 Bargates op.the british legion. UKIP4U

2:23pm Sat 8 Feb 14

retrogeoff says...

In the light of comments posted on this incident combined with comments reaching quite far back on other similar developments there would appear to be sufficient public concern to warrant a thorough investigation encompassing Council and companies records and forensic investigation into affiliations of those involved including developers agents, Councillors, and Council officers. It would need an outside police force with experience in corruption and fraud investigations. The outcome of such an investigation would serve notice on the remainder of the County and illustrate that such incidents lead to the breakdown of public confidence, social unrest, and more pressure for realignment of the law with the basic principles of democracy.
In the light of comments posted on this incident combined with comments reaching quite far back on other similar developments there would appear to be sufficient public concern to warrant a thorough investigation encompassing Council and companies records and forensic investigation into affiliations of those involved including developers agents, Councillors, and Council officers. It would need an outside police force with experience in corruption and fraud investigations. The outcome of such an investigation would serve notice on the remainder of the County and illustrate that such incidents lead to the breakdown of public confidence, social unrest, and more pressure for realignment of the law with the basic principles of democracy. retrogeoff

3:05pm Sat 8 Feb 14

MissIngbirds says...

So, just to clarify, the Council (notably Councillor Derham-Wilkes) believes that painting a yellow cross on trees in an attempt to save them is called vandalism. I am yet to hear such an accusation being made following the damage to these mature trees, which ostensibly meant that they had to be felled. Surely it should only be a matter of time before Cllrs. Wilkes, Nottage et al. come out to express their disgust at this true vandalism and confirm that action will be taken against the developers?
So, just to clarify, the Council (notably Councillor Derham-Wilkes) believes that painting a yellow cross on trees in an attempt to save them is called vandalism. I am yet to hear such an accusation being made following the damage to these mature trees, which ostensibly meant that they had to be felled. Surely it should only be a matter of time before Cllrs. Wilkes, Nottage et al. come out to express their disgust at this true vandalism and confirm that action will be taken against the developers? MissIngbirds

3:11pm Sat 8 Feb 14

damnlion says...

This arrogant developer, Renaissance Retirement, has got what he always set out to get....felling of trees, belonging to the people of Christchurch, in Druitt Gardens.
He initially asked the council to just fell them but when some residents found out and made a fuss he was forced to apply through the proper channels. This led to a revolt from local residents, hundreds of objections and the TPO's. And now the trees have been felled anyway..
'Archaeological trench'...rubbish! Who was the archaeologist ? Was the tree officer on site ? This is Renaissance getting what they set out to get -his own way with complete disregard for the wishes of the people or the law. The site should have been shut down after the first day's tree 'incident', not left for it to happen again.
Arrogant developer, incompetent council.
No one believes a word of what either has said in the last couple of days, do they really think we're stupid ?!!
I hope Renaissance never get another chance to operate in Christchurch, here's hoping they get a bucketload of bad publicity. They don't care about our town just greedy for money.
This arrogant developer, Renaissance Retirement, has got what he always set out to get....felling of trees, belonging to the people of Christchurch, in Druitt Gardens. He initially asked the council to just fell them but when some residents found out and made a fuss he was forced to apply through the proper channels. This led to a revolt from local residents, hundreds of objections and the TPO's. And now the trees have been felled anyway.. 'Archaeological trench'...rubbish! Who was the archaeologist ? Was the tree officer on site ? This is Renaissance getting what they set out to get -his own way with complete disregard for the wishes of the people or the law. The site should have been shut down after the first day's tree 'incident', not left for it to happen again. Arrogant developer, incompetent council. No one believes a word of what either has said in the last couple of days, do they really think we're stupid ?!! I hope Renaissance never get another chance to operate in Christchurch, here's hoping they get a bucketload of bad publicity. They don't care about our town just greedy for money. damnlion

3:44pm Sat 8 Feb 14

Nanais43 says...

The developers must be required to pay compensation. In fact they should be prosecuted for their incompetence (or worse). And there needs to be an enquiry into why the council allowed the developers to 'damage roots' so that the trees had to be felled for 'health and safety' reasons. (How convenient). The council seems also to be culpable.
The developers must be required to pay compensation. In fact they should be prosecuted for their incompetence (or worse). And there needs to be an enquiry into why the council allowed the developers to 'damage roots' so that the trees had to be felled for 'health and safety' reasons. (How convenient). The council seems also to be culpable. Nanais43

4:18pm Sat 8 Feb 14

fireflier says...

The TPO on these trees applies to the tree above ground but ALSO the root systems of each tree.

Whoever caused the damage to the root system(s), that led to these trees being classed as unsafe, must surely be liable to prosecution and conviction for damage to the whole tree.

Get the 'piggy bank' out and pay the £,000 fine that should accompany conviction for this offence.

