planning conditions tpo's and construction sites

[Dean O]

It would be useless me thinking of a good tactical approach to keep all happy - that's not going to happen.

 

there is a tpo on the row of trees blocking the access, two or three are down for removal for the access

 

so even if I were to carry on around the other three boundaries (still in breech of the condition) which aren't tpo'd the issue for the client is still the hold up for the site access.

 

am I culpable where there is planning consent (which I believe over rides the tpo) but with conditions.

whatever is agreed on site the site access is still the site access so this surely cant be in dispute between the client and local authority??

[daltontrees]

Not a happy dilemma.

 

I wasn't aware of the TPO, it changes things a little because Councils have a tendency to try and prosecute the guy covered in sawdust, regardless of whose orders he was following.

 

Here's my thoughts. Yes PP overrides TPO, but it depends. If the PP specifically shows the trees as being removed (there on the 'exisiting' drawing, not there on the 'proposed' drawing, and the drawings have been stamped by the LA as being part of the consent), they can be removed without further process IF (a) the removals are necessary to implement the permission [note the word necessary, which is not the same as desireable or convenient] AND (b) this hasn't been over-ruled by planning conditions. The way to think of it is that if there is a site with TPO'd trees, and if an application for planning permission is going in, you don't need a separate TPO application because it can all be dealt with at once... but like a TPO application conditions can be put in place that says what can and can't be done to the trees. The PP is just being used as a medium for communicating and formalising those conditions.

 

Can't say more than that without seeing the conditions, but I hope this helps. Just to be clear, the process for prosecuting for breach of TPO and the fines are much clearer and Councils seem much readier to pursue TPO prosecutions than breach of consent prosecutions. So be especially careful i.e. instructions clear and in writing and a record that you let the customer know what he might be getting into if he gets you to go ahead.

[Gary Prentice]

Personally, I think the condition is simply to control the pruning works. There isn't much discussion as to the extent of felling. Could you phone or, better still, email the TO and get agreement to do the access felling work.

 

If he or she is reasonable, where's the problem. One argument I'd put forward is that after the beginning of March the risk of nesting birds arises and it would be unreasonable if due to delays another environmental survey became necessary

[Adam M]

Forgetting the works to TPO'ed trees, but are other treeworks required to implement the proposal technically pre-commencement as no spade in the ground?

[daltontrees]

Personally, I think the condition is simply to control the pruning works. There isn't much discussion as to the extent of felling. Could you phone or, better still, email the TO and get agreement to do the access felling work.

 

If he or she is reasonable, where's the problem. One argument I'd put forward is that after the beginning of March the risk of nesting birds arises and it would be unreasonable if due to delays another environmental survey became necessary

 

The point about bird nesting is a good one. Postponing the whole development for 6 months becasue you can't get in to teh site would be very very expensive for development financing.

 

A few days ago I mentioned about the difference between being the contractor and being the agent. I should have epxplained a bit better. An agent is someone authorised to speak and enter into agreements on behalf of the 'principal' i.e. the client. Anyone who acts as if he is agent in speaking to others about a project binds the principal to any agreements he reaches. That can be dangerous legal stuff. It's OK to have the client's agreement to go off on fact-finding, just asking questions here and there, that doesn't really make you an agent, but if you discuss and disclose the client's business you are acting as agent.

 

If I was client on a big development and a contractor took it upon himself to discuss my business with the TO without my permission, I'd probably fire the contractor immediately, and then hold him responsible for any economic losses arising from him pretending to be my agent. I'm not saying that this is relevant in this case, but if ones' 'i'm-getting-set-up-here' radar is already pinging like a techno tune, it's good to tread very carefully.

[jaime bray]

The point about bird nesting is a good one. Postponing the whole development for 6 months becasue you can't get in to teh site would be very very expensive for development financing.

 

A few days ago I mentioned about the difference between being the contractor and being the agent. I should have epxplained a bit better. An agent is someone authorised to speak and enter into agreements on behalf of the 'principal' i.e. the client. Anyone who acts as if he is agent in speaking to others about a project binds the principal to any agreements he reaches. That can be dangerous legal stuff. It's OK to have the client's agreement to go off on fact-finding, just asking questions here and there, that doesn't really make you an agent, but if you discuss and disclose the client's business you are acting as agent.

