Reply to THIS thread
Start a NEW Talkback Thread
Talkback Home

Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - GVI (2nd Aug 2013 - 09:54:33) GVI has noted there are continual and ongoing accusations regarding the removal of trees in the past and is concerned that this misrepresents the true situation, most recently at the parish council organised meeting on 9th July. GVI has always clearly and in great detail explained the background to the historic removal of any tree, all of which has been carried out legitimately, to anyone who has expressed an interest in the matter. Accordingly we would be grateful if all those who may be concerned about this matter please read through the following correspondence, and if you have any queries whatsoever, please contact the team at bohuntmanor@glhearn.com or on 0844 225 0003. Below includes: 1. Extracts from a letter from GL Hearn to EHDC on 16th March 2011 responding to enquiries about the trees 2. Extracts from a letter sent by GL Hearn on 18th October 2011 addressing the matter If you would like to see the complete correspondence and photos that demonstrate the ill health of the ash trees please do not hesitate to contact us. Alternatively all this information should also be available and can be viewed at the Parish Council offices, where we understand a file on all Bohunt Manor matters is maintained for public information. 1. LETTER TO EHDC 11 MARCH 2011 1. The trees at the western end of the group of Ash trees in question were felled pursuant to the planning permission 39366/011 during week commencing 7th February 2011. 2. A substantial Ash tree within the group G4 blew over in November 2010. In falling, this tree caused significant damage to the adjoining Ash trees. Further, because the entire root ball was up-ended, the loss of this tree seriously destabilised the neighbouring Ash trees. 3. Of greater relevance, however, was the general health of the remaining Ash trees within this group. Geriwell’s contractor, RCD Hoare (Selborne) Ltd considered these trees to be a serious safety hazard, partly for the reasons outlined above, but also because of the state of health of these trees, which were observed to contain many dead branches, and were correctly assessed as being seriously diseased and of imminent risk of falling or blowing over onto the busy adjoining Bohunt Manor driveway. This driveway serves five dwellings, plus the IML/ComputerShare offices at Bohunt Manor, with circa sixty employees. This business generates significant traffc, including late at night and in the early hours of the morning, when deliveries are made. In fact, it was IML/ComputerShare who first alerted Geriwell to the blown over Ash tree in November 2010. You will note from the photograph that luminous material was fixed to the treebutt where it projected into the driveway for the very reason that a vehicle travelling on the driveway at night could easily collide with such an unexpected hazard. 4. As soon as Geriwell were aware of this serious imminent risk to public safety, the company very responsibly instructed the immediate removal of any trees considered to be unsafe and a risk to the public. 5. We have reviewed the guidance set out in Tree Preservation Orders: a guide to the law and good practice. It is clear that the felling of the ash trees in G4 was undertaken in response to an emergency situation, as set out in paragraph 11.9. Examination of the ‘hollowed’ tree stumps following the felling confirms that the felled trees were clearly diseased, and that the emergency felling was fully justified. 6. It is apparent that the original assessment of the trees for the G4 TPO miscounted ‘tree stems’ for individual trees. However, this is understandable as the trees were largely covered in ivy, which would have made any detailed assessment very difficult. 7. An Ash tree at the far western end of G4, lying outside Geriwell’s ownership, was removed by others in autumn 2007. We understand that this tree was also diseased. 8. Geriwell Management SA planted a substantial native tree belt in 2006 which is now established. Additionally they have created a private nature reserve to the west of Bohunt Manor. These substantial improvements to the landscape of Bohunt Manor are considered to constitute adequate replacement ‘compensation’ for the legitimate selected felling of a small number of diseased trees on the Frontage Land. 2. LETTER IN RESPONSE TO ENQUIRY 18 OCTOBER 2011 I am writing to you in response to your call yesterday regarding the works to the hedgerow at Bohunt Manor, this being the hedgerow that runs along the public footpath leading from The Firs westwards towards Foley Manor. I have been advised that the works carried out involved trimming back the hedgerow where it encroached on the public footpath, and also cutting back branches, which in places entirely overhung the public footpath and were resting