Agenda item - Public Questions

Written Questions: To receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on 27 October 2022.

54.1    The was one public question from Gareth Hall:

In 2017 planning permission was given to demolish the tea pavilion in Hove Park and build a restaurant.

It was agreed that a healthy elm tree could be felled provided replacement trees were planted once the restaurant was built.

The tree was felled but the new build hadn’t gone ahead.

Why does the planning committee not put a time limit between the felling of trees and the replacement of them?

Gareth Hall

Response:

Thank you for your question. Planning permission to replace the existing café was granted under delegated powers in June 2018 (reference BH2017/02095). The works allowed for the removal of the elm tree beside the existing cafe, with replacement tree-planting being required by condition. The condition required that the approved planting be carried out in the first planting season after the development was completed.

So, in answer to your question, the condition does specify a time limit for the replacement of trees lost to development, which is within the first planting season after the works are completed. However, local planning authorities have no power to ensure works are completed, or how long that process might take.

It is also worth noting that ‘implementing’ a planning permission can consist of as little as digging a trench. Thereafter, the permission remains ‘live’ and can be implemented at any future point.

In other words, we don’t know whether or not the developer intends to complete the work at some point.

As a result, we could not put a time limit between the felling of trees and the replacement of them, since, in law, once implemented, the decision whether or not to go ahead with a development and the timetable for any such development, rest solely with the developer.

It should perhaps also be noted that any tree which is not subject to a Tree Preservation Order or lies within a conservation area, can be removed without consent.

Finally, as noted, this application did not come before this Committee. Personally, I think that is a real pity. Although we have no greater powers than do officers, and might easily have made the same decision, I believe democratic oversight might have been beneficial, especially had members had the chance to ask relevant questions. Unfortunately, since there was only one public objection, and the ward Councillors did not choose to ask for the application to be brought here, this did not happen.

Do you have a supplementary question?

Why is this down to the developer?

Response:

          The legal stipulations state that the Local Planning Authority have no further powers on this matter. The Planning Manager will forward to legal wording being referred to.