Agenda and minutes

Appeals and Reviews Committee - Monday, 28th September, 2020 5.00 pm

Venue: Virtual Meeting - Zoom. View directions

Note: This is a public meeting and can be viewed by clicking on the media link below (you may need to use Chrome as a browser to do so). 

Media

Items
No. Item

6.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 191 KB

To receive and note the minutes of the previous meeting.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 8th June 2020 were received and noted.

7.

Questions Under Other Committee Procedures 12.8

Minutes:

No questions had been submitted.

8.

Disclosures of Pecuniary and Personal Interest

Minutes:

Councillor S. Bradshaw declared a personal interest in respect of Item 6 on the agenda, as ward councillor (Syston East).  He did not know the objector and came to the meeting with an open mind.

9.

Borough of Charnwood (11 Tickow Lane, Shepshed) Tree Preservation Order 2020 pdf icon PDF 167 KB

A report of the Head of Strategic Support is attached.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Considered a report of the Head of Strategic Support setting out details of the Tree Preservation Order served on the above site, the objection received to the Order and the comments of the Head of Planning and Regeneration on the issues raised by the objection (item 5 on the agenda filed with these minutes), together with an agenda supplement setting out further information from the objector (copy filed with these minutes).

 

Assisting with consideration of the report: The Principal Solicitor – Planning, Property and Contracts.

 

The Head of Planning and Regeneration’s representatives and the objector’s representative attended the meeting to put forward their cases and answer the Committee’s questions.

 

The Committee considered this matter in accordance with the “Procedure for Considering Objections to Tree Preservation Orders” set out in the Council’s Constitution and on the agenda for this meeting.

 

RESOLVED that the Borough of Charnwood (11 Tickow Lane, Shepshed) Tree Preservation Order 2020 be confirmed without modification.

 

Reason

 

Having considered, in accordance with the procedure set out in the Council’s Constitution, the objection to the Order, the Committee considered that the reasons put forward for not protecting the trees did not outweigh the contribution they made to the amenity of the area and that the trees should therefore be protected.

10.

Borough of Charnwood (1323 Melton Road, Syston) Tree Preservation Order 2020 pdf icon PDF 167 KB

A report of the Head of Strategic Support is attached.

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Considered a report of the Head of Strategic Support setting out details of the Tree Preservation Order served on the above site, the objection received to the Order and the comments of the Head of Planning and Regeneration on the issues raised by the objection (item 6 on the agenda filed with these minutes), together with two agenda supplements setting out further information and plans from the objector (copies filed with these minutes).

 

Assisting with consideration of the report: The Principal Solicitor – Planning, Property and Contracts.

 

The Head of Planning and Regeneration’s representatives and the objector and her representative attended the meeting to put forward their cases and answer the Committee’s questions.

 

The Committee considered this matter in accordance with the “Procedure for Considering Objections to Tree Preservation Orders” set out in the Council’s Constitution and on the agenda for this meeting.

 

RESOLVED that the Borough of Charnwood (1323 Melton Road, Syston) Tree Preservation Order 2020 be confirmed with modification to remove trees T2, T3 and T4 from the order.

 

Reason

 

Having considered, in accordance with the procedure set out in the Council’s Constitution, the objection to the Order, the Committee considered that the reasons put forward for not protecting the trees T2, T3 and T4 outweighed the contribution they made to the amenity of the area and that trees T2, T3 and T4 should not therefore be protected.