PAPER A

 

                                                                                                             Purpose : For Decision

 

Committee :   REGULATORY APPEALS COMMITTEE

 

Date :              21 NOVEMBER 2003

 

Title :               TREE PRESERVATION ORDER TPO/2003/13 – 153 PARK ROAD, COWES

 

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES

 

PURPOSE/REASON

 

1.                  This report requires the Committee to determine whether or not to confirm TPO/2003/13.

 

DETAILS OF THE APPLICATION/ORDER

 

2.                  On 17th June 2003 a TPO was made on five individual trees and a group of trees at land at 153 Park Road, Cowes.

 

3.         A letter of objection was received from the landowner.

 

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

 

4.         The site comprises a small bungalow set in gardens of mature trees and dense shrub growth. The plot is a small one at the junction of two roads. The frontage onto Park Road particularly is of high public amenity, being a major route into Cowes town. Parklands Avenue, similarly, is an important road which is well used by road traffic and pedestrians, particularly by those going to and from the High School. The plot includes several mature trees which are very clearly visible from these roads, and from significant parts of the local landscape.

 

RELEVANT HISTORY

 

            Factual

 

5.                  On 2nd June 2003 a request was made by a Senior Planning Officer for a new TPO to be made on the site. The site was the subject of a planning application for residential development and the trees on site were considered to be potentially under threat.

 

6.                  The Senior Countryside Officer visited the site on 4th June 2003 and an assessment was made of the trees. The trees were considered to be of sufficient amenity value and a Tree Preservation Order was made to protect them. The grounds for making the TPO were that the trees were of high present and future amenity value and were visible from Park Road and Parklands Avenue, Cowes.

 

 

 

            Committee History

 

7.                  There has been no previous tree protection on this site.

                       

8.                  A planning application was made for the formation of parking area and vehicular access off Parklands Avenue, land rear of 153 Park Road, Cowes.  The application was approved subject to conditions on 1st November 2002. (TCP/24886/P/987/02).

 

9.                  A planning application was made for the demolition of bungalow; outline for two pairs of semi-detached houses; formation of vehicular access and parking spaces, 153 Park Road, Cowes. The application was refused on 2nd June 2003.  Reason 3 of the refusal states: “Proposal seeks to remove trees, which are a significant feature in the local landscape worthy of retention, which appear to be in a sound and healthy condition and therefore their proposed felling would result in undue loss and detriment to the visual amenities of the locality and would therefore be contrary to Policy C12 (Development Affecting Trees and Woodlands) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan”. (TCP/24886A/P/680/03).

 

10.             A planning application has been made for demolition of bungalow; outline for 4 houses; formation of vehicular access and parking spaces (revised scheme), 153 Park Road, Cowes. The application is pending. (TCP/24886B/P/1878/03).

 

COUNCIL POLICY

 

11.             When a TPO is made and an objection is outstanding when confirmation is required, it is normal practice to bring the matter before the Regulatory Appeals Committee for determination.

 

FORMAL CONSULTATION  

 

12.             Fire - No consultation applicable.

 

13.             Police - No consultation applicable.

 

14.             Relevant Council Departments - The Senior Planning Officer for the West Development Control Team was copied the relevant documents in connection with this matter.

 

15.             Parish and Town Councils – Cowes Town Council was copied the relevant documents in connection with this matter.

 

16.             Local Member – Cllr Mr John Effemey has been copied the relevant documents in connection with this matter.

 

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

 

17.             Objectors – A letter of objection was received from the landowner. This is shown at Appendix B.

 

18.             Supporters – No letters of support have been received.

 

19.             FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

20.             If the Local Authority refuses permission to do works, including felling a protected tree, compensation may be claimed against the Local Authority by the landowner. However, any claim must be:

 

·                     The natural or probable cause of the decision;

·                     Within the contemplation of the Local Authority at the time;

·                     Quantifiable in money terms;

·                     Not too remote.

 

21.             In addition, no claim will be valid:

 

·                     For less than Ł500.00;

·                     When made more than 12 months after the decision.

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

 

22.             The legislative framework is the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. As an objection has been received concerning the making of the Tree Preservation Order, the objection must be considered before the order is confirmed. In all other respects, the criteria for confirming a Tree Preservation Order are the same as for making it. Section 198 of the 1990 Act provides that “If it appears to the local planning authority that it is expedient in the interests of amenity to make provision for the protection of trees… in their area they may make... an order with respect to such trees… as may be specified in that order”.

 

23.             The committee deciding whether to make or in due course confirm such an order must balance the level of amenity of the trees against the level of interference, inconvenience or disruption to the landowner and anyone else affected by the trees.

