Tulip Tree Vs Extension

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Wow, what a lovely tree!

 

If the soil is not a clay with a high plasticity, there shouldn't be effects in terms of ground swelling/heave following tree removal.

 

In my opinion, the cracks in the pavement are caused by direct physical pressure from roots, not ground movement. If there are no signs of cracking in the actual property, I wouldn't recommend anything.

 

I would say that unless there is a broken drain under the house, the roots are going to head out away from the house in to preferential soil - around the side of the house and along front gardens where there is more readily available water resources.

 

My tuppence worth anyway.

 

water will condense on the pipe work and wall foundations.

 

What's going on with that union/pruning wound? I can see some staining but it's not clear from the picture. Apart from that I agree, do a PI analysis and take it from there.

 

I would appreciate a much closer look at this wound, it is disrupting tension wood formations and certainly forcing the lowest main limb into compression compensation a sign of stress. If that wound has any significance it may be weakening the central core of the union, adding greatly to loading on the outer perimeter of the wood diameter.

 

Massive tree (tulip is very heavy wood) much to close to the house. if the client wants it out, and there is no TPO then do it, You are not the tree officer, or, if your feelings would be hurt by taking it out, there are many contractors who would fight back the tears and pocket the money for a fully justified removal.

 

and with a title like yours wouldnt expect any other reply on this!

 

Hi Steve,

that's a great tree and an interesting quandary! For what its worth, I survey buildings for a living ( my arb/fungi interest is a side-line). From your photos the 'extension' looks more like an adaptation of a garage built with the house. As a guess, I’d say circa 1970-1974 for the house and its annex. How old do you think the tree is?

Sadly the tree is too close to the house (or visa versa depending on your perspective!). At half its current size the tree would make a great asset . However, as it stands, it’s only ever going to be a distraction to the financial value and eventual safety of the building. An understanding of the building's foundation depths and type, sub-soil properties, age and growth habits of the tree will all help with a prognosis. But it will only buy time before the inevitable has to happen. That town just aint big enough for the both of 'em

 

regards Pete B

 

I dissagree, this tree well managed can be retained in the very long term.

 

But Steve has said that the tree is not on a clay soil, so he doesn't need to be concerned about water uptake. Subsidence caused by trees can only occur on clay soils with a high plasticity i.e. ability to swell and contract.

 

The research I have read about this indicates that reducing/pruning is ineffective for reducing water uptake - after one year the tree will have put grown enough foliage back to compensate that the water uptake will be the same.

 

And the staged removals are also a myth - probably conjured up by an arborist looking for repeat business

 

there is very little real evidence with regard to trees and subsidence, funny isnt it how trees are blamed yet these cases always coincide with drought periods I.e the first came in 76:sneaky2:

 

I realise that there are differing opinions on the subject of whether a tree can be felled in a day or over 3yrs of it's on clay.

Read Giles Biddles book first.

Irrespective of all that has been posted above, if you fell a tree in one go and the property subsequently experiences structural damage you will experience a very hot and sweaty collar while answering the judges questions when you get dragged to court. This is a legal fact according to a client of mine who is a high court judge.

 

A well informed witness would be able to put the avaliable info on current research and conflicts of opinion before the judge, it would be realistic to defend both retention and felling, just have to choose your evidence from the wide array avaliable.

 

Kjames' notion of including a very specific caveat is a very good idea. It won't give you complete autonomy but shows that you have acted as diligently as possible.

Also, make sure that ALL the other small print at the bottom of your quote is very wordy and includes everything you can possibly think of.

 

What you should be doing is spending 5mins on your quote and 45mins on your small print/disclaimer.

 

Have you ever read the lengthy disclaimer at the end of consultants report? No insult meant to any consultants. I've only ever read good stuff (that was educational too).

 

a caveat is for wimps with no confidence:001_tt2:

 

sorry for not seeing this before steve, personaly I would look at all options and consider felling as a last resort, rather than the other way round, it is after all of extremely high value, a fine tree

[Old Mill Tree Care]

[[/b]

I dissagree, this tree well managed can be retained in the very long term.

 

 

 

there is very little real evidence with regard to trees and subsidence, funny isnt it how trees are blamed yet these cases always coincide with drought periods I.e the first came in 76:sneaky2:

 

 

 

a caveat is for wimps with no confidence:001_tt2:

 

sorry for not seeing this before steve, personaly I would look at all options and consider felling as a last resort, rather than the other way round, it is after all of extremely high value, a fine tree

 

 

Hama, I agree that the tree could be retained if maintained.

 

Your next comment, I disagree with. A caveat is not for wimps. If your livelihood, ability to pay your bills, your future comfort and entire reputation depended on it (in other words, if you ran your own company) you would think slightly differently.

[Adam1990]

I know this is thread is 9 years old but did that tree ever get removed? 

[Mick Dempsey]

Shame we can’t see the street name on the photo of the tree in situ, we could have google earthed it.

 

I wonder if @stevelucocq ever pops in to tell us?

Edited September 9, 2020 by Mick Dempsey

[Khriss]

... a mere eye blink in Forestry  ?  K

[stevelucocq]

felled

 

[stevelucocq]

felled, decision made by planning inspector on appeal. 

[stevelucocq]

fyi decision notice attached

2011_0925-APPEAL_DECISION-18403.pdf