Re: Trees and Shading
| Subject: | Re: Trees and Shading |
|---|---|
| From: | TREECISION (Julian Forbes) |
| Date: | Dec 13 2001 17:06:06 |
Mark - I entirely agree, I was just trying to point out another angle to Jon. I recently had to second chair an arb consultant at a PI. His entire approach to infill on this wooded site was to go to Table 1. Made me feel very uncomfortable as I knew the other party could find good counter arguments. Turned out all right though: our barrister so mugged the LPA's consultant that their advocate spent his time on damage limitation rather than having a go at my colleague. I was pretty much bored rigid and amused myself finding holes in our side's proof. Table 1 is a handy guide in some cases, but not by any means the end of the debate. Julian. -- The UK Tree Care mailing list To unsubcribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxx.co.uk
Current thread
- Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 12:49:46- Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 15:11:48 - RE: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 13:13:21 - RE: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 14:17:52 - RE: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 15:20:57 - RE: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 15:41:59- Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 17:06:06
- Re: Trees and Shading
- Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 20:13:02- Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 14 2001 08:24:09
- Re: Trees and Shading
- Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 13 2001 20:19:35- Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 14 2001 08:25:00
- Re: Trees and Shading
- RE: Trees and Shading
Dec 14 2001 08:52:15- Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 14 2001 09:20:47
- Re: Trees and Shading
- RE: Trees and Shading
Dec 14 2001 09:42:56 - Re: Trees and Shading
Dec 14 2001 20:03:38
- Re: Trees and Shading