Implications of the new Tree Regs

[Amelanchier]

I know, I know...its boring and there's no chippers or cranes involved but if you're a working Arb there's every chance the new regs will affect you.

 

Following on from MonkeyD's post a week or so ago, new Regulations have been made that make the dreaded 1APP form compulsory from the 1st October 2008.

 

That is to say, no more S211 notifications on the back of a fag packet and no more TPO apps on takeaway menus. If it doesn't come in on a 1APP form the the LPA are legally required to deem it invalid. We're not just being awkward, it will be the law.

 

Now, you're probably all aware of that bit...

 

However, within the 1APP is the requirement for justification of proposed works that include health and safety concerns (e.g., the tree is diseased, or fears that parts may break or fall) to include a report by a tree professional explaining those grounds.

 

Similarly, in the case of alleged subsidence damage, a report by an engineer or surveyor, together with one from a tree professional (further details are contained within the application form) should be submitted.

 

Now, just as with a normal planning application, failure to include necessary information will result in the invalidation of applications or notification on the grounds of insufficient information.

 

Basically, if Mrs Miggins wants her TPO tree felled because its knackered and she engages you to make the application, if you don't include evidence supporting the claim that the tree is knackered... the LPA don't even have to go and look at it, you application can be invalidated from the desk!

 

On a more positive note, most councils, and I include the council I work for within that statement, will use these new powers with discretion and common sense. But that may not be all councils...

[christreeroot]

Thanks for sharing that Tony, lets hope it works out well for all parties...

[Arborlord]

Next it will be only council approved tree surgeons can work on tpo's

[Log-ologist]

The discressionary rejections may be a way to prevent sub standard firms doing TPO work. I look foreward to lots of referrals.

[Mesterh]

  Tony Sorensen said:

Basically, if Mrs Miggins wants her TPO tree felled because its knackered and she engages you to make the application, if you don't include evidence supporting the claim that the tree is knackered... the LPA don't even have to go and look at it, you application can be invalidated from the desk!

 

closedeyes:

 

What kind of evidence will they be asking for? Surely if the trees knackered and me/us being a professional tree surgeon apply and say its knackered wont that be enough?

Or are they going to want a 5 page report from me saying its knackered!

 

Sorry if it sounds negative but is the DDD bit not going to apply anymore?

[Mac McLennan]

  Arborlord said:

Next it will be only council approved tree surgeons can work on tpo's

 

No bad thing as far as I am concerned. The work by most companies around me is crap. It therefore takes them less time to do it, which means they charge less.

 

Which in todays climate matters.

[High Scale]

I may be wrong but local authority's practice of best price wins the contracts, can be a detrimental to the application of quality tree work, whatever that may be.

[Amelanchier]

  Mesterh said:

What kind of evidence will they be asking for? Surely if the trees knackered and me/us being a professional tree surgeon apply and say its knackered wont that be enough?

Or are they going to want a 5 page report from me saying its knackered!

 

Sorry if it sounds negative but is the DDD bit not going to apply anymore?

 

It has always been the duty of the applicant (or their agent) to prove the exemption under DDD. Now the regs simply ask for that proof.

 

When I speak of discretion, I mean exactly this issue. A clearly dead tree is often obvious, and only the most pedantic LPA would want report certifying its death.

 

Its more likely to come into play when Mrs Miggins wants a 30% reduction because the tree moves in the wind...

[bob]

  Arborlord said:

Next it will be only council approved tree surgeons can work on tpo's

 

lets hope so

although many councils do not have a recomended list anymore certainly the couple around me do not

[Amelanchier]

  Log-ologist said:

The discressionary rejections may be a way to prevent sub standard firms doing TPO work. I look foreward to lots of referrals.

 

Although it probably shouldn't be used like that, it probably will.

 

I should point out though that not all councils may be flexible with these regs. There will probably be quite a few councils that will bounce invalid applications straight back to cut down on workloads.