 

24.             When assessing amenity D.E.T.R. Guidance states that it is usual for at least part of the trees to be visible from a public place such as a road or footpath but this is not essential. In addition:

 

·                     The benefit may be present or future;

·                    Trees may be worthy of preservation for their beauty or contribution to the landscape, eg hiding an eyesore;

·                     Scarcity may enhance a tree’s value.

 

25.             It is proper for the potential compensation to be considered by the committee as it reflects an element of the true cost of preserving a tree.

 

IMPLICATIONS UNDER THE CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998

 

26.             None applicable.

 

IMPLICATIONS UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

 

27.             If the recommendation is followed, it will directly impact on the rights of the landowner to use the land and therefore may interfere with their human rights under article 8 and article 1 of the first protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, it is the author’s view that this interference is proportionate as it aims to secure a legitimate objective which in this case is the preservation of trees of high present and future amenity to the general public.

 

OPTIONS

 

28.             OPTION 1. Confirm TPO/2003/13 without modifications.

 

29.             OPTION 2. Confirm TPO/2003/13 with modifications (recommended).

 

30.             OPTION 3. Do not confirm TPO/2003/13.

 

EVALUATION

 

31.             On 2nd July 2003 a letter of objection was received from the landowner. This is shown at Appendix B. The landowner’s valid grounds of objection are:

 

·                     The trees are within close proximity of his property 153 Park Road, Cowes and they limit the amount of daylight to it;

·                     Their root systems are “almost certainly damaging [his] property”;

·                     The group of trees (G1) “are of little amenity value”;

·                     T4 is “not accurately shown on the plan”;

·                     There is an extant planning consent on the land for the formation of parking area and vehicular access off Parklands Avenue, land rear of 153, Park Road, Cowes (TCP/24886/P/987/02). The landowner states, “The implementation of this consent would necessitate the removal of many of the trees in G1 and affect T4 and T5 severely”. 

 

32.             Following the receipt of the landowner’s letter of objection, the Senior Countryside Officer made a second visit to the site on 11th September 2003 and assessed the trees in the light of the objections.

 

33.             As a result of this second assessment of the trees, the following modifications to the TPO were proposed:

 

·                     T4 – Ash: delete.

            Reason: the tree is too close to nearby building;

·                     T5 – Ash: delete.

            Reason: the tree is too close to nearby building;

·                     G1 – 7x Ash, 2x Sycamore: delete.

Reason: planning consent exists for entrance which will affect this group. The approved plan that accompanies planning application TCP/24886/P/987/02 indicates the proposed vehicular access to cover most of G1.

 

34.             On 12th September 2003, a letter was sent to the objector detailing these proposed modifications. This is shown at Appendix C. The objector was invited to withdraw his objection and was given one calendar month to do so (until 12th October 2003). No letter of withdrawal was received during this time.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

35.             OPTION 2. Confirm TPO/2003/13 with modifications

 

APPENDICES ATTACHED

 

36.             Appendix A. Plan from TPO/2003/13.

 

37.             Appendix B. Letter of objection from landowner.

 

38.             Appendix C. Letter from Senior Countryside Officer detailing modifications to TPO.

 

BACKGROUND PAPERS

 

39.             ‘Tree Preservation Orders, a Guide to the Law and Good Practice’ DETR 1999.

 

Contact Point : Matthew Chatfield, (  823893

 

                                                           

A ASHCROFT

Head of Planning Services

 





REPORT AUTHOR’S CHECKLIST

TREE PRESERVATION ORDER TPO/2003/13 –

            153 PARK ROAD, COWES

Place Y for yes and N for no in the box below

·                    Can the decision be taken under delegated powers by an officer:

Y

·                    Has sufficient consultation taken place?

Y

·                    Is the consultation set out and evaluated in the report?

Y

·                    If the recommendation is not consistent with the outcome of consultation, are reasons given?

N/A

·                    Can an elected Member (or member of the public) with no previous knowledge of the report see sufficient background information (which can include reference to previous reports) to allow them to understand the issue?

Y

·                    Does the report identify what strategic or policy aim is achieved or contributed to by the decision?

N/A

·                    Are all reasonable options identified and appraised?

Y

·                    Is there additional risk management information which needs to be set out?

N

·                    Has specialist advice been taken for the following:

 

· Financial?

N

· Legal?

Y

· Other?

N

·                    Is the cost associated with the decision fully set out and the source of any funding identified?

N/A

·                    Have the following been considered and explained (where necessary) in the report:

 

·                    Human Rights issues?

Y

·                    Crime and Disorder issues?

N/A

·                    Is risk management properly addressed?

N/A

·                    Are all background papers listed and available?

Y

·                    Are all appendices listed and attached?

Y

·                    If the report is confidential or exempt is the reason for the confidentiality or exemption clearly identified?

N/A

·                    Are there clear recommendations with reasons?

Y

·                    Are the report author and contact officer clearly identified?

Y