Zero tolerance for reductions

[RobArb]

Thinning can all too often become lion tailing! Plenty round here done by the council. They work out of mewps. Would not like to climb some of those trees without spikes. Probably couldn't!

 

Thats what I have to cope with most days! Not pleasant at all:lol:

 

Sent from Rob's GalaxySII

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi all, hope yer's r well!

 

I have just posted on 'A-N-other' forum running a parallel thread on this issue. BS3998 (2010) 'Table B.1' cites crown reduction in its various guises, and as applied to the whole tree or selected branches, as "Often Appropriate" (the highest level, i.e. * Done mainly for other reasons but of indirect value / ** Occasionally appropriate / ***Often appropriate), for more situations than any other mode of pruning and specifically cautions crown thinning as an alternative.

 

Perhaps with the advent, or rather 'rebirth', of crown reductions by volume rather than radially, resulting in less of the tree crown being removed in any one hit, LPAs may start to look more favourably on applications.

 

As matter of interest do they reduce their own trees, where apropriate of course?

 

Cheers..

Paul

[RobArb]

Yes but its normally 35-40% using the old BS3998

 

And thats classed as a medium reduction??

 

Nuts it is!

 

Sent from Rob's GalaxySII

[Amelanchier]

If I were you I would still put the application in and then appeal if they refuse it. I can't see a Planning Inspector upholding such a ridiculous policy for all trees.

 

So would I. If they can't make a sensible decision then take it out of their hands.

 

Which LPA is it? If it really is their policy there should be no problem in naming them.

[Jon Lad]

Harrogate B.C. They had refused consent for the reduction, but the customer wanted to meet the tree officer with me to find out why the tree couldn't be reduced and what pruning they would allow to be done.

[Paul Barton]

Stick to your guns Jon Lad!

[Paul Jenks]

I think it's great the way the new interpretations are shown in the updated BS3998. It's much better for the long term health of trees.

 

However, trees can and do survive for a significant time with medium or heavy reductions. Sometimes repeated reductions. I understand some of the oldest trees in the country are pollards.

It is expedient to reduce a tree more than the recommended maximum, 30% foliar, on occasion when the only other alternative is felling. This assumes that the tree is out of scale with its surroundings, often as a result of some do-gooding TO not allowing it to be removed when the house was built. One part of planning policy pushes toward higher density of dwellings whilst the other strives for tree retention.

Many indiginous tree species are not suitable for urban gardens. The challenge is that the more draconian the LA's become with their interpretation of policy guidlines, the more inventive tree owners and, dare I say it, tree surgeons will become in circumventing them. (and the more unloved the TO's become)

There is an ombudsman for council maladministration whose office will adjudicate on issues that have not been satisfactorily resolved.

Of course it all depends on how much energy you want to put into getting approval.

[Amelanchier]

Harrogate B.C. They had refused consent for the reduction, but the customer wanted to meet the tree officer with me to find out why the tree couldn't be reduced and what pruning they would allow to be done.

 

Well here is the Harrogate BC Tree and Woodland Management strategy.

 

http://www.harrogate.gov.uk/Documents/CS_20100803_Treesandwoodland_STRATEGY.pdf

 

Nothing in there about a reduction refusal policy. Perfectly normal strategy with acknowledgements that reduction is often appropriate (e.g., section 5.3).

 

I suspect someone is 'off message' - appeal (assuming the original application is robust enough!)

[Amelanchier]

You might also be interested to know that the BC raised no objection to the reduction of three sycamores as recently as the 27 July.

 

11/02610/TCON | Crown reducing of 3 Sycamore trees within Harrogate Conservation Area. | 2 Cavendish Avenue Harrogate North Yorkshire HG2 8HX

 

Although the planning website quaintly refers to approving s211 notifications... bless.

 

Have at them Jon Lad.

[Jon Lad]

Thanks for that, very useful. I have a friend who is a consultant and he is going to give me some help with this one.