When Planners Get it Wrong!!!!

[Johny Walker]

we dont know the full storey yet ? ,as it may be ear marked for removal @ some stage,it appears to be more off a h&s issue if the tree has been made unstable !

[Mesterh]

Yeah if that tree was earmarked to be condemned it would be well gone.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Another thing is the conditioning of third party Arb supervision. If the council doesn't have the money to watch the site - make the developer pay for Arbs to do it for the council.

 

Its something that we add in our development reports and often undertake. We provide updates and photo evidence to the TO - completely impartially. We sort out those stupid little site problems that take up some much time (is the fencing in right?) and the more switched on developers realise that is costing them double money to fix the snags.

 

Problem is only one council round our way is known to explicitly condition it within the planning consent.

 

Tony, is this something that has ever been discussed in the uktc? i dont follow it now as it tends to be.... well my face done fit, no letters after "hama"! lol:lol:

[Arborjim]

I cant belive that was ok`d by a tree officer? Cant get my head around it, surely thats his job gone?!!

 

I may be wrong but as i understand it as soon as the tree officer has given his comments on a planning app it is then taken out of his hands. The case officer then holds responsibility.

 

A strongly worded letter has already been sent to the planning department detailing the councils responsibility. I did have a bit of a Victor Meldrew moment.

 

I've got to admit that the town council involved are usually very good at protecting trees on development sites and I've been involved with several sites where i have been the qualified arborist on site and worked very with all of the tree officers involved, they all have a positive real world outlook to the work that they do.

 

As with all the tree officers that i deal with i have a good working relationship with them and will be following up with them what the outcomes are for the future of the tree.

[arb culture]

I may be wrong but as i understand it as soon as the tree officer has given his comments on a planning app it is then taken out of his hands. The case officer then holds responsibility.

 

A strongly worded letter has already been sent to the planning department detailing the councils responsibility. I did have a bit of a Victor Meldrew moment.

 

I've got to admit that the town council involved are usually very good at protecting trees on development sites and I've been involved with several sites where i have been the qualified arborist on site and worked very with all of the tree officers involved, they all have a positive real world outlook to the work that they do.

 

As with all the tree officers that i deal with i have a good working relationship with them and will be following up with them what the outcomes are for the future of the tree.

 

If you're talking about Harrogate, then I agree, they're usually extremely good at making sure trees are protected properly.

 

At the end of the day, every one of us has made a mistake at one time or another, so let's not be too harsh on the planner in question, none of us has the full story about this case.