Planning and Licensing Committee - Wednesday 13 August 2025, 2:00pm - Cotswold District Council Webcasting

Planning and Licensing Committee
Wednesday, 13th August 2025 at 2:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Dilys Neill
  2. Councillor David Fowles
  3. Councillor Daryl Corps
  4. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  5. Councillor Len Wilkins
  6. Councillor Nick Bridges
  7. Councillor Dilys Neill
  8. Officer
  9. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  10. Officer
  11. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Julia Gibson, Officer
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. 04. Approve minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2025
    Status: In progress
  2. Councillor Nick Bridges
  3. Councillor David Fowles
  4. 04. Approve minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2025
    Status: Ended
  5. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Nick Bridges
  2. Councillor David Fowles
  3. Councillor Dilys Neill
  4. Councillor David Fowles
  5. Councillor Dilys Neill
  6. Councillor Len Wilkins
  7. Councillor Dilys Neill
  8. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  9. Councillor Dilys Neill
  10. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  11. Councillor Dilys Neill
  12. 08. Appointment to Sub-Committee - Approve recommendations 1-2
    Status: In progress
  13. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  14. Councillor Dilys Neill
  15. 08. Appointment to Sub-Committee - Approve recommendations 1-2
    Status: Ended
  16. Councillor David Fowles
  17. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Officer
  2. Councillor Dilys Neill
  3. Objector
  4. Councillor Dilys Neill
  5. Objector
  6. Councillor Dilys Neill
  7. Councillor Nick Bridges
  8. Officer
  9. Councillor Dilys Neill
  10. Officer
  11. Councillor Dilys Neill
  12. Officer
  13. Councillor Dilys Neill
  14. Councillor Daryl Corps
  15. Officer
  16. Councillor Daryl Corps
  17. Officer
  18. Councillor Daryl Corps
  19. Officer
  20. Councillor Dilys Neill
  21. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  22. Councillor Dilys Neill
  23. Councillor Dilys Neill
  24. Councillor Len Wilkins
  25. Officer
  26. Councillor Dilys Neill
  27. Councillor David Fowles
  28. Officer
  29. Officer
  30. Councillor Dilys Neill
  31. Officer
  32. Councillor Dilys Neill
  33. Officer
  34. Councillor Dilys Neill
  35. Officer
  36. Councillor Dilys Neill
  37. Officer
  38. Councillor Dilys Neill
  39. Officer
  40. Councillor Dilys Neill
  41. Officer
  42. Councillor Dilys Neill
  43. Councillor Nick Bridges
  44. Councillor Nick Bridges
  45. Councillor Dilys Neill
  46. Councillor Nick Bridges
  47. Councillor Dilys Neill
  48. Councillor Nick Bridges
  49. Councillor Dilys Neill
  50. Councillor Daryl Corps
  51. Councillor Dilys Neill
  52. Councillor David Fowles
  53. Councillor Dilys Neill
  54. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  55. Councillor David Fowles
  56. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  57. Councillor Dilys Neill
  58. Councillor David Fowles
  59. Councillor Dilys Neill
  60. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  61. Councillor Dilys Neill
  62. Councillor Len Wilkins
  63. Councillor Dilys Neill
  64. Officer
  65. Councillor Dilys Neill
  66. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  67. Councillor Dilys Neill
  68. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  69. Councillor Dilys Neill
  70. Harrison Bowley, Planning
  71. Councillor Dilys Neill
  72. Councillor David Fowles
  73. Officer
  74. Councillor David Fowles
  75. Officer
  76. Councillor Dilys Neill
  77. Councillor Dilys Neill
  78. Councillor Dilys Neill
  79. Councillor Patrick Coleman
  80. Councillor Nick Bridges
  81. Councillor Dilys Neill
  82. Councillor Nick Bridges
  83. Councillor Dilys Neill
  84. Councillor Dilys Neill
  85. Councillor Dilys Neill
  86. 09. Tree Preservation Order 25/00001/IND - Refuse against Officer Recommendation
    Status: In progress
  87. Councillor David Fowles
  88. Councillor Dilys Neill
  89. 09. Tree Preservation Order 25/00001/IND - Refuse against Officer Recommendation
    Status: Ended
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Dilys Neill
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:00:12
Good afternoon and welcome to this meeting of the Planning and Licencing Committee of
Cotswold District Council.
Welcome to anyone who is watching at home.
Can I remind members and members of the public who are here to switch off their mobile phones
or to put them on silent so we don't get an interruption halfway through.
Members of the public, thank you for attending.
Just a reminder that you mustn't talk to members of the committee
or to interrupt proceedings.
I think one of you is speaking on the tree preservation order,
so you will be allowed, you'll be called forward after the officer's presentation
and you'll be allowed to speak for three minutes.
We are fairly strict on the three minutes, but you will be allowed to complete a sentence.
So that's that.
Okay, so now I'm going to introduce, ask members to introduce themselves, starting with my colleague on the left.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:01:25
Good afternoon everybody. My name is Councillor David Fowles and I'm standing in as the Vice
Chairman for this one meeting. I'm the ward member for the Colne Valley.
Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:01:40
Good afternoon everybody. I'm Darragh Caw, District Councillor for Morgan and Marsh West
in the north of Cotswolds.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:01:49
Good afternoon, I'm Councillor Patrick Coleman representing the village of Stratton in the
Councillor Len Wilkins - 0:02:00
town of Syrinsester. Good afternoon, I'm Len Wilkins, I'm the
Councillor for Borton Vale and I'm actually a substitute today for Julia Judd.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:02:10
I am Councillor Ray Bassenton, I represent a ward in Syrinsester.
And I'm Councillor Nick Bridges, Ward, Watermore.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:02:21
Thank you. Now can I ask the officers to introduce themselves?
Officer - 0:02:26
Jim Tyson, Trees Officer for Cotswold District Council.
Harrison Burley, Head of Planning Services for Cotswold District Council.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:02:33
Officer - 0:02:35
Mari Barnes, Legal Advisor to this committee.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:02:42
Thank you for those watching at home. The name of the speaker should pop up on your
screen and also when the vote is taken, this is normally an electronic vote and so you
should be able to see on your screen who's voted for which application, how people have
voted for each application. If anything goes wrong with the electronic vote, we'll revert
to a show of hands but let's hope that all goes well. So now can I ask for the names