on a garage roof and fence of the adjacent property Silent Garden. The cuttings from this work were shredded and blown back into the hedgerow to allow them to form mulch. No part of the hedgerow whatsoever has been removed; it has simply been cut back to remove any obstruction to the public footpath in line with normal estate management practices. You may be aware that in the past we have been contacted by the Parish Council with requests that obstructions blocking this public footpath, such as fallen and overhanging branches, be removed, and on this occasion the owner, Green Village Investments Ltd, has simply been undertaking measures to ensure that the footpath remains passable to the public in accordance with its obligations in that regard. We fully appreciate your concerns about historic tree and hedgerow felling and removal, and accordingly I have prepared a detailed report for you below, which I would be very happy to discuss further, and indeed if you would like to meet either myself or our Arboricultural Consultants, CBA Trees (Winchester), to discuss this further, then we would be delighted to do so. RE: History of Tree/Vegetation Clearance on the Frontage Land, Bohunt Manor, Liphook I am also writing to you directly in response to the tree / hedgerow felling issues... The background to the various works that have taken place in the recent past is as follows: Tree and hedgerow removal opposite Station Road junction, 2006 The removal of the Station Road hedgerow was carried out by Daybright Projects Ltd, pursuant to its Planning Permission F.39366/003/FUL for the conversion of Daybright’s property at Bohunt Manor called the \'Stone Barn\'. - A site line requirement had been negotiated between the local Highways Officer, Graham Oakley and Daybright’s agent, Jeremy Higgins of Pro-Vision Planning and Design (Winchester Office). - Details of Daybright\'s site line and landscaping proposals should be available at EHDC offices ref. DRG No. 639/P12 Rev. A Date July 2006. - Daybright Projects Ltd had negotiated a simultaneous purchase of its property from the WWF, known as a \'back-to-back\' purchase, and rights were reserved in Daybright’s purchase contract to enable it to implement site lines at the entrance as required pursuant to its planning consent. - Daybright Projects Ltd was, and is, completely independent of any past or current owners of other land parcels at Bohunt Manor. Tree and hedgerow removal pursuant to the Medical Centre approval, 2010 Adele Poulton, Tree Officer at EHDC, was advised in an email dated 06/10/2010 that trees were to be removed pursuant to the following planning consents: - EHDC ref 39366/015/TPO – authorised felling of a diseased large Oak tree on the medical centre site; and - EHDC ref: 39366/011 – a limited number of trees were removed along the Portsmouth Road frontage (to enable sight lines for the approved new roundabout at the Station Road junction) and a few trees were also removed along the existing driveway to Bohunt Manor (to enable the spur road to the approved Football Pitches). All this work was undertaken pursuant to planning consent and according to the approved plans for the permitted scheme for the sports pitches and community allotments. While undertaking these works, some additional trees adjacent to the drive were identified as being diseased and dangerous and these were removed under emergency procedures due to concerns over public safety. I attach the relevant correspondence to EHDC which provides further explanation. Recent hedgerow trimming on public footpath between The Firs and the 5 acre football field I have set out above the position on this most recent work. I hope the explanation above and factual enclosures go some way to allaying your concerns over management of the site following changes in ownership since 2005. I hope you will also recognise that the owners of the Bohunt Manor Frontage Land have undertaken substantial new tree planting over this period, which is now maturing and will leave a significant and enduring legacy. As stated at our meeting last week, GVI Ltd. has undertaken to give prior notice in relation to any future vegetation clearance or other works on the Bohunt Manor Frontage Land and I hope that this will prevent further concern about works that we have to undertake to manage the site appropriately and in the interests of the community.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - liz (2nd Aug 2013 - 11:53:30) I'm sure you had every box ticked but the removal of the hedgerow opposite Station Road has created a hideous eyesore. Then there is the preparation for the proposed roundabout which even the Highways Authority are not sure will be built. Not what I would call 'Green'.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - H (2nd Aug 2013 - 13:55:12) If you have done nothing wrong why did the enforcement team at EHDC get involved?

