The Cotswold District Council Planning and Licensing Committee met on 13 August 2025, and voted to refuse a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) for a Corsican Pine in Church Westcote, and approved the appointment of members to the Licensing Sub-Committees for the 2025/26 municipal year.

Tree Preservation Order 25/00001/IND

The committee considered objections and support for Tree Preservation Order 25/00001/IND, which concerned a Corsican Pine at Corner Cottage, Church Westcote. The Tree Officer, James Tyson, presented the history of the TPO proposal, site location maps, and photographs. He also noted that a risk assessment had deemed the tree to be low risk.

David Lewis, an objector, raised concerns about the tree's long-term stability and associated risk to property and personal safety, arguing that the council's risk assessment didn't account for the exposed location and that the tree should be considered a moderate risk, with removal being the preferred option. He also questioned the tree's public amenity value, citing its lean, unbalanced form, disproportionate size, and lack of aesthetic appeal, and noted that it already had protection under the conservation area designation.

During questioning, it was noted that:

• The tree was approximately 25m in height and 8–10m from the property.
• Any appeal against a decision made at the meeting would be with the Planning Inspectorate.
• The previous tree that had been removed had not been replanted.
• A replanting condition could not be considered if the TPO was rejected.
• The altitude and exposure of the position had not been specifically noted in the risk assessment of the Corsican pine.
• When permission was granted for the removal of the initial tree, the exposure of the site for the remaining tree had been taken into account.
• The prevailing winds were South-Westerly and there would not have had any previous protection from the previously removed tree.
• There would be no new growth from the trunk to compensate for the bare areas but other branches might grow into that space.
• The Corsican Pine (Black Pine) was brought to the UK in 1759 and was a common timber tree often planted as stand-alone specimens.
• There were no figures for tree losses in the village; the only incidents known were those reported at the meeting.
• If the TPO was confirmed, and disease was later discovered by the applicant, a further application by the applicant could apply for removal of the tree and a replant agreed.
• The amenity assessment determined that removal of the tree would detract from the amenity and the character of the conservation area.
• The Corsican Pine species was not particularly susceptible to falling with strong winds.
• If the tree did fall while a TPO was in place, the council would not be accountable as the responsibility remained with the owner.
• It was confirmed that causing anxiety to the applicant or neighbours was not a material planning consideration in deciding whether to confirm the TPO.

Members made the following comments:

• The tree was close to the house, was leaning and was not thought to be particularly attractive.
• That the Corsican Pine location was causing anxiety to the owner and the council had a duty of care to its residents.
• Many local residents had communicated their safety concerns which were weighed against the tree's amenity value.
• Climate change was increasing the frequency of intense winds, which should be taken into consideration.
• Discussion took place regarding the potential precedent for the removal of future TPOs.

Councillor Patrick Coleman proposed refusing the officer's recommendations and to not confirm the Tree Preservation Order 25/0001/TPO, and Councillor Ray Brassington seconded the proposal. The reasons given not to confirm the TPO were:

• The tree was 25 metres tall and located only 8 metres from the house.
• The tree was already leaning and in a prominent position on a ridge.
• Given the prevailing wind direction, the tree was considered to pose a potential danger.

The committee voted to refuse the making of Tree Preservation Order 25/00001/TPO.

Appointment to Sub-Committee

The committee considered a report to confirm the appointments of the Licensing sub-committees for the current council year.

It was proposed that five members from the committee form a subcommittee in accordance with political proportionality in relation to taxis, private hire, and street trading sub-committee. The Licensing sub-committee (Licensing Act 2003 Matters) would be formed from a rota of Planning and Licensing Committee Members.

It was requested that training be provided for new members.

Councillor Ray Brassington proposed appointing members to sub-committees as set out in Annex A Sub-Committee Nominations - 2025-26 and Annex B Licensing Sub-Committee Rota - 2025-26. Councillor David Fowles seconded the proposal, and the committee voted to accept the recommendations of the appointments to the Licensing Sub-Committees as set out in Annex A and Annex B:

1. Councillors Ian Watson (Chair), Julia Judd (Vice-Chair), Ray Brassington, David Fowles and Michael Vann were appointed to the Licensing Sub-Committee (Taxi, Private Hire and Street Trading);
2. It was noted that Licensing Sub-Committee (Licensing Act 2003) membership will comprise the Chair or Vice Chair of the Planning and Licensing Committee and two other members of the Planning and Licensing Committee drawn on a rota basis from the remaining members of the Planning and Licensing Committee (subject to their availability and completion of licensing training prior to participation in a Licensing Sub Committee (Licensing Act 2003) meeting), as set out in Annex B Licensing Sub-Committee Rota - 2025-26.