1 Apologies

Julia Gibson, Officer - 0:03:18
of any people who have given apologies? We've had apologies from councillors Ian Watson, Julia Ged, Michael Bann and Andrew McLean and we have a substitution of

2 Substitute Members

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:03:31
Councillor Wilkins for Julia Ged. Thank you very much. Do we have any declarations of

3 Declarations of Interest

interest in any of the items on the agenda. I have consulted with the legal team because
I know several people who live in Westcote and in particular I know one person who is
sent in a written objection pretty well. So I don't have any pecuniary interest.
Officer - 0:03:57
Thank you, Chair. Yes, the legal advisor is satisfied that you can remain and that the
interest is merely to be declared. Thank you.

4 Minutes

Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:04:07
Thank you very much. Now, I refer to the minutes of the previous meeting. All of us who were
there should have read the minutes. Does anyone have any concerns about any inaccuracies in
the minutes. In that case could I have somebody to propose that we accept the
minutes? Councillor Breslington and seconded by
Councillor Fales. All those in favour?
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:04:40
Councillor David Fowles - 0:04:43
get to the general committee
Thank you very much. So that's six in favour and one abstention. So those minutes are agreed.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:05:33
Sorry, I didn't have my microphone on. Six in favour and one abstention. So those minutes
are agreed.

5 Chair's Announcements

Chairs announcements, I don't have any except to remind you that although this should be
very brief meeting, please could you be to the point as far as possible and to avoid
repetition if other people have made your point already.

6 Public questions

Now are there any public questions? None. And are there any members' questions?

7 Member questions

Officer - 0:06:11
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:06:12
questions? Thank you very much. No members questions. In that case, we are going to move

8 Appointment to Sub-Committee

to the first item on the agenda, which is about the appointments to the licencing subcommittees.
So we don't have anybody, the responsible officer, the accountable officer is Andrew
Brown, he's not available today, but you've all been given a paper which explains the
rules around the appointments to the licencing committees.
Would you like a couple of minutes just to look at those?
Yes, please.
So you'll see the legal conditions governing the two separate committees are somewhat different,
which is why we have two separate committees.
We choose to have a subcommittee for taxi and private hire licencing.
So, Councillor Brasington, would you like to propose this item?
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:08:19
Yes, certainly will.
I'll just go through it very briefly.
We have all been handed a sheet of paper which is very helpful, it explains things.
The purpose of this report is to confirm the appointments of the subcommittee for this
current financial year.
In relation to taxes and private hire and strict trading, we propose that there be five
members from this committee to form a subcommittee and in accordance with
political proportionality there will be three from the Liberal Democrats and two
for Conservatives. We note there's no independent members sit on the planning and
licencing committee so we don't have any role to play.
The other committee is for strict training,
they're not strict training, it's just premises,
I'll get to it eventually.
And you'll note there are three members there.
And that again is based on proportionality,
and I just lost my places now.
Yes, Licencing Committee. So that is three members on that and it's
proposed that the membership of the subcommittee will continue to comprise the chair and vice -chair
for every meeting plus officers. So that's basically the situation. So I'd like to propose
that we accept it.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:09:59
Councillor Fowles, would you like to second?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:10:01
Councillor David Fowles - 0:10:02
Yes, I would be delighted to second it, Chairman. I have got nothing further to add to the papers
that we have been given and the very detailed explanation given by Ray as the proposer,
other than to say support the officer's recommendation. Thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:10:17
Thank you very much. Councillor Wilkins.
Councillor Len Wilkins - 0:10:24
Thank you, Chair. I know I am subsumed for Councillor Judge. She was most anxious that
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:10:33
should still continue to be on the subcommittee if that's possible. She is
on the Taxi Private Heron Street
Trading Committee as a regular member and then she will take her turn in
rotation on the other licencing subcommittee. Thank you very much.
Councillor Coleman, did you have a query?
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:10:57
Only a small one on the next page, the Licencing Subcommittee
2003 Act wrote
As far as I can see everybody's on once apart from the Chair and Vice -Chair wrote, except me.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:11:18
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:11:19
I got two goes. Can I thank you for the implied compliments?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:11:21
but not very much.
Yes, it's because you're so invaluable,
Councillor Coleman, your wisdom is so much appreciated.
Along with Councillor Breslington,
I'm surprised he doesn't appear twice as well.
There we go.
Good, so does anyone have any further questions
on this item?
So on this item, we're being asked to vote
on the recommendations, which I'm going to read out quickly,
which is that the Planning and Licencing Committee
resolves to firstly appoint five members of the committee to the licencing
subcommittee taxi private hire and street trading in accordance with
political proportionality and the wishes of the political groups so that's three
liberal Democrats and two conservative and the names are there for you to see
and then the second point to be that we're recommending is that note to note
that the licencing subcommittee membership will comprise the chair or
vice -chair of the Planning and Licencing Committee and two other members of the
Planning and Licencing Committee drawn on a rota basis from the remaining
members of the Planning and Licencing Committee, subject to their availability
and the completion of licencing training prior to participation in a licencing
subcommittee Licencing Act 2003 meeting. I'm guessing that all of us have had
licencing training. If anybody has not had the licencing training, you will need to have
it before you can be on that subcommittee.
Shall we vote? Can we take a vote? All those in favour of accepting those recommendations?
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:13:00
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:13:18
Those recommendations are passed unanimously.
We will move on to –
Julia, you are taking the minutes, are you?
Councillor David Fowles - 0:13:32
You are taking the minutes?
Did you catch that Nick needs licencing training?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:13:54
Okay.

