8/11/2019 14980 BA Who's Who 2013 Tree Article

1/342 | BALI Whos Who Landscape Directory 2012 |Trees and Development

Trees andDevelopment

Everybody loves treesas long as they belongto someone else

Graeme Drummond is a professional

member of the Arboricultural Association,

a Chartered Landscape Architect and a

director of both Open Spaces Landscape

& Arboricultural Consultants Limited and

Turning Leaf Garden Designs Limited.

8/11/2019 14980 BA Who's Who 2013 Tree Article

2/3BALI Whos Who Landscape Directory 2013 | Trees and Development | 43

After many years of working first

as a local authority tree officer and

then as an arboricultural consultant,

I have come to the conclusion

that most developers prefer to

cut down trees that prevent them

from developing the land for

maximum profit rather than find a

way to retain trees on a proposed

development site, allowing the besttrees to improve the character of

the development. This scorched

earth policy, favoured by some

developers, is a real indictment of

their mind set and most see the

constraints imposed by trees (and,

indeed, other ecological elements

identified on site) as a harbinger

of unnecessary expense and an

unwanted imposition upon their

(usually already well-developed!)

proposed schemes. Regrettably,

they appear to see little or no value

in retaining fine trees at the expense

of a fully informed design process.

The latest edition of the British Standard:Trees in relation to design, constructionand demolition recommendations, alsoknown as BS 5837:2012, came into forceat the beginning of April 2012. It replacesthe 2005 edition and sets out a series ofrecommendations to identify trees thatare important within and adjacent to thedevelopment site. It also identifies howthe proposed development impacts onthe trees and sets out requirements for a

range of methodologies to mitigate anynegative impact on the trees caused bythe proposed development. The Standardalso sets out how trees that have beenidentified for retention shall be protectedduring the whole of the demolition,construction and landscaping phases, andhow the tree protection measures are to bemonitored.

The Standard is an expensive document,retailing at over 160. This is, quite frankly,a ridiculous price to pay for what is nomore than a 40 page document, especially

as it is essential reading for anyoneinvolved with development sites wheretrees are growing. The Standard makesclear that other professionals should also

consult the document during the pre-designand design phases, including architects,developers and engineers, but I would bevery surprised if no more than a handful ofnon arboricultural practices have a copy ofthe document available to their staff. Thisis a shame because it means that thosewith influence (architects) do not consultthe document, which, if not complied with,

is likely to result in the planning applicationbeing refused.

I am usually involved with planningapplications where the developer and theirarchitect have already completed the sitelayout design, only to find out that theyhave not taken into account the treesgrowing within and adjacent to the site. Iam then asked to rescue the scheme via a(retrospective) tree survey and ArboriculturalImpact Assessment that should have beenundertaken at the outset.

Even a proposed car parking area or

access roadway will result in planningrefusal if it covers more than 20 per cent ofthe available root protection area (RPA) of aretained tree.

Often I am seen as the bad guy becausemy professional role is to tell the developerthat his scheme will need to be altered ifplanning permission is to be achieved. Thismay mean reducing the number of housingunits on a scheme or moving a proposedbuilding from what would be consideredthe obvious position. Recently, onedeveloper who had instructed me to

provide arboricultural services referred tome as the enemy! It is just as well I havethe British Standard to fall back on

The Standard is very clear in its approachto trees growing on, and growing adjacentto, development sites. It is important torealise that trees growing adjacent to adevelopment site will be regarded by thelocal planning authority in the same way asany tree growing within the developmentsite. This is something that many developersfail to grasp and on many occasions I havereceived a topographic survey plan from

the client showing no trees growing onneighbouring land; it is only during my sitevisit to carry out the tree survey that I findhalf a dozen mature trees growing adjacent

Basement built in the root

protection area of a mature tree

8/11/2019 14980 BA Who's Who 2013 Tree Article

3/3

to the boundary fence, with their crownsoverhanging the development site (their rootsbeing no respecters of boundary fences).Unfortunately, such a blinkered approach isdestined to lead to unnecessary expenseand delays in their bid for planning approval.

There are times, though, when even I amastounded by a developers attitude to trees.

This is when a developer cuts down maturetrees on the proposed development sitebefore any planning application is registered.Providing there is no Tree PreservationOrder (TPO) or planning condition on thesetrees, or that the trees are not growingwithin a Conservation Area, there is nothingunlawful about removing high quality maturetrees that may have dominated and addedcharacter to the local area for generations.Where this stands on the ethical front isdebatable.

These attitudes and behaviours by somedevelopers only cause them to be seen ina poor light by local authority tree officers;and so begins a war of attrition with eachparty badmouthing and distrusting the other.I can appreciate why some tree officers rushto use a TPO at the first sniff of a proposed

development. Developers should bear inmind that most local authorities do their bestto ensure trees are retained and protectedon development sites and, although they canbe a touch too zealous at times, it is a smallprice to pay if important trees are protectedfor the next generation.

I sometimes wistfully imagine a situation

where a site is purchased, trees are surveyedand their constraints identified at the outset,architects collaborate with me and plansare produced respecting fine trees, and abeautiful, partially mature landscape evolvesas their setting. Planning consent is gainedwithout problems or fuss, money is saved onlandscape implementation and, with such anenhanced aesthetic for future generations toenjoy, quick sales are achieved and everyoneis happy. And then I wake up.

Do trees have any allies out there?

I wonder sometimes. Everybody loves

trees as long as they belong tosomeone else.

44 | BALI Whos Who Landscape Directory 2013 |Trees and Development

Trees and Development

Everybody loves trees as long asthey belong to someone else (cont.) Bartholomew Landscaping groundmaintenance contract, London