Transcript

[BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you very much here. It was in regards to, you mentioned that if there were sort of conditions on the windows in the breadth of which they can open and the obscurity, it would be sort of more an acceptable development for you. If as conditions in the obscurity sort of size of things in condition four, do you think that would sort of be acceptable from that side of things? If that's what my dad has said, then yes, but he's not here to read it, so. Sorry, is it, is it unfair asking you? As you've been sent this document, you know, or is it this has just come out today? It's on the website. Okay, all right. And then the further one was there's an extra condition added in regards to the decking, so there would have to be a separate design sort of submitted in regards to the decking to ensure that that's not overlooking as well. Do you think that sort of would sort of satisfy those concerns as well? Sorry again. You told me you weren't asking a question, so. Yeah, we read it out to you. It says, the decking areas shall not be constructed until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, showing screening and boundary treatments to prevent overlooking of the neighbor to the south from its raised height. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereby retained for the lifetime of the permission. So that that means basically that that we weren't, we need to see their plans for how they're going to make sure that there is no overlooking from that terrace. I think that's what he said in the statement. Yeah, that that's condition eight. Hopefully that covers that concern. Okay, well, we'll look again at the windows when we get to questions to the officer. Thank you very much, leave for coming along. But you could just, that's it. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. And our next speaker. Is a council and been from the parish council. Hello, and welcome. I think you know the routine, do you? Yes, you will have three minutes as well from when you start speaking. Thank you. Good morning. Thank you for bringing this to your planning committee. It's the first time in a long time you also a council asked for something to be represented here. And the main concerns, even though with their comments, we haven't objected to that we do have concerns going forwards. As you'll know, they are aware in yours for these are very highly sought after residential area. And we are in the process of formulating a neighbourhood plan. We've had a housing needs assessment completed by ACOM, which is shown the lack of affordable housing in Oxford and the lack of smaller properties. Our main concern or one of our main concerns that this is an example of a smaller affordable property in Oxford. That would be suitable for the small for first time families. Taking it and not just extending it but completely redeveloping the property and putting it into a different category of housing. The massing on this, this isn't the first then again the reason that we brought this is time. There's been a pattern that seems to be happening over the last year of smaller properties being completely demolished and started again. And that take in our opinion, it just starts to change the housing stock in the town. On the planning side of things we are concerned of the potential that the elevation of the extension may impose on the street scene. It's going up them in the massing, I think it's doubling on it. We're also one of our other concerns is that the materials used in particular zinc may not be in alignment with local characteristics, which is outlined in the design statement. And I think it was also brought up by the urban design that the zinc. I'm not aware of zinc being used in many properties in that in Oxford. So that's really, you know, we don't have a major objection, but we just are concerned of the way that things tend to be going. Thank you. Thank you very much members. Do we have any questions of clarification for the parish council representative? No, I think you were very clear. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you. Okay. Finally, we have a supporter and two supporters, Jonathan Moore and James Fair. If you'd like to come forward, gentlemen, good morning. And you will have three minutes between you. So I assume you've worked out who's going to do the talking and presumably the other one is to help answer questions. And I leave it to you. You have three minutes for a new start. Thank you. Good morning, chair and committee members. Westview is an example of how our country's existing housing stock can be obtained, adapted and reused to provide a family home of super modern day and future standards. The simple choice for the owner could have been to knock down existing house and replace it with a new, poorly built stick building that so many of us seeing despised on everyday travels. Instead, the owner has decided to retain the vast majority of the structure and its embodied carbon footprint and adding new, thermally efficient, highly sustainable series of additions to create a new family home that will provide for now and will into their future. These include a high thermally efficient sip structure to the other floor roof elements, new internal insulation to the ground floor walls and floor elements, a new air source heat pump supported with flush mounted PVs, which will provide domestic hot water and heating and new high performance doors and windows, all providing for a building that targets a net zero carbon footprint in its everyday use. The new first floor edition, sorry. Sorry, the new first floor edition has been carefully considered in relation to its immediate neighbors and the wider context of Rosebury Road. It respects the neighboring ridge heights in terms of overall height and their setbacks at both the front and rear the properties. These diagrams all demonstrated in the design and exit statement, which was submitted. It reflects the local style in its use of small gables that face the street, setting it within its context and traditional vernacular architecture. It is a comparable scale to many of the houses along Rosebury Road. This has been demonstrated in the consultation process with both the planners, Winchester and easily design review panel and the town council. The languages of today, it represents the manner in which the additions will be built and provides a wholly appropriate language for its setting. What is new is reflected in a single, well detailed and considered material of zinc, whilst retained remains as it is in brick. The city of Winchester and its members are in advocates for well designed, well considered contemporary architecture that can only add to the diversity of its architectural heritage. Many modern buildings sit alongside their historical neighbors and add to the character and diversity of their locations. I know this is like lived and worked in which is a much more professional life and have added successfully to a number of its architectural areas. We very much hope that committee members and the chair look favorably on this application and see it for its merits, both in terms of adaptive reuse of an existing dwelling and the proposed enhancements to bring the home up to and be on modern day standards. Thank you. Thank you very much. Members, we now turn to questions of clarification to our speakers. Can I just ask, I know it would be permitted development, but there have been concerns raised about the noise emanating from the heat pump. Can you just very quickly reassure neighbors that that is going to be in some way in case in. Yeah, so so our source heat pumps are pretty much a modern way of heating new buildings these days. They're very efficient. They are actually quiet. Yes, they do run continuously. But actually, if you want to acoustically protect them, you can put them into acoustic enclosures. And is that planned in this case? Well, in this case, the S or C pump is on the northern side between an existing brick building and a fence line. So actually, we team that because the noise is coming out to that level, it shouldn't be in it here and the noise neighbors, but if it is. But if it was a problem, then something acoustic closure can easily go around it. Yes. Yeah. And, and you know, the addition of condition eight is that is that going to be acceptable and. Yeah, I think it's important to stress that there's already a deck there. What we're doing is we are, we're not, we're not really changing the use of that deck. So at the moment, the residents can go out, they can sit on that deck. And it's at the height that it will be with the motion. So at the moment, it's 150 mil below finished floor level. For modern day standards, you want level access. So we're raising it by 150 mil. That's all. Okay. It's also us noticing that the boundary conditions on that side, there is extensive screening, but it's maintained by number 32. And at the end of the day, they want added privacy, but they should let the age grow. That's the reality of it. From our point of view, if we wanted to put a 1.8, it's a high fence on our boundary side, then we'd be happy to do that. Okay. Well, that's to be decided, I think. Okay. Members, questions, Councillor Laming. Thank you, Chair. We hear from the parish council about the use of zinc planning on it. That does have an effect on the rest of the street. Yes. So I just wondered why you chose that, rather than something more conventional to fit in better. Okay. So we took the design to design and review panel at pre-app stage. We gave them six different variations to show how this design was developed. And through consultation with them, they came back and said this was the preferred option, which we developed up. And it was their view and our view that actually when you're adding a new addition, we wanted to keep the language is quite simple. What's existing is brick and what's new is in metal. We gave them several options to show different materials and they educate back and selling it up too fussy. So what we did, we go in body, the recommendations of design review. They are, you know, my peers, I sit on it as well, so I know where they're coming from. And at the end of the day, it's contemporary architecture. We know Winchester and easily are advocates for it. And yes, it may be slightly different, but actually the contextual form is no different to anything else within that street. And it adds diversity, it adds character, you know, at the end of the day. So we would be prepared to change it. But our stronger view is that actually it's part of the design at the moment. Now, I mean, now it's a feature experience that we've got several in my world. One too, which aren't reasonably acceptable, but there's at least one, which is horrendous. And creator, it was described as being better fitted to an airfield and right at the central road, and that's the bit that concerns me. Yeah, I understand that concern. I think, you know, zinc, when it's detailed right and it's designed correctly, zinc buildings can look very elegant all over the place. And, you know, as long as it's detailed right, I think that's what design review was getting across to us was that as long as this is executed well, and it will be. Then actually, zinc isn't, it's not an alien material. From the applicant's point of view, zinc is also highly sustainable. So, you know, it's called a long life. It can be recycled. It's it's it's probably a better than use material than, say, for instance, timber in these days or clay tile because they have different properties to limit. So, at the end of the day, do you see a lot of big buildings because of its environmental credentials at the end of the day? Yeah, the other question was