UKTC Archive

RE: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

Subject: RE: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent
From: Antony Wood _ Yew Tree
Date: Oct 02 2020 09:43:36
In the game of consultee Top Trumps, highways always seems to be the winning 
card..

Antony

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
On Behalf Of Bill Anderson
Sent: 02 October 2020 10:10
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

In my experience (not vast), the Highways Officer can say whatever he likes 
on the grounds of road safety and everybody else capitulates.
Bill.

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 09:46, John Booth <info@xxxxxxxx.co.uk> wrote:

more interesting still if a replacement planting condition is 
applied!? :O)

John

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info [mailto:
uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of Callum McCutcheon
Sent: 02 October 2020 09:09
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: Re: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

Hi All

Many thanks for the replies which seem to back up what I'm saying.

In this case it would be impossible to comply with the planning 
conditions without removing the trees, but we have been told by the 
LPA and Scottish Forestry that we still require felling permission. 
I'm sure we could argue our point but from the client's point of view 
he wants to follow the path of least resistance so we will be applying 
for the felling permission.

The situation will get interesting if we are refused the felling 
permission for what ever reason!

Kind regards

Callum

Callum McCutcheon BSc (Hons), M.Arbor.A Principal Arboriculturist 
Urban-Arb LLP www.urban-arb.com
Tel: 01343 XXXXXX
Mob: 07766XXXXXX

On 01/10/2020 19:47, willross583@xxxxxxxxxxx.com wrote:
Callum,
             We had a similar case a couple of years ago and took
counsels advise, this was in England but it was similar to that cited 
by Jim , in that necessary to implement the PP but we also had to 
apply for a felling licence which was another story, feel free to 
contact me directly

Will

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <
uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> On Behalf Of Rupert Baker
Sent: 01 October 2020 18:51
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: RE: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

If the trees were not in ownership then they would - or could - 
serve as
a 'Ransom strip' and the development, despite being granted 
permission, could not proceed.  In this case, all in same ownership, 
I'd say all you needed was a felling licence - but as others have 
said, I'm not versed in Scottish Law - and maybe you'll be a separate 
country in the not too distant future....
Atb
Rupert

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info On Behalf Of Jim Quaife
Sent: 01 October 2020 17:59
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: RE: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

Para 18.2.9 in Mynors
In short an FL is not required where felling is immediately required 
for
the purpose of carrying out consented development.  There is more too 
it (of course!), but that is the principle.
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info [mailto:
uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of Callum McCutcheon
Sent: 01 October 2020 17:40
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: Re: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

Thanks for the replies.

The full  planning consent has gone through so I can't imagine the
client will be too keen on changing the application boundary and 
resubmitting.

Jon- yes, the belt of Sitka is outwith the planning boundary and the
access has been routed though an existing gap in the trees to the road.

I'm fine with making an application for the felling permission but 
it
seems like we are adding another layer of bureaucracy to the planning 
process. I've never come across this before and it doesn't seem reasonable.

Kind regards

Callum

Callum McCutcheon BSc (Hons), M.Arbor.A Principal Arboriculturist 
Urban-Arb LLP www.urban-arb.com
Tel: 01343 XXXXXX
Mob: 07766XXXXXX

On 01/10/2020 16:51, Jim Quaife wrote:
Vision splays outside an application site boundary are a matter of
highway regs.  If the consented application specifies the removal of 
trees within the application site, their removal has consent.
I hesitate to introduce logic to the TCPA but if an LPA were to
separate the two it would be a bit non-sensical.
In my experience resolved highway vision splays are a material
consideration in the planning process.
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
[mailto:uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of Alastair 
Durkin
Sent: 01 October 2020 16:31
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

I'm not sure how this works in Scotland Jon, but in England if you 
want
to actually change the site boundary of a planning permission, then 
it's not an amendment, it's an entirely new application. Bit of a 
faff, which is why I suggested just applying for the licence.

Alastair


-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
<uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> On Behalf Of Jon Heuch
Sent: 01 October 2020 16:26
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Felling Permission versus Planning Consent

I can't give you chapter & verse for Scotland, but you have 
outlined a
situation where the council has conditioned visibility splays "outside 
of the boundaries". So if the condition applies "outside of the boundaries"
the implication is that planning permission has been granted on an 
area wider than just the site itself.



I would go back to the application form & see what the plan 
submitted
shows.
If it doesn't cover the sitka too a possible modification might be
useful. I assume that the visibility splays are required for access 
that is to run through the sitka? I think that you want planning 
permission to cover the whole area and if this is granted then the 
need for a felling licence should evaporate.



Jon






--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural 
consultancy and Stockholm Tree Pits 
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk






--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural 
consultancy
and Stockholm Tree Pits https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk



--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural 
consultancy
and Stockholm Tree Pits https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk




--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural 
consultancy
and Stockholm Tree Pits https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk








--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
and Stockholm Tree Pits https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk




--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
and Stockholm Tree Pits https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and
Stockholm Tree Pits
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk



-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and
Stockholm Tree Pits
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk