New TPO after an application for works

[sxc656]

Hi, first time poster hoping for some advice....

 

To summarise, a council Tree Protection Officer visited my house at the start of July 2023 - i asked for him to confirm whether a group (i think 3-5) of scots pine trees overhanging our drive are still unprotected (they are situated on a Housing Association land next door). I want to get them cut back as much as possible to the boundary line due to the amount of material falling on mine and my neighbours cars and driveway. 

 

A year or two back the Tree Officers predecessor visited and said they were not protected and showed me the Tree Map confirming this.

 

The housing association won't do anything despite me asking repeatedly over the last 5 years - they said the trees are safe according to a survey and they are not legally obliged to do anything, so any overhang must be cut back by us at our cost (as an aside I don't think this is fair but have no way of arguing this)

 

The new tree officer who visited in July initially thought they were protected. I told him your predecessor says they were not on his visit a year or two back, and the TPO map on the council website says they are not. After I showed him the map he agreed and said they are not, but upon leaving he said something along the lines of "oh i should put an order on them"

About 3 weeks later a tree surgeon visited, i asked him to cut the trees back. He said he would check with the council/tree officer to get in writing that they weren't protected, even though I told him the officer visited and said they weren't, and the map says they aren't protected.

 

The tree surgeon emailed the tree officer and asked if they were, and he said yes! - that there was a blanket TPO so an application must be put in - an application was therefore put in at the end of July for pruning works . I told the tree surgeon there isn't any protection order on them so i dont understand the tree officer's response.

 

Over August I emailed, phoned, and text the tree officer many times (i have the records) asking him to confirm the tree are not protected - going off what he himself said and what the tree maps says. I received no response and all my voicemails and email were ignored.

Then today I received a letter which my dad says he posted himself saying there is a provisional tree protection order in place blanketing all of the trees! 

 

I feel like he ignored all my messages asking him to confirm in writing that the trees are not protected (which they were not), just so he could apply the tree protection order. Is the tree protection officer within his rights to do this?

 

Many thanks

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

In a nutshell, "yes", provided i) the trees meet the 'amenity test', which they certainly appear to from the photo, and ii) it's expedient, your proposed actions make it so, the TPO is appropriate. 

This doesn't mean you cannot undertake any 'cutting back', it means you will need to make an application under the TPO and the Council / Tree Officer has control over how much you can cut (they may allow some cutting back but less than you apply for, i.e. not back to the boundary, and of course may refuse it all together (in which case you can appeal but this is a very long process.))

You have 28 days to raise objections to the TPO, which you should consider.  

To conclude I would hope a 'compromise' is achievable and you should discuss this with the Tree Officer involved ASAP.

Regards, and hoping you find an acceptable compromise.

Paul 

[Anno]

Check on the term 'expediancy' in the Regs.

By law, we can only make a TPO when we decide it is expedient to protect a tree, group of trees or woodland which make a significant contribution to amenity. This may include trees that are in danger of being felled or are under threat because of proposed development.

[sxc656]

Thank you for your replies @Anno & @AA Teccie (Paul), the advice is much appreciated!

 

The two housing associations on whose land the trees are (there is a boundary towards the left hand side), have done little to no maintenance on the trees over the last 10 years apart from some low height pruning back. I had to get the previous Tree Protection Officer/local MPs and even the Housing Association CEO involved to get anything done (there is another group of protected trees that were in contact with our outbuilding in the back garden that were lifted after years of hassle).

 

I now wanted to alleviate the problem these trees are giving (they make an absolute mess of the cars and driveway underneath) with some pruning (I can accept perhaps not to the boundary line) but this has become immeasurably more difficult now because of the proposed TPO.

 

My concerns are the tree surgeon has also said that the Tree Protection Officer is very "strict" and is likely to refuse any proposed pruning. The previous tree officer has visited several times and said we don't really put TPOs on these types of trees and was relaxed saying you can prune back but ensuring the trees remain safe which is absolutely fair.

 

On what basis can I appeal the TPO? I can appreciate the amenity value but on a practical "living with the trees" basis they are difficult.

 

 

 

 

[Mick Dempsey]

Sneaky bar steward.

 

Exactly the sort of behaviour that encourages the sort of weekend slam downs I participated in oftimes.

[maybelateron]

1 hour ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Sneaky bar steward.

 

Exactly the sort of behaviour that encourages the sort of weekend slam downs I participated in oftimes.

