Latest news with #localissues
The Sun
4 days ago
- General
- The Sun
Huge ‘Jack & the Beanstalk' tree towers over our homes – it's grotesque & irresponsible… but council won't chop it down
A GIANT "Jack and the beanstalk" tree is ruining locals' lives - but the council won't chop it down. Residents in Winchester, Hants, slammed the "grotesquely irresponsible" and "ludicrous" 45 foot high oak. 9 9 9 They say the tree was planted around 50 years ago by a previous homeowner on Canon Street who just "wanted something to do". But now it has branched into an "out of proportion" eyesore which overshadows the gardens of nearby properties - where the average house price is more than £600,000. However, the council have refused to cut it down and placed it under a protection order. The authorities said residents from a neighbouring street "appreciated" the tree. The decision has sparked outrage among locals who are actually dealing with the daily repercussions of such an overwhelming tree. Orla Williams, 40, moved into her terraced Grade II Listed home with her partner around two years ago. The doctor said after moving in, several residents went to her about the oak. She explained: "They were concerned that it is getting very large and that it could cause damage to their properties and potentially harm to people if it gets any larger, so they wanted it to be taken down. "We applied to the council to have it removed and someone came to look at it. "[The tree officer] said that they want to put a tree protection order on it." The mum-of-two also told how an "awful lot of detritus" falls from the tree in autumn and winter. She added: "We appreciate that the tree is beautiful but it's the wrong tree in the wrong place. "It is quite sad to remove something like that but it is only going to get bigger and potentially cause damage to lots of properties which is the main concern. "The council said they were concerned about removing it because it's one of the only trees in the area. 9 9 9 "All of the local residents seem to be of the opinion that unfortunately, it's the wrong tree in the wrong place." According to a council report, the tree officer visited Orla after receiving notice from the couple that it was due to be felled. But he found the tree met the criteria for a provisional protection order, which was issued in February of this year. A Winchester County Council meeting will take place next week to decide whether the tree status will change or not. There are nine residents in total who have objected to the order. Mark Pocock, a retired resident living on Canon Street, slammed the council's decision to protect the tree as "ludicrous". He said: 'As trees grow older they become more brittle. "If it were to fall and damage properties or persons, I would say the responsibility would be entirely with the council – not the owners of those properties. "I think putting a tree protection order on is grotesquely irresponsible of the council. 'It could be a danger to property and life." Nick Goff, 80, said he fears if the tree continues to grow, the roots underneath will damage a medieval wall in his garden, which was built in the Tudor era. The retired British Airways pilot said: "The issue is that in 10 years time, that will be double the height and double the width. 'It put on six feet last year it it's going to put on another six feet this year." He commissioned an independent report from a tree consultancy business. The report stated while the tree, which is still a "teenager" is in "good physiological condition". But the officer also found it is "a large sized tree in a very small area" and so the tree protection order is "unjustified". The report also stated "the possibility of longer term damage to the retaining walls and footings of the adjacent properties as entirely foreseeable". "Some guy planted this as something to do 40 years ago," Mr Goff continued "Now, we have got Jack and the Beanstalk. "It's not a historic tree – it's a silly mistake." However, the council report issued ahead of next week's meeting claimed these concerns were "speculative" and the tree "contributes meaningfully to local biodiversity and visual amenity". It added: "It is also the last significant tree in an area of land between Canon Street and St Swithun's Street, enhancing the character of the conservation area." Retired resident Graham Rule, 62, blasted the decision as "irresponsible". He said: "We all love trees but that shouldn't be there. "The people who want the protection order, they don't live here – its totally irresponsible." Winchester County Council was contacted for comment. 9 9 9
Telegraph
27-05-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
Campsite's smoky fire pits make our lives ‘misery', claim villagers
The homeowner added that Harry's Field is 'detested' by many locals, who 'dread the campsite opening as it makes their lives a misery'. He said: 'I believe that three residents have sold up and moved away largely because this campsite had made their lives intolerable. Noise, shouting, loud music, excessive smoke and anti-social behaviour being the main causes.' Earlier this month, the residents won a planning battle to stop the site increasing the number of days it is allowed to open from 28 to 52 yearly. The campsite rents out fire pits to guests, costing £15 for one night, £20 for two nights, £25 for three nights, and £30 for four nights. Campers are provided with one load of kiln-dried wood, but are charged £8 a bucket afterwards. Concerns for health and home Helen Taylor, a vet, lives right next to Harry's Field and says she has been 'plagued' by problems caused by the site, which was once voted in the Top 40 UK campsites. She said open fires, as well as gas and charcoal barbecues are used by campers daily. Dr Taylor added: 'Residents have suffered significant worsening of their asthmatic symptoms as a result of this smoke pollution.' Another villager, who lives in a thatched cottage, raised concerns for her health and home in her objection to the planning application made to the New Forest Park Authority. She said she has to keep her windows shut in the summer, adding: 'We have smelt accelerant being used to light fire pits and we can see the flames through the hedge. 'My insurance company won't allow me to have any type of open fire in my garden as my property has a thatched roof, and yet I can watch ash and burning debris being blown towards my property when the wind is in my direction.' 'Many neighbours support our campsite' A spokesman for the campsite said: 'Sadly, these are totally unsubstantiated, unevidenced and hysterical claims. Our closest neighbour to the campsite has a thatched roof and supports our application (there are no other thatched roofs within close proximity of the site at all). Many in the village also support our small and well-run campsite. 'Initially, the head of the parish council told us they could not foresee any issues as any complaints had been whipped up during the Covid years … We have had no complaints from neighbours, or from the parish council or from any environmental body.' Ms Sheriff, whose celebrity clients include the Princess of Wales, said the business would not be able to operate if what the neighbours complained of was true. The 60-year-old added: 'The main fact is nobody wants a quiet campsite more than we do. 'There is no way we would be able to run if what [neighbours] were saying is true. 'We were asked and encouraged to do this by the director of the national park planning team. 'This has been stormed up by a few people who have really got an axe to grind.'