about the ground up's heat pump. Are you quite happy to have a condition that it's got soundproofing around it because these run at night to be most efficient for that. Yep. And that that's cool. The problems within the night because yes, I was always, yes, so he's got 300 millip free air around it, then we can put in the close around that. Yeah, thank you. Okay, I think we've been reassured on the heat pump counselor canning him. Thank you, chair. Concern has been raised by the neighbors in number 32 with regard to overlooking. I think that specifically with regard to windows on the south side of the building to their north side of their building. That's correct. Yes. Can you tell me what windows are in their north side of their building on the north side of their building? Yes. And there's when you look from the upper level of the applicant site, number 30, you can see a dormer window in their in their hips roof. So when they refer to overlooking. If I was in there, what they're saying is that if you stand up after the window, because you're at first all level, you can look into their garden. But all of those windows on the south side will be opaque. When we talk about opaque, we're not talking about the film that's put on. We're talking about a type of pilka to glass, which has got the paper set into it. So it's part of the frame system. And so therefore, although there are windows on that south side, they're all secondary. They will be opaque and therefore there isn't going to be any overlooking issue of another 32. So, you're saying all the windows. So there's two bedroom windows there. Are you going to go to paint glasses? Yes. So those, those two bedroom windows, the one on the south side, sorry, the one on the west side is set much further back. And the one on the east side outlooks onto the front driveway, of which there are no windows there. So the overlooking from both of those windows is vastly more restricted than the ones which are up against. So if you look on that plan there, the bedroom on the, if you look on the garden, can you go back to the first floor plan, please. Yeah, so first floor plan. So you'll see the master bedroom, there is a small slot window there, 440 mil wide and it overlooks the green ceiling roof. That is well beyond 8 meters away from the neighbors boundary. So we don't consider that to have an overlooking issue. It's also low set down. So it's not a high height. The bedroom immediately next to that has got two aspects. It's got one aspect to the west, which will be clear glass. It's got one aspect to the south, which can be opaque, because it's on that southern boundary. You then get the bathroom, which will be opaque by its nature anyway, because nobody wants to be looking into the bathroom. The window next door to that can also be opaque, and then you've got the window, which looks on today from the front bedroom, which looks directly onto the driveway. There are no windows for it to look into. It's a front driveway at the end of the day. So there's no, it's not an immunity space. But if there was, if it was necessary to have that as opaque, then of course, we're going to accept that as being opaque rather than getting a refusal. So there's ways of negotiating all that. I'm just querying it because the update states that one bathroom on the south elevation would be glazed and obscure glass, whereas it says that all of them in the document is in our pack. It says, so when you look at, if you can go back to the elevation of your place, you'll see that the windows which are dark, those are the windows which we refer into as being opaque. Okay, so if you look at the bottom right hand elevation, you'll see you've got the bay window for the bathroom, which is dark. You've got the immediate window next to it and window to the left. They all overlook the carriage and those ones are the ones which have potential to overlook number 32, but you've got to remember as well, there is a substantial planting screen there already. And so whilst the neighbor talks about this change in every which there is, our reality is that when you actually stand there, you see very little of their garden space. But we're not objectionable to having the mode paper, which is why we're showing the drawings as being opaque. Thank you. So we can, we can raise that with the officer, perhaps add that to the conditions. Councillor CANDY. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. If there's no more questions of, oh, Councillor. Thank you, Chair. I'm just trying to check on the clans, are they going to be any so and. Yes, so what we've done is because of the way the roofs orientated to keep those cables smaller in relation to the surrounding buildings, that gives us the ability to have two south facing roofs. Those solar panels are integral. So rather than being bolt-ons, which you'd traditionally get with say a clay roof tile, we've seen you're able to set those tiles completely flush the zinc work. Councillor CANDY. Lovely. Thank you very much indeed, gentlemen. You may return to your seats now. Thank you. Thank you. Charlotte, did you want to add anything before we get to members questions? No, thank you, Chair. Okay, members. So we'll take questions on the whole report. I think we have discussed the issue of the obscuration of windows overlooking the neighbour. So perhaps we can add those other two windows to condition four. Is that possible? Yes, Chair. I believe so. We can put more specifically the first four windows with an S, certainly in the bathroom dressing room and bedroom on the south elevation, so it matches the grey ones there, members feel that's necessary. I think that would be taking in Belt and Breece's approach, but since the architecture said that that's what they're planning to do anyway, we might sort of condition it. Thank you. Just a huge other neighbour, really. Councillor Langford-Smith. Thank