Protected tree works at Crispe Park, Birchington
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Thanet Planning Committee on 14 Jan 2026.
The proposed tree works
The application seeks tree felling, a sycamore reduction and an ash crown raise within protected trees.
“LOCATION: M/TPO/3(1952), M/TPO/2(1951) - 3No Sycamore (T362, T363, T364) - Fell, 1No Ash (T441) - Fell, 2no Sycamore (T436, T360) - Fell, 2No Ash (T438, T366) - Fell, 2No Hawthorn (T358, T359) - Fell, 1No Elm (T361) - Fell, 1No Elder (T442) - Fell, 1No Sycamore (T435) - Cut back by 2m to clear building, 1No Ash (T365) - Crown raise to 2m above ground level.”
Officer report
The site and its trees
The trees are in Crisp Park, close to homes, prominent as a group and important to the area’s character and appearance.
“The trees are located within Crisp Park, some of the trees are close to residential properties at Crisp Park Close, the trees are highly prominent as a group and are considered to make an important contribution to the character and appearance of the area.”
Officer report
Why officers recommended approval
Officers considered the works essential under the tree policy, mainly because of ash dieback, and found no great negative effect on the area.
“The Council's Tree Safety and Conservation Manager assessed the site and provided survey details, and has noted on the application that, all of the works are considered to be essential work required to ensure compliance with the adopted TDC Tree Policy. The majority of the work is in response to ash dieback which has become established within the area.”
“Of the trees to be removed many are dead, many of the trees have advanced Ash dieback and one Sycamore is to be reduced to clear an adjacent building. There are many other trees in this area and these justified removals and reductions are not considered to have a great negative impact on the character of the area.”
Officer report
Notifications and consultations
A site notice was posted, no letters were received and there were no consultations.
“A site notice was posted close to the site. No letter has been received.”
Officer report
The committee vote
Councillor Rusiecki proposed approval, Councillor Matterface seconded it, and the motion was agreed.
“Councillor Rusiecki proposed and Councillor Matterface seconded the officer recommendation to APPROVE the application.”
“When put to the vote the motion was AGREED.”
Minutes
Councillors at the meeting
- Helen CrittendenChairLabour
- Pat MakinsonLabour
- Steve AlbonLabour
- Martin BoydLabour
- Kristian BrightLabour
- Mike GarnerGreen
- Jennifer MatterfaceLabour
- Jack PackmanLabour
- Marc RattiganConservative
- George RusieckiConservative
- Rebecca WingGreen
- Joanne BrightSubstitute for GreenLabour
Also attending Tricia Austin Green, Abi Smith Green
Source: Plota analysis of the council's minutes; parties from the council's list of councillors.
Sources
- Thanet Planning Committee minutes, 14 January 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Thanet's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Thanet Planning Committee
- Council
- Thanet
- Date
- Wednesday 14 January 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Councillors
- 12Labour 8Conservative 2Green 2Show councillors
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- View application →
- All decisions
- Thanet committee decisions →
This committee's year
60 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 2 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.