Replanting after tpo'd tree removal

[MATTMOSS]

The Duty to Replace Trees

11.2 Under section 206(1) of the Act the landowner is under a duty to replace a tree which is removed in contravention of the TPO. Outside woodlands the duty also applies if the tree is removed because it is dead, dying or has become dangerous (for more advice on the replacement of woodlands see paragraph 11.11-11.12 below).

11.3 The duty on the landowner is:

(1) to plant another tree,

(2) of an appropriate size and species,

(3) at the same place,

(4) as soon as he or she reasonably can.

11.4 The duty transfers to the new owner if the land changes hands.135 When planted, the replacement tree is automatically protected by the original TPO,136 even if it is a different species, although in these circumstances the LPA may wish to vary the TPO to bring it formally up to date (but see paragraph 11.15 below about the status of a replacement tree planted in accordance with a condition of consent).

11.5 There is no duty to replace one tree with two or more trees. A landowner may well be prepared to replace a large species of tree with two smaller ones, but the LPA have powers only to enforce the duty, which is to plant one tree with one replacement.

11.6 'The same place' means the position defined in the TPO by reference to the description in the 1st Schedule and the map.137 It may not be necessary to insist that the replacement tree is planted in the exact position of the original tree (indeed, it may not be practicable to do so), but the place must at least correspond with the position described in the TPO as shown on the map. In the case of 'area orders' the position of each tree is not

shown on the map, but in the Secretary of State's view the replacement tree should be planted as near as is reasonably practicable to the position of the original tree.

11.7 The duty on the landowner is to plant the replacement tree as soon as he or she reasonably can. In deciding what this means the LPA should carefully consider the circumstances of the case (such as the number of trees involved or the time of year). It does not necessarily mean a matter of a few weeks. It may be reasonable, for example, for the landowner to wait until the next planting season.

11.8 The Courts have not resolved whether there is a duty to replace trees uprooted or destroyed in strong winds. The Secretary of State considers that the duty does apply in such cases, although the LPA may decide not to enforce the duty depending on the circumstances of the case.

11.9 Anyone proposing to remove a tree on the grounds that it is dead, dying or has become dangerous is advised to give the LPA five days' notice before carrying out the work, except in an emergency. The LPA have powers to dispense with the duty to plant a replacement tree,138 and any request for such a dispensation should be put to the LPA in writing.

11.10 Under section 213 of the Act the same duty is imposed on the landowner following the removal of trees in a conservation area

 

 

It sounds to me as though the planning department does have powers under the act, but as usual using them is another thing.

[SiW]

Kevin , there was no response to this posting which was why i responded in the first place . I will find out tomorrow what fines are in place over here . I think the questions you raise are irrelavant tbh , in the commercial world and the real world just make sure something else gets planted ..

 

To be honest it's not my job to replant I was paid to remove a dangerous tree, my involvement ended when he settled his bill. what the client does now is up to him

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Kevin , there was no response to this posting which was why i responded in the first place . I will find out tomorrow what fines are in place over here . I think the questions you raise are irrelavant tbh , in the commercial world and the real world just make sure something else gets planted ..

 

That's a strange response if I might say so and I'm not sure I've understood your meaning.

 

I wasn't having a go at your first response, it's an open forum (with moderation of course)

 

If you think my questions are irrelevant, that fair do's, can't answer for what you think is or isn't relevant, but I did say "these are the questions I'd ask."

 

Did you say you're in Austria? So what the fines might be in Austria are relevant how? Other than in passing interest as a comparison?

 

Thanks for the insight into the "real and commercial world" though - maybe it's peculiar to Austrian arb that as long as "something" gets planted all is well with the world. Maybe a row of turnips will solve the problem?

[SiW]

I'm not sure OP specified that it was a condition? Maybe it was just my reading of the post? Was it a condition or was it an expression of opinion?

 

Unsure as to actual phrasing of email but tree officer definitely wants replacements, but if its a condition of removal doesn't it get messy as the trees were declared dangerous

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

To be honest it's not my job to replant I was paid to remove a dangerous tree, my involvement ended when he settled his bill. what the client does now is up to him

 

That has to be the best bet!

[SiW]

I like turnips lol

[born2trot]

You have at long last got the commercial world kevin , plant a turnip ..perfect .

[tarzan]

You must replace when you have removed a TPO tree and you can be fined for not acting on the TPO conditions

[tarzan]

And as a arborist when you apply for a removal of a TPO tree/s if you the boss/ M.D of the tree firm your liable for the replanting of a new unit after removal

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

See post #7