you, Chair. Can I just confirm the windows that are in the loft? We're assuming that they will open, but not be able to overlook the other properties. Yes, that's correct. Thank you. Any further questions on the whole report, members? Yeah, the TV is threatening to switch off. Sorry. No more questions? Sorry, you've had your opportunity. I think we've covered the queries that you had about the decking and the windows. Yes, we've covered the decking. We've covered that, and it's covered by condition as well. Yes, apparently there's an existing decking and it's only going up by small amounts. Okay, so members debate? Councillor Williams. Thank you, Chair. I think it's a very well designed property taking in regards to the climate crisis. So very much welcome that. I did have initial concerns about the overlooking aspects in regards to the neighbours. So I'm very welcome to see the amended condition so that it won't be overlooking the neighbours' properties. The glass will be obscured as well as the condition in regards to the decking. In regards to there will be a further submission of details in regards to the decking and screening. So I'm happy to support the office recommendation as the site fits in with other neighborhood properties as well. I think I'll just say a few words if I may. I did actually go and visit the site. Just do a drive by two days ago. And it is very much a eclectic mix as the officer said of housing around there. And both houses on either side of this, I think probably a 1930s bungalow. Yeah, 20s or 30s. I mean, it's quite an old bungalow is have been either rebuilt or completely changed from the original bungalows, which presumably were there. I take on board the concerns of the parish council and I agree that there is there's a huge amount of building going on and also at the moment you just need to drive around just to see it's going on all over the place. And you are losing a lot of small homes. And I do hope that you will be able to address that in your neighborhood plan. I think it's probably too late in this case and that horse has probably bolted. It looks and that kind of stick now that bungalow in amongst these very large family homes. But I do want to echo Council Williams and say it's a very well designed. Environmentally friendly, you know, it takes all the boxes and it's exactly the sort of thing. And you're not demolishing the original bungalow, you're embedding that carbon in the new home, which is brilliant and very much what we want to see going forward. There's so much embedded carbon in all these old homes that there's a knock. They're not fit for purpose anymore. And they're difficult to heat and all the rest of it so well done in looking at that and incorporating that into the new home. I was concerned about overlooking and it is a big house and it's going to basically fill the plot. But I think that with the obscuration that you have offered and we will condition on the windows that potentially could overlook the neighbor. I don't think it's going to be an issue. And with the addition of condition eight, I think the query is about the decking area will be addressed to everybody's satisfaction. And I'm sure that they will want to be good neighbors anyway and cooperate with the neighbors on that. So in bearing all of that in mind, I'm happy to to accept this as recommended by the officers. Are there any more contributions to debate members? No, so we go to the vote. So this recommendation is to permit this application. Can I see all those in favor? Nine and I'm just trying to thank you. So that application is approved with those two amended and additional conditions. Thank you. We now need to move on to our final item on the agenda and that requires just a short pause. It's not just not an allowance to go and make coffee members. Whilst we change over presenting officers. Thank you. [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] Okay members, I believe we're ready for our final item on this morning's agenda, which is number nine. And it's a TPO application to confirm a TPO at St Bartholomew's Church, King Alfred Place in Winchester, and our presenting officer is John Bartlett. Good morning John. Morning Chair, thank you. So this is the confirmation TPO 234842 lime trees. The lime trees are situated in the St Bartholomew's Church yard, just to the northwest adjacent to high church path. These are the aerial photos that show the two trees, and what it shows there is a significant gap between these two remaining trees. The other tree that's on the edge of the the row trees there. So they're one of the few remaining trees in that particular section of the church yard. And this is a view of them from the church yard. And they have a good level of visual immunity and also contributes to the character of the conservation area. This location. And then this is the view from hides paths as well. So these are mature lime trees that have been previously pollarded. And so they've had that management undertaken for a number of years, and this is a frequent management practice has used on many lime trees across Winchester. So the reasons given for removing these lime trees is through the decay that's been found in the upper part of the lime trees. But in terms of giving the evidence as to why they need to be felt, we haven't seen the extent of the decay that's been alleged. So we don't believe there's enough evidence to philanthropy totally removed. But we have indicated an alternative form of management where these trees would be taken down to lower pollards, as shown with these two trees that are also in hides. So it's an instant bath on these church. And these are now at three to four meters. So they're low pollards, but over time they'll be able to form rounded crowns as a shame of these trees here. But we see the proposal is still to fill these these two trees as a result of the