Forum

Replies

• 

  Trevor JH Knight March 2, 2014 at 11:42am

  Roy,
  I have had a fair few dealings with TPO,s and their protecting officers and have to admit they are a pretty rigid bunch of individuals and i suppose they have to be. The main criteria is if you have planning permission approved for your extension the TPO will have been flagged up on the submission. On these occasions TPO officer will then meet on site to discuss and will give you an idea where they sit with the application. If you disagree with their findings you can apply to over turn by the secretary of state. Document attached is what we keep on file for basic understanding of how the system works. Good luck with your application. Trev

  https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_dat...
• 

  MWJONES March 2, 2014 at 6:06pm

  Is it damaging anything?
  Is it in good condition?
  May be apply to reduce in size?
  
  Failing that no chance!
• 

  David Cox March 2, 2014 at 7:00pm

  Points 1 NOT a valid reason to remove TPO in its self.

  point 2 Not applicable as it is only considered after it is decided to remove TPO in its own right.

  Point 3 Is irrelevent as the TPO is applied in respect of the trees role in the wider landscape and title deed boundaries regarding size of your holding (garden inb your case) are not factored into the TPO being applied to a tree.

  Point 4 - the nighbours have no involvement its a matter for the Tree officer and the council in protecting mature trees in the built enviroment from removal and development.

  This leaves point 5.................... This is the only one you can argue on....... and best of luck as minimal amenity value may be a result of construction and planting since the TPO was applied in which case the Tree officer may still refuse......

  If you can prove this was the case, as the officer agrees, from the time of the TPO being instigated then you could have a case for removal, but even then it would depend on the reason for the TPO - was it applied as a condition of your house being built? in which case its unlikely as removing the tpo later would make a mockery of applying it to save the tree when the house was built.

  The other option is if it hsa ANY rot or structural defects have argue the tree is unsafe and theirfore removal and replant is an option.

  Your points regarding roots and future damage are not relevant either as root damage to foundations is mostly urban myth - soil shrinkage on heavy clay soils is the usual cause of foundation damage, and can be exacerbated by trees but mechanical damage is out of the question. Also if the tree pre-dates the construction it cant be used as an arguement for the tpo removal, and this is an issue alot of tree officers hate as its mostly nonsense told to them and hardens their attitude to keeping the tree.
• 

  Roy Werrett March 2, 2014 at 8:47pm

  Thanks for the input folks.
  Me comments about roots and foundations could have been better composed.
  The extent of the roots may mean that new foundations for an extension would require digging too close to the tree which I guess would mean that a planning application for an extension would fall at the first hurdle.
• 

  Brendan McHale March 2, 2014 at 9:14pm

  Might not mean refusal of planning but would require clay boards and very deep footings
• 

  Trevor JH Knight March 2, 2014 at 9:24pm

  It might not fall at first hurdle Roy, there was one occasion when the TPO officer asked us to surround the listed tree root with a root guard and gave us permission to continue the build up to the root guard which was a great relief for the householder so i would not give up keep going and await their decision.