More info required from tree office?!

[shillo]

Applied to reduce limb touching chimney to give 2m clearance. Literally a five minute job with pole saw. N S E or W?? The limb touching the chimney!! Height above ground level?? The height of the chimney!!

How would you reply?

Reference:3164/18/TPO Received: 21 September 2018

Proposal:

T1: Turkey Oak - please specify whether intended works are removal of branch touching chimney at ? metres from ground level on North/South/East/West side of tree or reduction of x1 limb by up to 2 metres at ? metres from ground level.

 

Request for Further Details for an application to Undertake Works to Trees in a Conservation

Area or to a tree subject to a Tree Preservation Order

APPLICATION INVALID

[Mark Bolam]

Good luck complying to BS3998 with a pole saw!

[Mick Dempsey]

Comical, I’m glad I don’t have to deal with nonsense like that anymore.

 

Mind you I have other paperwork nonsense that would blow your minds to deal with.

 

I suppose there’s a kind of cosmic level of it that everyone has to overcome.

[Gary Prentice]

On 01/10/2018 at 19:38, shillo said:

Applied to reduce limb touching chimney to give 2m clearance. Literally a five minute job with pole saw. N S E or W?? The limb touching the chimney!! Height above ground level?? The height of the chimney!!

How would you reply?

Reference:3164/18/TPO Received: 21 September 2018

Proposal:

T1: Turkey Oak - please specify whether intended works are removal of branch touching chimney at ? metres from ground level on North/South/East/West side of tree or reduction of x1 limb by up to 2 metres at ? metres from ground level.

 

Request for Further Details for an application to Undertake Works to Trees in a Conservation

Area or to a tree subject to a Tree Preservation Order

APPLICATION INVALID

To be fair, the application failed to meet the requirements for validation in the first sentence. For several years now, the requirement has been to provide the residual crown spread after pruning, whether that's the entire canopy or partial/in one direction. It's no harder to write a correctly worded application, than it is to write one that may not be validated. 

 

If it's only one limb, something like:

'Reduce lateral limb extending to the (N,E, S, W) at x m above ground level, to a residual branch length of x m to provide a two m clearance from the chimney. Pruning to be limited to the removal/reduction of secondary and tertiary branches only and in compliance with BS3998'

 

Bear in mind that if a TPO'd tree is mullered after receiving consent, the LA would want a cast iron specification of work that they could show a judge had been exceeded. I know it's annoying when stuff comes back, but shouldn't we all be on board to raise the standards and improve the system where we can?

 

 

 

 

[Gary Prentice]

14 hours ago, EdwardC said:

There's a difference between specifying BS 5837 and compling with BS 5837.

But that's the climbers problem. And after that, the LA's to decide whether there's enough of a contravention that it's in the public interest to pursue it. 

 

Hopefully, everyone is reasonable enough to appreciate that trees don't read the rules and regs and just grow without neatly fitting into the little boxes that we try to fit them in.

[shillo]

13 hours ago, Gary Prentice said:

To be fair, the application failed to meet the requirements for validation in the first sentence. For several years now, the requirement has been to provide the residual crown spread after pruning, whether that's the entire canopy or partial/in one direction. It's no harder to write a correctly worded application, than it is to write one that may not be validated. 

 

If it's only one limb, something like:

'Reduce lateral limb extending to the (N,E, S, W) at x m above ground level, to a residual branch length of x m to provide a two m clearance from the chimney. Pruning to be limited to the removal/reduction of secondary and tertiary branches only and in compliance with BS3998'

 

Bear in mind that if a TPO'd tree is mullered after receiving consent, the LA would want a cast iron specification of work that they could show a judge had been exceeded. I know it's annoying when stuff comes back, but shouldn't we all be on board to raise the standards and improve the system where we can?

 

 

 

 

Yes i know your right, just ranting out loud!

 

Extra annoying as i know another local tree surgeon has recently just been let off for felling 6 mature tpo'd trees. Notorious for getting away with tpo stuff. Heard he got away with nailing a ganoderma bracket to a tree and claimed it had to be felled.

Why do i bother filling in forms?! Have to also do it online now which takes me flipping all night!

[Gary Prentice]

Rise above it, keep doing it right (and being right) and your professionalism will eventually win out.

[sbyorkshire]

Just set up standard clauses like the one above, they the LPA need to know if it goes 'wrong' they have prove of what should have been done. There is no point having 2m if it doesn't relate to anything else that measurable.

[sbyorkshire]

Online applications take under 10 mins and you have a history of what you have sent.