 

If I was client on a big development and a contractor took it upon himself to discuss my business with the TO without my permission, I'd probably fire the contractor immediately, and then hold him responsible for any economic losses arising from him pretending to be my agent. I'm not saying that this is relevant in this case, but if ones' 'i'm-getting-set-up-here' radar is already pinging like a techno tune, it's good to tread very carefully.

 

 

 

That last point very true. I had similar situ before in a conservation area, tree removal had been a contentious issue and we were warned to expect the anti tree removal brigade out. Job had to be done on a Sunday to, even worse as was clause in planning approval starting no out of normal hours work should occur.

 

I informed the developer that whilst I was aware that as far as he was concerned the approval stated the trees could be removed, there were some discrepancies I wished to have cleared up prior to commencement of works. They got very abrupt and narky on the phone, ended up having all the info sent through to me, and a planning agent of developer rang me to confirm all my questions.

There are enough things to worry about when doing tree work. The last thing you need distracting you on site is whether you're going to be cobbled by council for breach of tpo etc.

 

Get it checked, get it printed off and have in van with you incase anything occurs on site by neighbourly well wishers.

 

I do think that arbs are seen buy construction industry as paranoid, over dramatic, and a pain in the neck at times like this. But we know the consequences of any unlawful tree work, and it goes beyond just a fine. Small industry, reputation can easily be tarnished.

[Gary Prentice]

The point about bird nesting is a good one. Postponing the whole development for 6 months becasue you can't get in to teh site would be very very expensive for development financing.

 

A few days ago I mentioned about the difference between being the contractor and being the agent. I should have epxplained a bit better. An agent is someone authorised to speak and enter into agreements on behalf of the 'principal' i.e. the client. Anyone who acts as if he is agent in speaking to others about a project binds the principal to any agreements he reaches. That can be dangerous legal stuff. It's OK to have the client's agreement to go off on fact-finding, just asking questions here and there, that doesn't really make you an agent, but if you discuss and disclose the client's business you are acting as agent.

 

If I was client on a big development and a contractor took it upon himself to discuss my business with the TO without my permission, I'd probably fire the contractor immediately, and then hold him responsible for any economic losses arising from him pretending to be my agent. I'm not saying that this is relevant in this case, but if ones' 'i'm-getting-set-up-here' radar is already pinging like a techno tune, it's good to tread very carefully.

 

Fair points Jules.

 

I often act as the arranger between developers and the LA, in that I have a fair idea what the authority will allow and agree to, but as you say, I wouldn't approach the LA without first discussing the situation, understanding the aims and priorities and getting the agreement of the developer.

 

In these particular circumstances, as I understand it, the priority is to get access, there's already consent/permission but the holdup is a meeting to specify the extent of some pruning works.

 

To move things on, for all concerned, I'd put the proposition forward to the developer that I might be able to get consent for felling by asking for a favor from the TO, as a professional courtesy.

 

I suppose a lot depends on the relationship you have with the officers concerned, as to whether they will stick 100% to the rules or short-cut some of the processes.

[scarebit72]

The TO may not be too happy about being asked to shortcut the process as a 'favour'. If it's a large development site they are probably answerable to people higher up the chain themselves.

[Gary Prentice]

Okay, as a favor could he arrange a site meeting promptly. After all, he is the only one who has to agree the limits of a pruning specification.

[Dean O]

just to update on this one

 

thank you all for your input - this left me with a sleepless night but turned out OK in the end.

 

I attended a site meeting

the TO looked around and some of the pruning work was discussed - the spec had suggested a 4 mtre lift - which the TO wanted to be assured wasn't going to be a case of stripping the stems clean to this height (this was of benefit to us as while I understood how this 4 metre lift would be implemented the client did not and would have been expecting a good hammering to the trees).

 

it was said that the removals were not in question and the situation just a formality/technicality (I suppose a fell is a fell and its hard to discuss the spec on these) - but I didn't know how this was going to pan out.

 

Its difficult to believe that the fells could not have been completed prior to discussing the pruning and lifting works to enable the site access to continue.

 

what has happened as a result is that the builders have entered the site and stripped it while they wait for this to be cleared up. This will make our work there a nightmare.

 

we are in limbo waiting for the go ahead.

 

There is probably more to this story - a councillor lives in the properties bounding the site and has been quite opinionated regarding the proposed work there - so perhaps some pressure being applied -

 

We haven't worked under this TO as she has been recently appointed so might just be making sure that we are cosha.

 

or perhaps the client has simply rubbed this TO up the wrong way in the past.

 

I will never know - and mine is not to reason why....

 

thanks again guys

 

Dean