Christmas Cracker : BS 5837 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Code of Practice Revision Consultation

[GarethM]

And how is any of this going to "help" your cause/crusade/becoming a public nuisance other than the eventual restraining order for harassment?.

 

The keyword to your current rabbit hole is "guideline", not law just a guide for best practice.

 

It's not like IKEA furniture where you swap 2&8 and you end up with a stool Vs a table

[Liquidambar]

Thanks Gareth  -  our local council says it requires a tree survey to comply with BS 5837 2012

https://www.leeds.gov.uk/docs/tree survey guidance note.pdf

so it seems like more than take it or leave it guidance ? But I don't know if other councils don't require a BS 5837 2012 survey or if some tree surveyors don't follow it.

 

[GarethM]

The point I'm trying to make is whilst it's best practice/guidance/ reasonably practicable etc.

 

It's now after the planning, whilst not an entirely one way system they've met and exceeded whatever the council/councillors/government inspector etc has requested.

 

Your not going to find some smoking gun amongst the volumes of paperwork, you're best speaking to councillors and MPs for a top down look, whistling from the bottom of a coal mine isn't going to get you anywhere unless you can do a petition with I dunno 10k locals.

[daltontrees]

On 26/12/2024 at 11:08, Liquidambar said:

Any chance the new BS 5837 will recommend a method for accounting for carbon sequestration loss ?

Local Council Local Development Plan Update Topics : 

"Retaining existing trees
LCC aims to preserve existing trees and establish a replacement planting regime that considers the carbon storage capacity of trees."

Can surveyors of trees be persuaded - is it essential now ?  - to identify individually in a tree survey all the trees they see on site?

No chance of it dealing with carbon capture. None. We tried to get it to address biodiversity (which is after all a  legal requirement in England) but the Chair of the committee isn't interested and he vetoes anything he doesn't personally want.

[daltontrees]

On 26/12/2024 at 15:24, monkeybusiness said:

The biggest threat to trees on development sites is ‘speculative’ removal prior to any tree surveys being undertaken.  
Once the tree stock is surveyed and included within a planning application the current system affords very good protection in my experience.

Unfortunately there is no protection of trees during the planning application process, pre-emptive felling can take place any time even after application is submitted.

 

It's a joke really.

[daltontrees]

On 26/12/2024 at 15:29, Liquidambar said:

Thanks. Please could I ask - Do you think a tree survey should list all trees in the survey area individually rather than listing some only as groups of trees not individually identified ?

What I dimly perceive is that listing as a group rather than say as 9 individual trees means scheduled tree removals of say 10 groups looks better to the casual observer like a Plans Panel than the removal of 90 trees for development rather than arboricultural reasons 

Grouping trees is the lazy and allowable shortcut of the chancer. It really makes it impossible to compete with them if you bid to do a survey properly. the new Standard should be a little bit better in some respects but the committeee tried to delete the requirement for a topo survey for peripheral trees, and the RICS guidance for topo surveys has a major flaw that ensures there is no consistent approach to capturing individual trees. So it might also get considerably worse.

[monkeybusiness]

1 hour ago, daltontrees said:

Unfortunately there is no protection of trees during the planning application process, pre-emptive felling can take place any time even after application is submitted.

 

It's a joke really.

I meant once planning is granted, but worded it incorrectly. 
In my experience not much felling takes place once an application has been submitted though, as developers don’t want to jeopardise their application. Any felling after the survey is immediately quantifiable.

[daltontrees]

14 hours ago, monkeybusiness said:

I meant once planning is granted, but worded it incorrectly. 
In my experience not much felling takes place once an application has been submitted though, as developers don’t want to jeopardise their application. Any felling after the survey is immediately quantifiable.

2 situations. Before permission there is NO impediment to pre-emptive felling, not even ater an applicaiton goes in. The Council can be annoyed as they want by it but they cannot lawfully delay or refuse permission because of pre-emptive felling.  There's a BNG implication (England only) but that's a different matter.

After permission, if there are conditions that say no felling, then felling would be an enforcement issue, but enforcement powers are weak, being only enough to stop someone continuing to do something or making them do something they haven't done yet.

And after development is complete the planning conditions disappear.

[Liquidambar]

About BNG  and "degradation"  :  

BNG is adding insult to injury here - in the owner's new planning application in November 2023 the developer's BNG assessor claimed that clearing the trees in Spring 2023 was permitted by the previous conditional planning permission but did not mention that most of the pre-commencement conditions weren't discharged  when the owner was felling the trees : 

"2. Recent management works have cleared much of the
Site, meaning most recent aerial imagery is not a true
reflection of the Site in its current state. These
clearance works have been carried out under the
approved planning permission 18/01609/FU;
therefore, the Site as it currently stands (not as its
previous woodland habitat) must be taken as the
baseline for the purpose of the Natural England
Metric, in line with published guidance. The existing
site plan provided by the client has been used for
base maps as an accurate depiction of the Site in its
current state."

The area cleared of beech and yew woodland is now described for BNG purposes as "Artificial unvegetated unsealed surface  (cleared land)" no brownie points 

On refusing this new application the planning officer reported that the previous planning application was no longer considered extant 

"With a number of pre-commencement conditions not discharged in relation to 18/01609/FU,
which are considered to go to the heart of the scheme, the demolition and tree works carried
out are not considered to represent a lawful commencement of development. Consequently,
as the time limit attached to 18/01609/FU has now lapsed, the development is not considered
to have been lawfully commenced, and therefore the consent is not considered to be extant "

I'm vexed that didn't stop the tree felling after the 3 year deadline passed in February 2023 but the owner now has a site with no planning permission so they'll be coming after the trees again.

 

 

 

 

 

[daltontrees]

Shouldn't really be discussing in public.