TPO

Surely it can impose a temporary order? However developers seem to ignore TPOs when it suits, and stand the fine if worse comes to worse, which it rarely does as the council often cannot afford an expensive fight in court. This is where the peasants lose out!

Council can and do take action. Money should not be a problem as they will get costs. Not necessarily cheap for the developer either. There is a recent case where the culprit had to pay £500,000 and costs and a replecement tree had to be planted as well.

My local council has a dedicated 'tree man. Presumably yours does and should be contacted for such advice.

It is the planners not the councillors you need to speak to initially. They will know the law and, assuming it is justified, can impose a temporary TPO that is valid for a few months. In any case if the council is selling the land they can make the sale conditional on ther trees being preserved.

The council officers should be able to tell you the folk in planning are dealing with this sort of thing all the time. Brian

The other one is neglect then it gets condemned and has to come down. Brian

In all but the most straightforward cases it's the planning sub-committee that makes the decisions, and that is made up of councillors. One would hope they would put conditions in the contract of sale, but the public would not be party to that, and we need all the transparency we can get

More than 95% of planning applications are decided by the paid planning offcials under delegated powers. That would include most TPOs. Most councils will have an aborialist or some such and they might be your best point of contact. They have the power to issue a provisional TPO that is valid for, AFAIK, six months. It then has to be confrimed.

My only experience was getting a notice from the council about a provisional preservation order on a tree next door. A thick wadge of A4 to me, another copy to my building society (who then sent a copy to me), another to me with my management co hat on. Several months later I notice the tree had gone so I phoned the council, they said it had not been confirmed/had lapsed. So all that effort sending out notices to all and sundry and they never bother so tell anyone when they don't confirm it.

but I am assured they cannot do this on property that they still own. In other words, they cannot impose it on themselves

AFAIK this is simply untrue. Who told you this?

One of the councillors mentioned it at a planning sub-committee meeting. I gather the other members weren't aware of that but took his word for it. I don't reckon my chances of finding a definitive answer

I would be inclined to think they would not wish to impose it on themselves, in order to keep their options open at all times. No doubt they would claim they have internal procedures that would protect any likely (for a TPO) trees on council land anyway......

i.e. TPOs are just for the peasants.

Jim K

Unless the rules have changed in the 10 years or so, I am aware of one instance where a TPO was put on council land just before sale.

Interesting, but I wonder what those rules are. I'm guessing I'll need to quote something chapter and verse to convince them if they're wrong

In some areas, a TPO automatically applies to all large trees (measured by girth of trunk), although this did tend to make some land owners automatically fell trees as they were coming up to the specified girth.

In message , Andrew Gabriel writes

Umm.. I think anything over 80mm dia. at 1.3m should need a Forestry Commission licence but farmers have a dispensation to fell up to 5 cu.m

ISTR that loophole was closed a while ago - something to do with a court case that set some new precedent of defining a "tree" as "what a normal person would class as a tree"... that would include a "young" tree, a "small" tree etc etc Course those super TPO chaps rather like that one...

Cheers Jim K