Appeal 6003191

The appeal is allowed and consent is granted for the felling of T2 Monterey pine protected by the Tree Preservation Order No. 25/0002/TPO, "Land at [name], Sidmouth" (the TPO), which was confirmed on 11 June 2025, in accordance with the terms of the application Ref: 25/2085/TRE, dated 25 October 2025 and subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule. Appeal B Ref: 6003191

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for two storey extension to north east elevation and two storey extension to north west as permitted Ref. 25/0479/FUL with the addition of a single storey link and garage extension, including the felling of [name] tree and planting of eight trees and a native hedgerow at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/1834/FUL, and the plans submitted with it, subject the conditions in the attached schedule. Appeal Decisions APP/TPO/U1105/11019 and 6003191

The property has been unoccupied for a number of years and the grounds became very overgrown. A Tree Preservation Order was made in 2024 (Ref: 24/0026/TPO) to protect the trees following clearance works but this was not confirmed. A less extensive TPO was made to protect only the T2 Monterey pine. The appellants objected to the making of the TPO and commissioned the Peacock “[name]” in February 2025. The accompanying Tree Evaluation Method for Tree Preservation Orders (TEMPO) assessment concluded that, due to the significant structural defects and associated foreseeability of collapse, which would incur a disproportionate expenditure of resources to manage for only a short time span, the TPO should not be confirmed.

A second [name] “Detailed investigations to a Monterey pine tree located at [site address] , Sidmouth [postcode] ” in May 2025 used an increment borer and fractometer and found localised decay to an unspecified depth between the buttress roots and mostly acceptable values for strength readings. However, the Council considered that the tree was in fair condition, rather than poor, and found a higher TEMPO value. The TPO was confirmed, as set out above.

There are two appeals on the same site. I have considered each proposal on its individual merits. However, to avoid duplication, I have dealt with the schemes together, except where otherwise indicated.

Appeal A relates to residential extensions for which the only reason for refusal cited on the Decision Notice relates to the loss of the protected pine. Appeal B is an application for the felling of the protected pine.

A main issue for both appeals is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. In addition, for Appeal B, a main issue is whether the reasons given justify the felling of the pine.

The appeal site is in an established residential area. The houses between [address], including those on [name], up to the backs of more recently, more densely, developed properties on [address], [address], [name] and [address], are mostly detached houses in large, well established gardens with many mature trees and shrubs. The appeal site is a typical property and is at the top of a cul-de-sac. Access is via a drive off the end of the cul-de-sac such that only a small portion of the front garden is visible from [name].

[name] rises up from [address]. The appeal site also rises up and the house is positioned near to the highest, most level, part of the site. Levels drop steeply in the north west corner of the garden, possibly a former quarry or pit, with a difference of some 4m. The pine is some distance behind the house on the edge of the steep slope. Beyond this along the rear boundary is an overgrown conifer hedge.

Planning permission has already been granted for two two-storey extensions. The proposal adds a single storey link and double garage. The proposed design and Appeal Decisions APP/TPO/U1105/11019 and 6003191 appearance of the extensions would be in character with the existing building and the local area. The Council raises no objections in this respect and I see no reason to come to a different view.

Part of the proposed single storey extension and the extended driveway would be within the root protection area of the pine and regrading of the steep slope would be needed to make the garden useable. Works during construction would be likely to disrupt the root plate and be harmful to the health of the tree. Part of the crown would overhang the extension. Over shadowing and debris on the roof would be likely to lead to pressure for significant pruning or removal of the tree.

The pine is a large mature specimen of statuesque form and appearance. It has one main stem with substantial branches that form a tracery against the sky. Together with other trees in the locality, the appeal pine contributes to the verdant character and appearance of the area, making it a pleasant environment in which to live, work and relax.

Parts of the crown can be seen from some vantage points on [address]. [address], (which continues past [address]) and the [name]/[address] private estate. The most noticeable view of the pine is from the latter. None of these are through roads but they are used by residents and visitors and therefore views of the tree add to the public amenity value of the area. However, because of the topography, intervening buildings and other vegetation, it appears as an occasional backdrop above and between roofs. I note that the Council accepts that views from public locations are relatively restricted with the main views of the trees being over the rooftops or between nearby buildings as a skyline feature which is often typical of trees in urban environments. Views from private properties carry relatively little weight in the assessment of public amenity in terms of works to protected trees.