Then re-instate the trees with new saplings ...... as would be required elsewhere.
The TPO on these trees applies to the tree above ground but ALSO the root systems of each tree. Whoever caused the damage to the root system(s), that led to these trees being classed as unsafe, must surely be liable to prosecution and conviction for damage to the whole tree. Get the 'piggy bank' out and pay the £,000 fine that should accompany conviction for this offence. Then re-instate the trees with new saplings ...... as would be required elsewhere. fireflier

4:29pm Sat 8 Feb 14

brian74 says...

When the Council decided to blame the weather as the only cause to make the trees unsafe then you naturally suspect foul play. This was not a 'knee jerk' response but a statement to the local Echo.

Does not fill you with confidence, does it?

I am sure all that the Christchurch residents want is a fair and honest system. We must all abide by the same laws, if we do not agree with the laws then we fight for change. We don’t do as we please.

Lets see what the local UKIP can find out - can they publicize the petition that should be on line in the next few days that asks for a independent inquiry.
The petition is on the governments web site - titled' DRUITT GARDENS FAILED'

PLEASE look for it and sign up if you agree. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/
When the Council decided to blame the weather as the only cause to make the trees unsafe then you naturally suspect foul play. This was not a 'knee jerk' response but a statement to the local Echo. Does not fill you with confidence, does it? I am sure all that the Christchurch residents want is a fair and honest system. We must all abide by the same laws, if we do not agree with the laws then we fight for change. We don’t do as we please. Lets see what the local UKIP can find out - can they publicize the petition that should be on line in the next few days that asks for a independent inquiry. The petition is on the governments web site - titled' DRUITT GARDENS FAILED' PLEASE look for it and sign up if you agree. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/ brian74

5:24pm Sat 8 Feb 14

fedupwithfedupjobsworths says...

What a load of fuss about trees ! I just don't understand it. With all the other things going on in the world put your energies into something more important.
What a load of fuss about trees ! I just don't understand it. With all the other things going on in the world put your energies into something more important. fedupwithfedupjobsworths

5:27pm Sat 8 Feb 14

ctrewyou says...

Haven't these hippy eco-warriors got better things to do? Why dont they get a job instead of getting in the way of the council? Benefit scroungers all of them. Good to see so many Christchurch residents taking up the eco message, though.
Haven't these hippy eco-warriors got better things to do? Why dont they get a job instead of getting in the way of the council? Benefit scroungers all of them. Good to see so many Christchurch residents taking up the eco message, though. ctrewyou

5:54pm Sat 8 Feb 14

crazybird says...

OMG people - get a flipping life - it's only a couple of trees. Surely people have got something better to do than complaining about a few trees. I wish someone would cut all the ones down near my house - blasted leaves blocking the drains up and the roots causing damage to drains!
OMG people - get a flipping life - it's only a couple of trees. Surely people have got something better to do than complaining about a few trees. I wish someone would cut all the ones down near my house - blasted leaves blocking the drains up and the roots causing damage to drains! crazybird

6:14pm Sat 8 Feb 14

bobsworthforever says...

UKIP4U wrote:
Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council.
UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch
Nice to know someones still got a sense of humour
[quote][p][bold]UKIP4U[/bold] wrote: Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council. UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch[/p][/quote]Nice to know someones still got a sense of humour bobsworthforever

7:19pm Sat 8 Feb 14

xchresident says...

Why trees?
FACT: Trees help stabilise the soil from landslip and reduce flood risk, absorbing rain and reducing storm run-off
FACT: Trees clean pollutants out of the air -- urban green areas are our 'green lungs'
FACT: Trees absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen-- they help reduce global warming
FACT: Trees provide a habitat for bees bats and pollinators and other species crucial to our economic and physical survival
FACT: Urban centres with green areas have lower vandalism land crime
FACT: People in hospital who can see green and trees growing have been shown to fare better
Why trees? FACT: Trees help stabilise the soil from landslip and reduce flood risk, absorbing rain and reducing storm run-off FACT: Trees clean pollutants out of the air -- urban green areas are our 'green lungs' FACT: Trees absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen-- they help reduce global warming FACT: Trees provide a habitat for bees bats and pollinators and other species crucial to our economic and physical survival FACT: Urban centres with green areas have lower vandalism land crime FACT: People in hospital who can see green and trees growing have been shown to fare better xchresident

8:40pm Sat 8 Feb 14

MJD says...

It a shame there was not a 36Kva cable there. I bet the roots wouldn't have been damaged then.
It a shame there was not a 36Kva cable there. I bet the roots wouldn't have been damaged then. MJD

8:45pm Sat 8 Feb 14

brian74 says...

Quarantine and Close the site pending an inquiry.
How can we be sure the developer can work safely.
Who checked the developers insurance, who checked their method statement, trees were left in a dangerous state, this is a NEAR MISS and should be recorded. Has the HSE been informed.

