Woodland V Gardens/Grounds.

[joeydaniels]

appologies to you too, i did not mean to call you fool hardy. I should have chosen my words more carefully. I know this is not relevent to this case but look at lord ballyedmond's case. Could help with defining the woodland rather than alternative designation??

[agg221]

To the best of my knowledge, land use is defined by Land Registry, so you should be able to do a Land Registry search without alerting the 'normal' powers such as the council - it's the same search as when you're buying a house but you can order it yourself online.

 

There are various designations - agricultural, domestic dwelling, greenbelt etc. and so long as it shows that the area concerned lies within the curtilage it should fall within the domestic dwelling heading, although there may be covenants on this. This matters as much to your client in his ongoing plans to build something planning exempt, presuming the exemption is not an agricultural one based on total holding.

 

Note though, it's worth checking the defined curtilage - even if the area has been historically used as garden this isn't always strictly speaking legitimate. My own place for example looks like one plot, but is actually three, previous owners having bought different bits of adjoining land. One is the original domestic dwelling plot which has planning exemptions but is subject to listed building consent, a second is unencumbered agricultural and the third is agricultural with covenants. Walking round my 'garden' you could never identify which was which unless you knew, and what you do with trees/construction etc. could be perfectly legitimate in one part of the 'garden' but not in another.

 

Alec

[Spruce Pirate]

Don't know if it makes any difference, but is it urban or rural location?

 

Rural location to me would suggest woodland, urban more likely to be garden. Probably has no basis in law, but that's the way it seems to me.

 

I know an ex-woodland officer with the FC. I'll ask him his opinion, see if I can get any ideas how FC would view it.

[openspaceman]

 

Note though, it's worth checking the defined curtilage - even if the area has been historically used as garden this isn't always strictly speaking legitimate. .

 

 

The thing is it will be up to the FC officer to decide but I have been involved in a couple of "incidents".

 

1 Felling a large >5m3 Douglas fir along the long entrance drive to a large country house which was divided into flats, a flat occupier complaineed to FC dive was not garden within curtilage, no further action and the FC officer ribbed me about my lack of sense of humour for years after.

 

2 an entrance lodge to a previously demolished property where secondary pine woodland had developed on the lawn, developers started felling the pine prior to a planning application for new houses. This was held to have become a woodland and a licence was required. LA TO was asked to resign over this one.

 

3 Not curtilage related: Felling a christmas tree plantation on nursery stock grounds and burning the arisings (all over 8cms dbh) in order to restock. FC held felling licence was required onwner continued and I never saw further outcome.

 

IMO FC are fairly reluctant to prosecute and more likely to involve LA to impose tpo

[Gary Prentice]

The thing is it will be up to the FC officer to decide but I have been involved in a couple of "incidents".

 

1 Felling a large >5m3 Douglas fir along the long entrance drive to a large country house which was divided into flats, a flat occupier complaineed to FC dive was not garden within curtilage, no further action and the FC officer ribbed me about my lack of sense of humour for years after.

 

2 an entrance lodge to a previously demolished property where secondary pine woodland had developed on the lawn, developers started felling the pine prior to a planning application for new houses. This was held to have become a woodland and a licence was required. LA TO was asked to resign over this one.

 

3 Not curtilage related: Felling a christmas tree plantation on nursery stock grounds and burning the arisings (all over 8cms dbh) in order to restock. FC held felling licence was required onwner continued and I never saw further outcome.

 

IMO FC are fairly reluctant to prosecute and more likely to involve LA to impose tpo

 

That was my feeling on this issue. If the FC wish to define it as such, then only a Judge can decide. Looking at the planning consent that the previous occupier received, the local TO had an input and the actual submission by the agent alluded several times to the mature woodland. But no TPO was made.

 

I really need to be confident on our standing, we're starting monday week and I've a feeling all hell's going to break loose.

[Gary Prentice]

appologies to you too, i did not mean to call you fool hardy. I should have chosen my words more carefully. I know this is not relevent to this case but look at lord ballyedmond's case. Could help with defining the woodland rather than alternative designation??

