scarebit72

This job has now been readvertised as a full time position Swansea.gov.uk/jobs

If the application was to fell but the council have given prune as an alternative, the inspectorate will consider the original application at appeal - to fell, yes or no and will answer that. They will disregard the council's decision to allow pruning as this is materially changing the application. If your client wants to appeal the council's decision and the inspectorate don't allow the appeal to fell, he will then have to submit a new application for pruning as the inspectorate won't consider this as an alternative. Obviously, this then adds somewhat to the timescale..........

Swansea - Landscape Assistant (Aboriculturalist) RG63569-V1 A job opportunity in the sunny climes of South Wales

A5's can still be issued in Wales but only in the interests of good forestry or outstanding amenity vlaue. Thanks.

Last March I submitted an application to the LA to remove 15 trees covered by a woodland order but which are in the garden of a residential property. The site is adjacent to a woodland also covered by the same order. 10 of the trees have visible honey fungus rhizomorphs and the other 5 are in poor condition (crown dieback, bark peeling off) and in close proximity to trees colonised with HF. The trees are in very close proximity to a residential building (a chalet, unoccupied at present, my client doesn’t want to rent it out until this is resolved), an LV powerline and a private road. Two of the trees shed large branches pre-application damaging my client’s car. The TO had visited the site in Feb 2014 and identified HF on 1 tree and advised my client to have a survey carried out. The TO visited the site after the application was made and agreed we could fell 8 trees ‘because of their condition’, no mention was made of HF. When I queried this with the case officer, an additional site visit by the TO was requested. His findings after this were that we could fell 6 trees because of their condition and reduce the remaining 9 which he considers to be perfectly healthy 'to reduce the risk of tree or branch failure' and that there were no signs of HF. No reason has been given for the change in number of trees to be felled (I have asked). This application has dragged on for almost a year, the LA has told us a bat survey must be submitted (which we have declined to do), promised to determine by certain dates and then not done so and twice asked us to revise the application at one point saying ‘we will determine your application if you agree with the tree officer’s findings.’ We appealed to the PINs for non-determination at the beginning of Nov. A determination allowing us to fell the 6 trees turned up mid-Dec in the form of an Article 5 Certificate. When I challenged this, the LA admitted that there was no specific reason for issuing this but have refused to revoke it. Their response was that they issue these automatically on all refused applications which I know is not true as I had another application refused by the same LA in Dec and it was a standard decision notice not an Article 5, additionally the case officer’s report to the panel advises that a A5C should be issued as my client had previously threatened legal damage in the event of any damage incurred due to the delays in this process. We are now appealing the decision and the A5C. The LA sent me their appeal documents this week including a copy of an internal email from the tree officer to the case officer sent last May before the second survey confirming that there are visible HF rhizomorphs but it is probably not one of the aggressive species. This information has never been disclosed to me or my client and the case officer’s report to the planning committee in Dec does not disclose this either instead giving the TO’s official recommendation that there is no HF on site. Having spent a year scratching my head and wondering if I had imagined the rhizomorphs that I saw I am now somewhat annoyed by this. The good news is that I am not worried about the outcome of the imminent appeal or my ident skills anymore. The bad news is that I am out of pocket on this as I charge my clients a set rate for writing a report and submitting a TPO application – I thought this would be straightforward as the TO had flagged up the presence of HF initially. My client has paid a small amount more (which doesn’t cover the hours spent on emails, phonecalls, additional site visits, wearing out my copy of Mynors, gin – the above is a much shortened version of the farce and I will likely have to attend the PINs site visit) but I do not feel justified in charging him more fees given the circumstances. I also want to see it to the end anyway. I am waiting for the results of the appeal but am inclined to take it to the Ombudsman on the grounds of maladministration. Has anyone else done this? Is it worth it? Or will it just take up much more of my time for little result? Is there anywhere else to go? I feel that this information has been deliberately hidden as throughout the whole application process the LA has seemed to be deliberately procrastinating and very keen for us to revise our application to reflect the TO’s recommendation that only 6 trees be felled and the others be reduced. It also seems as if they have issued the A5C just to cover themselves knowing that the trees are colonised by decay fungi. I have already complained twice during this process to the Head of Planning with no result. It looks like the planning committee making the decision have been misled as to the condition of the trees as well. Also, would I be justified in invoicing the LA for my time as I feel that if the TO had agreed the presence of HF on site last May this would have been over a long time ago. The appeal is going to run on until at least April.

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.