The Council and Developer shouldn't be surprised if the site is closed, its clear if can make the same serious mistake within a couple of days of each other,it is either total incompetence or a premeditated act.


IS THE DEVELOPER SAFE TO CONTINUE? CLOSE THE SITE AND INVESTIGATE.
Quarantine and Close the site pending an inquiry. How can we be sure the developer can work safely. Who checked the developers insurance, who checked their method statement, trees were left in a dangerous state, this is a NEAR MISS and should be recorded. Has the HSE been informed. The Council and Developer shouldn't be surprised if the site is closed, its clear if can make the same serious mistake within a couple of days of each other,it is either total incompetence or a premeditated act. IS THE DEVELOPER SAFE TO CONTINUE? CLOSE THE SITE AND INVESTIGATE. brian74

9:06pm Sat 8 Feb 14

brian74 says...

Interesting reading in the mail online........ only March last year..

'Cut down trees before they can object': Council planning officers offer 'consultancy services' to help developers win applications
Officials paid thousands to find 'vulnerable' areas for developers to target
One councillor suggests doing 'x,y and z' before permission is granted
This includes cutting down trees before neighbours bring protection orders
Government says that council officers involved risk breaking the law




Read more: http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
2292006/Cut-trees-ob
ject-Council-plannin
g-officers-offer-con
sultancy-services-he
lp-developers-win-ap
plications.html#ixzz
2slauZNrJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

You decide - is this an isolated case............
Interesting reading in the mail online........ only March last year.. 'Cut down trees before they can object': Council planning officers offer 'consultancy services' to help developers win applications Officials paid thousands to find 'vulnerable' areas for developers to target One councillor suggests doing 'x,y and z' before permission is granted This includes cutting down trees before neighbours bring protection orders Government says that council officers involved risk breaking the law Read more: http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 2292006/Cut-trees-ob ject-Council-plannin g-officers-offer-con sultancy-services-he lp-developers-win-ap plications.html#ixzz 2slauZNrJ Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook You decide - is this an isolated case............ brian74

9:19pm Sat 8 Feb 14

brian74 says...

brian74 wrote:
Interesting reading in the mail online........ only March last year..

'Cut down trees before they can object': Council planning officers offer 'consultancy services' to help developers win applications
Officials paid thousands to find 'vulnerable' areas for developers to target
One councillor suggests doing 'x,y and z' before permission is granted
This includes cutting down trees before neighbours bring protection orders
Government says that council officers involved risk breaking the law




Read more: http://www.dailymail

.co.uk/news/article-

2292006/Cut-trees-ob

ject-Council-plannin

g-officers-offer-con

sultancy-services-he

lp-developers-win-ap

plications.html#ixzz

2slauZNrJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

You decide - is this an isolated case............
it appears to be widespread....

read this report ' developer accidentally cut down trees'

Developer who cut down perry trees allowed to build house on site

Read more: http://www.legacythi
sisgloucestershire.c
o.uk/Developer-cut-p
erry-trees-allowed-b
uild-house/story-199
91723-detail/story.h
tml#ixzz2sleST7TY

Make up your own mind Christchurch......
[quote][p][bold]brian74[/bold] wrote: Interesting reading in the mail online........ only March last year.. 'Cut down trees before they can object': Council planning officers offer 'consultancy services' to help developers win applications Officials paid thousands to find 'vulnerable' areas for developers to target One councillor suggests doing 'x,y and z' before permission is granted This includes cutting down trees before neighbours bring protection orders Government says that council officers involved risk breaking the law Read more: http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 2292006/Cut-trees-ob ject-Council-plannin g-officers-offer-con sultancy-services-he lp-developers-win-ap plications.html#ixzz 2slauZNrJ Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook You decide - is this an isolated case............[/p][/quote]it appears to be widespread.... read this report ' developer accidentally cut down trees' Developer who cut down perry trees allowed to build house on site Read more: http://www.legacythi sisgloucestershire.c o.uk/Developer-cut-p erry-trees-allowed-b uild-house/story-199 91723-detail/story.h tml#ixzz2sleST7TY Make up your own mind Christchurch...... brian74

12:06am Sun 9 Feb 14

Wageslave says...

The tress suffered from 'brown envelope disease' it must have spread from Bournemouth
The tress suffered from 'brown envelope disease' it must have spread from Bournemouth Wageslave

9:57am Sun 9 Feb 14

xchresident says...

FOR THE RECORD:
It is important to recognise that the Developers have negotiated with the Council Officers in the light of Council Committee decisions made by Councillors who represent the people of Christchurch.

So the actions of these Councillors are significant.

