Worthy of a TPO?

[Jcarbor]

Good morning all,

Can i ask for your opinions on this cherry thats pushing over this estate boundary wall, its in a conservation area and the owner wants to remove it so he can rebuild the structure as to it original condition.Its got a large included bark junction on its trunk that open at the top with debris and vegetation growing from it.

I have been asked to withdraw the application straight away. The wall is 15 degrees out of true.

[Jcarbor]

here is the wall.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

The likelihood is the TO would like to see the tree retained, the union looks stable, and the wall rebuilt to accommodate the tree if there's an engineering solution to allow for such. Hence dialogue is important.

 

However, you're not oblige to withdraw the notification and once 6 weeks has expired, from formal registration, and with evidence of such, e.g. an acknowledgement letter, the works can proceed. That's the way the legislation works (see https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tree-preservation-orders-and-trees-in-conservation-areas#Protecting-trees-in-conservation-areas a relevant extract from which is below.

 

What about trees in a conservation area that are not protected by a Tree Preservation Order?

Trees in a conservation area that are not protected by an Order are protected by the provisions in section 211 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. These provisions require people to notify the local planning authority, using a ‘section 211 notice’, 6 weeks before carrying out certain work on such trees, unless an exception applies. The work may go ahead before the end of the 6 week period if the local planning authority gives consent. This notice period gives the authority an opportunity to consider whether to make an Order on the tree.

 

Regards,

Paul

Edited January 21, 2019 by AA Teccie (Paul)
missing text

[swinny]

Think I’d argue for removal there. The wall cannot be rebuilt further out and take up part of the highway. 

 

The wall will always be an issue. The roots on the cherry tree will always be ever expanding and spoil the structure again further down the line. Possible roots causing issues at the clients side also.

 

tree could be retained with small reduction maybe and keep an eye on the union? But still wall issue. Not sensible nor feasible imo

 

to be fair surely this tree has given its best and is no longer suitable for its location and it would be better to establish a new tree in a better location for future generations. 

 

Just my thoughts from a photo

Edited January 21, 2019 by swinny

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

6 minutes ago, swinny said:

..to be fair surely this tree has given its best and is no longer suitable for its location and it would be better to establish a new tree in a better location for future generations. 

 

Very valid comments

 

The above, a reasonable and pragmatic outcome, could not be conditioned / controlled at all by the LPA/TO and hence would be down to the goodwill and cooperation of the land owner...hopefully an understanding and 'arboriculturally'  sympathetic one.

 

Paul

[Jcarbor]

Thanks for the input, as Swinny says that tree is in the wrong place, its had its day, the wall was there long before the tree and there I’d no way the wall can be built out on to the pavement devoid highway, my client most definitely doesn’t want to have a gap engineered into his wall to accommodate the tree trunk ( A for security and B for aesthetics)and the tree is also going to continue to increase in size. This particular council is often so inflexible in its ways and often places extra financial burden on householders when not needed.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Not advocating / encouraging such but there is a compensation clause in 'the Act' (see https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tree-preservation-orders-and-trees-in-conservation-areas#Compensating-for-loss-or-damage ). It's a more complex aspect of the TPO legislation, which I don't fully understand tbh but I know others in the forum will.

Simplistically, as I see it, if the LPA TPO'd the tree, and then refused consent for removal, on the basis that the tree must stay and an engineering solution found (don't know what / if) if the 'additional cost' is £500 or above, a compensation claim may be lodged.

 

Regards,

Paul

 

PS Where you are, Harrogate, is a beautiful spa / garden town is it not, and hence the LA / TOs will seek to protect the trees / urban forest within their jurisdiction / control and oft come under managerial and political (small 'p') pressure to do so.

[Gary Prentice]

1 hour ago, swinny said:

Think I’d argue for removal there. The wall cannot be rebuilt further out and take up part of the highway. 

 

I've had a couple of occasions where a TPO'd tree has conflicted with retaining walls which had to be rebuilt. 

 

On both occasions the TO said that he'd talk to highways to allowing re-siting of the walls, further onto the pavement, if necessary to rebuild accounting for root growth.

[Mark Bolam]

Do you have any pics of the crown JCarbor?

[Gary Prentice]

1 hour ago, swinny said:

Think I’d argue for removal there. The wall cannot be rebuilt further out and take up part of the highway. 

 

The wall will always be an issue. The roots on the cherry tree will always be ever expanding and spoil the structure again further down the line. Possible roots causing issues at the clients side also.

 

tree could be retained with small reduction maybe and keep an eye on the union? But still wall issue. Not sensible nor feasible imo

 

to be fair surely this tree has given its best and is no longer suitable for its location and it would be better to establish a new tree in a better location for future generations. 

 

Just my thoughts from a photo

I can't really see future growth as being particularly rapid or extensive. I imagine that that tree is in it's mature growth stage and putting the minimum of incremental growth on.