previous section two one one notice that was issued to us. And so our recommendation is to confirm two three four eight. Thank you. John, we now move to the public speaking and we have Mark Merritt, who is the agent. And I believe you have a presentation for us as well, Mark. Okay, I'm sure I'll sort that out. And when you're ready, you have three minutes for your presentation. Thank you. I'm Mark Merritt. I run my own company and we're just a merit tree specialist and also professional tree inspector on the land for awards. The reason for objection to the TPO is that they don't actually fully meet criteria for TPO consideration. And so to be considered for a TPO, there must be a high immunity value and reasonable condition. As you can see from the picture, that doesn't really constitute high immunity value. And with good condition in mind, the top of that tree is actually on the floor. We were asked to provide more information during the notification period of this application. And that section of tree actually fell off during the six week period that we were doing the the paperwork. Also, I think on that first picture, there is it's not very clear, but there's a fungal bracket just in the in the top fork in that main fork up on the right hand side, which we believe to be for Linus, which is a decay fungus that attacks the internal timber of the tree. So that renders it weak and liable to failure. So, with regards to that, I mean, the visual visual impact of that tree as you look at it is pretty limited. And the immunity value is very low. It offers no screening to the other properties from those properties because they look directly out onto the church. And it's a limited contribution to the character of the area, due to them being heavily topped in the past. So, historical, historical importance. They don't actually have any historical importance in the churchyard. And they can't be considered a rarity. Their lime trees are classes, common lime trees, which is they're not rare at all. So, due to the proximity to the footpath and the ongoing major concern health and safety, the longer they're retained, the more of a danger they become to the public. So, in summary, we would remove or have a significant negative impact on the local environment and the enjoyment by the public. I don't think so. None of the local residents are happy with the trees or the way that they look would really will significantly impact the immunity on the area. Again, no, they're in terrible condition. I think you can see that from the pictures. So, I think replanting would be the best option. And is the tree dead, dying or dangerous? Well, clearly, given the fungal bracket on there and that extent of that decay in that fork, which is now healed off and is now on the floor in the churchyard. I think we can all agree that that is dangerous. So, thank you. Members, do we have questions of clarification for Mr Merritt? Can I just ask, do you know what the church would like to replace these with? I don't, to be honest with you, I don't think anyone's actually come up with a clear plan of what they want to put in because we were told we couldn't take them out. They're now sort of in limbo, not knowing what they can do or not. So, I'm not entirely sure. If we were minded to not approve this, could we make recommendations to the church, to what they should plant and stuff? I'm not sure you could put a condition on a removable TPO. Well, I don't know what we could do. Well, we'll leave our offices to ponder that. Are there any more questions? Councillor Laming? Just clarify things. What would you suggest that we were replaced with? What to replace them with? I mean, again, you could go with more lines. If you want to continue the continuity of the area, then you could do put more lines in there. I mean, that's what they've got in the moment. So, there's no reason why they couldn't put a substantial replacement in. Not something that's a little skinny thing, but a fairly substantial tree in that that would, yeah, given the longevity, would be better than the thing at those. I think I saw something from. What's such tree size-wise? Can you use your microphone screen? How many years old would it truly need to be substantial in town? It goes on girth more than age, so you can get reasonable sized trees. The limitation you've got there is that footpath is very, very narrow. As you can see from the pictures earlier, you've got a very narrow footpath. So, to get a huge tree in there would be almost impossible. So, you could get something rootboard would be a fairly substantial rootboard, which would be sort of 16, 18 centimetre diameter. I think I saw something from a neighbour who was supporting that to have the trees cut down, and they thought that they wanted to put in fruit trees. Anyway, I would say fruit trees. Okay, Councillor Ashford. Thank you. If the trees were possibly pollarded, would that help, or would you suggest? That's not actually classed pollarding. What's happened there, they topped them. So, pollarding is bringing all the branches in, so you actually get a broad structure to the tree, which would be great. But if you were to do any more to that tree, so bring it down to three or four metres, you end up with a big woody stump, which will end up with those toughy bits on top, which is what you've got here. And with the decay fungus you've got in there, it's probably likely to be further down the stem as well. So, you'll end up with a huge stem that's going to decay because it never occludes, that will never heal over. And with these weak stems on the outside of it, so it will just end up being a three metre stump with the tufts on the top. Councillor White. So, regarding the rock or the decay, what's the kind of lifespan of that, I mean, how much longer can that tree survive? That's an unknown, to be honest with you, I mean, obviously that piece