Residents shocked by felling of trees
Wednesday 22nd September 2010, 2:57PM BST.
Residents with Deputy Jackie Hilton at a previous meeting to protest about the development
RESIDENTS in La Pouquelaye are upset that trees have been chopped down by a developer.
They claim that they were reassured at a Planning meeting that the trees at the Channel Television site would not be cut down but developer Alpine Contracts received permission from Planning to fell the trees at a later stage.
However, residents say they were not consulted about this and one resident, John Veal, said he was shocked to find five trees gone when he returned home last night.
Neither developer Geoffrey Noel, nor Planning assistant director Peter Le Gresley were unavailable for comment this morning.
• Read the full report in Wednesday’s Jersey Evening Post
Read the full story in the Jersey Evening Post. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are also available online.
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
JOIN US ON...
Facebook and Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Got a story? Get in touch
KIT 4 CLUBS
Win a share of £10,000
2012 is the year of the London Olympics and to celebrate this great event the Jersey Evening Post, in association with sponsors Ogier is giving all sporting clubs a chance to win a share of £10,000.
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
If a tree falls in the woods do the residents of in La Pouquelaye make a noise?
Report abuse
Just trash the place who gives a toss for nature and beauty…they won’t rest till it’s all concrete..I hate them all.
Report abuse
I got home from work tonight and all the trees behind my house have gone. It was bad enough that the building site in channel TV car park backed on to my garden but at least the trees were there to block our view of the works, now instead of views of the trees I have an ugly house sat at the bottom of the garden and to top it off there is also a window over looking my property, not a happy bunny!
Report abuse
That will be for the new estate, which will be built soon, even though the top man Mr Cohen has denied. Watch this space.
Report abuse
BR (comment 1) I think you are slightly missing the point.Trees do fall down sometimes due to disease or perhaps strong winds but that is not the same as someone destroying them for no good reason.Perhaps you would like to see all the trees in Jersey chopped down and then it would make more space for thousands more blocks of flats.
Report abuse
More tree felling going on this morning, there will be none left at this rate :/
Report abuse
Well Erical, I can not feel sorry for you, as you are fortunate to have your own home. However it’s is the wildlife ( birds, squirrels etc) that will suffer
because planning don’t care what so ever.
Report abuse
It seems that money talks too much in this island! And it’s always wildlife that suffers because of man’s sheers ignornace to everything! Look at the state the world is in, we don’t need trees, we need building to sort out future problems! Only if animals ruled the world, it would be a greener healthier world to live in today.
Report abuse
The island is only so big, we are all living in an over populated island but u cant keep building and knocking trees down to suit!
Building all these estates on fields aint going to sort this problem out, its going to make it worse!
Report abuse
I wonder where the bird house in the tree at the bottom of my garden went? Hopefully there were no birds in there…
Report abuse
As I get older I really appreciate nature far more, especially trees for some reason they take so long to grow, and add so much to the landscape.
Should the planning department have put anything down in writing possibly to deputy Hilton, then they could be in serious trouble.
Yet another take on Reg’s skips charade. There is a chance that the planning officer acted far beyond his authority.
Fifty percent of people that complain to planning minister Freddie Cohen are correct.
FC: I get people phoning me all the time about planning applications and it is always the same story.
They have been let down by the Department, that
everything is too slow, the Department is hopeless and it is quite difficult to deal with because half of the complaints are valid and the other half are just…
they are trying it on.
FC; is actually Freddie Cohen planning minister, his words above.
He is quoted from a open report that’s on the States assembly web site at.
http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/documents/reports/35208-5007-1692010.pdf
Report abuse
I would like to see lots of trees everywhere, except of course where my house stands, and garage, and sheds…. but everywhere else must stay green!!!!
Typical greenies and lefties…. want everything to stay nature except their house!
They have permission, it is their land!
Report abuse
How dare a developer cut down trees on a property he owns, they have no right to do what they want on their own property. If you live in a house with nice trees nearby you own those trees, just because they are on someone elses land they are collective property.
My neighbour recently erected a shed at the end of his garden completely blocking my view of the leylandai bush beyond, I was furious how dare he. To make matters worse there are children playing in the garden opposite, I now don’t have an unrestricted view of the house opposite, this is unacceptable.
Why do other people insist on doing what they want with their property.
Report abuse
Time South @ 11: “As I get older I really appreciate nature far more, especially trees for some reason they take so long to grow, and add so much to the landscape.”
Solution: Well, why don’t you knock your house down and plant trees. Just because you want it doesn’t mean everyone should!
Report abuse
Concerned residents and deputy Hilton were given assurance that the trees would not be harmed by the planning department. Then cut down this ” is the issue “.
Whether you are a tree hugger, someone who enjoys nature or a troll like Truthseeker is completely irrelevant.
