TPO checks getting easier???

[HRG Tree Services]

Hi Guys

Just found out that you can now check for TPO Trees online with the New Forest Council/National Parks it makes it so much easier to look at the map and see exactly what you need! Does anyone if the rest of the councils are planning to follow suite?

[Chris at eden]

Hi Guys

Just found out that you can now check for TPO Trees online with the New Forest Council/National Parks it makes it so much easier to look at the map and see exactly what you need! Does anyone if the rest of the councils are planning to follow suite?

 

Yes they will. European legislation makes it a requirement that all spatial data is available online, that includes TPO's. Council's are allowed to charge for it though, but the TPO guidance states that the register must be available free of charge so thats a bit contradictory. It may take a while for them to get up to speed but it should happen in the nearish future.

 

Cheers,

[treequip]

Hi Guys

Just found out that you can now check for TPO Trees online with the New Forest Council/National Parks it makes it so much easier to look at the map and see exactly what you need! Does anyone if the rest of the councils are planning to follow suite?

 

Tameside.gov.uk has had thier stuff on line for a an age

 

Shame other authorities hereabouts aren't as enlightened but then they want you to ask so they can make a sneaky order if they see fit.

[AHPP]

http://nfnpa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/OnePane/basicviewer/index.html?appid=b25f2bd6bd8240008fd234487a3ab959

[MATTMOSS]

Tameside.gov.uk has had thier stuff on line for a an age

 

Shame other authorities hereabouts aren't as enlightened but then they want you to ask so they can make a sneaky order if they see fit.

 

Although annoying, You cant blame them for protecting trees that are worthy if they get the chance.

[Adam M]

Although annoying, You cant blame them for protecting trees that are worthy if they get the chance.

 

Absolutely

[treequip]

Although annoying, You cant blame them for protecting trees that are worthy if they get the chance.

 

Not if they use it to tip the table in their favour

 

Its a particularly short sighted idea given that it encourages developers to remove all trees because they feel they cant trust a council employee to be reasonable.

 

Despite the odd few that you may manage to slip an order onto the tactic probably leads to a net loss in trees.

[colwoodlandcare]

Does any one have the link for west sussex?

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App

http://Www.colwoodlandcare.co.uk

[MATTMOSS]

Not if they use it to tip the table in their favour

 

I don't understand what you mean by this? How can a tree officer tip the table in his favour? His job is to protect trees for the wider benefits of everybody.

 

Its a particularly short sighted idea given that it encourages developers to remove all trees because they feel they cant trust a council employee to be reasonable?

 

or you could say, greedy developers cut good trees down unnecessarily before they get protected and might make them have to compromise there plans of cramming as many houses as possible into a small space without any thought to integrating any decent green infrastructure that is vital for a healthy community.

A TO being reasonable and a developer being reasonable can be argued either way. They both have there own agendas, a developer wants to make as much dosh has possible and a tree officer wants to preserve good trees that are difficult to establish into maturity.

Personally I'm on the tree side of things but I would like to think I would be reasonable, there is often room for give and take.

 

Despite the odd few that you may manage to slip an order onto the tactic probably leads to a net loss in trees.

 

I don't think the tactic happens very often but I agree, from my experience developers would sooner not take the chance.

[MATTMOSS]

God knows what happened to the text Not used to ipad typing