fell off during the process of us doing the notification. So, it's, I mean, it's going to continue to decay. But to actually extend that extends down the stem, we know it's fully in the top because the piece is peeled out and it's falling out. And the fungal bracket tells you that, but how far down the tree extends is an unknown unless you start doing invasive drill testing, so it's a difficult one to call. Councillor Langford Smith. Thank you, Chair. Can you undertake resistor graph testing on living trees to establish the extent of the decay? So, you could do that. Yeah, that could be done. It's worth the church, I've got the money to do it, or whether they want to do it, if you understand. So, it's not down to me to sort of, I mean, I can put that to them and say we can resist the graph here, but you'd be starting at the top, because that's what the case and then gradually trying to work your way down, which isn't sort of, I don't know if that's achievable. The reason for asking, Chair, so that would establish the existing life left in the tree, and whether or not supplementary planting could take place in the meantime before this tree is eventually diseased. Thank you for that clarification. Any more questions to our contributor, no? Thank you very much indeed, and may return to your seat. Thank you. Okay. We have no other public speakers. So, John, was there anything you wanted to add before we come to general questions? Yes, if I can, please, Chair. So, in terms of the suggested management going forward, we believe that these trees could be managed as a lower high pollards. For at least 20, further 20 years, as, as showing with the trees that are here. So, they will still be able to contribute to the character and visual immunity of the location. These lime trees are actually characteristic of this particular area within the churchyard. So, we believe they can be managed for that bit longer at a lower height to still carry on making that contribution to the local landscape. Obviously, new trees will take that bit longer to make that same contribution that these lime trees are making to the local landscape and the conservation area. Thank you. Are we able to confirm this TPO, but with the provider that that pollarding is recommended by our tree officer would be allowed? We couldn't do this on a particular TPO. We could only do a condition if it was an application that was submitted. So, without this TPO being confirmed that those trees would be at risk of being failed because the TPO would no longer be valid. So, we need to confirm the TPO and then the church would have to return with a request to do the low pollard. Yeah, so we have indicated that that would be an acceptable form of management in a future application. Is it possible then that we don't confirm the TPO, but insist on replanting with a like for like basis or an additional tree as well. No, I don't. I think we either approve the TPO or don't produce a TPO and then it's up to the church. What they do. Any more questions members? No, so we moved to debate. Councillor Lamey. Thank you, Chair. I'll form myself in a very unusual position here, but normally I would approve TPOs as they serve a very useful purpose within the community. Looking at these trees and listening to the expert, I'm in a quandary of whether it's worth doing a short term measure when we should be looking at a much longer term view of this. From an ecology point of view, etc. So I'm not sure whether I can support this or not. Councillor Williams. Thank you, Chair. I do feel as the immunity value is much less than the normal sorts of trees that we see coming through. However, I still feel that with this being a conservation zone as well. I think applying the TPO would be a sensible decision to make today and then a further application at a later date regarding the management of the trees themselves. To increase their immunity value or if failing is required, then a management plan to have full replanting or replanting alongside the management of these current ones in the future. I mean, the application before us today is that we can't condition that. So I'd be minded to have the TPOs be put on so that in the future we would have some sort of control over the management of those trees, especially as it is in a conservation zone. Conservation zones, we should only be accepting applications that can serve or enhance those zones and removing the trees altogether today without any control over future management. I fear as though that either conservation or enhancing aspects would be ignored. Yeah, so I feel that the ecological and the community value of these trees as they are outweighs any problems that they might have at the moment, there doesn't seem to be a plan of what they might be replaced by. And it's very difficult to replace very mature trees with something equivalent of ecological value. So I would support it. And thanks for the Langford Smith. Thank you chair. I think I will support the officer's recommendation with the pollarding of the trees to come forward possibly in a future application. It's also too important to note that decaying wood provides an important habitat. So the church have the opportunity to mitigate the future loss of these trees through planting in the meantime, but for now I will support the officer's recommendation of reforming the TPO. And there's no more comes look clear. Just a quick, just to say, I will support the TPO with the pollard pollarding. I hope will take place in the future, but if that is up to the church, I gather to put the application and fingers crossed. I hope they do it, but I support the TPO. Thank you. So I think I think that's all debates. So this application to confirm the TPO is before us. Can I see all those in favor of confirming this TPO, please. That's a second chat. And those against one and abstentions. One. What chair. So that's.