school trees

[combined tree services]

I see, it's in PPG17. It's saying that school playing fields may be of public value as open space when considering the supply of recreation facilities in an area.

 

Surely and he la can deem it as a an open space then the FC should be in agreement . This is the problem in the uk , every possible authority or organisation interprets the ruling differently , I guess I'm no different but really ! ! As a country we really do need to smarten up and sort our system of red tape out

[Tom D]

People get really worked up about this. The first thing that the FC will do is ask the LA if there are any TPO / CA issues. Felling licences are for woodland/forest areas and are there to ensure that our woodland cover is preserved. If the area in question is horticultural, garden, amenity or subject to planning permission then there is no need for a felling licence.

[skyhuck]

People get really worked up about this. The first thing that the FC will do is ask the LA if there are any TPO / CA issues. Felling licences are for woodland/forest areas and are there to ensure that our woodland cover is preserved. If the area in question is horticultural, garden, amenity or subject to planning permission then there is no need for a felling licence.

 

But if you fell enough trees (on a none exempt site) and the council disapprove, but have no power due to no TPO's of CA, they may pressure the FC to use no FL as a stick to beat you with.

[hamdogg]

Get stump grinding ASAP

[skyhuck]

Get stump grinding ASAP

 

Google earth spoilt that one.

[hamdogg]

Google earth spoilt that one.

 

 

Could they use that as sufficient evidence?

[Tom D]

But if you fell enough trees (on a none exempt site) and the council disapprove, but have no power due to no TPO's of CA, they may pressure the FC to use no FL as a stick to beat you with.

 

 

They can slap on a TPO pretty quickly if they want to. I have had that happen on a development site though. A member of the public asked the LA about a felling license and they went to FC only to find that the FC asked them about planning status.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

People get really worked up about this. The first thing that the FC will do is ask the LA if there are any TPO / CA issues. Felling licences are for woodland/forest areas and are there to ensure that our woodland cover is preserved. If the area in question is horticultural, garden, amenity or subject to planning permission then there is no need for a felling licence.

 

 

Tom, I'm a year into one particular task - a row of TPO'd Mont pine in a paddock. Not woodland / forest. It could be a classic example of a contradiction to your point above (without wishing to upset the apple cart!) about getting too hung up on the detail.

 

It does exceed 1/4ly allowances and it's not subject to any exemptions.

 

It does require a licence (and TPO approval.)

 

Also the point made earlier about "...if it's sectioned down it doesn't need a licence, FC are not interested.." Is completely spurious. For that to be a true statement, there'd need to be another exemption - "section felling!"

 

Agreed, there is too much scope for interpretation between different Gov / Quango departments and too much red tape but in this case I'm working on, the local politics and NIMBYs are out in full force. I've had to ensure all my "I"s are dotted and "t"s crossed because they are all over the regs and trying all sorts of capers (including direct action) to try and interfere.

 

It's straight forward so far as I can see, if you don't satisfy the exemptions, you need a licence. If you need a licence and you don't get one... Well, I rather not find out how that pans out!

[skyhuck]

They can slap on a TPO pretty quickly if they want to. I have had that happen on a development site though. A member of the public asked the LA about a felling license and they went to FC only to find that the FC asked them about planning status.

 

But not when they're horizontal

[daltontrees]

People get really worked up about this. The first thing that the FC will do is ask the LA if there are any TPO / CA issues. Felling licences are for woodland/forest areas and are there to ensure that our woodland cover is preserved. If the area in question is horticultural, garden, amenity or subject to planning permission then there is no need for a felling licence.

 

I disagree, the FC's original remit, although somewhat diluted now, was to create and preserve an adequate national stock of timber. Didn't matter whether the tree was woodland or otherwise or if it was felled, sectioned down or whisked away with a helicopter. Nothing to do with woodland cover.

 

Everyone has their own 'rule of thumb' for FL exemption, but there's only one rule that counts and that's the one that's in the Act. There are enough examples of prosecutions and admonishments and near misses to suggest that the FC can and will get pretty pedantic about the definition. I'd never advise a client to take a chance on it. The exemption definition is so succinct that I find paraphrasing of it unnecessary -

 

"in an orchard, garden, churchyard or public open space"