VOTING at the August 2013 Planning meeting which agreed the Cornfactor Development Application—(despi
te letters form residents expressing concern for over-density, with a 3 story development permitted within a half meter of the Druitt Gardens boundary and concern for nearby trees)
Votes are not minuted by CBC but it is understood that Conservative Cllrs Hall, Spittle , and independent Bungey voted AGAINST.
Con.Cllrs: Jamieson, Bath, Fox, Mawbey, Smith, Hilliard voted FOR.


VOTING at the Weds 18 December Community Services meeting which agreed a licence for the Developers to use approx 800sq m of Druitt Gardens for the duration of construction (an area including the trees which have been felled) --9 votes for, 1 against , 2 abstentions.

FOR: Con Cllrs Ray Nottage, Bernie Davis, Sally Derham Wilkes, David Flagg, Michael Duckworth, Gillian Geary, Nicholas Geary, Margaret Phipps, Trish Jamieson,
AGAINST: Independent Colin Bungey
ABSTENTIONS: Conservative Cllrs David Jones and Denise Jones who both spoke against agreeing the Licence. On the subject of concern for trees within the compound Cllrs Gillian Geary and Margaret Phipps said they had worked very hard to ‘minimise damage’.

Chair of the Committee Cllr Derham Wilkes was described in the ECHO as saying she deplored the vandalism and damage to the trees caused by paint marking them. ”I have always believed everybody was doing everything they could to look after trees in the whole of this borough.” It appears that CBC Officer Judith Plumley Head of Community and Leisure has said she was within her delegated powers to agree the closure by the Developer’s 8 foot hoardings of the much used footpath from Wick Lane car park.

PLANNING MEETING 9 Jan: Tree Works application Druitt Gardens
Voted FOR the Tree Protection Order proposed by Cllr Hall: Cllrs Hall. Spittle, Mawbey, Dedman, Neale, Hilliard,
Voted AGAINST: Con Cllrs Jamieson, Bath, Trevor Watts, Tavis Fox, Smith

IF ANYONE FEELS THERE IS AN INACCURACY IN THE ABOVE PLEASE RESPOND. Despite earlier requests to allow recording of CBC meetings by the public this was banned until recent Government guidance on transparency resulted in members of the public at the 9 Jan meeting being given permisssion to record.
FOR THE RECORD: It is important to recognise that the Developers have negotiated with the Council Officers in the light of Council Committee decisions made by Councillors who represent the people of Christchurch. So the actions of these Councillors are significant. VOTING at the August 2013 Planning meeting which agreed the Cornfactor Development Application—(despi te letters form residents expressing concern for over-density, with a 3 story development permitted within a half meter of the Druitt Gardens boundary and concern for nearby trees) Votes are not minuted by CBC but it is understood that Conservative Cllrs Hall, Spittle , and independent Bungey voted AGAINST. Con.Cllrs: Jamieson, Bath, Fox, Mawbey, Smith, Hilliard voted FOR. VOTING at the Weds 18 December Community Services meeting which agreed a licence for the Developers to use approx 800sq m of Druitt Gardens for the duration of construction (an area including the trees which have been felled) --9 votes for, 1 against , 2 abstentions. FOR: Con Cllrs Ray Nottage, Bernie Davis, Sally Derham Wilkes, David Flagg, Michael Duckworth, Gillian Geary, Nicholas Geary, Margaret Phipps, Trish Jamieson, AGAINST: Independent Colin Bungey ABSTENTIONS: Conservative Cllrs David Jones and Denise Jones who both spoke against agreeing the Licence. On the subject of concern for trees within the compound Cllrs Gillian Geary and Margaret Phipps said they had worked very hard to ‘minimise damage’. Chair of the Committee Cllr Derham Wilkes was described in the ECHO as saying she deplored the vandalism and damage to the trees caused by paint marking them. ”I have always believed everybody was doing everything they could to look after trees in the whole of this borough.” It appears that CBC Officer Judith Plumley Head of Community and Leisure has said she was within her delegated powers to agree the closure by the Developer’s 8 foot hoardings of the much used footpath from Wick Lane car park. PLANNING MEETING 9 Jan: Tree Works application Druitt Gardens Voted FOR the Tree Protection Order proposed by Cllr Hall: Cllrs Hall. Spittle, Mawbey, Dedman, Neale, Hilliard, Voted AGAINST: Con Cllrs Jamieson, Bath, Trevor Watts, Tavis Fox, Smith IF ANYONE FEELS THERE IS AN INACCURACY IN THE ABOVE PLEASE RESPOND. Despite earlier requests to allow recording of CBC meetings by the public this was banned until recent Government guidance on transparency resulted in members of the public at the 9 Jan meeting being given permisssion to record. xchresident

10:07am Sun 9 Feb 14

xchresident says...

FOR THE RECORD:
It is important to recognise that the Developers have negotiated with the Council Officers in the light of Council Committee decisions made by Councillors who represent the people of Christchurch.

So the actions of these Councillors are significant.

