Agenda and minutes

Councillor Kirkman declared a personal interest in the following item, being acquainted with Robert Partington in his professional capacity as an architect, remained in the room during consideration of the item and voted in the matter.

Report of Head of Democratic Services

It was reported that at the previous meeting of the Appeals Committee on the 8^th July 2008, when Tree Preservation Order No. 436 (2008) had been due for hearing, it had been resolved that, in consideration of the late notification received by objectors, the matter be deferred and considered by the Committee at a later date.

Present at the meeting to consider the matter was Mr. Robert Partington of Thomas Associates, Architects, presenting the owner of 29A Stanhope Avenue, Morecambe. 
Mr. Collinson of Whiteside and Knowles, Solicitor for the owner of 31 Stanhope Avenue, Morecambe, had been unable to attend the meeting due to attending a funeral and had instructed Mr. Partington on his behalf.  Also present was the owner of 29A Stanhope Avenue, Morecambe and his son.

The Committee considered appeals against a decision of the Council under Section 198 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, making an Order in respect of trees established to the rear of 31 Stanhope Avenue and land to the rear of 29A Stanhope Avenue, Morecambe. 

In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation Order) Regulations 1999, objections had been received to Tree Preservation Order No. 436 (2008), which had been made in relation to trees identified in a total of six groups:  groups 1 to 6 (G1-G6).

The two properties included the rear garden of a private residential property, 31 Stanhope Avenue, and grass land to the rear of 29A Stanhope Avenue.  The trees were mixed evergreen and deciduous species.  The grassland area included mixed species hedgerows and fragments of former hedgerows established along boundary lines.  The land had residential properties to the east and north-east and a public cycle/footpath immediately adjacent to the southwest.  White Lund Industrial Estate lay beyond the cycle path.  The size and form of the hedgerow trees indicated that they had not been formally managed and had developed into mature trees with well structured crowns. 

Approximately 50 to 60 trees had been removed from the garden area around the main dwelling, including standard trees and hedging, species of conifer, old English variety fruit trees, hawthorn, cherry, elder, poplar, ash and sycamore.  The removals had, in effect, removed the tree cover from within the main property, exposing private garden areas of adjacent properties with an associated loss of amenity and privacy for a number of neighbouring residents.

The trees in question had been identified in a total of six groups:  groups 1 to 6 (G1-G6)/.  The trees in G1-G6 were of good condition, within the grassland area.  The absence of regular maintenance of the hedgerows had meant that the hedgerows had become fragmented in areas and trees had grown to develop well structured crowns and had attained the height and dimensions of mature trees.

The trees within the groups provided screening for a number of private residential properties and helped to screen the industrial estate close by.  These trees made an important contribution to urban greening along the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.