Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St. Helier: Protection of Trees

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 6 February 2012:

Decision Ref:	MD–PE–2012-0008
Subject:	List of Protected Trees: Trees at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier
Decision Summary Title:	DS – NoI to List as a Protected Tree Trees at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier
DS Author:	Director	File reference:	T/2012/002
DS Date:	31 January 2012	DS Status:	Public
Written Report Title:	WR – List of Protected Trees Trees at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier
WR Author:	Director: Policy and Projects
WR Date	31 January 2012	WR Status:	Public
Oral Rapporteur:	Director: Policy and Projects
Decision(s):	The Minister expressed an intention to add four sycamores [identified as T2, T3, T5 and T6: see appendices 5 and 6] at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier to the List of Protected Trees because of their amenity value
Reason(s) for Decision:	the amenity value of four sycamores [identified as T2, T3, T5 and T6: see appendices 5 and 6] at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier as defined in the schedule and relative to the established criteria for selection, justifies their intended inclusion in the List of Protected Trees in accordance with the provisions and purposes of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 and; it accords with the States Strategic Plan commitment of protecting and enhancing our natural and built environment
Legal and Resource Implications:	Article 58(2) of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 enables the Minister to include on the List of Protected Trees those trees which the Minister is satisfied, in the interests of the amenity of Jersey, should not be cut down, lopped or otherwise altered, harmed or interfered with, without the Minister’s permission.
Action required:	Serve notice of the Minister’s intention to add the tree(s) to the List of Protected Trees
Signature:
Name and Position:	Deputy RC Duhamel, Minister for Planning and Environment
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different to Date Signed):

Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St. Helier: Protection of Trees

		Item No:
		Date:

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

List of Protected Trees

Trees at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier

Purpose of the Report

To enable the Minister to consider whether he intends to add a group of trees, comprising five sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) and one robinia (Robinia pseudoacacia) at Rosemount Court, St Helier to the List of Protected Trees.

Background and discussion

Concern has been expressed to the department about the potential threat of removal of trees from land at Rosemount Court (representation dated 16 December 2011 at appendix 1).

The trees in question comprise a group of relatively mature trees growing in a line in a confined space between the rear of a garage block and a boundary wall immediately adjacent to Mont Pinel. The trees are prominent roadside features in a suburban setting that forms part of the designated Green Backdrop Zone in the 2011 Island Plan (see location plan and Island Plan zoning at appendices 2 and 3).

There is limited soil for the trees to grow in and there is evidence that the retaining roadside wall has been repaired in the past and old clay pipe rubble on site may be indicative of previous damage to drainage goods (see images at appendix 4).

The trees have been surveyed by the Arboricultural Officer (see appendix 5). His professional view is that whilst of some local amenity value, the constrained location of the trees is posing some difficulties for the trees’ survival as they continue to grow: there is already some evidence of this presented by some stag-heading in the crowns of some of the trees. Furthermore, some of the trees are very close to existing structures and may cause damage.

Of the six trees at this site, the Arboricultural Officer considers that one of the sycamores, in its own right, is worthy of Listing as it is in good condition and that the other trees, at T2 and T5 and T6, whilst not of individual value, may warrant overall protection as a group. T1 and T4 are too close to existing structures and suffering from decay respectively and, on this basis, do not warrant protection.

From a planning perspective, it is considered that the trees do provide amenity value to the immediate locality, as well as contributing to the green backdrop of this part of the town.

From a management perspective, the Arboricultural Officer has suggested that a phased removal and replacement of trees here could be successful, enabling removal of the weaker trees in the first instance, followed by their replacement with a more suitable species (such as hawthorn). In the longer term, the remaining sycamore could be removed as the earlier replacement planting matures. A management regime of this sort could only be secured where the removal of trees (and their subsequent replacement) is regulated by listing. This would not preclude the future removal of trees, where this was justified because of their declining health and vigour, but would enable formal consideration of this, as well as their potential replacement.

Legal and resource implications

Article 58(2) of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 enables the Minister to include on the List of Protected Trees those trees which the Minister is satisfied, in the interests of the amenity of Jersey, should not be cut down, lopped or otherwise altered, harmed or interfered with, without the Minister’s permission.

Article 61(4) of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 enables the Minister to specify the replacement of protected trees where permission is granted by the Minister to remove them.

Recommendation

On the basis of the above and the advice of the Arboricultural Officer the Minister is recommended to express an intention to add four sycamores [identified as T2, T3, T5 and T6: see appendices 5 and 6] at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier to the List of Protected Trees because of their amenity value.

Reason(s) for Decision

the amenity value of four sycamores [identified as T2, T3, T5 and T6: see appendices 5 and 6] at Rosemount Court, Mont Pinel, St Helier as defined in the schedule and relative to the established criteria for selection, justifies their intended inclusion in the List of Protected Trees in accordance with the provisions and purposes of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 and;

it accords with the States Strategic Plan commitment of protecting and enhancing our natural and built environment.

Action Required

Serve notice of the Minister’s intention to add the tree(s) to the List of Protected Trees

Written by:

Kevin Pilley: Director (Policy and Projects)

Attachments:

Appendix 1: representation dated 16 December 2011

Appendix 2: location plan

Appendix 3: Island Plan zoning

Appendix 4: images

Appendix 5: Arboricultural assessment

Appendix 6: location plan of trees recommended for protection

File ref T/2012/0002

Date 31/01/12

Appendix 5: Arboricultural assessment
TREE	LATIN NAME	COMMON NAME	GRID REF	AGE	HEALTH	CONDITION CODE	COMENTS
1	Robinia pseudoacacia	Robinia	-	M	P	D	The base of the tree is touching the wall and does not have the potential to grow safely in the future. Poor uneven branch structure makes the tree unbalanced.
2	Acer pseudoplatanus	Sycamore	42993:65215	M	P	C/D	This tree has a very poor vigour and is stag heading which means the top of the tree is dying back. May have only a few seasons left.
3	Acer pseudoplatanus	Sycamore	42991:65222	M	G	B	A good example of a sycamore to the west side of the crown it is wind scorched by prevailing winds and will always have poor vigour on this side. Growing in between two walls and does not have the potential to grow to full maturity one the poor soils.
4	Acer pseudoplatanus	Sycamore	-	M	P	D	This is a weak tree with a large cavity at its base. There is a drain cover 1m away from the trunk and given time could do damage to drain.
5	Acer pseudoplatanus	Sycamore	42985:65233	M	P	C/D	A poor specimen which has dead wood in crown and is growing close to wall.
6	Acer pseudoplatanus	Sycamore	42985:65233	OM	P	C/D	A large tree of visually importance. At the base on the North eastern side there are two large pruning scare where once branches grew. These scares are decaying leaving a hollow trunk. This has weakened the tree. T 5,6 are growing on made up ground surrounded by walls on three sides it is hard to tell how they are anchored. Potentially both are weak tree.