felling trees in a conservation area.

[pjd1001]

Morning,

 

If a tree is in a CA and you fell it without giving notice under s211, then you have a duty to replace it. If you give notice and the LPA say no, ie TPO the tree and you fell it, you would need to replace it (and explain yourself to the beak). If you give notice and the LPA say yes, then the tree is like any other non-protected tree and you don't need to replace it.

 

Cheers

[Topcat]

A lot of people don't understand that in a CA you are giving notice to the LPA. The LPA can not decide (IE yes or no) it is not an application. They can do 1 of 2 things make a TPO or not. If they make a TPO you then make an application and the LPA can insist on a replacement. If they don't make a TPO,you do what you want. It's also worth remembering the time limit. If the LPA don't come back to you within 6 weeks you can do the work in the notice. I always use the date on the letter from the LPA.

[treebloke]

 

Forgive me if I've misunderstood here but if the tree in question is in a CA and is being removed under the DDD (now DD of course, i.e. no dying anymore)

 

Take care.

Paul

 

Strange how the new BS has overnight reclassified all TPO'd dying trees as dangerous whearas before they where simply dying.

 

Where did the bit between alive and dead go?.

[dexta]

A lot of people don't understand that in a CA you are giving notice to the LPA. The LPA can not decide (IE yes or no) it is not an application. They can do 1 of 2 things make a TPO or not. If they make a TPO you then make an application and the LPA can insist on a replacement. If they don't make a TPO,you do what you want. It's also worth remembering the time limit. If the LPA don't come back to you within 6 weeks you can do the work in the notice. I always use the date on the letter from the LPA.

 

Nice straight forward answer to the question:thumbup1:

[Amelanchier]

Strange how the new BS has overnight reclassified all TPO'd dying trees as dangerous whearas before they where simply dying.

 

Where did the bit between alive and dead go?.

 

The BS? You mean the new regs right?

 

No reclassification - just the removal of a oft misused / misunderstood term.

 

You don't need a state between alive and dead; by definition if you are not dead you are alive and vice versa. The regs simply assert the fairly sensible position that a tree is alive until it is dead!

[Pedroski]

Strange how the new BS has overnight reclassified all TPO'd dying trees as dangerous whearas before they where simply dying.

 

Where did the bit between alive and dead go?.

 

No, dying trees haven't been reclassified as dangerous. Dying trees are still living. And I don't think the 'dying' classification was misunderstood - it was just often abused.

 

Worth reading the "exceptions" The Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation)(England) Regulations 2012