Agenda item

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: To confirm the TPO without modification. 

60.50        This was in respect of the confirmation of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO).  The Planning Committee had visited the site on Friday 11 February 2022.

60.51        The Tree Officer advised that the order related to TPO 410 which was made in October 2021 with the purpose of protecting a young woodland.  The TPO had been made in response to a planning application being received for residential development and confirming the TPO would help to ensure that the trees remained protected as a material consideration throughout the planning process.  The woodland trees had public amenity, landscape and wildlife value which would only increase as they matured.  It was therefore recommended that the TPO be confirmed without modification.

60.52        The Vice-Chair in the chair invited the landowner’s representative, speaking in objection, to address the Committee.  The landowner’s representative indicated that the purpose of the TPO regime was to ensure that trees of substantial age and of the greatest quality of specimen were protected.  The effective and proper use of TPOs had served the borough well in the past and many of its finest trees – ones that genuinely contributed to the environment – had been duly safeguarded; however, TPOs were not intended to be used superficially.  As set out within the Committee report, the specimens in question were young, juvenile species that had been planted within the last five years or so.  They had been planted by a private landowner but had not since been managed and there was no mechanism for their long-term management.  Members would be aware that Twyning was under development pressure and the site was subject to a development proposal.  The Committee report essentially confirmed that the TPO had been made for that reason and that most of the trees lacked any individual merit; however, the decision to confirm a TPO was completely separate from any planning application and, ultimately, if the impact of the development on local amenity value was so great, it was within the Council’s gift to refuse permission, or impose measures for protection, at that point regardless of whether a TPO was in place or not.  The question that should be asked was whether each of the trees were really worthy of a TPO.  The landowner’s appointed arborist, who was a chartered arboriculturist and a professional member of the Arboricultural Association, had provided a detailed assessment and concluded that the majority of trees were simply not good enough for TPO status; many of the trees were Ash which were unlikely to have a long-term existence in any event due to Ash dieback.  The landowner’s representative asked Members to consider whether a TPO was really necessary – a felling licence would be required from the Forestry Commission for any significant amount of removal or clearance in any event; whether it would be reasonable for the Council to refuse a future TPO application to fell some of these low quality specimens and if that could be justified to the Planning Inspectorate; and whether consideration had been given to what would happen if the development did not occur in terms of management ramifications that would require repeated TPO works applications which the Council did not have resources for.  To confirm a TPO on these trees would, in his opinion, undermine the TPO assessment process and devalue trees in the borough that were genuinely worthy of protection.  Therefore, he respectfully suggested that the TPO not be confirmed and the Council seek alternative means to ensure the future of the trees.

60.53        The Vice-Chair in the chair invited a local Ward Member to address the Committee.  The local Ward Member indicated that he wished to support the Officer recommendation to confirm the TPO without modification.  He felt the Committee report had adequately dealt with the issues that had been raised by the landowner’s agent and that there was little merit in the arguments put forward.  He had the opportunity to visit the site twice last year, once in summer and again in autumn, and he had been quite staggered at such a beautiful asset existing on the doorstep of the village and being so accessible to the local community.  He had walked around the site and been able to see a number of well-worn paths crossing the woodland so it was evident it was well-used by walkers – during his visits he had bumped into a number of local residents who had told him how much they valued the woodland for recreational purposes.  In his opinion, it was rare to come across a woodland at this stage of development and he believed it could act as a showcase to others.  The wood was developing well and was a credit to the person who had the vision to create it 10 years earlier.  Trees took time to develop their full potential and impact on biodiversity; this TPO would give the woodland that opportunity and in another 10 years it would be even more amazing so he hoped the Committee would support the application.

60.54        The Vice-Chair in the chair indicated that the Officer recommendation was to confirm the TPO without modification and he sought a motion from the floor.  It was proposed and seconded that the TPO be confirmed without modification in accordance with the Officer recommendation.  The proposer of the motion felt there was very little to add to what the local Ward Member had said other than to emphasise the importance of the site for the residents of Twyning.  In his view it would be sacrilege not to protect the trees for now and generations to come and he was sure Members that had been on the Planning Committee site visit would echo these sentiments.  A Member noted it was not often the Planning Committee was asked to determine something other than housing and Members had the opportunity to protect this woodland for future generations.  He reiterated that trees took years to mature and those who had visited the site had witnessed the birth of a woodland which would give so much enjoyment to people from all walks of life.  He was very happy to support the proposal on that basis.  Another Member echoed these views and felt it was a brilliant idea and something he would have liked to have seen in relation to Agenda Item 5b, as discussed earlier in the meeting.

60.55        Upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED          That the TPO be CONFIRMED WITHOUT MODIFICATION in accordance with the Officer recommendation.