Exceptions and notifications to trees with TPO's.

[benedmonds]

Last week I had a job felling 3 horse chestnuts, these were deemed "dangerous" by an arb consultant during a planning application for the construction of a garage. The planning application was refused.

 

However, in the statutory responses, the local council Consultant Arboriculturalist agreed with the consultants findings that they were dangerous and had no objection to them being removed.

 

Would this count as a notification of intention to do works? Or does one think and additional 5 day notification would be required?

[Andy Clark]

An email to the T/O to cover your bum, quoting the correspondence where he/she confirms no objection, and ansking for a confirm/deny response within 5 working days will suffice.

[MATTMOSS]

If the trees are tpo'd I would get something on paper to say that you can take them out. Just saves any messing should any objection arise

[Chris at eden]

Hi

 

I'd say it wasn't a notification, not least because it wasn't a notification, it was a planning application for a garage.

 

Where the works are necessary to remove an immediate risk of serious harm you must give notice as soon as practicable after the works become necessary. Immediate risk of serious harm and "deemed dangerous" may well be two different things. And as soon as practicable after the works become necessary isn't five days notice.

 

If the trees did represent an immediate risk of serious harm surely either the consultant, are the Council Officer would have said so, and hopefully something would have been done. They haven't. On this basis I'd say you would need to serve a six week notice as normal.

 

If you have done the work, I can't imagine the Council would prosecute, if that is what you are concerned about. I'd say it wasn't in the public interest on the basis that if you had given the six weeks notice to remove the trees the Council, given the arboriculturists comments to the planning application, would not have TPO'd the trees.

 

Ed

 

 

Pretty well covered I would say although I got the impression that the tree was TPO'd not within a CA and so an application required, not a notice.

 

Doesn't sound like an exemption to me although the info is limited.

[Paul Cleaver]

take photos of any visable defects just incase

[daltontrees]

A slighty odd situation.

 

Regulation 15 makes the regulations for TPOs and CAs the same.

 

Regulation 14 says "Nothing in regulation 13 shall prevent—

 

"© the cutting down, uprooting, topping or lopping of a tree, to the extent that such works are urgently necessary to remove an immediate risk of serious harm, or to such other extent as agreed in writing by the authority prior to the works being undertaken;

 

"(2) Where paragraphs (1)(a)(i) [dead] or (1)© apply, notice in writing of the proposed activities shall be given to the authority—

(a) in the case of works urgently necessary to remove an immediate risk of serious harm, as soon as practicable after the works become necessary; and

(b) in any other case at least five working days prior to the date on which the works are to be commenced."

 

Stricti ly speaking, the Council may have agreed to the works (i.e. removal) and their condition is immaterial. I agree that the expression 'dangerous' is not quite the same as 'an immediate risk of serious harm' and if so the Regulations are clear that a 5 day notice must be put in, even though the Council has already agreed to removal.

 

Or ask teh client to get the consultant to advise. It's got to be safer than going on the basis of advice on Arbtalk.