High Hedges

[Gary Prentice]

It might be the appropriate reaction, and might even be intra vires but if you had applied for a high hedge notice, wouldn't you be livid that the Council seemed to be abusing its position?.

 

I probably would be livid, but TPOs are a amenity to all and the LA have strategies, or should have, to protect and enhance the local environment. It's a regular occurrence to slap orders on development sites, after the trees have come to the attention of the authority, so is this scenario that different?

 

Trees and the social, environmental and economic benefits they provide are for the greater good and if a small minority have to suffer, well so be it. (well, unless I'm being paid to take them down:lol:)

[MATTMOSS]

I probably would be livid, but TPOs are a amenity to all and the LA have strategies, or should have, to protect and enhance the local environment. It's a regular occurrence to slap orders on development sites, after the trees have come to the attention of the authority, so is this scenario that different?

 

Trees and the social, environmental and economic benefits they provide are for the greater good and if a small minority have to suffer, well so be it. (well, unless I'm being paid to take them down:lol:)

 

like it

[MATTMOSS]

In England at least, the full Council sets the fee. Fees vary wildly from £700+ to £0, and some Councils offer discounts to OAP's or those in receipt of certain benefits.

 

Before a householder can bring a complaint they must initially try and resolve the matter themselves. This can include mediation, but it is not a strict requirement.

 

Many mediation services have closed due to loss of funding, the parties may not want mediation, or the parties may not even be speaking to each other. So what constitutes sufficient initial efforts to resolve a complaint will vary depending on the individual circumstances of the complaint.

 

Edward

 

Also I believe that the Council has no obligation to offer this mediation service and may choose not to get involved.

[daltontrees]

Firstly the LA wouldn't get an application to reduce a high hegde. They would receive a high hedge complaint which, if the complainant has tried and failed to resolve the problem, and the hedge qualifies as one to which the Act applies, they must adjudicate on.

 

A hegde is a hedge, and not a row of trees, so if it was a row of trees the Act would not apply. If the trees were under threat and an amenity the LA could TPO them.

 

Of course trees do grow in hedges, so if there are trees that warrant protection growing within a hedge then they too could be TPO'd.

 

If a high hedge complaint has been received, the adjudication process undertaken, and a remedial notice issued to reduce the hedge to, lets say 2m, that very nice 30m oak within the hedge would also have to be reduced to 2m. Even if it had a TPO on it. The exemption in the TPO Regs, "in compliance with an Act of Parliament" would apply so no seperate TPO application required.

 

But and this is a very big but, the LA should have drafted the remedial notice in such away as to exclude the oak. E.g. Reduce height of hedge, but excluding the oak marked X on the attached plan, to 2m. They could exclude the oak whether or not it was TPO'd.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Esdward

 

Sorry, I meant if the LA receives a high hedge complaint on a row of trees that are so close grown that they constitute a hedge.

 

So the question is whether they could react by TPOing the trees in the hedge. The Antisocial Behaviour Act defines a hedge as comprising trees or shrubs. So any evergreens in the hedge that are not shrubs are trees and can be TPOd.

 

You have flagged up correctly that,contrary to the commonly held view,deciduous trees can be the subject of a high hedge remedial notice, not just evergreens. In Scotland it is worse, a wholly deciduous hedge could be.

 

Of course, the remedial notice doesn't have to say that the hedge has to be cut to single height. But if it isn't (and especially if deciduous trees are involved), the poor LA officer dealing with it can't use the Guidance in Hedge Height and Light Loss any more and will have to resort to the British Standard, he BRE Site Layout and Planning guidance and had best get himself some sky protractors, sunpath diagrams and a detailed understanding of vertical skylight components, daylighting factors and winter sunlight hours. And a large packet of aspirin while he is at it.

[daltontrees]

like it

 

 

Me too. But here's the rub. If TPO'd trees (or a tree that could be TPOd in response to a high hedge complaint) are blocking so much light that they are adversely affecting the reasonable enjoyment of the property (which could be the property on which the trees stand), isn't it morally repugnant that the property owner should be denied all the health and wellbeing benefits that underpinned the high hedges legislation in the first place?

