Protected lime tree removal at The Skittles, 53 Belper Street, Ilkeston

What was proposed

The application sought permission to fell a protected lime tree, with the applicants offering to plant an approximately five-metre evergreen instead.

“The application proposes to fell a protected Lime tree. The reasons given for the works include: • Structural and safety concerns due to pronounced lean and root exposure. • Environmental and health impacts from sap, wasps attracted to the sap, pigeon droppings and pollen that aggravates one of the owners’ asthma. • Maintenance issues, including leaf fall, moss growing on shaded surfaces, and the regular cost of trimming branches clear of nearby telephone lines.”

“The applicants have advised that they would replant an approximately 5m evergreen in place of the Lime tree if permission were granted for its removal. The preference for a conifer is on the assumption that it would require less maintenance.”

Officer report

The site

The tree stands on the eastern boundary of a bungalow on Belper Street and is protected by a Tree Preservation Order.

“The application site relates to No. Belper Street Ilkeston, a bungalow sited on the western side of Belper Street. A Lime tree protected by a Tree Preservation Order is located on the eastern boundary with Belper Street which is the subject of this application.”

Officer report

Earlier tree works

Applications for pollarding and other works to the lime tree were approved in 2016, 2020 and 2024.

“A number of applications have previously been submitted and approved for pollarding works etc. to the Lime tree in 2016; 2020 and 2024.”

Officer report

The main issue

The decision turned on whether the stated problems outweighed the tree’s amenity benefits, including its contribution to the street scene.

“The tree is sited in a prominent location and is visible from the highway thus forming part of the street scene on Belper Street. As such, the tree has a level of amenity value which provides a significant contribution to the aesthetics of the area and its maintenance and long term health is considered to be essential. Indeed it is the only tree on the street and pre-dates the conversion of an outbuilding into the current owners dwelling.”

“The Council’s Tree Officer has objected to the works on the grounds that the tree is in good condition and its loss would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the area. Its replacement with an evergreen would not outweigh its loss or replace its amenity value. Whilst the justification for the works is noted it is not uncommon for trees to shed branches, sap, attract birds.”

Officer report

The tree officer’s view

The Tree Officer objected, supported reducing the crown and lifting it, and said a young replacement would not match the existing tree’s value.

“The Local Planning Authority’s Tree Officer – Objection. The tree is in good condition and has a high amenity value. Replanting the tree with a young Pine tree would not replace the amenity value or environmental contribution that the existing mature tree offers. Recommended works – reduce the crown to previous pruning points and crown lift to 4m from ground level.”

Officer report

Comments from others

A near neighbour supported the application because of maintenance costs, while no further representations followed the site notice.

“The application included a supporting representation from a near neighbour citing maintenance costs, including clearing leaf litter from gutters.”

“A site notice was displayed for 14 days, no further representations were received.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A supporter addressed the committee about wasps, pigeons, street waste, reduced light and interference with the phone line.

The committee’s decision

The committee refused the application in line with the officer recommendation.

“Members of the committee considered the matters covered in the report and:”

“RESOLVED that the application be refused as per the recommendation in the report.”

Minutes