Dropped kerb planning rejected due to RPA

[Paul in the woods]

1 hour ago, Anno said:

Love the Forum, hate the Council!

I can't speak for others but as one who has moaned about council behaviour in the past I'll just add the following. There are obviously some hard working and knowledgeable people in councils and money at the front end may be less than is required. I certainly appreciate any help and advice they give here.

 

However, I have had to deal with various councils over the years and I'm normally met with very unhelpful people who's first responce is to lie.

 

I'm still waiting for a responce from my highways department as to why they thought they could undermine a 60+ year old beach tree by using a JCB on my private land. Said beech tree shortly fell across the road. This is one reason why I take the comments that councils value trees with a very large pinch of salt.

[john87]

7 minutes ago, Paul in the woods said:

I can't speak for others but as one who has moaned about council behaviour in the past I'll just add the following. There are obviously some hard working and knowledgeable people in councils and money at the front end may be less than is required. I certainly appreciate any help and advice they give here.

 

However, I have had to deal with various councils over the years and I'm normally met with very unhelpful people who's first responce is to lie.

 

I'm still waiting for a responce from my highways department as to why they thought they could undermine a 60+ year old beach tree by using a JCB on my private land. Said beech tree shortly fell across the road. This is one reason why I take the comments that councils value trees with a very large pinch of salt.

Have to say, that in my latest dealings with the local council, [the monitoring officer no less] Nothing to do with trees though.. [it was to do with vicarious liability for their agents]

 

They are a pack of liars that will say anything to try to make you go away.

 

Basically,, "do you have a contract with XZY ltd"

 

Answer; Definitely not.

 

"You sure??"

 

Answer; Yes.

 

"Well, that is funny because they say you do"

 

Answer; Well they are wrong.

 

"Well, that is funny as their accounts at companies house say you do and you paid them nearly £300,000 last year"

 

Answer: Their accounts are not definitive..

 

"Are you serious!!!????"

 

Answer, Ok, we do have a contract with them.. Etc etc etc..

 

Blatant liars.. [and the monitoring officer is a solicitor too]

 

john..

[Gajendra]

On 15/12/2021 at 17:42, tree77 said:

Have they given you the size/measurements specifications for the crossing.

 

If you know the size/extent of the new crossing you will know how close to the trees it will be.

No they haven't, they just said I can't build any dropped kerb!

[Gajendra]

Update: I have submitted my appeal. Let's wait and see what happens. There were 45 trees on that roan and 40 of them had dropped kerb within 1.5m from the tree. I know LA will just say that was done before the legislation got changed but how can changing something on a paper in last few years will save those 40 trees if this is wrong? Maybe I am naive but I just don't get it. The distance between two trees is 9m and I only want to build 2.4m dropped kerb in the middle of these tree. Fingers crossed LA will offer me some lifeline.

[monkeybusiness]

3 hours ago, Gajendra said:

Update: I have submitted my appeal. Let's wait and see what happens. There were 45 trees on that roan and 40 of them had dropped kerb within 1.5m from the tree. I know LA will just say that was done before the legislation got changed but how can changing something on a paper in last few years will save those 40 trees if this is wrong? Maybe I am naive but I just don't get it. The distance between two trees is 9m and I only want to build 2.4m dropped kerb in the middle of these tree. Fingers crossed LA will offer me some lifeline.

I think (and partly kind of hope, as it means that the legislation brought in to protect trees is working here) that you are on a hiding to nothing in this situation.

It is the necessary construction work that would lead to root damage that the legislation was brought in to protect against. Once any work has been undertaken (as in the case of the other historical dropped kerbs on your street) the trees will potentially decline/die/fall over, or otherwise recover and potentially regrow roots lost during construction (any of these outcomes can take several years to present).
The existing remaining trees clearly survived or have been planted since the dropped kerbs were installed - they are now afforded the same protection as the trees blocking your application and your neighbours will face the same issue as you do now if they need to undertake construction works in their RPAs. 

