Jump to content
benedmonds

TPO Application time......

Recommended Posts

Some interesting points have been presented - eg the inapplicability of 2 year limit (didn’t know that, could be useful in the future even though most 211s are done fairly quickly after 6 weeks just because that’s how it is) but can’t help but feel the cause of the problem here is the subjects inability to grasp, what I’ve always found to be, a fairly simple, quick and easy online submission process via the planning portal. 

 

Failing to grasp the requirements of the system doesn’t (necessarily) mean the system is flawed....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EdwardC said:

Hi Gary. It's to do with the wording in s211 (3)(b) TCPA.

 

S211 (3)(b)(i) says you can do the works if the council cosent to it, as per your councils letter. However, and importantly, there's no time limit.

 

S211 (3)(b)(ii) says you can do the works after six weeks, but in this circumstance, imposes the two year time limit.

 

Your council is effectively imposing a condition, which they can't do, but many do it this way.

Thanks for this Edward, strangely enough it's the first I've heard of it (every day is a school day).

 

It seems a bit of a loophole.

If the council don't oppose a notice to fell but the notifier leaves the tree, which then matures to provide a much more significant amenity benefit to its surroundings although being situated in a conservation area its no longer protected - unless the LA later decide to TPO it because they recognise its increased significance.  I imagine there's a lot of room there for the LA to think trees are covered by the CA status 'forgetting' that they consented removal years previously. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point I was trying to make is that it makes more sense for the TO and the arborist to work together in a more pragmatic way.

 

Although a s211 notice does not take any particular form the guidance notes states that 'a notice submitted' to the LPA.  You're effectively serving a legal notice on the LPA and it should be in writing (whether that is a handwritten note, typed on posh paper, email or standard form).  In my opinion, I don't think a verbal conversation would be adequate to call a notice.  It would be like a TO telling someone verbally to plant a tree and calling it a Tree Replacement Notice.

 

As for the two year rule for s211.  You're right.  If the Council gives consent then the two year rule does not apply and the work can take place whenever. 

 

However, if in the hypothetical scenario above, that the tree was left and the tree was later found to be worthy of a TPO then the TPO would stand.  TPO's are only challenged in the high court (would you client run the risk of that and its associated costs?).  The recourse would be for the tree owner to apply for the same work again and if the work is refused appealed to PINS.  It would be an interesting one would that.  That being said, if the tree was in a condition or situation were it couldn't be TPO'd in the first place would it be worthy of a TPO later?  Shouldn't the TO be looking to the future when making decisions especially where s211's are concerned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Spideylj said:

I think the point I was trying to make is that it makes more sense for the TO and the arborist to work together in a more pragmatic way. I'm starting to like you! :D

 

Although a s211 notice does not take any particular form the guidance notes states that 'a notice submitted' to the LPA.  You're effectively serving a legal notice on the LPA and it should be in writing (whether that is a handwritten note, typed on posh paper, email or standard form).  In my opinion, I don't think a verbal conversation would be adequate to call a notice. 

 

It would be like a TO telling someone verbally to plant a tree and calling it a Tree Replacement Notice. Some LAs would like you to think that that was the case! 

 

As for the two year rule for s211.  You're right.  If the Council gives consent then the two year rule does not apply and the work can take place whenever. 

 

However, if in the hypothetical scenario above, that the tree was left and the tree was later found to be worthy of a TPO then the TPO would stand. You've lost me there.Do you mean that a TPO made at some later date, after the council consented its removal? I get that obviously. TPO's are only challenged in the high court (would you client run the risk of that and its associated costs?).  The recourse would be for the tree owner to apply for the same work again and if the work is refused appealed to PINS.  It would be an interesting one would that.  That being said, if the tree was in a condition or situation were it couldn't be TPO'd in the first place would it be worthy of a TPO later?  Of course it could. A small young tree is generally viewed as of little significance and easily replaced. But as it matures it gains more significance to its surroundings which may also have changed. Maybe the maturing tree has become more publicly visible due to changes in the surroundings. Shouldn't the TO be looking to the future when making decisions especially where s211's are concerned? One would hope so, which is why I find the legislation odd. On one hand you've two years to fell, on the other the LA are obliged to continue to assess the 'worth' of the tree and to TPO it if appropriate because it's no linger protected by the CA designation. It seems a bit of an anomaly that creates work, whereas if there was a time limit to fell, the same as a tree works app, the onus of continuing assessment of 'worth' would be removed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Spideylj said:

I don't think a verbal conversation would be adequate to call a notice.

Most conversations use verbs as do written notices.😛

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.