Whilst the spirit of the policy is supported, concern is raised regarding certain elements of the current proposed policy direction.
The current policy direction seems somewhat contradictory stating in one bullet that seemingly all trees should be protected (no matter what their value), whilst another suggests only trees of value (as measured by a recognised tool such as iTree) should be protected. In any event it is considered additional flexibility should be introduced to allow for instances where trees are required to be removed due to disease, age or safety concerns which renders their retention inappropriate. Flexibility should also be allowed for where in some instances the removal of trees, in whole or part, is required in order for the development to be brought forward and this loss should be weighed against the benefits of the proposals. Countryside are committed to delivering 250,000 trees across their developments by 2025.
Furthermore the necessity of stipulating a recognised tool such as iTree is questioned. Assessment should be undertaken in accordance with relevant professional guidance and supported by tools as appropriate. Further detail is not considered necessary or justified.