Planning question- No CA, no TPO but can i fell it?!

[arbmark]

Evening medames-meiseurs,

I have a low-amenity value but very mature tree 1.5m dbh that isnt TPO or CA but it is in conflict with the planning permission that has been granted for a new dwelling. The tree is large and prominant on a main road and the new owners want it removed so they can build.

The planning permission for the new dwelling was renewed in 2010 from an original 2005. The original architects plans show the tree retained but building the house is almost impossible with it retained in any way (looks less than 2m away). The applicant (a former owner of the site - not the current one) did not tick either yes or no on the application form question that asked if there were any trees on site, although it was shown as retained in the plans.

So the council havent flagged up any BS5837 stuff but permission has been given. Am i within my rights to remove the tree?

Thanks

Mark

[HCR]

Development other than in accordance with the submitted plans?

[redmoosefaction]

Yarp, I reckon.

 

But do ring the Council up and ask a broad question of " are there any restrictions on pruning trees at this property" get the answer and the name of the person you spoke to. .. One better email them, then you have your paper trail and all bases covered

 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

[arbmark]

Development other than in accordance with the submitted plans?

 

Cheers HCR

I guess so as the tree is shown retained (on the elevations oly - it is not shown in plan views) but there are no conditions to keep it and keeping it is unworkable.

I dont want to stir up a proverbial hornets for the client......

[arbmark]

Yarp, I reckon.

 

But do ring the Council up and ask a broad question of " are there any restrictions on pruning trees at this property" get the answer and the name of the person you spoke to. .. One better email them, then you have your paper trail and all bases covered

 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

 

hmmm i think thats giving the council too much info...plus its full removal of a prominant tree...i get on well with the TO but im not sure about asking him, or anyone in planning such a broad, but loaded question.

[armybloke]

I used to work as a TO in planning and development. Not ticking the box will make the application invalid and your client would have to resubmit. It would not look good if went to committee. I would not touch tree in my opinion. You have already admitted (by your post) that you feel what they are doing is not right.

 

Just an opinion. Good luck,

[Gary Prentice]

Email planning for a search on the house next door and ask if there are any restraints on neighbouring properties.

[Gary Prentice]

I used to work as a TO in planning and development. Not ticking the box will make the application invalid and your client would have to resubmit. It would not look good if went to committee. I would not touch tree in my opinion. You have already admitted (by your post) that you feel what they are doing is not right.

 

Just an opinion. Good luck,

 

I recently read an application from an architect who ticked the no box, for an extension. Four mature trees a meter from the existing rear elavation. Then he told the client the trees could be removed. Just a little matter of a thirty year tpo.

[arbmark]

I used to work as a TO in planning and development. Not ticking the box will make the application invalid and your client would have to resubmit. It would not look good if went to committee. I would not touch tree in my opinion. You have already admitted (by your post) that you feel what they are doing is not right.

 

Just an opinion. Good luck,

 

many thanks armybloke. that is a great help. The application must have been deemed valid though for it to have been approved wouldnt it though?

Is the permission to build then possibly invalid as well?

thanks

mark

[Pat Ferrett]

Id go straight to the next tree job in the book and leave it well alone.