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Digger (5th Aug 2013 - 20:00:25) Dear Liz This Bohunt topic is truly fascinating. I have now read all the correspondence on GL Hearn\'s website, and also Parish Minutes and what a saga this is ! I would urge everyone interested in this subject to check out all the background information as I have done. You say that the removal of the hedgerow has created a \'hideous eyesore\' I am not sure that I agree with you. I would say that it has opened up an important vista at the end of Station Road - this view was not available prior to the hedge being removed - just please consider this point of view for say 20 seconds or so. I do however agree (if that is what you are saying) that the groundworks done in preparation for the roundabout at this junction are an eyesore. Is it not time that the roundabout was completed so that the doctors surgery can finally be built. We definitely do need this surgery - I asked my GP about this two weeks ago and he confirmed as much, but obviously money, or the shortage of money is the issue, as always. Nevertheless my GP has told me that their practice would welcome bigger premises and that it was definitely needed - why not ask your GP the same question if you live in the village ? Please also let us know exactly what your GP tells you. I have to, however, take you to task with regards to your statement that \'even the Highways Authority are not sure will be built\' vis-a-vis the roundabout. How do you know this ? Who told you this ? Where is the evidence........please? Is this just supposition....I wonder. Please explain. In researching this matter, I note that the roundabout was supported unanimously by our elected parish council, and then subsequently approved at the EHDC planning committee. This is democracy at work. What is your gripe ? What do you mean by \'GREEN\' - you mentioned it, so please enlighten us with your definition of what is Green...thank you I ask this question of you, as you have made the curious statement \' Not what I would call Green\' Very odd and you should now explain what you mean by Green (but please do not forget the democracy bit) Dear H Perhaps you could research exactly why the Enforcement Team \'got involved\' I guess that you are trying to insinuate something, but I may be incorrect and doing you some sort of disservice. Could please fully research this topic and report back here in full, including a precis of the EHDC Enforcement Teams conclusions etc etc. Many thanks PS I suggest that before anyone replies or contributes to this thread, he or she carefully reads all the background information , which I note is apparently available at the parish council offices. Thanks again.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - A. Ryan (5th Aug 2013 - 21:07:09) Have read all the documentation and would have to agree with you. I was totally opposed to this development, but so much of this has been allowed by the council, and I tend to think that this may be the devil you know. I am very interested to find out why this developer causes so much angst among the parish Councillors as to other developers. What if any have they put by for Liphook.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - bdavies (6th Aug 2013 - 09:13:41) well... Lovely lady leaves wonderful legacy to WWF for the purposes of nature reserve or something similar for the community to benefit from. Nasty WWF sells legacy to scheming, ambitious developer. Scheming, ambitious developer puts in motion a plan to build houses (supported by fictitious oilman). Tries a number of hillarious and hopefully expensive schemes to get this going, most notably to have a Gospel Hall built for some obscure religious sect - possible change of use scam but of course that will remain a delighful mystery (tee hee). Then the vague promises of something for Liphook, but not really sure what and under what terms, so long as houses are built and scheming developer fills his boots. What's not to like? It's a wonderful comedy! At least the others are transparent- they are scheming and ambitous but they have had planning permission granted without pretending to be philanthropists.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - liz (6th Aug 2013 - 09:35:57) Digger I have read all the planning applications and related correspondence both on this website and elsewhere as far as possible over several years. Thanks for catching up. I think you are being deliberately pedantic but at least you agree that the land opposite the end of Station Road is now a hideous eyesore. I dare to make the assumption that the hedgerow wasn't removed to open up the view. More like fait accompli. I live in Liphook and have done so for a long time but my GP is in Grayshott. I have, for the record, no objection to the doctor's surgery. As for the information from the Highways Authority I have that information through professional contacts and if you don't believe me that's up to you. Admittedly it was a few months ago. Why don't you give them a call yourself and ask the status of the roundabout? As for 'green' - removal of ancient hedgerow is not 'green' in anybody's book - ecologists are fighting to preserve them. Finally, the reason so many people are against this development is that it is in the newly designated South Downs National Park, after people campaigned for the area to be included, an unspoiled area of Liphook with, as you say yourself, 'important views'. As for democracy - the PC and EHDC approved the roundabout, doctors surgery and football pitch - but not the associated 175+ houses and school. You seem to think 'green' is at odds with 'democracy' which seems a bit odd. - Unless of course you were a developer who kept coming up against the green lobby I suppose.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - ellie (6th Aug 2013 - 11:03:52) Digger I do not think you can have lived in Liphook very long. In planning terms, the burden of proof is on the applicant eg can they give enough good reasons that all existing planning criteria should be overturned? if not the development should be refused. The onus is not on the local community to provide legal proof why they do not want development, regardless of what any local estate agents may say! The onus is on those who are promoting this, to PROVE the legality of development. At the moment Digger the pound signs in front of some people's eyes are cynically causing objectors to run around in circles chasing their tails proving to you why they do not want to develop in the National Park. Cheap tricks. It works only on the Liphook Herald!