VOTING at the August 2013 Planning meeting which agreed the Cornfactor Development Application—(despi
te letters form residents expressing concern for over-density, with a 3 story development permitted within a half meter of the Druitt Gardens boundary and concern for nearby trees)
Votes are not minuted by CBC but it is understood that Conservative Cllrs Hall, Spittle , and independent Bungey voted AGAINST.
Con Cllrs: C Jamieson ?, Bath, Fox, Mawbey, Smith, Hilliard voted FOR.


VOTING at the Weds 18 December Community Services meeting which agreed a licence for the Developers to use approx 800sq m of Druitt Gardens for the duration of construction (an area including the trees which have been felled) --9 votes for, 1 against , 2 abstentions.

FOR: Conservative Cllrs Ray Nottage, Bernie Davis, Sally Derham Wilkes, David Flagg, Michael Duckworth, Gillian Geary, Nicholas Geary, Margaret Phipps, Trish Jamieson,
AGAINST: Independent Colin Bungey
ABSTENTIONS: Conservative Cllrs David Jones and Denise Jones who both spoke against agreeing the Licence. On the subject of concern for trees within the compound Cllrs Gillian Geary and Margaret Phipps said they had worked very hard to ‘minimise damage’.

Chair of the Committee Cllr Derham Wilkes was described in the ECHO as saying she deplored the vandalism and damage to the trees caused by paint marking them. ”I have always believed everybody was doing everything they could to look after trees in the whole of this borough.” It appears that CBC Officer Judith Plumley Head of Community and Leisure has said she was within her delegated powers to agree the closure by the Developer’s 8 foot hoardings of the much used footpath from Wick Lane car park.


PLANNING MEETING 9 Jan: Tree Works application Druitt Gardens
Voted FOR the Tree Protection Order proposed by Cllr Hall: Conservative Cllrs Hall. Spittle, Mawbey, Dedman, Hilliard, and Independent Neale
Voted AGAINST:Con Cllrs C Jamieson, Bath, Trevor Watts, Tavis Fox, Smith

IF ANYONE SEES AN INACCURACY IN THE ABOVE PLEASE SAY SO. VOTING IS NOT MINUTED AND CBC HAS ONLY RECENTLY RESPONDED TO GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE, AND PERMITTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO RECORD CBC MEETING OF 9 JAN--
FOR THE RECORD: It is important to recognise that the Developers have negotiated with the Council Officers in the light of Council Committee decisions made by Councillors who represent the people of Christchurch. So the actions of these Councillors are significant. VOTING at the August 2013 Planning meeting which agreed the Cornfactor Development Application—(despi te letters form residents expressing concern for over-density, with a 3 story development permitted within a half meter of the Druitt Gardens boundary and concern for nearby trees) Votes are not minuted by CBC but it is understood that Conservative Cllrs Hall, Spittle , and independent Bungey voted AGAINST. Con Cllrs: C Jamieson ?, Bath, Fox, Mawbey, Smith, Hilliard voted FOR. VOTING at the Weds 18 December Community Services meeting which agreed a licence for the Developers to use approx 800sq m of Druitt Gardens for the duration of construction (an area including the trees which have been felled) --9 votes for, 1 against , 2 abstentions. FOR: Conservative Cllrs Ray Nottage, Bernie Davis, Sally Derham Wilkes, David Flagg, Michael Duckworth, Gillian Geary, Nicholas Geary, Margaret Phipps, Trish Jamieson, AGAINST: Independent Colin Bungey ABSTENTIONS: Conservative Cllrs David Jones and Denise Jones who both spoke against agreeing the Licence. On the subject of concern for trees within the compound Cllrs Gillian Geary and Margaret Phipps said they had worked very hard to ‘minimise damage’. Chair of the Committee Cllr Derham Wilkes was described in the ECHO as saying she deplored the vandalism and damage to the trees caused by paint marking them. ”I have always believed everybody was doing everything they could to look after trees in the whole of this borough.” It appears that CBC Officer Judith Plumley Head of Community and Leisure has said she was within her delegated powers to agree the closure by the Developer’s 8 foot hoardings of the much used footpath from Wick Lane car park. PLANNING MEETING 9 Jan: Tree Works application Druitt Gardens Voted FOR the Tree Protection Order proposed by Cllr Hall: Conservative Cllrs Hall. Spittle, Mawbey, Dedman, Hilliard, and Independent Neale Voted AGAINST:Con Cllrs C Jamieson, Bath, Trevor Watts, Tavis Fox, Smith IF ANYONE SEES AN INACCURACY IN THE ABOVE PLEASE SAY SO. VOTING IS NOT MINUTED AND CBC HAS ONLY RECENTLY RESPONDED TO GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE, AND PERMITTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO RECORD CBC MEETING OF 9 JAN-- xchresident

10:46am Sun 9 Feb 14

Loyal2AFCB says...