What is important, is that the states planning department, behind closed doors in sympathy with one party [the developer], went against all that was discussed without informing other interested parties.
How can anyone trust any Government departments who act in this manner, and who in Government will remedy these clear failings.
Report abuse
Real Truthseeker;
Solution: “Well, why don’t you knock your house down and plant trees”
“They have permission, it is their land!”
Bit of a silly comment, really. Development permission would be required for this and the loss of a housing unit would be intrumental in the probable refusal. Think before posting.
Report abuse
Water Fowls: You completelymissed the point, I don’t advocate anyone knocking down their house – you need to learn abotu a word called ‘sarcasm’!
The point being made, since I now have to explain to the uneducated what was clear to most, is that these trees being cut down: it is their land, thier property, and they had permission to do so to develop the land. Why is it that developers are regarded as evil? Jealousy.
TIm Souoth: Who cares what assurances they were given, it isn’t their land (deputy hilton et. al.) so they are completely irrelevant when it comes to the decision making process. If they wanted to have kept the land, they should have organised a co-operative, contributed their own money and bought the land. Simple.
If you want a tree, buy some land and plant it yourself.
Finally: Watery Fowls: Buy a dictionary.
Report abuse
Thank you Tim South for your sensible comments.If Government departments can turn decisions over at a whim without consultation with interested parties what is the point in making any decisions in the first place as they are meaningless.
Report abuse
Watery fowls@16 another excellent point.
truthseeker @2 as most readers will know has been around for a long time and usually makes valid points on the issues discussed.
My main response was actually to Real Truthseeker who has trouble thinking up a different name ( is their a shortage ?) and actually just writes to wind up people with few valid points. I apologies to truthseeker he / she is not the troll.
Report abuse
Julie: You need to get the facts correct, rather than listen to Tim. There was never a decision by planning about the trees. All plannign were commenting on was at the point they were asked was whether permission had been granted to cut the trees down – which at that point it hadn’t. It is not a reversal or anything like this.
Tim South: the other truthseeker made no such valid points and rarely does. She simply gives her personal opinion based not on fact, but her emotional emptiness as it exists at the point of typing.
From her comments I woudl also sugegst I have been aroudn alot longer than truthseeker by the way, all 58 years.
Tim: Stop spreading misinformation and ridiculous comments that have no basis in turth, fact or otherwise. Re-read your posts, they are simply divel without fact.
Report abuse
real Truthseeker:
“The point being made, since I now have to explain to the uneducated what was clear to most, is that these trees being cut down: it is their land, thier property, and they had permission to do so to develop the land. Why is it that developers are regarded as evil? Jealousy.”
Bit of a silly comment, really. You admit using saracasm to, as you say, try and educate people. There is no place for saracasm in pedagogy (get a dictionary if you don’t know what that means). Further, your self-styled role as an educateor to the uneducated marks you out as a rather pompous individual.
To return to the subject of your misonformation, the residents had been assured that the trees would remain. That is a matter which exists extraneous to the matter of development permission. Indeed, as the quote from your previous quote made clear, you did not even believe that such permission would be required for demolition. Read the story again and ask someone who knows their stuff if you still can’t grasp the point.
Report abuse
Don’t understand why Watery fowls would need to buy a dictionary as Real Roofseeker suggests
Report abuse
17, Real Truthseeker said ;”you need to learn abotu”
What is that, is it a language which involves making silly statements to annoy other people posting comments? If so, I would rather not, thank you very much. I prefer objective comment, not the reactionary and misinformed garbage which you seem set on promulgating….
Report abuse
The point is simply to comments 21, 22, and 23 who clearly have no idea about the decision process and how it was reached. The assurance was given in relation to their being no application at that point to remove the trees. Subsequent to that ‘assurance’ (which again dictionary you lot – is not a decision, an application was lodged to remove the trees.
Why did that have to notify the residents? Well they didn’t. Simple – it isn’t your land, and the felling of trees had no impact on anything other than your selfish wants. If you want something, buy the land, and stop telling people what to do on theirs.
Simple. Now go crawl back into your caves, and leave the debate for the adults.
Report abuse
Real Truthseeker has no idea about planning law and related legal matters if his post at 24 is anything to go by. I’m not going to tell him what the issues are because he clearly knows it all. Go and take advice and stop being such a pompous individual. And get a life while you’ re at it
Report abuse
Real Truthseeker (a contradiction in terms if ever there were one); planning is under a duty to notify interested third parties. There are also certain rights of appeal to third parties even though, as you say, the third parties don’t own the land. It is a pity that you feel the need to direct personal remarks at those who disagree with you. As well as being a bit silly, it also tends to show that the points which you make ar weak, otherwise why not just make them in a mature and measured way?