 

It's a separate question but related very directly to the original one. Could a LA refuse a TPO application and defend it successfully at appeal if refusal would result in continued adverse affect on reasonable enjoyment of a property?

[MATTMOSS]

Me too. But here's the rub. If TPO'd trees (or a tree that could be TPOd in response to a high hedge complaint) are blocking so much light that they are adversely affecting the reasonable enjoyment of the property (which could be the property on which the trees stand), isn't it morally repugnant that the property owner should be denied all the health and wellbeing benefits that underpinned the high hedges legislation in the first place?

 

It's a separate question but related very directly to the original one. Could a LA refuse a TPO application and defend it successfully at appeal if refusal would result in continued adverse affect on reasonable enjoyment of a property?

 

Very good question.

One I find hard to answer with clear thoughts for and against.

I am going to say in general NO, but with an addition of that the outcome of each situation should be decided on its own merits.

[Gary Prentice]

Very good question.

One I find hard to answer with clear thoughts for and against.

I am going to say in general NO, but with an addition of that the outcome of each situation should be decided on its own merits.

 

Spoken like a true LA Tree Officer:sneaky2:

[MATTMOSS]

All good input Ed,

I wish I had the energy to be more involved in these threads.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

In England at least, the full Council sets the fee. Fees vary wildly from £700+ to £0, and some Councils offer discounts to OAP's or those in receipt of certain benefits.

 

Before a householder can bring a complaint they must initially try and resolve the matter themselves. This can include mediation, but it is not a strict requirement.

 

Many mediation services have closed due to loss of funding, the parties may not want mediation, or the parties may not even be speaking to each other. So what constitutes sufficient initial efforts to resolve a complaint will vary depending on the individual circumstances of the complaint.

 

Edward

 

Thanks!

[daltontrees]

Well is it a row of trees or a hedge. You can't TPO a hedge, but you can TPO a row of trees. A problem arises in the definition of a high hedge for the purposes of the legislation. A line of two or more evergreen , (for those of us in England and Wales), trees or shrubs that are a barrier to light or access. However, the legislation is not meant to apply to individual trees. At what point a row of trees comprises a hedge for the purposes of the legislation, or is a row of individual trees to which the legislation doesn't apply is, once again, a matter for the decision maker. See Castelli, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Merton [2013] EWHC 602 (Admin) (05 February 2013).

 

A line of trees viewed square on may have sufficient gaps to be considered as individuals, and not therefore a hedge as far as the legislation is concerned. However, the same line observed from an acute angle may present a different view, that of a solid hedge. If such a 'hedge' was to the side of a window and so viewed as a solid hedge, then it may have an adverse impact on light into the dwelling that needs to be resolved, but not the garden, as from there it would be viewed as a line of trees with gaps. But if it is opposite the window from where it is viewed as a line of trees with gaps, it probably wouldn't require action at all.

 

Of course the impact on the amenity of the wider area must also be considered. So if your line of trees/hedge is important in the street scape, or a national treasure, then that must be added into the mix and given adequate weighting when making a decision. Are you thinking of complaining about the Meikleour hedge.

 

At the end of the day some common sense, whatever that is, has to be applied.

 

Edward

 

Thanks for all this. I have read Castelli etc. in the past and I think it is a very useful general examination of some of the issues arising from the (english) Act. It says for example that a hedge is a freestanding line forming a boundary. You ask "Is it a row of trees or a hedge"? I say (ignoring shrubs for now) that the definition of a hedge is or includes that it is a row of trees. Presumably a group TPO would allow a hedge to be protected without getting concerned about the individual trees. The case looks in more detail as whether there are gaps and whether these would stop it being a hedge. If they do, that's the end of the story. The Act cannot apply.

 

If they don't, it has passed only the first test of whether it is a hedge. It then has to pass the test of whether it is a high hedge. What becomes all-important is whether and to what extent it is a 'barrier to light'. The existence of gaps in the statutory sense here is different as to the basic test. In the basic test gaps could prevent it from being a hedge. In the statutory sense the gaps determine the extent to which it is a barrier to light, for the purpose of calculating the action hedge height, but if the overall effect of the gaps above 2m is significant then it stops being a 'barrier to light' and cannot therefore any longer come within the definition of a 'high hedge'.