UKIP4U wrote:
Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council. UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch
I suspect the reason this retirement development and the Churchill one at Stony Lane were passed was to import more Tory voters from the Home Counties into marginal seats.
[quote][p][bold]UKIP4U[/bold] wrote: Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council. UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch[/p][/quote]I suspect the reason this retirement development and the Churchill one at Stony Lane were passed was to import more Tory voters from the Home Counties into marginal seats. Loyal2AFCB

10:53am Sun 9 Feb 14

Loyal2AFCB says...

UKIP4U wrote:
Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council. UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch
I suspect the reason for granting planinng permission for the plethora of retirement developments going up is to import moreTory voters from the Home Counties into marginal council seats.
[quote][p][bold]UKIP4U[/bold] wrote: Thank heavens for a political party who will protect christchurch from the clutches of this out of touch council. UKIP would have listened and not allowed this application to go through in the first place,support/ vote UKIP and give power back to the people of Christchurch[/p][/quote]I suspect the reason for granting planinng permission for the plethora of retirement developments going up is to import moreTory voters from the Home Counties into marginal council seats. Loyal2AFCB

11:04am Sun 9 Feb 14

Nanais43 says...

It seems the developers have been at best negligent - is it possible that they were worse than careless? - in damaging those roots. They need now to pay compensation to Christchurch for damaging public property while making money for themselves. The councillors who voted for this development should be ashamed of themselves. This kind of thing happens over and over again, and it looks from the outside that this council has interests other than the people and the town at the top of its agenda.
It seems the developers have been at best negligent - is it possible that they were worse than careless? - in damaging those roots. They need now to pay compensation to Christchurch for damaging public property while making money for themselves. The councillors who voted for this development should be ashamed of themselves. This kind of thing happens over and over again, and it looks from the outside that this council has interests other than the people and the town at the top of its agenda. Nanais43

11:09am Sun 9 Feb 14

Jetwasher says...

What councillor is getting the back hander is the question you need you ask.
What councillor is getting the back hander is the question you need you ask. Jetwasher

1:33pm Sun 9 Feb 14

Justin Black says...

So Councillor Noittage, your wish has come true over the trees in Druitt Gardens. It is alleged, that you said the trees will come down, and they have come down. In the editorial above, you say you are saddened but unfortunately I doubt if that is correct because you appear to speak with terminological inexactitude on various occasions. You once made a promise that you would never sell off Christchurch, yet you have done exactly that along with your good friend the CEO. Between the two of you, you have killed off Christchurch, and it is now just one final step away from being a parish of East Dorset District Council which was predicted but was rejected as "Rubbish" by your good self.
I am beginning to wonder if the leader of Christchurch Council is a secret weapon set up by UKIP to ensure they get the majority of seats in the next Christchurch Council Election.

Maybe either Rollo Read, or David Williams (UKIP) will be the next leader of Christchurch Council. Dream or reality?
So Councillor Noittage, your wish has come true over the trees in Druitt Gardens. It is alleged, that you said the trees will come down, and they have come down. In the editorial above, you say you are saddened but unfortunately I doubt if that is correct because you appear to speak with terminological inexactitude on various occasions. You once made a promise that you would never sell off Christchurch, yet you have done exactly that along with your good friend the CEO. Between the two of you, you have killed off Christchurch, and it is now just one final step away from being a parish of East Dorset District Council which was predicted but was rejected as "Rubbish" by your good self. I am beginning to wonder if the leader of Christchurch Council is a secret weapon set up by UKIP to ensure they get the majority of seats in the next Christchurch Council Election. Maybe either Rollo Read, or David Williams (UKIP) will be the next leader of Christchurch Council. Dream or reality? Justin Black

4:55pm Sun 9 Feb 14

Muddyford Mick says...

I would like to know why the Chief Executive issued the first misleading statement that is now known to be false which stated that damage had been cause by weather conditions and Christchurch Borough Council would not take any action against the developers, when it is a fact that decision is made by elected Councillors, it is up to them to decide.
Why, when it became clear, that the archaeological trench had damaged a tree with TPO’s on it, did the Council Officers not say “Stop, do not do any more on this we need to assess where we are?” Why did they allow the trench to continue? I don’t suppose for one minute that the accident to the tree was planned, or is it just me having cynical thoughts? Should I be surprised when a Rattlesnake rattles?
I would like to know why the Chief Executive issued the first misleading statement that is now known to be false which stated that damage had been cause by weather conditions and Christchurch Borough Council would not take any action against the developers, when it is a fact that decision is made by elected Councillors, it is up to them to decide. Why, when it became clear, that the archaeological trench had damaged a tree with TPO’s on it, did the Council Officers not say “Stop, do not do any more on this we need to assess where we are?” Why did they allow the trench to continue? I don’t suppose for one minute that the accident to the tree was planned, or is it just me having cynical thoughts? Should I be surprised when a Rattlesnake rattles? Muddyford Mick

5:34pm Sun 9 Feb 14

FrogKiss says...