9 Tree Preservation Order 25/00001/IND

Okay. Now, we are moving on to the next item on the agenda, which is concerns tree preservation
order in Wuscot, which is in the Fosbridge Ward. The ward member is Councillor David
The application being called into committee is to consider comments of objection and support to the making of the tree preservation order
At corner cottage church, Westcott chipping Norton Gloucestershire
so
I'd like to invite the case officer to present the case
Okay
Officer - 0:14:57
and
So we received a section 211 notification which is for works in a
conservation area to remove two trees at the property. One being a Lawson Cyprus,
one being the tree in question. No issue with removal of the Lawson Cyprus.
The pine on the other hand we carried out the due cheques and whatnot and
decided that it was worthy of a tree preservation order, which is one of the ways in which the
council can respond to a section 211 notification.
The other's been issued a no objection or allow the six -week notification period to
run out and which point is assumed as no objection and works can continue.
We did reach out to the applicant and agent to discuss it, but they weren't willing to
amend the application from felling, so we moved ahead with the tree preservation order.
So Church Cottage is at the junction of the main road into the village, on the main road
through the village.
The tree is visible from a lot of angles, particularly on the approach to the village.
You'll see it's a tall mature pine tree, which is a sort of pivotal feature in the landscape.
As you can see there's other tall trees in the village, so it's typical of the village and the conservation area.
It is slightly one sided but that is due mainly in part to a companion tree being removed
in 2020 which was authorised by the council.
One of the reasons it was allowed is there were other trees in the area.
Retaining the big tree was part of the decision in being able to remove the smaller partner.
So we decided to move on with the TPO and objections were received,
which is why we're here today.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:17:14
Can I ask the public's speaker to come forward, the objector,
Mr. David Lewis, if you would like to sit at the front here.
Thanks.
Just to remind you, you've got three minutes.
Objector - 0:17:45
Hi. Thank you for inviting us
to make our representation this afternoon.
So just to be clear, I speak as a forestry advisor and also son of Mary
Lewis who is the owner of Corner Cottage Church, Westcott. I was also asked to list
my qualifications. I'll just summarise them by saying I'm a chartered forester,
a chartered surveyor and I represent or advise a number of private landowners. So
the main reason for objecting to the TPO and my mum's wish to be granted consent
to fell it is to do with the concern about its long -term stability of the
tree and in turn her safety. This is a big tree weighing several tonnes. It is
also very close to the house and certainly within falling distance. It
also leans towards the house so if it was to blow over in the wind then it's
likely to land on the house. She's become so concerned about the tree and the way
it moves in the wind that she moves out of her usual bedroom and sleeps at the
other end of the house when the wind blows fiercely. I don't believe she
should have to suffer this anxiety every time there is a warning of a storm. In my
capacity as a professional advisor I want to comment on the council's
assessment of both the tree's safety and also the tree's perceived public amenity
value. I see that the council have done a valid risk assessment and conclude that
the risk is acceptable. However, this risk has not taken into account the elevated and
exposed location. Wind is unpredictable. By way of illustration, several years ago a large
cypress tree in my mum's garden on the boundary blew over into her neighbour's garden and
last December four large poplars on a nearby property also blew over. These trees had no
visible defects and would have probably been classed as an acceptable risk using
the valid assessment that the council use. It is impossible actually to
quantify the exact likelihood of risk but I would argue in my capacity as a
professional advisor that this tree with its defects, its high -risk location
should be considered as a moderate risk and not an acceptable risk and the
look at the possibility of trying to prune the tree or reduce its height or
crown and concluded that that would just look really unsightly and
inappropriate. I now move on to public amenity. The main reason for putting a TPO
on a tree is if it's considered of high public amenity value. Again I looked at
the council's appraisal and would argue that this is also a subjective
assessment. The tree has a noticeable lean. The distribution of the branches
are unbalanced. The tree's size and height is now out of proportion to its setting. Yes,
the tree is visible from public places, but I would argue that it's not an attractive
feature.
Mr. Lizzie, what time is that? If you could just finish your sentence, that would be fine.
Yeah. Final thing, the notification came out of the blue and there was no invitation to
discuss this. It's in a conservation area. It's already afforded sufficient protection.
So I see that the TPO is unjustified.
Thank you very much for the invitation to speak.
Thank you very much.
Thanks.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:21:17
Objector - 0:21:17
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:21:18
I don't see the ward member.
So I guess has the ward member put in any statement?
Okay.
In that case, I'd like to open the floor to questions.
Yes, please.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:21:35
Could you tell us what the height is of a tree and how far
it is away from the house, please.
Officer - 0:21:42
That tree is approximately 25 metres tall.
I didn't measure the distance to the property,
but I'd assume 8 to 10 metres.
Is that fair?
8 to 10 metres.
If we were to grant this, confirm it,
would there be any cheques the council would carry out
from time to time to reassess it, to see if the lien has got worse.
It's not possible given the number of trees we've got in the district.
That wouldn't be down to us, that would be down to the occupier.
And finally, is there any appeal against the decision we make today?
You can appeal to the Ombudsman, I think.
Sorry? I think you can appeal to the Ombudsman, I'd have to cheque that.
Okay, thank you. It's with the Secretary of State, sorry.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:22:39
Officer - 0:22:40
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:22:41
I was about to say I think you can appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against a TPO
Officer - 0:22:46
is that right? There is an appeal mechanism yeah. I'm just going to ask
whether there's been any attempt to replace the previous tree the other tree
and whether we can just put some sort of condition on not guarding this that
trees of similar class are planted in its place.
