Repollarding with conservation area

[Adam M]

Hi Adam,

 

Sorry, I'm not sure if you're asking (me) a question here or making a statement

 

Whilst it makes perfect sense, and cuts down on bureaucracy for both the applicant / contractor and the LPA, I'm just not sure if there's the same opportunity with a Sect. 211 Notice as there is a TPO consent which can be duly conditioned which are then enforceable if anything outside of the scope of the consent occurs.

 

...or maybe I'm just over-complicating it as is often my way

 

Cheers,

Paul

 

What I copy/pasted came straight from the gov tpo/ca guidelines page.

[roseyweb]

Damn I was hoping this would re deffinate crack on from everyone in the arbtalk legal department

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Damn I was hoping this would re deffinate crack on from everyone in the arbtalk legal department

 

You could just crack-on in the hope that it wouldn't be in the public interest to bring a prosecution..... But that would be a fairly ballsy call

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

What I copy/pasted came straight from the gov tpo/ca guidelines page.

 

Aaah, okay, sorry...get with the program Paul

 

 

Cheers Adam

[roseyweb]

There in a high profile location so I can't crack on, if they were not visible i could be tempted.

Its the time issue were getting a bit into a bad time for pruning id't have to wait for summer if its not done soon

[roseyweb]

You're confusing ballsy with stupid. Committing a criminal offence, possibly putting your client in Court, or even just getting them interviewed under caution is not a good way to demonstrate professionalism, or have your clients or own best interests at heart.

 

Ed

 

Chill out ed, xxxx

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

You're confusing ballsy with stupid. Committing a criminal offence, possibly putting your client in Court, or even just getting them interviewed under caution is not a good way to demonstrate professionalism, or have your clients or own best interests at heart.

 

 

 

Ed

 

 

Emmmmm, no Ed, I wasn't, no confusion at all. Just looking at all the possible options - kinda like if you're late for work this morning you "could" exceed the speed limit or contravene some traffic regs to make up time - even though you know there COULD be implications. I'm sure you wouldn't 😳

 

I said "could", and indeed one "could" just crack-on. It wasn't a recommendation, but it IS one option.

 

The possible implications of doing so, as you highlight above, are just a part of the decision making process - not necessarily the deciding factor.

 

It is entirely appropriate to consider possible implications and the likelihood of encountering them. But you may also recognise, in the reality of commercial enterprise, risk v reward is a reality.

 

Without re-reading the thread, I don't recall there having been any mention of condition of the trees or possible exceptions either.

 

So there COULD be exceptions to the requirement to submit notice and it COULD be a valid consideration to ignore the requirement.

 

Just looking at it with a broader lens!

[Gary Prentice]

Depending on the helpfullness of the TO, you could also just send a picture, explain why you want to crack on and see if he'll send a 'not-opposed' letter/email back.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Depending on the helpfullness of the TO, you could also just send a picture, explain why you want to crack on and see if he'll send a 'not-opposed' letter/email back.

 

Hey Gary, you've clearly got some "very" helpful TOs in your neck-of-the-woods if they'll do that. I think what you're actually referring to is, in effect, a Sect. 211 notice that the TO responds to formally saying not opposed / no objections.

 

In a former (Planning) TO role I got my knuckles rapped for issuing "de minimus" works letters as, effectively, an exemption. It worked a treat but the legislation doesn't allow for it so neither did my departmental manager

 

Cheers,

Paul

[Gary Prentice]

Hey Gary, you've clearly got some "very" helpful TOs in your neck-of-the-woods if they'll do that. I think what you're actually referring to is, in effect, a Sect. 211 notice that the TO responds to formally saying not opposed / no objections.

 

In a former (Planning) TO role I got my knuckles rapped for issuing "de minimus" works letters as, effectively, an exemption. It worked a treat but the legislation doesn't allow for it so neither did my departmental manager

 

Cheers,

Paul

 

Yep, should have added 'send formal notification' after works - just to create the paper trail.