 

I'll search that. :beerchug:

 

To the best of my knowledge, land use is defined by Land Registry, so you should be able to do a Land Registry search without alerting the 'normal' powers such as the council - it's the same search as when you're buying a house but you can order it yourself online.

 

There are various designations - agricultural, domestic dwelling, greenbelt etc. and so long as it shows that the area concerned lies within the curtilage it should fall within the domestic dwelling heading, although there may be covenants on this. This matters as much to your client in his ongoing plans to build something planning exempt, presuming the exemption is not an agricultural one based on total holding.

 

Note though, it's worth checking the defined curtilage - even if the area has been historically used as garden this isn't always strictly speaking legitimate. My own place for example looks like one plot, but is actually three, previous owners having bought different bits of adjoining land. One is the original domestic dwelling plot which has planning exemptions but is subject to listed building consent, a second is unencumbered agricultural and the third is agricultural with covenants. Walking round my 'garden' you could never identify which was which unless you knew, and what you do with trees/construction etc. could be perfectly legitimate in one part of the 'garden' but not in another.

 

Alec

I've had a quick look at the land registry and I will order the plans. It's worthwhile as it's also going to be an ongoing site for us. This particular project is just a small part of a very large site.

 

Don't know if it makes any difference, but is it urban or rural location?

 

Rural location to me would suggest woodland, urban more likely to be garden. Probably has no basis in law, but that's the way it seems to me.

 

I know an ex-woodland officer with the FC. I'll ask him his opinion, see if I can get any ideas how FC would view it.

 

I'd appreciate that if you could, it would be interesting to get the 'oppositions' perspective, so to speak.

[phirow]

I ave been told by FC or somebody who worked for them, thinning size is up to 10cm DBH

and does not need planning etc: woodland coppice and such.

anything larger requires permission anywhere.

 

Again his seems to come down to who you speak to and which area you live in.

[john k]

I ave been told by FC or somebody who worked for them, thinning size is up to 10cm DBH

and does not need planning etc: woodland coppice and such.

anything larger requires permission anywhere.

 

Again his seems to come down to who you speak to and which area you live in.

 

From Forestry Commission - Felling licences exemptions

 

"You do not need a licence for trees that have the following diameters when measured 1.3 metres from the ground

 

8 cm or less

10 cm or less for thinnings

15cm or less for cutting coppice"

[john k]

That was my feeling on this issue. If the FC wish to define it as such, then only a Judge can decide. Looking at the planning consent that the previous occupier received, the local TO had an input and the actual submission by the agent alluded several times to the mature woodland. But no TPO was made.

 

I really need to be confident on our standing, we're starting monday week and I've a feeling all hell's going to break loose.

 

The felling licence requirement and exemptions are in the Forestry Act 1967, which doesn't actually give a definition of "a garden". I've only managed to dig out one bit of case law, where the FC prosecuted and the owner won on appeal. He was a property developer with a few quid behind him though!

 

Millionaire who cut down trees in own garden cleared - Telegraph

 

The legal definition of a garden - Telegraph

 

Judges sitting in the High Court decided that the OED definition was "too narrow" and should take into consideration the trend for wild gardens and meadow areas.

 

Lord Justice Moses said the key to what constituted a garden was the "relationship between the owner and the land and the history and character of the land and space".

 

ROCKALL v DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT FOOD & RURAL AFFAIRS | West Law Report

 

Unless there are TPOs in place then the only authority that will be concerned with unlicensed felling is the FC. It's not a planning issue or anything else to do with the local authority.

 

You could get advice from your local FC officer, but ultimately it is the judge's opinion that counts.

[Gary Prentice]

John K,

 

Thanks for the links, appreciate that. Strangely, at appeal, the judge sided on the intention of re-instating an overgrown 'garden', which is at odds with other cases where a garden has been deemed as no longer such, due to lack of use.

 

In your link there's reference again to McInerney v Portland Port Ltd, but I still can't find the court report.

 

The jobs been postponed now anyone, I realised yesterday that the client hasn't yet got planning consent for change of use of the property. At present its under a commercial usage, not residential, so there's no FC Felling Licence exemption applicable.

 

Thanks to everyone for the replies, the law case links have helped to greatly improve my knowledge.