So is that in reference to the previously removed trees?
Yeah, I was just asking whether the previous tree has
been replanted or
basically whether we can insist that they do put... No, in that case the replant
condition
was dispensed with because of other trees and shrubs in the area. That was
noted on the previous removal case.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:23:34
Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:23:41
Councillor Caul. Thank you. If we were to be minded to permit the tree to to be
cut down could we put in stipulation that would have another tree of a
similar, could be replanted in its place at a safer height?
Officer - 0:23:56
Yes, we would, that's not, kind of, that would be a consideration if the TPO was confirmed
and then at a later date agreed for removal. As it stands, if we don't confirm the TPO,
then the applicant can cut the tree down.
And then it, because it was originally a TCONR,
as we call it, a conservation area notification,
we can't, there's no replant condition on that,
we can't insist on a replant.
Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:24:33
And also, obviously, the garden TBO,
was the altitude of Church West got taken into consideration,
considering it's, I think it's about 200 metres above sea level
and very exposed up there on that bridge line?
Officer - 0:24:47
Not specifically.
However, trees grow to their condition.
A tree will grow as tall as it can get
without putting due pressure on itself.
It's still standing following name storms.
And at the point of inspection, there was nothing to me
or a fellow officer that went out
to suggest that that tree is likely to fall over.
Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:25:16
I'd ask one more question.
So obviously, you're talking about the tree growing
to its conditions.
That tree, could it be said that that tree was growing
to its condition previously when there were other trees around
it?
Now being exposed, it might be subject to more susceptibility
to storm damage and high winds up on that area.
Officer - 0:25:41
Yeah, exposure was a consideration
in undertaking the valid.
It was four years ago and the weaker,
smaller of the two trees was removed.
Consider that the added exposure is unlikely
and also given the fact that the prevailing winds
are from the southwest, the tree that was removed
wouldn't have afforded any protection to the remaining tree due to its
geographical position.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:26:11
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:26:13
Councillor Colle. Thank you. To say how helpful and educational this very rare
type of application is. If I look at the pictures on page 45 and 46 which I'm
was a design that clearly clearly they're taking roughly the same direct you know
the opposite directions same direction ah is it your view then if this tree
remains that lack of foliage on the right -hand side of the picture will
gradually be minimised by the
it won't spurt new growth from the trunk and that's not the way can
infrastructures work but other branches might start to move around to take
advantage of the extra lights you know where it was in
of time.
Thank you.
Whilst I think you do say that there's nothing in the regulations to give any
particular greater or lesser protection to non -native trees,
and I'm old enough to remember when everybody had a down on sycamores,
and now sycamore's the most valuable tree in the north of England,
one particular one anyway.
But, I mean, how common is the Corsican pine,
and how long has it been a native of our shores?
Right, so according to...
Where was it? Which one was it?
It's a type of black pine,
first introduced into this country in 1759.
And they are very common timber tree,
often in forest lands,
but they are planted standalone feature trees on properties.
and there are a few about the Cotswolds.
They're not a hugely common species,
but there are a lot of black pines around the Cotswolds.
Just one last question, sir.
On page 43, the top picture,
I think it's a rather good picture
of what the approach to the village, or the hamlet,
how the tree stands in there.
There's a tree slightly this side of it,
slightly on the approach which is I don't know deciduous by the look of it
and then there's a large coniferous tree to the right with a Christmas tree shape
any idea what those two trees are or whether they're any particular
contribution it seems to me they do make a contribution to the landscape roughly
equal if not better than the one that we're looking at that's just a thought
I don't know to be honest with you.
The coniferous tree, again, could be some kind of leylandite or something along those
lines.
I can't think.
Thank you for having a go.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:29:37
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:29:43
Thank you.
Councillor Len Wilkins - 0:29:48
Do we have any knowledge of losses of trees from wind damage in the village?
Is it a particularly area that is exposed to wind loss?
Officer - 0:30:03
I don't have any figures for that and the first I knew of any of the trees in the village
coming over was what's been reported here.
Any other questions?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:30:16
I was going to ask a couple of questions.
Oh sorry, Councillor Fattie.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:30:23
Yes, can I ask a couple of questions, James?
The first is, going back to the point made about corsica pine, they're quite a popular
tree in the Cotswolds.
You mentioned that if we objected to the TPO, I was not clear, could we insist in objecting
to the TPO that it is replaced with another corsica pine, a smaller one?
Is that something in our power to do?
That's question number one.
And if so, I'm just curious to know,
how fast does a course combine grow?
I mean, the one that's there, you were saying is 25 metres
or 60 feet according to one of the neighbours.
So just curious that if we were to,
on the grounds of safety,
recommend to object for the TPO,
could we insist on it being replaced
with an equivalent species?
That's question number one.
Question number two is a lot of the photographs you took of the area show that I know that
village very well and it is on the ridge as you say, but there seem to be an awful lot
of high trees there.
It's not like this tree is a standalone tree.
So whilst the tree has amenity value in its own right, in your considered opinion, would
the landscape, it's a difficult question, but would the landscape be materially affected
if that tree was removed, replaced with a smaller tree that would have time to grow.
And then just looking at the landscape in those photographs, to me, as not a professional,
it wouldn't materially affect the amenity.
But I was wondering what your view was.
And the last one is a more general one.
In your experience, given the climate change, have you in your professional experience seen
more trees falling recently as a result of climate change in the Cotswolds than say in
previous years, just to get a feel for that. I would confess at this point that I represent
