How to have a TPO removed?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

3 hours ago, Sutton said:

 

 

What it comes down to is simply that trees in conservation areas, urban settings etc set a tone, a theme, that give a place character. 

 

I see what you mean, but your starting assumption (above) is not necessarily 100% accurate - certainly not in relation to CAs. 
 

It is the justification document which sets out those elements of historic character which combine to provide the qualification of any given area as CA designation. 
 

It’s just as likely that trees may not feature at all in a CA designation assessment but they do still enjoy the protections afforded regardless of the complete absence of their contribution. 
 

To put that into context, historic Cornish fishing port designated CA for the quintessential, post card-ness of the harbour and wider town - not a tree on site and certainly no historic reference to trees in the fishing harbour yet, every scraddedy assed garden Leylandii with a stem diameter greater  than 75mm is required to be validated by the LA. 
 

That could be regarded as shortsightedness in the drafting of the legislation or perhaps over zealousness or even lack of motivation to challenge the application of poor legislation….

 

Who knows. I’d take the view though, that power once divested to an ‘authority’ will never be returned to its original owner. 

[Sutton]

1 hour ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

... certainly no historic reference to trees in the fishing harbour yet, every scraddedy assed garden Leylandii with a stem diameter greater  than 75mm is required to be validated by the LA.

Yep. Some randomly planted tree in a CA with poor form, badly situated, neglected or over pruned, can't be easily compared to fine specimens in well tended gardens, I agree, but we all have to submit to the same application process for works on all types and it doesn't make all trees the same  - for the time being 🤣.

[Mark Bolam]

The TPO system is definitely flawed.

I’m a big fan of it for protecting really nice trees, especially mature ones, privately owned or not.

 

Where it falls down for me is in two situations in particular.

 

Applied to really skanky trees.

I’ve seen TPO’s applied to pollarded birches that are more rot than wood. (I’m not directly accusing you here @Mick Dempsey!)

 

Applied to a nice semi mature oak, say, as they have granted planning permission to build a house right beside it.

It’s obvious to anyone that the tree will have to be increasingly mullered as time goes on.

Either refuse planning or don’t TPO the tree!

 

I’m also a bit sick of being asked for the ‘arboricultural justification’ for work on TPO’d trees.

There usually isn’t one.

 

If I’ve stated in the app I would like to remove a limb that is crushing Mr. Smiths shed it’s to help him, not the tree.

 

I’m not qualified to provide arb reports, although the last one I saw recommended taking 2m off some 25m pops to ‘reduce sail area’, so maybe that’s a good thing.

[Sutton]

1 hour ago, Mark Bolam said:

I’m also a bit sick of being asked for the ‘arboricultural justification’ for work on TPO’d trees.

There usually isn’t one.

The worst justification I read was of three mature yews in a front garden which despite being healthy and vigorous would "benefit" from being heavily pruned. All three are failing now with rot.

 

The word "benefit" suggests that without intervention trees wouldn't thrive. That bait-word (amongst others) may trigger the desired result? If such management speak can cut through red-tape with this then it certainly raises questions.

 

None of us like jumping through hoops but I'm still hoping a TO or ex-TO will rise and gives us their take

Edited October 9, 2022 by Sutton
spellming

[Dirk Pitt]

On 08/10/2022 at 13:54, Rich Rule said:

How long have you lived there?

 

 

a year

 

dirk pitt

[Dirk Pitt]

On 08/10/2022 at 14:33, John Shutler said:

The tree is obviously in the front garden of your property so will have a level of public visibility. The tree is also nice enough that the LPA deemed it necessary to protect the tree to ensure that the tree can be enjoyed by many for a long as the tree is suitable to be retained.

You claim that the works you want to do would not affect the long term health of the tree, but one day you might decide your sick of picking up leaves and cut the tree down (equally you might decide to sell the house and the next bloke will cut it down). The value that the tree adds to the local area and landscape will then be lost forever, unfortunately people can't be trusted to always do the right thing when it comes to trees so that's why statutory protection is important.

 

Is it really obvious? What do you base that on? Trees in our front and back garden have TPO's on them.

The trees at the front screen us from the houses opposite and I wont trim them higher then the fence, the trees along one side that do not have TPO's shield has from the neighbours. 

I quite agree about trusting people and I guess when an honest one comes along, they are treated as someone not to be trusted. I would have no issue giving an undertaking not to fell them or polled them.

 

dirk Pitt 

[Dirk Pitt]

On 08/10/2022 at 14:52, Mark Bolam said:

You could have completed the application in the time it takes to read this thread.

It’s not difficult.

I can do it.

what on earth is your point and how does in answer my original question?

It does not matter how quick an application can be made, it takes some 5 weeks before one gets a decision and the decision may be a refusal. 

 

Dirk Pitt

[John Shutler]

5 minutes ago, Dirk Pitt said:

Is it really obvious? What do you base that on? Trees in our front and back garden have TPO's on them.

The trees at the front screen us from the houses opposite and I wont trim them higher then the fence, the trees along one side that do not have TPO's shield has from the neighbours. 

I quite agree about trusting people and I guess when an honest one comes along, they are treated as someone not to be trusted. I would have no issue giving an undertaking not to fell them or polled them.

 

dirk Pitt 

I made my comments based on your previous statement

“I want to be able to maintain them such as cutting "branches" so pedestrians can walk under the trees when stepping out of the road away from traffic, to keep clear from my neighbours drive , so I can drive under them without catching my roof or the cycles on the roof”

 

i

[Dirk Pitt]

7 minutes ago, John Shutler said:

I made my comments based on your previous statement

“I want to be able to maintain them such as cutting "branches" so pedestrians can walk under the trees when stepping out of the road away from traffic, to keep clear from my neighbours drive , so I can drive under them without catching my roof or the cycles on the roof”

 

i

Ok, I can see how you came to think that, I'm sorry to have been so confrontational.

 

Dirk Pitt

[Dirk Pitt]

I think we can bring this thread to a close, I have just found this. A very one sided policy and biased to those in power

/assets/static/govuk-opengraph-image-dade2dad5775023b0568381c4c074b86318194edb36d3d68df721eea7deeac4b.png

Tree Preservation Orders and trees in conservation areas - GOV.UK

WWW.GOV.UK

---

Explains the legislation governing Tree Preservation Orders and tree protection in conservation areas.

 

 

dirk pitt