Quite agree. One of our local tree officers is excellent and would never do this. Years ago I checked with him that a large roadside Oak near me was not protected as the customer wanted to fell it (having built a house extension under it!). The TO said it was not protected but that it was worthy of a TPO and he would put one on it very soon. He openly left me with the option to get on and fell it quickly while I could. The customer is a local PITA, the tree is lovely, so I did not rush and it got protected. The TO and I respect each other and it works well. 

Flip side: Another local council are the opposite. I reduced a largish Holly in a conservation area several years ago, with permission. It has since died, deceased, snuffed it, become a tree no longer, had its chips and gone to meet its maker. See photo. Owner applied with photo evidence to take it down. Council told him they need a tree surgeon's report to confirm it is dead! I reckon I could probably snap the trunk if I pushed hard enough on it. Sorry for semi derailing thread but its shows what a lottery it can be dealing with councils.

[sxc656]

Update:

 

Had a chat with the tree officer over the phone (he picked up after a month of not doing so).

 

He said my reasons for wanting to prune are not justifiable to grant any work on the tree. All the cleaning up after the trees on the driveway, root damage to driveway, mess on the cars you have to put up with - they're not good enough reasons to warrant granting work. Only if a building is being damaged would I grant work. Even if a shed were being damaged i wouldn't grant work.... so no.

 

I asked could even minimal low level branches on the trees on the left - he said no, they're young trees and would cause stress. 

 

I said not even minimal work with your guidance? He said if you're allowed to cut one branch you might say i want to cut this and that too - i said we would do minimal work with your guidance, so can we compromise - he said no.

 

I said i'm using an accredited tree surgeon and we can do work with your guidance - he said it's their job to cut trees, mine to protect, so no.

 

He said you can try to appeal but your reasons probably won't be good enough (I said cars and driveway are a mess, so couldn't the minimal work even on the trees on the extreme left and right to alleviate this be allowed - he said no).

He said there are trees on my street that affect my car, i wouldnt expect them to be cut down for that reason. I said theyre not my trees, I couldnt cut them down if i wanted to, so can we compromise - he said no.

 

Slightly unrelated but adding to my frustrations with the lack of empathy....
In the past a dead silver birch dropped a branch where i was stood 2 minutes before in another part of my rear garden (i was constantly clearing dead branches for a while until the housing association neighbour removed it). I caught it on camera and was quite shocked considering the crash it made.

 

I called the tree officer to help get the housing association to take action. When i told the tree officer about it and tried to show the video he wasnt interested, He said you could cross the road and two minutes later a car goes past, it doesnt mean you were in danger.

 

A dead tree constantly dropping sizeable branches in a constantly used walkway in my garden cant be compared to crossing the road can it?!

 

I was quickly losing patience with no compromise or understanding from the tree officer so hastily said ok, bye and put the phone down.

 

I am planning to meet as many local councillors as I can in the hope that they can offer support in rejecting the TPO - I even said can you allow some work and then I wont have to appeal it, I can appreciate the amenity but just want to alleviate the practical problems - he said no.

 

Edited September 5, 2023 by sxc656

[openspaceman]

23 minutes ago, sxc656 said:

ll the cleaning up after the trees on the driveway, root damage to driveway, mess on the cars you have to put up with - they're not good enough reasons to warrant granting work.

I'm no fan of TPOs but in this instance I agree with him.

[Hillbillee]

Sell your house and buy one with no trees nearby.

[Chris at eden]

7 hours ago, maybelateron said:

Quite agree. One of our local tree officers is excellent and would never do this. Years ago I checked with him that a large roadside Oak near me was not protected as the customer wanted to fell it (having built a house extension under it!). The TO said it was not protected but that it was worthy of a TPO and he would put one on it very soon. He openly left me with the option to get on and fell it quickly while I could. The customer is a local PITA, the tree is lovely, so I did not rush and it got protected. The TO and I respect each other and it works well. 

Flip side: Another local council are the opposite. I reduced a largish Holly in a conservation area several years ago, with permission. It has since died, deceased, snuffed it, become a tree no longer, had its chips and gone to meet its maker. See photo. Owner applied with photo evidence to take it down. Council told him they need a tree surgeon's report to confirm it is dead! I reckon I could probably snap the trunk if I pushed hard enough on it. Sorry for semi derailing thread but its shows what a lottery it can be dealing with councils.

You do not need a report for dead trees. The requirement for a report is part of the application process when the statement of reasons says that works are required based on health and safety. 
 

Dead trees are exempt. You submit a five day notice and the LPA go out and check.