the Colne Valley and there was a tree that was well established, looked safe in the village
of Hasrup and out of the blue the wind changed and it crashed into a house opposite and it
was, you may well remember that tree and it was just fortunate that the residents were
not in that part of the house at the time.
So three questions.
Could you answer those?
Thank you.
Officer - 0:32:46
To answer the third question first, if that makes sense,
having had a look at the stump, what
remained of the tree and how the rope that came down
that tree had defects.
It had wood decay fungus.
So that's the third part of the question.
So the second...
If we object it to the TPO, could...
Okay, so if we don't confirm the TPO today...
Sorry, confirm it.
If we don't confirm the TPO today, the applicant is at liberty to cut the tree down
and because it would only be a teak on our conservation area notification,
we cannot insist on a replant.
However, if we confirm the TPO and at a later date,
and the applicant comes up with some evidence
that the tree is unsafe, dying, diseased, whatever,
we can then insist on a replant if we agree to it being failed
once the TPO is confirmed.
Until the TPO is confirmed, we cannot insist on a replant
should they remove the tree.
So can you clarify that?
If we confirm the TPO today and the applicant can demonstrate
some movement or something's happening with the tree, once it's got the TPO, we could
then support...
Officer - 0:34:10
Yes.
And the second part...
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:34:19
Officer - 0:34:19
And the last question, sorry, was to do with the amenity. The photographs seem to me, and
I know the village well, that there are a lot of very large trees, tall trees there,
and yes this is a very tall tree but it's not a standalone tree
and your assessment of amenity
because in point 13 you say
high public community value and being consistent with the conservation area
which contains many large skyline feature trees
so tricky question
but intended to be so if it was removed would it materially affect the amenity
I think so, yeah. I think it would definitely detract from the amenity and the character of the conservation area.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:35:03
Thank you very much. I had a couple of questions to ask myself, first of all.
Firstly, one of the concerns expressed is that in a fairly recent storm, four poplars in the vicinity of the village came down.
I used to live in the next door village, Idbury, and I know it to be a very windy spot.
Is there a difference in the susceptibility of healthy trees to being blown over in the
wind?
Is a poplar more likely to get blown over than a corsacompine really is, what I'm asking?
Officer - 0:35:43
Yeah, the wood in different species of trees forms differently and has different characteristics
and different strengths.
Poplar is not strong wood. It's easily targeted by wood decay fungi and things
like that. You might not see it with the eye. You don't always see the fruit and
bodies of decay fungi, things like that. Poplars are not what you might call a
tough guy. They will fall over. I mean, first I've heard about these
trees falling over so I can't comment whether they were defects or not.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:36:15
Okay, but in your experience a healthy Corsican pine is not particularly susceptible to being
blown over in the wind, I think.
Officer - 0:36:22
No.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:36:24
Great, thank you.
Secondly, there's concern about who would be responsible if we put a TPO on this tree
and then it did fall and damage either Mrs Lewis's house or a neighbour's property or
a car.
Can you say, would Mrs Lewis have any recourse to suing the council or whatever if damage
was sustained because this tree fell down?
In a word, no.
Officer - 0:36:56
The council would not have responsibility.
The responsibility would still be with the owner or occupier.
If they came to us with evidence that the tree was unsafe and healthy and put in an application and we refused that application, that would be a different matter.
It would have to be decided by a court but we could be accountable in some respect there.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:37:29
Okay, so in order to get permission to have this tree removed, the applicant would need
to prove that it was in some way unhealthy and a viable tree.
Officer - 0:37:41
Yes, if the TPO is confirmed today, the legislation expects evidence to be presented to the LPA,
the local planning authority in respect of works to a TPL tree.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:37:56
Okay, sorry I keep... do please put your hand up. I'm hogging the floor at the
moment please put your hand up if you can. I'll just ask one more question.
So the fact this is causing anxiety not just to the applicant but to her
neighbours that's not material planning consideration is that right?
Officer - 0:38:16
I don't believe it is.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:38:19
Thank you very much, Councillor Breslington.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:38:23
Could you put the map on the screen?
Show me the site location.
Page 41.
Did it come up?
Have you seen it once?
Thank you.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:39:18
Thank you.
Could you show us which is the direction that the prevailing wind comes from?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:39:51
Any other questions?
And in that case are there any comments?
Councillor Fass
Yes, thank you
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:40:04
I hate to disagree with one of our officers, but having heard everything and considering we we have a tree that's
25 metres high I think and only eight metres from the house
and it's
leaning as it is, and it's not a particularly attractive tree,
I can't really support the recommendation, I'm afraid.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:40:34
Is that a proposal to refuse?
To refuse the opposite's recommendation,
is that a proposal to?
Are you proposing that we refuse the opposite's recommendation?
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:40:45
Well, I'd like to hear other comments first before.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:40:47
Okay, further comments.
Councillor Caul.
Councillor Daryl Corps - 0:40:51
Thank you. Thank you for your report as well. I hate to say to suggest that we lose a tree
anywhere in the Cotswolds, but a tree that's causing somebody sleepless nights and causing
somebody stress about this tree in their garden, that we can do something about it, having
to sleep in a separate room. I think of a duty of care for somebody who's suffering
from anxiety about a tree. I'm not trying to trivialise that it's just one tree, but
it is just one tree. It's a tree that, there are lots of other trees in the village as
well. I feel that losing this for somebody's mental state and making them be able to sleep
well in their house is unfortunately something that I would be potentially recommending and