Hopefully the reason you bought the house wasn’t based on gaining off-street parking as I think you have a struggle ahead. 
 

[daltontrees]

19 hours ago, openspaceman said:

 

I think it's the Highway Authority and that is often delegated to the Local Authority

This depends on what you mean by "tolerated", the thing is if the entity who was in a position to give permission, or their successors in title, since 1905 has acquiesced in allowing the practise then a prescriptive right may be gained in time "by fiction of lost grant"IIRC. In this case no such chance exists.

I pleasd clemency, I am in Sctland and the Roads Act is almost the same as the Highways Act but there  are differences in terminology and powers, plus in Scotland we don't have easments we have servitudes, and a different set of rules on prescriptions and personal bar (estsoppel to you guys), but all that said prescription does not trump statute unless statute says it does. In Scotland there is no such thing as the doctrine of lost grant, since our law came from roman law and yours came from french and medieval law. It hurts my head keeping up with both. Ours is better, of course, and simpler, so I think in those terms.

 

'Tolerated' was the word I deliberately choose to cover that whole business of 'not quite permitted but too late to do anything about it'.

[aspenarb]

The councils "The answer is no now what is the question" policy is the reason a lot of folk just pay a hole in the road gang working in the same street to drop a kerb for them.

 

Bob

[doobin]

16 minutes ago, aspenarb said:

The councils "The answer is no now what is the question" policy is the reason a lot of folk just pay a hole in the road gang working in the same street to drop a kerb for them.

 

Bob

Would have probably flown under the radar had op just done that 🤣

[Chris at eden]

10 hours ago, nepia said:

...with uncanny insight to the Public Sector generally 😔

They really don’t.  People only ever see the bad.  I’ve worked on both sides for years and the private sector is no different. Good and bad exist in both.  You should see some of the stuff consultants try to get through planning.  As a TO you can write a consultation pointing out 20 issues for them to clarify, they will do 3 and resubmit. TO then has to go through all the new docs to point out the same issues.  Applicants then moan when decisions are late. You can end doing 6 or 7 consultations on the same thing when realistically you shouldn’t need more than 2. 
 

[Chris at eden]

10 hours ago, Paul in the woods said:

I can't speak for others but as one who has moaned about council behaviour in the past I'll just add the following. There are obviously some hard working and knowledgeable people in councils and money at the front end may be less than is required. I certainly appreciate any help and advice they give here.

 

However, I have had to deal with various councils over the years and I'm normally met with very unhelpful people who's first responce is to lie.

 

I'm still waiting for a responce from my highways department as to why they thought they could undermine a 60+ year old beach tree by using a JCB on my private land. Said beech tree shortly fell across the road. This is one reason why I take the comments that councils value trees with a very large pinch of salt.

Working for the council is basically doing a job where you get moaned at constantly and criticised by everyone. Rarely does anyone call the council to say you have done a good job.  You get screamed at down the phone when you won’t fell street trees. Swore at, got threatened with a spade and shot at with an air rifle working as a TO.  TPOs isn’t as bad but looking after council trees is horrendous. they assume you are some numpty that knows nothing about trees and that they know more. Not everyone, but some folk are like that. I don’t get that in the private sector. When you turn up as a consultant, you are immediately accepted as an expert. I get emails all the time from people thanking me for the work I have done.  From this perspective it’s a lot easier in the private sector and a lot nicer. It’s why a lot of TOs switch to consultancy as they get older.  I’m pretty sure this contributes toward councils not always being helpful. I always tried but I can understand why other might not have. 
 

Also re councils being pro tree. The parks department will be as will the planning TO. The rest of planning will split. Some like trees but others don’t. One planning officer told me he thought trees were an eyesore that spoiled the look of architecture. Highways though, I have never met a highways officer that liked trees. They see them as a pain and unnecessary expense usually.