Attractive Town Centre Tree Under Threat - Council Vandalism?

I have never heard anything so redculouse, there are trees all around that will cause leaves to blow onto the pavement. Does this mean that they are going to remove them all. Not only are there trees in various places in wincanton that are on public land there are those in the church yard that over hand walkways. People have trees growing in there front gardens that drop leaves onto walkways/pavements are they going to tell us next that we arn't allowed to grow treesin our gardens. And i agree with theabove comment about the slabs themselves being slippery, i often have to use crutches due to my health and i will actually cross over to avoid walking on these slabs as i find my crutches slip so as not giving me there suport. Praps instead of cutting down a helpless tree they should change the slabs to a better gripped surface.

Have our local authority decided to take this action without visiting Carrington Way. The tree may make a minor contribution to the problem but cutting it down will not prevent people slipping on the wet paving. The paving slabs are the main obstacle to standing upright and giving them a similar treatment to that given to Bristol Airports runway would rectify this and we could retained the trees.

This is an update on the situation with our beloved tree.

As a result of this article I have been communicating with our local District Council. I advised them that we would be asking some specific questions, and as a result they have given us a press release to answer those questions. The questions and answers are as follows:

1 – My assumption that County was behind the request to remove the tree was wrong. So, sorry County, I consider myself suitably rebuked.

2 – How did this issue about our beloved tree come about?

Answer:
This was a town centre enhancement scheme jointly funded in 2006 by English Heritage, Somerset County Council - SCC, Wincanton Town Council - WTC & South Somerset District Council – SSDC.
SSDC facilitated the scheme which replaced a patchwork of surfaces including uneven broken paving and lifting tarmac.
English Heritage funding required natural stone paving. There were three types of natural paving approved by SCC for highway use, (one of which was not being quarried at the time). Following consultation with local stakeholders including businesses, a site visit to a natural stone highway scheme elsewhere in Somerset, and a well publicised ‘drop-in’ event, the paving was selected because it best fitted with the surrounding stone buildings and had been approved for highway use.
The scheme was completed in summer 2006 and as part of the standard post completion process there are two remaining stages of a safety audit which are submitted to SCC, this is always carried out after this type of scheme.

3 – Who asked for the risk assessment?

Answer:
The safety audit process identified (what was already well known locally), that there had been a higher than usual number of slips/trips on the paving. Special tests were undertaken and the surface scored within ‘normal tolerances’ but at the higher end of this assessment. To help get the area adopted by SCC and improve the surface for pedestrians SSDC undertook algae treatments and have put in place additional cleaning.

4 – Assuming that this was brought about by people slipping, who are these people? Where did they slip? Under the tree? Outside Julian Shave’s shop? Outside the Library?

Answer:
There is a higher than usual number of reported slip/trips in the area but regrettably – although as you might expect - when these are reported the precise location has not been identified by those reporting it, simply that it is within the area. The White Beam tree that overhangs the surface causes shading and drops berries making the area more slippery for pedestrians.

The surface provides a cost effective and attractive enhancement; the removal of the tree is part of a package of measures to minimise the likelihood of slips and possible injury to pedestrians. A replacement planting scheme could include another tree subject to advice on an appropriate species.

Fresh questions to be addressed:

It seems clear that this current line of action is not based on well documented facts, but on an assumption that because this tree sheds berries annually, that it is clearly responsible for the higher than average incidents of slipping on the pavement in this area. As there is no evidence to state that people slipped under the offending tree I suggest that this fact alone is grounds enough to cancel this order to remove the tree.

I’m sorry if by bringing this issue into public view causes more work and hassle for our local District Council. This is not, and never was my intention. My reasons are very simple.

• Is this proposed action justified?
• Is there clear and documented evidence to prove the guilt of this tree? From the District Council answers provided, there is no evidence to prove where people slipped.
• What were the weather conditions when the slips occurred?
• Did all the slips happen in winter? In wet rainy weather? During periods of frost or snow?
• Did the safety audit even take into consideration that the actual paving slabs themselves may be the major culprit?
• Apart from these questions, what about the other trees in the vicinity, or indeed anywhere in town? You could end up with a precedent that leads to a mass cull of berry bearing trees because of the risk to pedestrians slipping on pavements.

Conclusion:

There can’t be any factual conclusion. There are too many unanswered questions proving that this decision to remove a tree was not taken from any reasonably considered position.

In fact, from the comments made, I believe that there is more evidence to suggest that the actual culprit in this whole issue is the inappropriate paving used in the original scheme, obtained to comply with English Heritage regulations, but with hind sight (always easy) not the best solution. That means that SSDC should be issuing a sentence of death on the pavement, and not the tree.

I don’t doubt for one moment the District Council’s genuine concern to minimise risk to pedestrians. As chairman of WBT I enjoy an excellent working relationship with all our Councils, and that goes on. My only desire is to ensure that issues like this one are decided because the full facts are taken into account, and not based on assumptions that can so easily leave a bad taste in the mouth afterwards.

So, at the very least we ask the District Council to guarantee that this tree will not be removed until a proper assessment, based on facts, has been completed.

When all is said and done, if it can be factually established that this tree is the cause of all the reported slips, then SSDC would be right to proceed to remove the tree. However, if the facts show that the problem lies elsewhere, then SSDC should transfer their attention from the innocent tree and towards the real issue.

This issue has clearly sparked some interest, and a healthy response from some of the Window readers. It’s very easy to complain about local authorities. Over all they are a very hard working bunch, working on our behalf, and deserving of our thanks and support. This is about a bad plan that affects our town and its communities. Because it’s a bad plan it is also bad for our District Council, because it will result in lots of extra work and hassle for them. Sorry guys.

I can state that from personal experiance that the Paving slabs when wet from rain are leathal, it has nothing to do with the tree, its leaves or berrys. I think a thorough investergation is needed into the paving being the possible issue with slipping before the poor tree is felled for no reason.

Nice touch with the ribbons. It's not an oak, but it'll do. Let's hope that sense prevails and we don't end up with bunches of flowers and a wreath.