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Digger (6th Aug 2013 - 12:44:14) Dear Liz Thank you for for entry and much of what you say has the ring of truth about it. Could you please tell me what makes a hedgerow ancient ? (A very emotive word is ancient) By this I mean when is a hedgerow considered ancient. For instance is it 30 years old, 55 years old, 86 years old 102 years old, or 150 years plus old or anywhere in between. How old was the hedgerow in question ? The prefix ancient must surely categorise the status/age of the hedgerow in some recognisable way which would be accepted by the relevant experts in this particular field. I have just driven past, checked out what is left of the hedgerow and I have my own opinion, but I am not an expert, but please lets hear your opinion and then perhaps we could find someone on here who is an expert in tree matters who could then give their version of what constitutes ancient in arboricultural/hedgerow terms. AGREED? Please don't duck my question as I am sure that you have a clear idea of the age of the hedgerow in question as you have stated that it is ancient - we could agree a bit of wriggle room with a margin of say 10 years and.....ahem what is the definition of green please (you have told us what is not, but I ask you to explain what is) Many thanks

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - liz (6th Aug 2013 - 13:34:14) An ancient or species rich hedgerow is one in existence before the Enclosures Act, planted mainly between 1720 and 1840. After this it tends to be single species. Generally at least five native species per 30m. The hedgerow can be checked on old maps - you will get no idea from driving past and you will certainly have no idea now from what is left. Green is a colour between blue and yellow.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Digger (6th Aug 2013 - 15:12:56) Dear Liz Thank you for the history lesson, but I am afraid to say that you have not answered my question. I too could easily Google the Enclosures Act but this, whilst interesting, does not answer my query. You have in fact ducked the question entirely, which I pointed out you should not do. Once again..... how old was the hedgerow that was removed ? To assist you and to give you a clue, I suggested that you inspect the trees/hedgerow species that were untouched ie the trees that remain in situ further along the Portsmouth Road in the direction of the Links. How old would you say they were ? also.... What constitutes an ancient hedgerow or, in other words, when is a hedgerow considered ancient. Is it the trees/hedgerow species themselves, for instance or is it the boundary, as such (which is still in situ I noticed) with the Portsmouth Road being exactly where it always has been. If it is the trees then how old do you think they are (the ones remaining, that is, and which must be representative of the ones removed) Your definition of GREEN is fatuous to say the least, and it concerns me (though please forgive if I am incorrect) that you may not be able to define Green as in the Green Movement, or what the ideals of the Green Movement are. Perhaps go back to Google ? Maybe you just cannot be bothered ? Maybe you are bored with all this....I don\'t blame you frankly. However if you must jump on the GREEN bandwagon (and I am certainly passenger thereon) then you should explain yourself. Remember you are the one that flagged up the Green label in the first instance - possibly to hijack the moral high ground and as a way of eliciting an unquestionable self righteous position. If you must adopt the Green standard, please do us the courtesy of explaining what it is to be Green. I look forward to seeing your report in full on this thread on Talkback. Thank you in advance

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - liz (6th Aug 2013 - 16:10:32) Looking at the hedge near the Links won't help either as that has been radically thinned. As I said, fait accompli. As for 'Green' - the answer was correct, verifiable and in the pedantic tone that you seem to prefer - I thought you'd like it!

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Digger (6th Aug 2013 - 16:17:37) Liz You have just lost this round. But thank you and God Bless

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - A. Ryan (6th Aug 2013 - 17:48:17) Having looked up on Google maps at the Portsmouth road I would have to say there does not appear to be a hedge there. There is a lot of plant growth, most of which looks more like shrub type, and grasses. Possible brambles? There even seems to be a lone young sycamore amongst it all. Although nice and rural I would not class any of it as ancient. I lived directly opposite there in the 1970\'s and, I may be wrong,but I thought that there was a hedge and that it was taller. I will have to go through old photos and see if I took any pictures of it. I think the area that seems to have been mapped out for all this has mostly been used for agriculture, which really is not a problem. Houses would then be built adjoining The Firs, which would not be out of keeping. If anything were to encroach further back towards the more wooded areas then this certainly would be wrong. At least no one is starting to think of developing further out of Liphook on the Midhurst Road, as that would be sacrilege. I would be interested to know some of those opposing this development, where they live because we have had so many developments some people must be living in these houses. Lets face it Sainsburys was approved and we all have to live with that eyesore, and it\'s huge lorries driving through the village. Nothing can be worse than that!

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Peter Richardson (6th Aug 2013 - 19:51:30) This is a quote from Ellie's posting dated 6 August "In planning terms, the burden of proof is on the applicant eg can they give enough good reasons that all existing planning criteria should be overturned? if not the development should be refused. The onus is not on the local community to provide legal proof why they do not want development," If what she says is fact why bother with an Action Group. She also seems to have down on estate agents in general and The Herald in particular. If her gripe with estate agents is that they want more houses built in Liphook to make money, what else does anyone go to work for if not to make money. If her gripe against The Herald is because of Gabrielle Pike's report on the public meeting then I really don't know what she is talking about. I was at that meeting and subsequently read the report. It was well written and accurate giving the facts and highlighting that there were a great number of protestors present who voiced their concerns.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Paul Robinson (6th Aug 2013 - 20:12:47) Oh Peter, such a shame that you did not make yourself known at the public meeting, especially as you would have been one of the 'dozens' that Gabrielle Pike said were in attendance. So, dozens . . . lets say four, no five dozen i.e. 60. According to Ferris Cowper, who chaired the meeting, there were at least 240 people who attended. What he could not see, but I could, was at least thirty more who were in the atrium and could not get in. Paul Robinson

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - liz (7th Aug 2013 - 08:37:23) Digger You can't lose a round if you're are not competing. I have made what I believe to be valid comments in this forum, if you are not convinced that is of no consequence. However I think you perhaps have a lot to lose. Please see Lhagman's post on the other Bohunt thread!

