1. The decision to fell or not will now be taken by Cllr Julie Smith after she has taken advice from the planning committee on Wednesday the 1st of April 2009. Without an objection the decision to fell would have been made by officers alone.

2. The council have now published their extended reasoning for wanting to fell each of the seven trees they are planning to remove from Midsummer Common.

The council’s report can be viewed via this link.

In the case of the riverside London Plane I believe that if the problematic primary branch was removed the tree would be left in essentially the same state as the neighbouring Plane Tree and could be monitored.

Diana Oviatt-Ham,

My reasons for objecting are as follows:

Paragraph 4.2 of the local plan states:
“The setting of Cambridge and its open spaces are an essential part of the character and quality of Cambridge. The protection of these and the features within them is essential if Cambridge is to maintain that quality. ”

The trees on the green spaces clearly are critical features within them, and ought according to this policy be protected. Having listened to the reasons given for felling the plane tree on the riverside about four trees upstream of the cutter ferry bridge I do not believe this felling is in-line with that policy. I would prefer to see other options such as removal of the problematic primary branch (and perhaps other branches) rather than moving straight to felling.

In respect of the other trees to be felled on Midsummer Common I am questioning the balance of judgement made between safety and protection and preservation of the trees. I feel the safety culture is going too far. For example I would prefer to see a “wait and see” approach to Horse Chestnut on Victoria Avenue with the damaged root, and the tree by the roundabout the council believes was damaged by the electricity cabling works. If these trees move, slip, or start dying then of course they’ll need to be felled, but the current proposals to fell appear to be based on damage, the effects of which are unknown.

The only tree on Midsummer Common I wholeheartedly support felling is the Horse Chestnut near the corner of Brunswick Terrace.

Paragraph 4.19 of the local plan states, in what I consider garbled English:
“There are occasions where felling, or significant surgery to trees, is acceptable. In such cases the amenity value of the tree, its condition and potential life will be weighted against the safety from its removal, the protection of other important site features or any more general benefits of a new development.”

I interpret this as saying there is a judgement to be made balancing safety with the value of a tree. I accept this, but question who ought be making the judgement. I think that the judgements are erring too often towards felling, and I think residents’ views ought be taken account of and alternatives to felling considered.

One of my reasons for objecting is that I would like to see councillors, not officers, making informed decisions on whether or not to fell trees, particularly established and contentious ones, in the city. I note that at the West Central Area committee on the 8th of January 2009 Cllr Julie Smith, the executive councillor responsible said that this was the first that she had heard of the tree-felling. I understand the good reasons for doing tree works in the winter, and I would not wish to delay progress, but do think the plans ought go before a an informed councillor or committee of them.

I am also objecting on the grounds of insufficient consultation. There has been very little information on these proposals on the city council’s website, and the reasoning given on the notices on the trees was very brief. This has been the case in relation to all the council’s tree felling this winter. I think consultations and public awareness surrounding the future of the city’s trees could be improved my making the council’s tree database publicly available.

My address for correspondence is [my email address] I cannot imagine why you would need anything more than that, could you let me know if that is sufficient or enlighten me as to why a full postal address is required.

Since my initial response I have been able to ascertain that on Wednesday 24 February Mr McGregor gave a comprehensive assessment of the issues and a detailed analysis on each of the trees and the reasons for undertaking the work. I understand you were present and able to ask
questions at the meeting.
I note your objection to the felling of the London plane tree.

Diana Oviatt-Ham then wrote to say:

Dear Mr Taylor
If the Council is to register your objection formally I would be obliged if you could provide the following information:
1. Your reasons for objecting.
2. Your postal address.

Yours sincerely
Diana Oviatt-Ham

Dear Diana Oviatt-Ham,

I attended the Friends of Midsummer Common, open annual general meeting on Tuesday. Kenny McGregor gave an absolutely brilliant presentation which was appreciated by all eighty or so of those present.

I have made my notes on what was said available on my website:
http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/friends-of-midsummer-common-2009-agm.html

I am, even in light of the presentation, still not convinced of the need to fell all seven trees. In particular I would like to object to the felling of the plane tree on the riverside about four trees upstream of the cutter ferry bridge. Mr McGregor told the meeting that many people had commented on the proposal to fell this tree, and I see that someone has defaced your notice writing “Why?” in big letters. I would like to ask what mechanism there is for residents views being taken into account with respect to this tree. Ex councillor Joye Rosenstiel suggested a development control forum, can we have one of those for a tree? Can you ensure that councillors, rather than you and your team make the final decision on those trees where there is significant opposition to felling?

The only tree on the common I wholeheartedly support felling is the Horse Chestnut near the corner of Brunswick Terrace.

There has been very little information on these proposals on the city council’s website, and the reasoning given on the notices on the trees was very brief. This has been the case in relation to all the council’s tree felling this winter.

Judging from the state of the grass where the ice rink was, it needs one.

Why else could you have cause to criticse Cllr Blair, the environment scrutiny chairman who couldn’t be bothered to read the Jesus Green lottery bid document.

Or Dorothy Grigson, whose is paid £100K a year as chief executive of the Cambridge police authority, although it is a complete mystery what she does.

What a hoot!