Last March I submitted an application to the LA to remove 15 trees covered by a woodland order but in the garden of a residential property. The site is adjacent to a woodland also covered by the same order. 10 of the trees have visible honey fungus rhizomorphs and the other 5 are in poor condition (crown dieback, bark peeling off) and in close proximity to trees colonised with HF. The trees are in very close proximity to a residential building (unoccupied at present, my client doesn’t want to rent it out until this is resolved), an LV powerline and a private road. Two of the trees shed large branches pre-application damaging my client’s car. The TO had visited the site in Feb 2014 and identified HF on 1 tree and advised my client to have a survey carried out. The TO visited the site after the application was made and agreed we could fell 8 trees ‘because of their condition’, no mention was made of HF. When I queried this with the case officer, an additional site visit by the TO was requested. His findings after this were that we could fell 6 trees (?) and that there were no signs of HF. No reason has been given for the change in number of trees to be felled (I have asked). This application has dragged on for almost a year, the LA has asked for a bat survey (which we have declined to do), promised to determine by certain dates and then not done so and twice asked us to revise the application at one point saying ‘we will determine your application if you agree with the tree officer’s findings.’ We appealed to the PINs for non-determination at the beginning of Nov. A determination allowing us to fell the 6 trees turned up mid-Dec in the form of an Article 5 Certificate. When I challenged this, the LA admitted that there was no specific reason for issuing this but have refused to revoke it. Their response was that they issue these automatically on all refused applications which I know is not true as I had another application refused by the same LA in Dec which was a standard decision notice not an Article 5, additionally the case officer’s report to the panel advises that a A5C should be issued as my client had previously threatened legal action in the event of any damage incurred due to the delays in this process. We are now appealing the decision and the A5C. The LA sent me their appeal documents this week including a copy of an internal email from the tree officer to the case officer sent last May before the second survey confirming that there are visible HF rhizomorphs but it is probably not one of the aggressive species. This information has never been disclosed to me or my client and the case officer’s report to the planning committee in Dec does not disclose this either instead giving the TO’s recommendation that there is no HF on site. Having spent a year scratching my head and wondering if I had imagined the rhizomorphs that I saw I am now somewhat annoyed by this. The good news is that I am not worried about the outcome of the imminent appeal or my ident skills anymore. The bad news is that I am out of pocket on this as I charge my clients a set rate for writing a report and submitting a TPO application – I thought this would be straightforward as the TO had flagged up the presence of HF initially. My client has paid a small amount more (which doesn’t cover the hours spent on emails, phonecalls, crying into my copy of Mynors, gin and I will likely have to attend the PINs site visit – the above is a much shortened version of the farce) but I do not feel justified in charging him more fees given the circumstances. I also want to see it to the end anyway. I am waiting for the results of the appeal but am inclined to take it to the Ombudsman on the grounds of maladministration. Has anyone else done this? Is it worth it? Or will it just take up much more of my time for little result? Is there anywhere else to go? I feel that this information has been deliberately hidden as throughout the whole application process the LA has seemed to be deliberately procrastinating and very keen for us to revise our application to reflect the TO’s findings but without advising us as to what their findings on the condition of the trees are or why we should revise it other than that the TO doesn’t believe that there is HF present. It also seems as if they have issued the A5C just to cover themselves knowing that the trees are colonised by decay fungi. I have already complained twice during this process to the Head of Planning with no result. It also seems that the decision-making committee have been misled re the condition of the trees. Also, would I be justified in invoicing the LA for my time as I feel that if the TO’s findings had been disclosed last May this would have been over a long time ago. The appeal is going to run on until at least April. Oof needed to vent

I would speak to either Natural England or Natural Resources Wales, they deal with the protection of wildlife. If the trees are an immediate threat to public safety this can override other considerations but if there is good cause to think bats are present I would be very careful. I am guessing here, but I think the only realistic survey that could be carried out at this time of year is a hibernation survey anyway. Who wants the survey to be carried out?

Hi, I wanted some clarification on whether these can still be issued in Wales? The changes in the regulations in 2012 revoked the LPA's right to issue them in England but was this also been done for Wales subsequently?

No, I've just seen this photo.

I haven't seen this myself. A colleague found it as part of a cluster of brackets on the trunk of an oak about 7' from the ground. Any ideas?

I use a Caxton FX travel card when abroad. Fees (3% each transaction) are less than my banks and as it's pre-loaded you only lose what's on the card if it gets stolen. Might be a useful backup till you get the NZ bank account up and running. All the best, hope it goes well :-)

Hi, I've had to do a couple of surveys lately on woodland sites that belong to outdoor pursuits centres and are used as assault courses. The obstacles are all supported by trees. I'm not advising my clients on the condition of the obstacles only the condition of the trees. But I am wondering whether there is any industry guidance/ recommendations (not necessarily arb industry, I've been looking at sites dealing with ropes courses but have drawn a blank) for fixing climbing walls, cargo nets, platforms etc to trees. Mainly for my own curiosity and so that I can refer my clients to it. As most of the obstacles need replacing/ re-rigging because of damage to the trees. Has anyone had any experience of this? Thanks

Thanks everyone! Will try that, Spud.