On 21 Mar 2012, at 09:06, Glyn Thomas <glyn.thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk>
wrote:
Hi Bill
<<I fairly regularly see conditions along the lines of "You are required to
give this department 5 days notice of the date upon which the work will be
undertaken." The objective being the Town Hall want to be able to say they
know about it when someone rings up to complain; this seems reasonable.>>
Just ignore them Bill.....they're not enforceable or valid
<<However wouldn't it be nicer if they said "would you mind awfully giving
us a call the morning you start or sending an e-mail the night before,"
which I suspect we'd be less likely to ignore....>>
I agree.....as far as trees and planning conditions are concerned, the
carrot is better than the stick. It's about getting out and talking to and
educating people. Much easier though to bluff it with a harshly worded
condition.
I use this type of condition now and again just for more technical pruning
jobs and when I don't know who will be doing the work. The reason is so I
can have a chat with the climber prior to the work starting to make sure a)
they've seen the decision notice and any attached conditions and b) to talk
over the work to ensure they know what their doing and are aware what's
been approved.
90% of the apps I get don't come in from the contractors here, they're
submitted by the punters and they could have employed any cowboy with his
B&Q bought chainsaw to do the work and there's a lot of them about. Also
it's amazing how many of the punters don't give a copy of the decision
notice to the contractor and just give them verbal instructions, which may
differ from what's been approved. I don't see anything wrong in operating
in this way in the circumstances we have here. If the contractors you know
and trust submitted apps, I wouldn't have to use this condition so often.
Having 5 days notice means I can programme visits into my working week. If
they phone up on the morning there's a good chance I will be in a meeting
in the office or at a pre- booked site meeting. That doesn't help me, the
contractor or the punter.
I do get out and talk to people, however only about 30% of my work load
gets taken up with TPO work, with the majority being taken up with
planning apps and other work. I would love to get out of the office more to
spread the word.
Anyway as most of the reputable arborists around here won't apply for
permission themselves, off the TPO apps and S211 notices I get, I do
pre-apps with the punters on about 80% of these. At least with these I can
hopefully steer them in the the direction of qualified, insured and
experienced arborists and give advice on the tree, what's likely to be
approved and what's likely to be refused, what's best for the tree, what
can be achieved to achieve the punters objectives and importantly their
rights of appeal. Sometimes this results in an application, which is at
least properly worded and enforceable and sometimes no application, as I've
told them to save their money as the tree isn't dangerous and doesn't need
any works. There's nothing better than giving clear advice and this being
taken on board by the punter, who then have a better understanding of their
tree and the legalities of having a protected tree.
I agree that carrot is best, but you need to keep your big stick handy for
the occassions when it's needed. Re the carrot approach I would like to see
means tested financial grants for owners of protected trees for works that
are required for safety reasons and to help manage/ conserve protected
ancient, veteran and notable trees. That's another kettle of fish
altogether. Please feel free to discuss.
Cheers
Moray
--
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/
