Regulatory Appeals Committee Minutes

5. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interests received at this stage.

6. REPORTS OF STRATEGIC DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT SERVICES

(a) St Anne’s, Augusta Road, Ryde – Tree Preservation Order No 26, 2002

Members were reminded that this case had been presented to the meeting of the Committee, on 11 April 2003, where it had been deferred to enable a site visit to be undertaken. The report of the Strategic Director of Environment Services set out the history and the current situation with regard to the proposal to confirm the above Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The trees concerned were 2 common limes and a holm oak. The limes were currently protected by TPO1952/1 and the holm oak by the Ryde Conservation Area. In order to clarify and extend the protection afforded by this TPO, a further, more specific one was required. An additional letter dated 16 May 2003 from Mr J Kerr, the landowner, was circulated to members of the Committee together with a copy of a civil engineers report on the lime tree T2.

The grounds for making the Order were that ‘the trees were of very high present and future amenity value and were visible from Augusta Road, which was a private road to which the public have access, from Ryde Pier, and from the sea including Ryde ferry.’ Members noted the correspondence received from the landowner and his solicitor, which set out a number of objections and highlighted the difficulties faced by the owner in rebuilding an existing boundary wall which, in his opinion had become dangerous and impossible to do so without the two limes being removed. The correspondence also referred to a covenant over any tree growing on the property and the Senior Countryside officer gave his views on the implications of this. The owners’ solicitor had appealed to GOSE against the decision to refuse consent to remove the two lime trees. However, this had been deferred pending the outcome of the days meeting.

The landowner and his solicitor were present and outlined their case. The landowner indicated that he would be prepared to deviate the line of the wall to accommodate lime tree T1.

The Committee, after having adjourned to private session reconvened in public in order to clarify as to whether the Holm Oak was a natural species and whether the tree was an environmental asset. The Committee then re-adjourned to private session.

Upon reconvening in public it was indicated that the Committee, having considered the evidence of the landowner and the Senior Countryside Officer, felt that the wall was a fine specimen and were pleased to see it being sympathetically rebuilt. The removal of T2 and its replacement of the same type was a compromise, which balanced the landowners’ ability to use the land and secured the future amenity of the area.

Trees T1 and T3 were very important trees and were visible from outside of the property. The Committee were minded that they considerably enhanced the amenity of the local area and that this outweighed the interference and inconvenience to the landowner.

RESOLVED :

THAT Tree Preservation Order No 26, 2002 be confirmed with the following modifications:

Consent is granted to remove tree T2, on the condition that a tree of the same species was planted on the premises, in a location to be agreed by the Senior Countryside Officer.

(b) Tree Preservation Order at ‘Timber’, Undercliff Drive: The Report of the Local Government Ombudsman

On 19 March 2003, the Local Government Ombudsman had issued their report into complaint No 01/B/15370 against the Isle of Wight Council. The Local Government Ombudsman had found that injustice had been caused by maladministration, on the part of the Council, in respect of Tree Preservation Orders at ‘Timber’, Undercliff Drive, St Lawrence, Ventnor.

The Council had considered the report and taken action on all the points identified. The complaint referred to a particular period in 2001 and, since that time, there had been very significant changes in the way the Council managed all its Tree Preservation Orders and enforcement procedures. The Senior Countryside Officer expressed his confidence that adequate procedures and protocol were now in place to prevent any similar occurrence ever happening in the future.

RESOLVED :

THAT the response to the report of the Ombudsman, regarding the Tree Preservation Order at ‘Timber’, Undercliff Drive, St Lawrence, Ventnor, be ratified.

It was advised that an initial report regarding the application to register a Village Green at the fields or the Old Allotment, Whippingham had been presented to the Committee on 11 April 2003. As additional information had been received, subsequent to the agenda for that meeting being circulated, the item had been deferred without any discussion thereon.

The application to register the parcel of land south east of Osborne Works, Whippingham Road, East Cowes was made under Section 13, of the Commons Registration Act 1985 and the Commons Registration New Land Regulations 1969. The application had been advertised and the consultation procedure, required by the 1965 Act, had now been completed. A substantial amount of conflicting evidence had been submitted in support of the application and from the landowner, GKN Aerospace Services Ltd, in objection.

Members noted that in contested or difficult cases, it was good practice for the registration authority to appoint an independent inspector, usually experienced counsel, to hold a public inquiry. The inspector would hear from all parties and thoroughly test all the evidence presented, reporting their recommendations back to the registration authority. The Council, as the registration authority, was not bound to accept the inspector’s recommendations and still retained the duty to determine the issue in due course.

The applicant and the objectors’ representative were present and expressed their agreement for the matter to go before an independent inspector.

The Committee indicated that, in order to properly investigate the issues and due to the conflicting nature of the evidence presented, which would require the statement makers to be invited to answer questions on their evidence it was considered appropriate for an independent inspector, with specialist knowledge of this area of the law, to be appointed. The investigation could take at least 3 days to thoroughly test the evidence presented and an independent inspector would be better able to issue directions and resolve any dispute as to the process and admissibility of evidence. .

RESOLVED :

THAT an independent inspector be appointed to consider the evidence at a non-statutory public inquiry and to make a recommendation to a future meeting of the Regulatory Appeals Committee.

CHAIRMAN

Mr R C Richards (Chairman), Mrs T M Butchers, Mr A J Mundy