To advise Planning Committee of the making, provisionally, of Tree Preservation Orders 280, 281, 282 and 283 on various areas of trees and a woodland at Ashover.
(Planning Manager – Development Management)
The report to Committee explained that four Provisional Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) had been made, covering various areas of trees and a woodland at Ashover. Members were informed that representations had been received on the four Orders (TPO 280, TPO 281, TPO 282 and TPO 283). Committee was asked to decide if it wished to confirm them without modification, confirm the Orders with modifications or to not confirm them, in which case the Orders would then lapse.
Committee was reminded that an original Tree Preservation Order had been made to protect a large number of trees on an area of land west of Ashover. This Order had been made in 1944. Consequently, it had become increasingly difficult to enforce. There was often no way of confirming that specific trees or groups of trees were present at the time the Order had been made and so protected by it.
Committee was informed that certain portions of the land had been re-surveyed over time and replacement TPOs covering part of it had been made. These provisional Orders had then been made earlier in the year to cover the other trees in the area. This meant that the original Order had been superseded altogether.
Before Members discussed the Provisional TPOs they heard from, D Atkinson, representing Marsh Green Estates Ltd, the site owner for trees covered by several of the Orders. Mr Atkinson spoke against their confirmation. As part of this, he raised a number of points about the technical evaluation of the specific trees covered by the Orders, the process for making Provisional Tree Preservation Orders and communicating these decisions to their owners.
Committee discussed the Application and the concerns which had been raised about the way in which the trees covered by the Orders had been evaluated and the process for Making the Provisional Orders. Some Members felt that further information would be required for the Committee to reach a determination on what protection should be accorded to the trees covered by the Provisional Orders. Committee noted that if the Orders were not confirmed then the trees would cease to be protected until further provisional Orders could be put in place.
At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor A Powell and Councillor P Elliot moved and seconded a motion for determination on the existing Tree Preservation Orders be deferred, to enable further information to be gathered. They recognised that as a consequence of this the existing Provisional Orders would lapse and so also proposed further provisional Tree Preservation Orders be now drafted, while an assessment is made of the protection required by the trees for the Committee to then consider at a later date.
The motion was put to the vote and was approved
(1) That the Committee does not determine on the existing Provisional Tree Preservation Orders – (TPO 280, TPO 281, TPO 282 and TPO 283) and that the Orders lapse.
(2) That interim Provisional Tree Preservation Orders covering those trees protected by TPO 280, TPO 281, TPO 282 and TPO 283 be re-made as soon as possible.
(3) That an assessment of the protection required by the specific trees and woodland takes place to help inform the Committee’s subsequent decision on whether the interim Provisional Tree Preservation Orders be confirmed, modified or not-confirmed.