Issue - meetings

The Committee received an application to fell 5 lime stems from a group of pleached limes that contribute to the double avenue that borders Howes Place. The reason given as the need to fell them was clay shrinkage subsidence damage to 18 Howes Place.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a resident of Howes Place (written statement read by Committee Manager):

      i.          Suggested notable similarities between the Howes Place situation and the Sturton Street/St Matthews Piece, the Alexandra Gardens and the Beech tree on Hills Road situation.

     ii.          Large areas of Cambridge were built on clay ground. In periods of hot weather, the clay would shrink, and in periods of wet weather, the clay would expand. Buildings constructed on the clay ground were likely to move and cracks appear.

   iii.          As a result of climate change, more clay shrinkage and expansion - therefore more house cracking - was likely to occur. The very worst thing that we as a community could do was remove all our trees, as this would exacerbate climate change related problems.

   iv.          Called on the local authority to act against the destruction of urban environments in Cambridge by tree removal due to the demands of insurance companies.

    v.          Howes Place was recognised as a local heritage asset for the architectural interest of the buildings, the street scene value of the buildings set within formal landscaping and the importance of NIAB and Howes Place in the social and economic history of Cambridge.

   vi.          In 2010 Officers of the local authority recognised Howes Place was an “area of special architectural and historic interest” and recommended designation as a Conservation Area to protect and enhance its special character.

 vii.          The local authority was currently consulting on a draft Consultation Area Appraisal which encompasses the former NIAB HQ building and Howes Place. Within this appraisal it was recognized that “key groups of trees of importance include hedges and pleached lime trees which line Howes Place on the either side of the road and at the end of the road.”

viii.          The creator of NIAB and Howes Place, Sir Lawrence Weaver, collaborated closely with Gertrude Jekyll. Howes Place could be considered a historic and rare example of Arts and Crafts landscaping.

   ix.          The four parallel rows of pleached lime trees in Howes Place were protected by a Tree Preservation Order because they provided an unusual and aesthetically pleasing avenue of trees which represented the most significant formal landscaping feature in Howes Place. Removing individual or small groups of trees would irrevocably destroy the overall coherence of the formal landscaping.

    x.          The pleached lime trees in Howes Place were planted in the 1920s, 18 Howes Place was constructed in the 1940s, twenty years after the trees were planted. Both the trees and the house have co-existed for 80 years without issue.

   xi.          The correlation between the cracks in 18 Howes Place and the presence of the pleached lime trees was unproven.

 xii.          Other solutions, such as a root barrier system, should be installed before the felling of the mature pleached lime trees was considered. The Alexandra Gardens case proves this to be a viable solution.

Councillor Smith (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application:

      i.          Referred to Planning Policy Guidance which should be considered when removing trees.

     ii.          Tree Preservation Orders protected trees if their removal would do harm to the environment.

   iii.          Howes Place trees had special amenity value as recognised in various strategies over the years.

   iv.          The appraisal noted that although Howes Place was not a Conservation Area the trees were important to the character of the area. More Tree Preservation Orders were suggested for other Howes Place trees as they also had high amenity value.

    v.          The 2018 Crawford Technical Report and 2022 Crawford Addendum Agricultural Report suggested poor foundations rather than the lime tree roots being the cause of damage to the property.

   vi.          Referred to the consultant’s report that recommended a second group of trees on the property be removed, this suggested all trees would be removed over time to mitigate (insurance) risk. The Applicant had not provided any evidence why the 5 lime trees or other ones should be removed. Reasonable steps such as a root barrier had not been implemented already.

The Committee:

Unanimously resolved to reject the application to fell 5 lime stems from a group of pleached limes which contribute to the double avenue that borders Howes Place.

The reason for refusal was unanimously agreed as being:

The application failed to justify with sufficient evidence that the removal of the trees is necessary and outweighs the contribution the trees make to public amenity, which includes but is not limited to their visual, atmospheric, climate, biodiversity, historical and cultural benefits. The 5 trees are an important part of a pleached group with significant amenity, landscape and historic value, especially when considered as part of the wider groups of trees on Howes Place. The alleged damage associated with the retention of the trees is not considered to outweigh their public amenity value. A significant loss of public amenity to the Arts and Crafts character and appearance of Howes Place – which provides a cohesive and established landscaping design which centres around the positioning of the trees in combination with the historic design and layout of the properties - would arise from their proposed removal. The proposal would, therefore, be contrary to Cambridge Local Plan 2018 policies 61 and 62, NPPF 2023 paras.131 and 174, NPPG guidance para. 090 Reference ID: 36-090-20140306 and para. 093 Reference ID: 36-093-20140306 and other legislation, policies and guidance that seek to safeguard the environment.

Unanimously resolved:

      i.          to refuse the application contrary to the Officer recommendation for the following reason:

The application failed to justify with sufficient evidence that the removal of the trees is necessary and outweighs the contribution the trees make to public amenity, which includes but is not limited to their visual, atmospheric, climate, biodiversity, historical and cultural benefits. The 5 trees are an important part of a pleached group with significant amenity, landscape and historic value, especially when considered as part of the wider groups of trees on Howes Place. The alleged damage associated with the retention of the trees is not considered to outweigh their public amenity value. A significant loss of public amenity to the Arts and Crafts character and appearance of Howes Place – which provides a cohesive and established landscaping design which centres around the positioning of the trees in combination with the historic design and layout of the properties - would arise from their proposed removal. The proposal would, therefore, be contrary to Cambridge Local Plan 2018 policies 61 and 62, NPPF 2023 paras.131 and 174, NPPG guidance para. 090 Reference ID: 36-090-20140306 and para. 093 Reference ID: 36-093-20140306 and other legislation, policies and guidance that seek to safeguard the environment.

     ii.          with delegated authority to Officers in to carry through minor modifications / grammatical errors to the reason for refusal in consultation with the Chair, Vice Chair and Spokes.