A 101 on how to follow BS5837...

[Gary Prentice]

In an ideal world, we would prosecute the contractor for negligence and unsafe working practices, specify for replacement trees and proper aftercare, and question why no assessment was done of working within RPAs.

 

Is there existing legislation to enforce the arb consultants role in compliance to the AMS.

 

I think that the developer need to provide a bond, a percentage of the project total, that is only returned if the arb consultant has actually regularly visited the site and overseen the major components of the build. If the consultant or even tree officer fails to sign off, the bond is lost and the money goes into a fund ring-fenced for urban planting.

 

One of the American foresters developed something a few years back, valuing highway trees that were lost to utility installations. If an alternative to tree loss couldn't be found, at least decent replacement funding was secured.

[Kveldssanger]

A lot of planning applications do seem to be mere box-ticking exercises. I've got photos of rubble stored right at the base of a poplar, and likely other photos of similar poor practice elsewhere. Disconcertingly, the instance with the poplar involved development on a site where they had explicitly stated they would work in accordance with 5837, and the excuse was that of "oh [the pile of rubble will] only be there a few days...".

 

Whilst things are driven exclusively for-profit, any corner-cutting will be undertaken if left unsupervised. Unfortunately I cannot be omnipresent and am fortunate to spot certain things in passing as they unfold.

[Gary Prentice]

Chris, don't get me wrong. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone, I talk to planners and TO's on a daily basis and understand that those who still give a damn are in an impossible position.

 

Realistically, LA's are unlikely to given bigger budgets to police these things, officer time is inadequate and likely to become even less. Something has to change. If a developer can be forced to pay a surcharge for improvements in the borough - which don't even have to be local to the development, why can't something be implemented to safeguard those trees that everyone has agreed need protecting.

[Paul Barton]

.

 

 

 

Has anyone actually written an AMS to say that they will oversee the protective barriers and then gone on to do so?

 

 

 

Yes!

 

...but mostly I write it but no one asks me to actually come to site.

 

I never understand why planning conditions aren't more specific about arboricultural supervision.

[Kveldssanger]

I believe they aren't ranked high enough as people in places of significant influence don't care enough.

 

Protecting a tree is a cost, and if such a cost can be cut without repercussions (or repercussions that still wouldn't equate to the original cost), it will be.

Edited August 19, 2015 by Kveldssanger