Thank you Edmund and Mike
I appreciate that with the new BS the tree constraints plan would address
these matters at the early design stage. However, sites are currently being
developed which were granted consent pre Sept, so the amount of arb forward
planning is regrettably variable, hence my original posting.
Cheers
Sharon
Edmund Hopkins <Edmund.Hopkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.gov.uk> wrote:
Sharon, for my part I'm happy to see schedules of work done as conditions of
consent, and I don't mind in the least if its nowhere near the footprint of
the building. Actually I think this is a thoroughly good thing because it
gets the site into arboricultural order and almost certainly on the
developer's budget. Once the site is signed off there may be fragmented
ownership and TPO apps coming in on a sort of scattergun way.
Quoting uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info:
Table of contents:
1. protected trees on development sites - Sharon Hosegood
--
Edmund Hopkins
City of Nottingham Council
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content
and cleared by NetIQ MailMarshal.
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal
views which are not the views of Nottingham City Council unless specifically
stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system,
do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that Nottingham City
Council monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will
signify your consent to this.
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/