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - mary (7th Aug 2013 - 09:00:51) Dear Paul, Yes I too was there at that parish council orchestrated meeting to try form my own views. I must say that I and others with me felt quite intimidated by the anger of the few who dominated the event, so I for one didn’t bother to make myself known and maybe that is how Peter felt too?

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - dawn (7th Aug 2013 - 13:15:41) few who dominated the event? The microphone was passed to one person after another all night long!? I did not see any person have the microphone to ask questions more than once. Which FEW do you propose were dominating?

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Valerie (7th Aug 2013 - 17:17:37) I also was at the meeting and although I did not find the people there intimidating, I felt that the most voiciferous had already made up their minds in that they were against the development. As often happens when people feel very strongly about something, they do not want to hear the other side of the argument and so it proved at this meeting. However, this was rather annoying for the people who did want to hear the other side of the argument. A closed mind is, by definition, never receptive. I think A Ryan makes an interesting point when he says under the Thread "Call for Action - The Bohunt Manor Estate" on 7 August and I quote” And yes I do agree that a large part of the Bohunt land should not be touched, but I hardly see that the area marked out for development is "special". It does rather beg the question as to whether the Bohunt Manor land should have been included in the SDNP. I drove over The Downs on Saturday and the vista was truly stunning. That is a National Park and with the best will in the world Liphook cannot be classed as a rural village any more and should it have been included in SDNP in the first place. With hindsight, possibly not as it means that anything outside it gets dumped on. It certainly seems to make more and more sense to have houses on the edge of Bohunt Manor land near the village, retaining the bulk of the land as a nature reserve, allotments etc, within walking distance of schools and shops than have more development in Longmoor Road further out of the village, thereby extending “the sprawl” of houses. The Editor stressed that more traffic would be generated from houses built on Bohunt Manor Land. This is true but applies to any new housing development and surely to build houses within walking distance of shops and schools will lessen the traffic. Liphook has to accept more development somewhere so I agree with the Threadusers who say, “Let’s get us much for Liphook from the developers as we can”.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - Russ Ellis (7th Aug 2013 - 23:35:28) What I cannot understand is that if a piece of land is ear marked for development why is that not used first before looking at other areas. I have lived in Liphook most of my life and for as long as I can remember we have all know that the fields on Lowsley were going to be built on. Having read some of this debate I wonder if you actually know how big this piece of land is. It reaches from the bend on Longmoor road to the Headley Road and on the inside of the A3 bypass. When they built the first stage which is The new part of The Avenue, Yeomens Drive, Hurst Close and Lark Rise the contractors left access to the fields behind for the next stage. Hence if you look the roads just ends. The Headley Road entrance known as Pope’s Field, would make an ideal place for a football pitch and if a road was put in between both the Headley Road and Longmoor Road it could be accessed by all routes. Also this road would make an access for any new developments and of course it would reduce traffic entering the square to access the A3 . As for saying it is along way out of the village I think people who live here would disagree. The 3 schools are within easy walking distance so no cars have to be used. From this side we do not have to go across the square to get to the A3 and from there you can get to all the towns Portsmouth Petersfield, Bordon, Farnham, Basingstoke, Haslemere, Guildford and of course London. These places are where the majority of traffic wants to get to especially as this is where are hospitals are. We also have the post office and a very good Co-op this side and a very easy walk to the square. The only time we need to cross is to get to the Station, Station shops, Doctors and of course Sainsbury’s.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - liz (8th Aug 2013 - 08:36:28) If Valerie has a low opinion of Bohunt and Liphook as a village then so be it, but not all of us would agree. You just have to look at an aerial view of Liphook to see that it is still rural. A huge dose of common sense and perspective from Russ in my view.

Re: Tree Matters at Bohunt Manor - valerie (9th Aug 2013 - 11:17:38) Liz I did not say that I have a low opinion of Bohunt and Liphook as a village in my posting, nor do I think it. Please do not distort and misquote what I am saying. I said that I did not consider Liphook to be a rural village and having just returned from a village in Herefordshire, I stand by this. If you think differently, then so be it.

Reply to THIS thread
Talkback Home