As an arborist, I know trees and appreciate the varying contributions they can make. Sometimes, larger trees have limited value due to their condition whilst smaller ones can be really significant. Big is not always beautiful! I worked on a very sensitive site in a National Park, where the applicant was seeking to regenerate a brown field site within a Conservation Area. The important Beech tree by the main entrance was highlighted for special protection. Similar attention was expected to be required for a mature Willow tree, but as I assessed it, I recognised signs of decline, and the greater potential for a replacement tree.
Keen to impress the planners of their good intentions, the planning consultants proposed some significant replacement trees including an avenue of Alder by the central feature (of apartments). Appreciating how large such trees can become, and their tendency to shade, the planning officers were not reassured, until I was able to explain that this was only a suggestion and more sensitive planting would be in the final scheme.
On another site, veteran Hawthorn has been highlighted as a significant feature, one which I have heard described as being ‘scrub’. Some plants can be centuries old.
It is important to accurately position trees. One site where this proved a key factor had the significant tree out of position by ten metres, in the middle of the access road. Ecologists had identified the tree for retention and the actual position made site design considerably more challenging.
One of the services that I provide is technical evidence in support of a proposal. For one site, where a substantial Field Maple was proposed for retention at the request of the local authority, compromising site design, I was able to demonstrate that the tree was actually in decline, and extensive landscaping to mitigate its loss would enhance the setting.