New 2012 TPO regs

[Amelanchier]

Available since yesterday, not in force until 6th April (see attached). Will post more detail when I have some time...

uksi_20120605_en.pdf

[eng84]

thanks for that info,

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

thanks tony, major changes?

[Trees-]

Thanks very much for sharing.

[geoff]

Thanks,will have a good look through that.

[slack ma girdle]

Holy cow batman.

I managed to get to page five before my eyes crossed, and my brain switched off.

 

Is there any one on here that understands this, and can provide an idiot like myself an english version.

[Yorkshireman]

cheers Tony

[sloth]

I didn't realise change was imminent. I can't look at the attachment at the mo because I'm on my phone, what is it? Are they regs to go with the existing tcp act regs, or do they replace something? Thanks

[Paul Barton]

Holy cow batman.

I managed to get to page five before my eyes crossed, and my brain switched off.

 

Is there any one on here that understands this, and can provide an idiot like myself an english version.

 

Here's a helpful summary!

TPOregs2012explanatorynote.pdf

[Bundle 2]

iv) qualify the scope of exempted works (particularly in respect of dead, dying and dangerous trees) and clarify the requirement for prior notification;

 

Isnt this going to lead to orders that (try) to preempt the condition of a tree somewhere in the future....?

 

" The changes will make the system easier for local authorities to administer and they will be more able to consider applications for consent to carry out works to trees that are to be repeated on an annual or regular basis, or for a series of operations over a stated period;"

 

I guess this is already a requirement and there is good sense in it..... I understood "dying" was to be removed...but the first para above seems a little pointless ! Have I misunderstood the context ? Why reiterate that which is set out in the legislation unless there is an overriding lack of confidence in the TCP(Tree Preservation) ( England) 2012- so then sort it proper?