I'm afraid I can't support the officers suggestion in this instance.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:41:48
Councillor David Fowles - 0:41:52
Councillor Fowles. Well upon your advice Chairman you said don't repeat comments or
questions already asked so I was going to make a couple of observations which
is in kind of in support of what my two colleagues have already said. The first
is that we have had a lot of letters from local residents talking about the
safety aspect of the tree and they acknowledged that it has amenity value
but they don't think that outweighs the safety issue. The ward member hasn't
responded and the parish council haven't responded and the additional point I'd
like to make is having read Mrs. Lewis's comments and in particular her
son's comments, Keen Gardiner, Mr. Lewis makes his living from looking after
trees and like you James is passionate about trees so I don't think for one
minute he'd want to see a tree taken down if it wasn't for the fact he's
concerned about the potential downside the potential risk and I'd hate to be
one that supported this officer's recommendation and the tree came down
and either damaged the house or worse than that Mrs. Lewis and so I'm kind of
in support of where Councillor Brassington and Councillor Cork are
recognising everything that you said both before this meeting and the briefing
and today. It just seems awful that we're in this position which is why I was keen
to see if we could plant another tree in its place but that's not in our gift. So
I don't think it's right for me to support a recommendation from
colleagues but I do take on board what Councillor Brassington and Councillor
Gore have said and perhaps that's why it's come to us for us to deliberate on it. Thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:43:39
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:43:42
Thank you. So I'll just jump in for two seconds. Obviously members are you're entitled to make
any of you want because you're going against this recommendation is completely within your power.
I think we just need to very much bear in mind that the impacts of stress and anxiety are not
a consideration that we can have regard to in this process. So obviously having considered
regard to the material considerations, the immunity value, all of those aspects absolutely,
but with the evidence in front of us it isn't a material consideration so just
bear that in mind when making a decision. Just that the mental health impacts things
are not unfortunately considerations, I have the deeper sympathy but from a planning perspective.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:44:24
So could I go through the chair. It seems to me that the balance is whether the
amenity value whether the potential safety of the tree and Councillor
Brassington who has a background as an officer in various things. It's leaning, it's very
tall and it's very exposed. All of those things seem to me to amount to a certain amount of
risk.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:44:46
That's a valid concern, although I would bear in mind that our officer has recommended there
isn't.
It's not a question about the officer.
No, no, absolutely not a tool, not a tool. But yes, they are entirely valid considerations.
It's just to bear that in mind that we are looking at the risk element and not necessarily
the stress anxiety element because we just have to be sure we're in line with what we're
out able to consider as part of the decision.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:45:03
Can we just go to the fact that why is it come to us as Chairman?
Sorry, I just want to ask why we're considering it.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:45:09
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:45:14
We're considering it because of the objections raised.
I just want to say of course our officer has gone through the valid assessment
which is available for us to see on the back on the final page.
So I think you should all take a good look at that.
Councillor Coleman.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:45:34
Yes, thank you, Chair.
That was a helpful contribution from Harrison Bolie there.
But I do feel that whatever we're doing on this council,
we do have some kind of overriding responsibility
for well -being and safety of individuals.
It is true that safety, or the lack of it,
is often perceived rather than provable.
Nevertheless, the resultant anxiety is a material factor in a larger context than the strict planning context.
So whilst I'm not going to say that that's the reason I might be about to vote against the officer's recommendation,
nevertheless it's something worth bearing in mind.
And if the tree were more attractive, it would have greater appeal, even if that's not one of the material considerations.
And I think given that something will replace that tree, as I understand it, just as something
will replace the other one, the much less attractive, not worthy of a TPO tree that
we agreed, the officer agreed to, I think given what we know about the, as someone has
already mentioned, climate change leading to more intense heat, more occasionally intense
cold and frequently more intense winds it would be prudent and again because
this is such an exception I can't remember the last time we were if ever
15 whatever it is years now that we've refused a TPO maybe once or twice so I
think that in the context of that this is the time for us to make an exception
and I will move that.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:47:17
Councillor Wilkins
Councillor Len Wilkins - 0:47:21
Thank you, Chair. I hate going against an officer's recommendation. They know much more about trees and everything than I do.
I hate seeing a tree
taken down, but I am minded to look at the
appendix one and the fact that just at the bottom it talks about Windy Reach
which does suggest that perhaps there was a argument.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:47:48
It's the name of a house down the village, it's Windy Ridge.
Windy Ridge.
Okay.
Can we just add one more?
Yes.
Officer - 0:48:00
Just had a couple of points before you vote.
The annual risk to any one individual from a tree or being killed by a tree is one in
ten million.
That's six people every year die through trees.
And three of those are pretty much people driving into trees that have already fallen.
The HSE regards a risk of one in a million as insignificant or trivial.
We are talking about a risk of one in ten million.
The other point I would like to make is if we don't confirm this TPO, consider setting
precedent every time someone comes in with a tree works application or to remove trees
because the perceived risk, because it's a big tree near a house.
Not many trees fail.
Thank you.
Councillor Conlon.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:49:07
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:49:09
I just wanted to cheque if possible with our legal officer or maybe with our planning officer about something the officer has just said.
