Issue - meetings

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option 1: Further adjust the proposed design layout by siting the “platform” further into the square and reducing the area of the “carpet” at the eastern end

Works can go ahead

Keeps all existing trees in the square as per the previous Cabinet decision.

A compromised layout that restricts space for a better market layout and constrains suitability for staging events

Option 2: Authorise removal of tree D and implement the design improvements planned

Works can go ahead to improve the central part of the square consistent with the design presented to Cabinet in December 2009.

Therefore gives significant improvements and potentials for multiple and flexible use of the square, for seating and passive recreation and for the market and staging events.

Loss of tree D.

Removal of the single tree makes the number of trees on the north and south sides of the square unbalanced and asymmetrical.

Option 3: Authorise removal of both tree D and tree H

As for option 2 but removal of tree H at the same time will also -

optimise the effectiveness of the new lighting scheme in this corner of the square  that presently attracts anti-social activity;

open up the opportunity for street café use in this corner of the Square as per the Gillespie’s design ambition

reveal Anchor Lane better

mean there are three trees at  both sides of the Square

Loss of trees D and H

Option 4: Undertake a more fundamental review

None

The project now proposed is devised after extensive consultations and review will unravel that consensus achieved to date.

Would make abortive much of the time and cost inputs to date.

Would involve significant time delay and new costs in design and additional consultation for which there is no financing.