211 notice details.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

2 hours ago, Joe Newton said:

 That's kind of how I saw it. Just the planning department pushing their remit a bit.

 

Like I said that worded it as a "request" not a condition, so I gave it due consideration and carried on. 

Clumsiness (as well as obviously wholly inappropriate) wording it as “oversee”. Just to really push the buttons, you could have made a complete ass of the job, smash the shed/fence/greenhouse, kill the cat and dump hyd oil all over the drive - LA overseeing (owning the job) so please refer any complaints to the green space man. 

 

Obvs an unrealistic scenario but funny....

[Khriss]

17 hours ago, Gary Prentice said:

Made a complete cock up posting too early.

 

The TO needs to decide the effect of the work and then decide whether to accept it or or TPO stuff. Providing enough info to make sure they understand the intent, as long as that's based on good practice or management, should be beneficial and makes you look professional (read, they get more helpful if you don't make their life harder)

 

I normally give reduction specs the same as an application, but wouldn't supply details as to the current height/spread of trees or hedges. That isn't even a requirement of a full on app.

.....that would be the wine then -am having same problem this week k

[Khriss]

Just had my Defra biodiversity offset refused fr third time - I think they guy is a Cock end  who hasn't even read the notes ! K

[Coletti]

Validation of a S211, really! Well the clock is ticking, and it started ticking from the first full day after the notice was served. If they are not happy they must serve a TPO, because after the six weeks is up you can go ahead and do the notified works. Maybe the council will kick  off but they cannot validate the notice as there's no procedure to validate it. It's a notice, not an application.
 
Of course going through all the hassle of the council threatening prosecution etc might be worse than indulging them. And your client would definitely be pissed off if threatened with prosecution.
 
See S211(3) TCPA1990
 
However, you still have the problem that it's not clear what you want to do, which could be different things to you and the tree officer. And that may still result in prosecution.
 
I'd write to the council along the lines of: I am writing to you to provide a detailed specification in accordance with BS3998 to clarify the specification set out in the S211 notice served on xx/xx/2018 for the tree at (address). (Set out the detailed specification).
 
It's easier for the tree officer to decide if the works are appropriate, or not if they know what the works are. Reduce in height by 5m means different things for different trees: if the tree's 100m tall it means a finished height of 95m. Not too much loss of amenity. If the tree is 5m it means a finished height of ground level. Total loss of amenity. Same spec, completely different outcomes.
 
To summarise: You've served notice and the clock is ticking. After six weeks, but before two years, you can undertake the work in the notice unless the trees are TPO'd. The council can't prosecute you for undertaking work in contravention of S211 as it is a defence that you served notice. But, there is a possibility they could prosecute you for exceeding the specified works as it's not clear what you want to do.

Thank you, what you have said is much more along my line of thinking (rightly or wrongly).

I have given them the extra information they have asked for but also highlighted that we are nearly 4 weeks into a 6 week process so I require their decision without undue delay so I'll see where that goes.

I hate to make a deal out of dealing with councils, we all have to do it as part of the job but this particular council is known by many local tree surgeons for being very difficult and to be honest, it's rather annoying as it's completely unnecessary.

I called them not so long ago to check if there were any tpo or conservation area at a property and they refused to tell me until I told them what work I was intending on doing. After explaining I was going to be removing a dangerous roadside beech tree that has kretzschmaria deusta and is falling to pieces and needed to know if I had to submit retrospective planning for the removal or not, they explained they were tempted to rush down and serve emergency tpo's. This I can understand but I don't feel they have a right to refuse me the information I have requested pending a good enough explanation from my self. There were no tpo or conservation area for the property.