Tree in a Conservation Area - development outside

[Nimby]

Morning.

 

Does anyone know the legal side of a situation where a tree in a CA is close to a boundary and development is taking on the adjacent land within the RPA?

 

Does the same apply, AIA for roots and branches? I presume so but need to hang my hat on legislation. 

 

Scouring through the Governments website and having trouble finding any answers. TIA

[Anno]

In my opinion in this case the Cons Area is largelly irrelevant, the TO should be asking for an AIA and possibly method statement anyway, so treat as you would any Application.

Hope that helps.

[daltontrees]

2 hours ago, Nimby said:

Morning.

 

Does anyone know the legal side of a situation where a tree in a CA is close to a boundary and development is taking on the adjacent land within the RPA?

 

Does the same apply, AIA for roots and branches? I presume so but need to hang my hat on legislation. 

 

Scouring through the Governments website and having trouble finding any answers. TIA

It's not clear Are you saying 'development is taking PLACE on the adjacent land'? Are both sides of the boundary in a CA?

[Nimby]

2 hours ago, daltontrees said:

It's not clear Are you saying 'development is taking PLACE on the adjacent land'? Are both sides of the boundary in a CA?

Sorry. The tree is in CA but the development site isn't. I am looking for any relevant legal information from the T&CPA.

 

It's not a big deal as common sense prevails, (AIA because of the potential for impact upon a tree in a CA). I have never come across this before and wonder if a precedent has been set somewhere. 

[daltontrees]

There is nothing specific about this in legislation, and I am not aware of any case law.

 

The LPA has 2 roles.

It has to decide if the trees are important enough to be protected, this can be relevant to trees on and off site. If important they should be retained and protected. BS5837 etc blah blah. What is questionable is whether it should be protecting what amounts to encroachment and possible common law nuisance.

It also has to decide whether the CA tree is so important for the amenity of the area that it should be TPOd. The reason is that generally a planning application replaces the need for a separate CA notification or TPO application. So it could TPO the tree and prevent any development that would harm it. This could exceed the RPA, which is really just a temporary made up thing that only preserves about 1/4 of the roots.

Remember, CAs don't imply the trees are important. It's jsut a precaution to allow the LPA to decide if they are in the context of any threat to their remvoal or harm.

Edited 3 hours ago by daltontrees