I don't believe that when we're considering any kind of a case in this room that comes before this committee,
that anything we do creates a precedent because we have an overriding duty to consider every
case on its merits.
That's what we do.
And whilst we may try, when we're arguing our points for or against, to say, well, last
week or last month or last year, we allowed this or refused this, so why shouldn't we
allow this one and refuse this one?
And we'd be laughed out of court by our colleagues nowadays.
they could see through that that is it's not right and even if it were to create
a precedent there are something in the hundreds I think thousands of decisions
made on trees every year by our tree team they've certainly got many
thousands of trees to look after and none of their decisions create the
precedent as far as I can see every one of them is created on its merit and is
considered as a result of considering something purely on its own merit there
There is no identical location to this where we could use this, our decision on this, as
a precedent there.
Thank you.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:50:22
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:50:23
In my view, but the lawyer can tell me in one.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:50:25
Would you like a response to that, either from our legal officer or from Harrison?
I mean, I would generally agree, yes.
Harrison Bowley, Planning - 0:50:30
Precedent is, yeah, we don't, there is no such thing as precedent in planning as you
assess everything on a case -by -case basis.
The point we're trying to make is just to bear in mind, obviously, when members are
taking into consideration all the points raised, is obviously there has been a risk assessment
that we've had regard to those aspects.
So just ensure members are considering those points really.
But no, I agree.
Precedent, I think we're more looking at
that yeah, just ensuring we're considering
all of those considerations.
Some members have talked a little bit about risk
and obviously that is assessed within appendix,
doesn't have a number, appendix eight of the report.
But yeah, just to bear that in mind.
Yes, Councillor.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:51:14
Councillor David Fowles - 0:51:17
Firstly, could I apologise to Councillor Coleman and other members for asking questions when
we were on comments.
Could I now ask a question, please?
Could you clarify again, because I didn't quite grasp it, if we support the TPO and
the applicant
Can demonstrate that there's something wrong with that tree
Could you just remind members of the process so we leave today supporting your recommendation and then?
There is a case put to
Well remove the TPO could you just clarify that and it seems to me is it quite onerous is it quite
Officer - 0:52:04
So, if the TPO is confirmed today and the applicant agent then finds, say, a heterobasidian
anosum, which is a wood decay fungus growing out of the roots of that tree in 12 months'
time, that's evidence that that tree will become unsafe.
They would apply normally under the legislation to remove the tree and we'd assess the evidence
evidence and if that was a case more likely than not agree to removal of the tree. It
would just be a case of applying.
In terms of the owner, is there a point in what is required for the application?
It would simply be an application similar to the section 211 notification that came
in, but a TPO application to do works to the tree. It's a case of applying on the planning
floor, portallaw, filling the forms in and we would assess it.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:52:54
And, Chairman, through the Chair, would this discussion and our recommendation carry weight
in that argument, saying that we are all very concerned as a committee that in granting
this TPO that there is a potential risk and we want the tree to be monitored, would that
carry weight for you and the applicant or not?
Officer - 0:53:18
I don't think it I don't think that would be a consideration to be honest
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:53:27
okay are there any more comments does anyone want to put forward a
recommendation
Councillor Conlon. I propose that the TPL be not confirmed.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:53:41
The basis of the arguments raised in the recording in the minutes will come.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:54:00
Do you want to say that you disagree with the officers view that the tree is safe?
Is that what you are trying to say?
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:54:09
I just wanted, well, okay, I thought, when we come to a vote,
Given that there's no appeal against our decision, there's no reason for us to put more reasons
than can be identified by the debate.
But I can't see who's going to challenge our decision, therefore having had the benefit
of a recorded debate both by electronics and minutes.
I'm not saying I can't do it.
It just seems to be an unnecessary detail, but okay.
I will suppose that primarily with regard to the over general requirement
on councillors to assist with the well -being and lack of anxiety in which
our residents live we recognise that the location in an area which is defined by
local place names as Councillor Lem Wilkins pointed out Windy Ridge at a
time when we are satisfied I think all of us are satisfied with the official
advice that we can expect increasing cases of extreme weather both in
temperature and in winds and the fact that the tree of itself is only of
moderate attractiveness that given the special circumstances, on balance we should make an
exception to our normal practise and on this occasion decline to confirm the TPO.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:55:47
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:55:48
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:55:55
Councillor Bressington. Can I suggest something a bit more precise?
The more the better usually. Yeah, reasons to not confirm a TPO is because
we have a tree of 25 metres and only eight metres from a house. It is already
leaning and it is in a prominent position on top of a ridge and given the
direction of prevailing wind we think there is a danger and therefore in my
opinion we don't confirm a TPO. Sorry.
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:56:29
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:56:34
Are you seconding it? Okay that's fine. So Councillor Coleman will propose and
Councillor Brasington will second the suggestion that we refuse. Do we have any
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:56:49
further comment? Are there any other proposals on the table? So we'll vote on
on the suggestion that we refuse the officer's recommendation so that the TPO is not allowed.
Councillor David Fowles - 0:57:03
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:57:32
So there are three in favour, one against and three abstentions, so that TPO is overturned.
the suggestion. Thank you very much.