The council acted so quickly to remove the Druitt trees in the interest of public safety. Yet a fallen tree blocking a public footpath at the top of Friars cliff has been left for the last two days with out a thought for public safety. Not sealed off, kids running amok down the path under the branches. I have a picture if you want it for comparison Katie.
The council acted so quickly to remove the Druitt trees in the interest of public safety. Yet a fallen tree blocking a public footpath at the top of Friars cliff has been left for the last two days with out a thought for public safety. Not sealed off, kids running amok down the path under the branches. I have a picture if you want it for comparison Katie. FrogKiss

6:48pm Sun 9 Feb 14

ashleycross says...

http://www.ancient-t
ree-hunt.org.uk/more
stuff/Tree+Wardens
This is a link to a national scheme for volunteers to become protectors of ancient trees with the Woodland Trust. Strength in number.
http://www.ancient-t ree-hunt.org.uk/more stuff/Tree+Wardens This is a link to a national scheme for volunteers to become protectors of ancient trees with the Woodland Trust. Strength in number. ashleycross

2:02am Mon 10 Feb 14

Mrs C. A Townend says...

elite50 wrote:
madM74 wrote:
So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn!
Oh, they did!
It worked just fine the first time so if you have a winning formula just keep using it!
I have a big tree in my front yard, it blocks my view. I think that I will dig down around it to look for archaeological remains from ancient Britain that could be there.
This could be the start of a treeless Britain.
I am in Bournemouth, I have a tree in my garden that is a threat to foxes and cats which enter my garden. It blocks the light from coming into my lounge and gets covered in wasps, bees and spiders in the summer. In the past, a child has got stuck behind it as well. I've asked my council to inspect it a few times and been ignored. Therefore I can conclude its ok for the council to cut down a protected tree because it is deemed unsafe in a street, despite public protests, but not ok for a resident to enquire about the danger of a tree in her garden then. Not really good is it when preserving nature or protecting human's.
[quote][p][bold]elite50[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]madM74[/bold] wrote: So the developer says it is a repeat of what happened only a day or so earlier, you'd think they would learn![/p][/quote]Oh, they did! It worked just fine the first time so if you have a winning formula just keep using it! I have a big tree in my front yard, it blocks my view. I think that I will dig down around it to look for archaeological remains from ancient Britain that could be there. This could be the start of a treeless Britain.[/p][/quote]I am in Bournemouth, I have a tree in my garden that is a threat to foxes and cats which enter my garden. It blocks the light from coming into my lounge and gets covered in wasps, bees and spiders in the summer. In the past, a child has got stuck behind it as well. I've asked my council to inspect it a few times and been ignored. Therefore I can conclude its ok for the council to cut down a protected tree because it is deemed unsafe in a street, despite public protests, but not ok for a resident to enquire about the danger of a tree in her garden then. Not really good is it when preserving nature or protecting human's. Mrs C. A Townend

9:16am Mon 10 Feb 14

APC303 says...

ashleycross wrote:
http://www.ancient-t

ree-hunt.org.uk/more

stuff/Tree+Wardens
This is a link to a national scheme for volunteers to become protectors of ancient trees with the Woodland Trust. Strength in number.
Except there's no ancient trees in Druitt Gardens.
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: http://www.ancient-t ree-hunt.org.uk/more stuff/Tree+Wardens This is a link to a national scheme for volunteers to become protectors of ancient trees with the Woodland Trust. Strength in number.[/p][/quote]Except there's no ancient trees in Druitt Gardens. APC303

11:46am Mon 10 Feb 14

pd7 says...

xchresident wrote:
Why trees?
FACT: Trees help stabilise the soil from landslip and reduce flood risk, absorbing rain and reducing storm run-off
FACT: Trees clean pollutants out of the air -- urban green areas are our 'green lungs'
FACT: Trees absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen-- they help reduce global warming
FACT: Trees provide a habitat for bees bats and pollinators and other species crucial to our economic and physical survival
FACT: Urban centres with green areas have lower vandalism land crime
FACT: People in hospital who can see green and trees growing have been shown to fare better
They make great logs
[quote][p][bold]xchresident[/bold] wrote: Why trees? FACT: Trees help stabilise the soil from landslip and reduce flood risk, absorbing rain and reducing storm run-off FACT: Trees clean pollutants out of the air -- urban green areas are our 'green lungs' FACT: Trees absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen-- they help reduce global warming FACT: Trees provide a habitat for bees bats and pollinators and other species crucial to our economic and physical survival FACT: Urban centres with green areas have lower vandalism land crime FACT: People in hospital who can see green and trees growing have been shown to fare better[/p][/quote]They make great logs pd7

7:21pm Mon 10 Feb 14

brian74 says...

