Agenda item

To consider a referral made by Councillor Sandford in relation to the tree pollarding programme.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Councillor Sandford had requested that this item was placed on the agenda for this meeting.  Councillor Sandford advised that following discussions by the then Environment Select Panel and Cabinet a decision had been made a number of years ago to introduce a biennial pollarding programme which would be completed by late February each year so to avoid the bird nesting season.

Councillor Sandford made the following points:

• Pollarding had been undertaken during the spring this year and this was against the Council’s policy. 
• A limited amount of pollarding had been carried out in his ward without the Ward Councillors being consulted.
• It was accepted woodland management practice that trees could be pollarded once every 10 years.
• Once trees were pollarded they had to be continued.
• Trees would not become unsafe if pollarding was not done every two years.
• Was it economically sensible to undertake pollarding every two years and should funding be invested more in the maintenance of all trees?
• If work could not be completed by mid-March then it should be discontinued and resumed in the autumn.

In response the Commercial Services Director, made the following points:

• There were 503 trees which were pollarded in the City and with a small number of exceptions these were all lime trees.
• The trees were dealt with on a biannual basis in accordance with the previous decision.
• Pollarding ensured that the structure of the tree at the crown maintained its strength and integrity during high winds and did not shed young branches and secondary growth.
• Officers had planned to complete the pollarding programme by mid-March, however this year there had been considerable snowfall along with a sustained period of low temperatures between January and March.  This had meant that the tree work could not be undertaken without risking damage to the individual pollards.
• Working in those weather conditions would also have been extremely hazardous for the employees undertaking the work.  For this reason the pollarding could not be started in time and was later than normal.
• Prior to working on the trees all were inspected for signs of active/nesting birds.  During the work six trees had been identified as having active nests in them and these were left until the young pigeons which were nesting had fledged.
• The current balance of work was that two thirds of trees were dealt with in one year and one third in the second.  Action was now being taken to resolve this and to ensure that a more balanced programme was introduced which would give the contractor undertaking the work a more realistic opportunity to complete the work during weather which was suitable.
• With regards to consultation, the Trees and Woodlands Strategy stated that consultation would only be undertaken on major tree work.  As pollarding was a regular programmed element of work it did not meet the criteria for consultation.
• The Director could not dispute that pollarding had taken place out of season but to have undertaken the work would have put the trees and operatives at risk.
• The City had around 14,000 street trees which were regularly inspected by a full time and a part time officer.

Observations and questions were raised around the following areas:

• What was the frequency of the tree inspections?  There was no set frequency for inspections but risk assessments were undertaken on the trees.  Officers looked to inspect a minimum of every four years but some trees may be inspected more frequently.  Due to limited resources the priority was to those trees where there was likely to be damage.
• Tree maintenance in urban areas was a big issue and it was vital to get it right. Could officers let ward councillors know of the streets where trees were maintained regularly?
• Do trees have to be pollarded every two years?  Pollarding could be undertaken in longer periods but there would be more insurance risks especially during high winds.
• What evidence was there to show that there would be significant insurance risks with a longer regime?  There was more chance of branches being pulled out.  We had a duty of responsibility and would have to show that we had taken reasonable steps to maintain the trees if there were any claims.
• How much difference would there be in the growth of a tree if it was left for between two and three years?  Could we leave a sample of trees for 3-4 years to look at what happened to the growth of the trees and to see if a longer regime was reasonable?

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Cabinet Member for Culture, Recreation and Strategic Commissioning is recommended that consideration is given, during the Lot 3 process, to pollarded trees in one or two streets being left for 3-4 years to see if a longer maintenance regime was reasonable compared to the current two year programme.