10 Sites Inspection Briefing

And...
The video is still in the house until it's legally run because it's being served.
So we'll have to speak tomorrow then.
Okay.
Yes.
Did you hear that?
You mustn't go and chop it down straight away until...
Can we stop?
Can you excuse me?
Councillor Dilys Neill - 0:58:21
We don't...
This conversation is not allowed.
within the Chamber.
Moving on to the next item on the agenda, which I think is a site inspection briefing.
As far as I am aware, there isn't a briefing planned at the moment, but if one is required
It will be on the 3rd of September.
And the councillors to do that myself,
Councillor Brasington, Councillor Caul,
Councillor Judd and Councillor van.
So can you hold yourself ready?
Yes.
In case we're called for a site inspection briefing.

11 Licensing Sub-Committee

The licencing subcommittee would be on,
it says August the 21st, which is a Thursday.
Is that the right date?
We normally meet on a Wednesday, do we not?
I think the 20th.
What time is that normally?
There's not going to be one anyway.
Okay.
That's fine.
There's not going to be one.
Okay.
So it seems as though we're not aware of a potential licencing subcommittee.
If there is one, the date and the membership of that committee will be confirmed by email,
I'm sure.
All right.
Good.
And then finally, our next committee meeting, our next planning committee meeting, as far
as I'm aware, will be on the 10th of September.
Is that right?
10th September, I look forward to seeing you all then. Thank you for your participation.

There are currently no votes to display