Agenda and minutes

Regulatory & Appeals Committee - Monday, 21st January, 2019 10.00 am

Venue: Council Chamber - FH. View directions

Contact: Howard Bassett  Email: comsec@teignbridge.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 53 KB

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting held on 26 November 2018 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

 

2.

Declarations of Interest.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

 

3.

Tree Preservation Order 2018 - E2/50/20 pdf icon PDF 299 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a request to confirm the provisional Tree Preservation Order (TPO) which was served on 27 September 2018 and would cease on 22 February 2019.

 

The District of Teignbridge (St Boniface) Tree Preservation Order 2018 protected an area of trees located within the area of Land north of St Boniface and as shown on a plan that forms part of the Order.

 

The Committee heard from the Council’s Arboricultural Officer who gave his reasons why the Committee should confirm the Order. He made the following points:-

 

·         while individually the trees were of moderate quality, collectively they formed an important landscape feature that was highly visible. The plotting of all the trees within the area ranging from the smallest to the largest was not considered practicable and an area rather than a woodland designation was considered appropriate;

·         contrary to the objector’s observations the area of trees was regarded as highly visible contributing to the visual amenity of the area;

·         following a meeting with the agent representing the owner of the site on 8 January 2019, correspondence has been received suggesting the Order should be modified to protect seven trees - one ash tree referred to as tree (T1), two ash trees referred to as group (G1) and three lime trees and one ash tree referred to as (TG1 or G2). The agent considered other trees within the site should not be included as they were not worthy of protection. This suggestion was not supported as, while individually, the trees may be of indifferent quality, collectively the trees contributed to the visual amenity of the immediate and wider area, and should be protected;

·         at the site meeting, trees adjacent to the water course and trees on or close to the northern boundary of the site were identified as providing the majority of the visual amenity; and

·         owing to the above, the plan that formed part of the Order had been revised to reflect the area of the land that had been cleared and to include the trees that provided the majority of the visual amenity.

 

Letters of objection had been received from an agent representing the owner of the land affected by the tree preservation order dated 28 September and 7 November 2018 and 8 January 2019, which were considered by the Committee. Also considered was a petition received on 16 January 2018 with 64 signatories in support of the Order and an email, also in support, received on 18 January 2018.

 

The objector attended the hearing. The agent’s letter stated that the Order had been made with an Area (A1) designation when Government advice stated that this should only be used in an emergency and that the TPO was unreasonable due to its indiscriminate coverage and should be amended to include those trees with a public amenity value that are of reasonable quality, in accordance with Government. The objector stated that the site largely contained poor quality shrubs and vegetation which was not worthy of an Order. He believed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.