Close to its appearance is diminished by numbers of dead and snapped branches and browned needles throughout the canopy. However, these would not be noticeable in longer views.

Taking all the above into account I conclude the felling of the pine would have a moderately harmful effect on the visual amenity, character and appearance of the area. There would be conflict with Policies D1 and D3 of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031, adopted 2016 (the LP) that seek to retain trees when permission is granted for development. However, the harm arising is reduced, as the loss would be of a single tree, in a well treed area, and as the proposed New Landscaping Plan would meet the Policy D3 requirements for planting.

Any reasons given to justify the proposed felling of a protected tree need to carry sufficient weight to outweigh the harm to the character and appearance of the area that would arise from the loss of the tree.

The appellants are concerned that the tree is unsafe and a risk to the safety of users of the property and that the tree is too large for its location, being over-bearing, casting shade over the property, and inhibiting the ability to develop and maintain a productive residential garden. Appeal Decisions APP/TPO/U1105/11019 and 6003191

The pine is growing on the edge of a steep bank so that many of its roots are exposed. There are numbers of dead and snapped branches and dead needles throughout the canopy and on the ground around the tree together with signs of accelerated growth on the tree stem.

The Peacock Report identified two Phaeolus schweinitzii fungal fruiting bodies, which are known to cause brown rot and associated decay within the tree’s lower stem. Decay is likely around the majority of the tree base and root decay/dysfunction is a distinct possibility with windthrow considered to be foreseeable. The condition of the tree is likely to deteriorate and brittle fracture of the wood can occur even at a fairly early stage of decay from this fungi. Further investigations, which would be intrusive, may not be conclusive if the decay is below ground level and so hard to detect. Added to the likely decay from the fungal infection is stress from drought following a very dry spring and summer and desiccation of soil due to other vegetation being cleared.

Due to the structural defects the condition of the tree was assessed as poor with symptoms predicted to deteriorate over the next 5 to 10 years with a retention span of 10 to 20 years. I acknowledge the Council’s view that the pine could recover from the observed stress but this could not be guaranteed. I also note that the Council reduced its original CAVAT1 of the pine of about £62,000 to £40,000 some two months later due to the condition of the tree.

Some of the needle browning and dropping is to be expected as part of the normal cycle. However, this combined with large branch dieback, can indicate the possibility of active decay and compromised structural integrity. The risk of failure is exacerbated by the position of the stem in the edge of a steep slope particularly now surrounding vegetation which provided shelter has been removed.

The tree is very dominant in its setting. The garden is large and can accommodate a substantial mature tree and still have sufficient private garden for the usual domestic activities. However, in this particular case, due to its central location, and the extent of the crown with its dense shade and the dropping of large pine cones and branches, combined with the levels differences the use of much of the private garden area is inhibited. Once the property becomes inhabited there would be a risk to safety of users of the garden and enjoyment of it would be restricted.

Trees are living organisms whose health and condition can change rapidly. The earlier [name] indicates the health, condition and safety of the pine should be checked on a regular basis, and before occupation of the house. Dead and seriously dangerous branches can be removed without the need for consent and appropriate tailored pruning could address these concerns to some extent. However, it seems very likely that the pine will deteriorate given the fungal infection. Taking into account its position on the edge of the slope, especially as the shelter gained from other vegetation has now gone, the extent of risk from failure is a residential garden, and the likely resource requirements of the monitoring that would be required I consider there to be a strong case for felling the pine.