Public in danger.

Four trees have been accidentally had their roots severed to leave them in such a dangerous state that they must for felled for Health and Safety reasons.

Had the developer adhered to his approved method statement?
Did the planning officers ensure the method statement what suitable?
Had the developer recorded this as near miss?
Have the planning office checked that this has been recorded?
What preventive action did the developer/planning office take following the first accident that severed roots and made the tree unstable.

I have reported this to the HSE - How can a developer can have the same accident twice and still be safe to continue
Please contact the HSE yourself and ask them to make sure.
Public in danger. Four trees have been accidentally had their roots severed to leave them in such a dangerous state that they must for felled for Health and Safety reasons. Had the developer adhered to his approved method statement? Did the planning officers ensure the method statement what suitable? Had the developer recorded this as near miss? Have the planning office checked that this has been recorded? What preventive action did the developer/planning office take following the first accident that severed roots and made the tree unstable. I have reported this to the HSE - How can a developer can have the same accident twice and still be safe to continue Please contact the HSE yourself and ask them to make sure. brian74

7:50pm Mon 10 Feb 14

GeorgeW64 says...

They need to cut down more tree's they are a damned nuisance, they shed leaves in the autumn clogging up drains and in the summer they block out the sunlight.
They need to cut down more tree's they are a damned nuisance, they shed leaves in the autumn clogging up drains and in the summer they block out the sunlight. GeorgeW64

9:21pm Mon 10 Feb 14

brian74 says...

Before you get rid of the Councillors, the tree officers need to go. They are, quite literally, the root of the problem.
Before you get rid of the Councillors, the tree officers need to go. They are, quite literally, the root of the problem. brian74

9:48pm Thu 20 Feb 14

brian74 says...

hi if you are reading this the you know about DRUITT gardens and the cutting down of the trees by the Christchurch Panning Office.

if you agree that we need an independent inquiry then PLEASE sign this government petition.

http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/petition
s/60678

thanks
hi if you are reading this the you know about DRUITT gardens and the cutting down of the trees by the Christchurch Panning Office. if you agree that we need an independent inquiry then PLEASE sign this government petition. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/petition s/60678 thanks brian74

8:57am Fri 21 Feb 14

localratepayer says...

Yes definitely. I will sign this petition.
Yes definitely. I will sign this petition. localratepayer

1:10pm Fri 21 Feb 14

localratepayer says...

Why not let the Council know how we feel about all this.

The next Council meeting is this coming Tuesday 6pm (25th) Why not make our views known to Councillors and the Press outside the Civic Office Bridge Street BH23 1AZ (rear entrance) at 5:45 Tues.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH— ask the Council to LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE!
Why not let the Council know how we feel about all this. The next Council meeting is this coming Tuesday 6pm (25th) Why not make our views known to Councillors and the Press outside the Civic Office Bridge Street BH23 1AZ (rear entrance) at 5:45 Tues. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH— ask the Council to LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE! localratepayer

6:08pm Fri 21 Feb 14

brian74 says...

hi if you are reading this then you know about DRUITT gardens and the cutting down of the trees by the Christchurch Panning Office.

if you agree that we need an independent inquiry then PLEASE sign this government petition.

http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/petition
s/60678

PLEASE TELL OTHERS
hi if you are reading this then you know about DRUITT gardens and the cutting down of the trees by the Christchurch Panning Office. if you agree that we need an independent inquiry then PLEASE sign this government petition. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/petition s/60678 PLEASE TELL OTHERS brian74

6:36pm Fri 21 Feb 14

xchresident says...

I have signed the petition, and will defiinitely be there at the CBC offices TUESDAY at quarter to six to express my strength of feeling about this appalling failure to ensure the safety of TPOd trees.
I have signed the petition, and will defiinitely be there at the CBC offices TUESDAY at quarter to six to express my strength of feeling about this appalling failure to ensure the safety of TPOd trees. xchresident

12:19pm Wed 5 Mar 14

Nanais43 says...

MP Christopher Chope has sent me a letter in reply to my email: he has writ ten to the Chief Executive of Christchurch Council to find out why there is not going to be an impartial enquiry into 'what is clearly a very serious matter'.
MP Christopher Chope has sent me a letter in reply to my email: he has writ ten to the Chief Executive of Christchurch Council to find out why there is not going to be an impartial enquiry into 'what is clearly a very serious matter'. Nanais43

7:10pm Wed 5 Mar 14

xchresident says...

Good that you have emailed the MP, Nanais43.
Surely people would be dubious of the Council investigating this internally!
Good that you have emailed the MP, Nanais43. Surely people would be dubious of the Council investigating this internally! xchresident

Comments are closed on this article.

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