Report abuse
Agree with all of you too numerous to mention, In UK 100yr Oaks are cut down for 1.5m houses even though there are covenants on Title Deeds. Check out Gerrards Cross & around. Fellers move in on Saturday when Council Offices are closed. Its disgraceful filling everything with cement.
Report abuse
Real Truthseeker fails to understand that life has a spiritual as well as a material quality and that trees bring a sense of grandeur and wonder to those who look up from their blackberries long enough to contemplate their surroundings. So as a matter of fact, to say that “the felling of trees has no impact on anything other than your selfish wants” is wholly misguided.
It pulls a thread from the fabric of society itself. It reduces still further those aspects of our landscape that humanise (as opposed to aggrandise) our sense of self. Finally, it obscures the inevitability of death. Anyone with any sense of the aesthetic, the sublime or the religious will mourn their passing. Those obsessed with money won’t give a toss.
Report abuse
the assurance was made. No wonder the residents are disgruntled. It matters not whether the application was that application or any other. The assurance was made
Report abuse
Does this mean that when planning say no you cannot build on your land, one can just ignore them on the basis they are wrong and will later realise it and change their minds without telling those who may have complained before.
Report abuse
OK all, found this out. You would have thought that planning would tread carefully as they new about(and read the draft of the RSL report) but no, not one bit of it. Still stamping all over people views and wishes.
JEP.
A planning officer recommended the scheme for approval but the planning applications panel, comprising a group of politicians, refused it. Because their decision was contrary to the officer’s advice, the decision went to Senator Cohen, who also rejected the application.
On Wednesday Sir Philip, who was sitting with Jurats Morgan and Marett-Crosby, said that the advice from the planning officer seemed to be running against the policy decisions that the minister made and the policies set out in the Island Plan. ‘That observation is troubling the court at the moment,’ he said.
http://www.thisisjersey.com/2010/05/01/planning-decisions-a-cause-for-concern/#ixzz10w9M4JRg
All information is in the public domain and penned by John Mills and his committee, who have commented much about the lack of management leader ship. Should Mr Thorne as chief executive and Mr Le Gresley as director be held to account ?
18 CONCLUSIONS
(a) sloppy report writing and administrative practice,
(b) absence of due process (and seemingly a lack of recognition of its importance), and
(c) want of analysis in order to ensure well founded decisions.
18.7 The criticisms and shortcomings noted above were clearly heightened by organisational weakness in the Department and what is hard not to describe as a lack of effectual managerial leadership of it during much of the period in question.
18.8 Examples contributing to this view include –
(a) poor record-keeping and recording of decisions;
(b) overly informal decision-making;
(c) unsatisfactory arrangements for the proper taking of decisions under delegated authority, including the signing-off of planning conditions
and a lack of clarity about the rules or conventions pertaining to delegation;
f) insufficiently robust procedures for consultation with other States departments on planning applications; [ Would destroying trees be of interest to the environmental department? my question ]
(g) poor report writing coupled, in certain cases, with a marked lack of analytical rigour;
Above and much more to be found below click on the hyper link below. Sorry it’s not shorter.
http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/documents/reports/35208-5007-1692010.pdf
Tim South
Report abuse
Feathery Nests: You are the one who is not sure. Third parties do not have to be notified. Simple fact, which you are wrong on.
My responses are of equal measure to the troglodytes here criticising me. I make simple fact based legal argument, supported by legislation. NOT emotion. Everyone wants more trees, and green areas, and not to have to work, but we have to face reality.
If you want to talk abotu personal see comment 19. I dont’ care though, because those lefties carrying on with such comments are meaningless in the scheme of things.
But of course, you criticise my comments, but my evidence doesn’t suit your NIMBY situation.
Report abuse
Teacakes and all other: This is hilarious…. They claimed there were assurances. That is not true. Go get the facts, and you will find out this is just a bunch of NIMBY’s re-interpreting the truth.
As I said before, and say it again – get back into your caves leave the debates to the adults. You need facts before taking a position.
Report abuse
donald pond your post was beautiful. thank you.
Report abuse
Real Truthseeker; read the planning law. While you are at it, read the associated caselaw on matters such as legitimate expectation.
Your views should be respected. That said, you don’t respect other people’s views which are just as valid as yours. In fact, I believe that you are wrong in some, if not all of the points which you make, but you simply don’t want to hear the other side or indeed anything which goes against your view.
As for personal remarks; you do seem to like to make unpleasant jibes when your views are challenged. That is not the mark of a mature mind. I read post 19 at your suggestion and I cannot any particular insult there. That stands in contrast to your invitation to other commentators to “crawl back where they came from”, wherever that might be!
I hope this is helpful. Don’t forget to read the law before making further comment.
Report abuse