The Hurley “[name] 5837:2012 Arboricultural Impact Assessment, Tree Protection Plan and [name]”, September 2025, 1 The Capital Asset Value for [name] (CAVAT) provides a basis for managing trees in the UK as public assets rather than liabilities. It is intended primarily for publicly owned trees but can be used in relation to the tree stock as a whole, but also in individual cases, where the value of a single tree needs to be expressed in monetary terms. Appeal Decisions APP/TPO/U1105/11019 and 6003191 accompanied the applications. This clearly states that the New Landscaping Plan, [name]/C608/0725 1.3, seeks to mitigate the loss of the pine by providing a number of new trees across the property and a hedgerow. The most significant and key replacement would be an English oak. It is also stated that “this plan can be conditioned as part of any planning consent granted”.

This planting would take many years to become sufficiently mature to replace the public amenity provided by the appeal pine. Nevertheless it would do so in due course and, even taking into account that the appeal pine may be younger than other nearby pines, would have the advantage of adding to the age profile of trees in the locality.

With any application to fell a protected tree, a balancing exercise needs to be undertaken. The essential need for the works applied for must be weighed against the resultant loss to the amenity of the area.

Usually there would be a strong presumption against felling of a protected tree, particularly one confirmed so recently. In this case, in my judgement, sufficient evidence has been provided to demonstrate the poor health of the tree and the consequent likelihood of failure and risk to those nearby. I give these matters great weight in favour of the removal of the tree and find they outweigh the resultant harm to the character and appearance of the area. This provides sufficient justification for the felling of the tree.

There appears to be some concerns that proposals for additional residential development on the site might be forthcoming. However, should this be the case, the Council would be able to exercise appropriate control in the context of planning policies and material considerations. I note the Council considers that a reduction in the size of the single storey extension would have a less harmful effect on the pine. However, that is not the proposal that is before me. Accordingly these matters carries negligible weight in the context of these appeals.

I have taken account of the condition proposed by the Council in respect of the tree works proposal and the subsequent comments of the appellants about species. In the fast-track procedure for tree works applications the Council has no opportunity to respond to the grounds of appeal. The tree works application clearly states that the proposals include the replacement planting scheme and this includes an English oak (Quercus robur) which is one of the species preferred by the Council.

As well as the standard condition specifying the time limits for the felling of the pine/commencement of development, compliance with the approved plans and the stated external materials is necessary to provide certainty. Tree and hedge planting would accord with the submitted plans; protect the character and appearance of the area; and, in due course, provide public amenity value in place of that provided by the protected tree.

It is necessary to secure the implementation of the submitted Tree Protection Plan Ref TH/C608/0725 1.3 in the interests of the character and appearance of the area. Appeal Decisions APP/TPO/U1105/11019 and 6003191

There is some conflict with the Policies D1 and D3 of the LP in respect of the loss of the pine tree. However, I have found there is sufficient justification for the felling of the tree. This is a material consideration that outweighs the conflict with the development plan. For the reasons given above both Appeal A and Appeal B should be allowed.

The tree works for which consent is hereby granted shall be implemented within two years from the date of this decision.

All tree work operations agreed to under this consent shall comply with BS 3998:2010 'Tree Work Recommendations' (and all subsequent revisions).

All planting comprised in the approved New Landscaping Plan, [name]/C608/0725 1.3 shall be carried out by the end of the first planting season (October to February) following the felling of the Monterey pine, and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the planting die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. Appeal B Ref: 6003191

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the plans: • 1925.3 Proposed Floor Plan; • 1925.4 Proposed Floor Plan; • 1925.5 [name]; • 1925.6 [name] and Alterations; and • The Advanced Arboriculture Ltd., “[name] 5837:2012 Arboricultural Impact Assessment, Tree Protection Plan and [name]”, September 2025 including New Landscaping Plan, [name]/C608/0725 1.3; and Tree Protection Plan Ref TH/C608/0725 1.3.

No construction materials or construction equipment shall be brought onto the site until the measures shown on the approved Tree Protection Plan Ref TH/C608/0725 1.3 have been fully implemented. These measures shall be retained for the duration of the construction works hereby permitted.

All planting comprised in the approved New Landscaping Plan, [name]/C608/0725 1.3 shall be carried out by the end of the first planting season (October to February) following the felling of the Monterey pine, or within the first planting season following the completion development hereby approved, whichever is the sooner, and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the planting die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased. shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. End of Schedules