TPO confirmed but owner not informed

[Mark Bolam]

I’d apply for a fell under a 5 day DDD and await response.

 

Get on the phone to the TO tomorrow.

[Mark Bolam]

And I’ll bare my arse in Burtons if that hasn’t heaved.

 

(Sorry to go into ‘80’s speak).

[Johnelle]

5 day DDD seems an interesting approach, need a survey first I expect

[Chris at eden]

20 hours ago, Johnelle said:

The offending polar...

And thanks so much for all your advice/comments so far.

The tree is about 60-80ft with, as you can see, a serious lean. The ground below has risen to form a mound comprised of very large bare roots (8” in diameter)

Our main objection is that the lean is towards a grade 2* listed tithe barn. Gov.uk says trees near national monuments should be discussed with HeritageEngland before slapping on a TPO. That didn’t happen either, planning committee not even seen the tree, or TO who only saw its amenity value from the road.

Have been advised about judiciary review but can’t afford it...

My view? What’s more important - a listed building or an big tree that can be seen from the main road...

Any advice?

Listed building and scheduled monument are not the same thing although they ca be applied to the same building.  You don’t have to inform historic England for TPOing trees near listed buildings. Only scheduled monuments. 

[Chris at eden]

18 hours ago, Puffingbilly413 said:

I could look it up but it's nearly time for tea...

 

Am trying to remember whether amongst the criteria for deeming a tree worthy of a TPO, a TO is supposed to consider defects, safety issues etc as a matter of course ie can they even put a TPO forward without having satisfied themselves of the absence/existence of such things?  I'm guessing that due to COVID-related restrictions on entering properties etc, the TO concerned (as hinted at by the OP) didn't inspect the tree other than from the road - hence issues with the root plate etc and proximity to targets were not properly observed?

 

I wonder who carries the liability in such cases where hurdles have, possibly incorrectly, been put in the way of removal and the tree then fails and causes damage?

 

Interesting one.

The LPA doesn’t assess tree condition, only visual amenity.  There is no reason that cannot be done from the road.  The owner can then either object based on condition or apply to fell based on condition.  The safety of the tree is the responsibility of the owner not the LPA. Although it would be a bit dodgy to TPO something that was obviously dangerous when viewed from the street.  The OP just needs to follow the process with one of the above options.  The owner hold the liability. Unless, they submit an app with supporting evidence and the LPA disagree and refuse and then the tree falls as a result. 

[Chris at eden]

3 hours ago, Johnelle said:

5 day DDD seems an interesting approach, need a survey first I expect

There is no 5 day exemption for DDD any more, it went with the 2012 regs. It is now dead trees, dead branches within trees or where there is an immediate risk of serious harm.  Note the word immediate. 

[Chris at eden]

3 hours ago, Johnelle said:

5 day DDD seems an interesting approach, need a survey first I expect

You will need a report if you are applying to fell based on condition. Not for a five day notice as the risk would need to be so obvious and immediate that you wouldn’t have time and it can be assessed by a layperson. For example, a large hanging branch over the road. 

[Johnelle]

This was the view of the tree from the road when TPO served. And when in leaf it blocks the view of the church steeple. This is the basis on which the TPO was served. 

As to the immediate risk of harm, I take your point. Poplars are grown for wind breaks so it should be pretty stable but it’s the lean and the mound of roots to one side which concern us.

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by Johnelle

[Chris at eden]

Based on the photo it probably meets the criteria in terms of amenity and expediency.  As such you will be looking at other issues for example risk.  You are probably right to be concerned re the lean and in particular lifting of the root plate. If it has moved recently it may even meets the immediate risk category. If not it will be an app or objection.  Just to be clear, I wasn’t saying there is no risk. Just that you can’t just put in a five day notice saying it is dangerous anymore.  It has to be justified. That is why the wording was changed, dangerous is too ambiguous.  Also, if you put in an app and it is refused, you can’t appeal it until the TPO has been confirmed and they may not confirm the order for six months.  Putting in an objection will almost certainly delay confirmation so there are decisions to be made. 
 

it really needs to be looked at properly so you can make those decisions.  Where are you based?  
 

[Johnelle]

Cotswolds

Where we have quite a few trees...