Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Giles Hill

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    630

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Giles Hill

  1. Giles Hill
    Looking at the top picture it looks like you can see the stem against the sky, through a gap in the foliage - it looks like you'd be ok cutting it somewhere around there (the bricks in the wall are 215mm long as a guide) - difficult to tell how high that is from a picture, but it looks 'comfotable' you'd need to judge the proposed height on site. I imagine they'd allow a little leeway on the 200mm - they won't go up there with a tape. I mentioned 5m for a pollard height, but go with whatever suits and looks right and allows the tree to contribute a 'mature green' c appearance of the street. Just another thought, the case for pollarding could be further argued as a proactive way of retaining and managing the tree with Massaria on the increase.
  2. Giles Hill
    It looks like a reasonable size for a first pollard too - i.e. as opposed to what might be seen as butchering a more mature tree - you'd need to choose a suitable height - 5m or so would be my suggestion and manage the regrowth above that.
  3. Giles Hill
    Given the lack of space, I think you could make a good case for managing them as pollards. I would concentrate on the positive aspects of this form of management - eg traditional form of urban tree management, will suit the appearance of the tree better (it looks like it's outgrown it's space already) the pollard form will be more attractive than a tree with half its canopy lopped off etc. Also if possible refer to any other pollards locally to show that it's in keeping with the surroundings, or just make the point that pollards are a traditional feature of confined urban spaces. Your client would get the light the LA would keep the tree and you'd get future work.
  4. Giles Hill
    If it was planted in the spring or summer, then I think it's probably drought stress. It only takes a few days for newly planted trees to go from being healthy looking, to looking like that. The others were planted at the optimum time so they've had a better chance to settle in and can cope better. It'll probably come back next year, but won't grow as fast as the others. You might need to cut the top off that stake BTW, to stop the stem rubbing on it.
  5. Giles Hill
    If it was planted in the spring or summer, then I think it's probably drought stress. It only takes a few days for newly planted trees to go from being healthy looking, to looking like that. The others were planted at the optimum time so they've had a better chance to settle in and can cope better. It'll probably come back next year, but won't grow as fast as the others. You might need to cut the top off that stake BTW, to stop the stem rubbing on it.
  6. Giles Hill
    Paul, I know you're experienced with BS5837, I was explaining my thinking rather than teaching you how to suck eggs. The original question was about the point of categorising trees on neighbouring land and that was what I was attempting to refer to. I think it's best to consider the trees on neighbouring land as an integral part of the survey / assessment / proposal and propose protection accordingly. I wouldn't give the neighbour's trees less protection than those within the site and I wouldn't give them more. Regarding damaging the neighbours property - obviously you'd (probably) want to avoid killing or destabilising their tree, but beyond that I would see cutting some roots off in a similar way as cutting off some branches. I'm not saying I'd condone cutting all the roots off on the boundary line - the extent of the encroachment into the RPA would depend on the tree and would need to be justified in a report to which the person who'd written it would be held accountable.
  7. Giles Hill
    Paul, I know you're experienced with BS5837, I was explaining my thinking rather than teaching you how to suck eggs. The original question was about the point of categorising trees on neighbouring land and that was what I was attempting to refer to. I think it's best to consider the trees on neighbouring land as an integral part of the survey / assessment / proposal and propose protection accordingly. I wouldn't give the neighbour's trees less protection than those within the site and I wouldn't give them more. Regarding damaging the neighbours property - obviously you'd (probably) want to avoid killing or destabilising their tree, but beyond that I would see cutting some roots off in a similar way as cutting off some branches. I'm not saying I'd condone cutting all the roots off on the boundary line - the extent of the encroachment into the RPA would depend on the tree and would need to be justified in a report to which the person who'd written it would be held accountable.
  8. Giles Hill
    Paul, I know you're experienced with BS5837, I was explaining my thinking rather than teaching you how to suck eggs. The original question was about the point of categorising trees on neighbouring land and that was what I was attempting to refer to. I think it's best to consider the trees on neighbouring land as an integral part of the survey / assessment / proposal and propose protection accordingly. I wouldn't give the neighbour's trees less protection than those within the site and I wouldn't give them more. Regarding damaging the neighbours property - obviously you'd (probably) want to avoid killing or destabilising their tree, but beyond that I would see cutting some roots off in a similar way as cutting off some branches. I'm not saying I'd condone cutting all the roots off on the boundary line - the extent of the encroachment into the RPA would depend on the tree and would need to be justified in a report to which the person who'd written it would be held accountable.
  9. Giles Hill
    It would depend... You start off with the BS ideal of avoiding the RPA of all retained trees, but if a compromise has to be made then I'd advise that the compromise is made in respect of the 'C' category trees, rather than the higher grades. Obviously you'd need to assess the tree in question to decide how much compromise it'll take, the RPA is basically theoretical, some trees will tolerate a lot more disturbance than others. Notwithstanding this, some 'C' category trees just don't merit working around, with something like a Leyland cypress, that's been topped at 4m the main reason for recording it is so the engineer to can assess it's impact on the foundation designs. Regarding liability, I'd be primarily concerned about the damage that might occur if the tree in question became unstable - i.e. as opposed to worrying about reducing it's life expectancy.
  10. Giles Hill
    It would depend... You start off with the BS ideal of avoiding the RPA of all retained trees, but if a compromise has to be made then I'd advise that the compromise is made in respect of the 'C' category trees, rather than the higher grades. Obviously you'd need to assess the tree in question to decide how much compromise it'll take, the RPA is basically theoretical, some trees will tolerate a lot more disturbance than others. Notwithstanding this, some 'C' category trees just don't merit working around, with something like a Leyland cypress, that's been topped at 4m the main reason for recording it is so the engineer to can assess it's impact on the foundation designs. Regarding liability, I'd be primarily concerned about the damage that might occur if the tree in question became unstable - i.e. as opposed to worrying about reducing it's life expectancy.
  11. Giles Hill
    It would depend... You start off with the BS ideal of avoiding the RPA of all retained trees, but if a compromise has to be made then I'd advise that the compromise is made in respect of the 'C' category trees, rather than the higher grades. Obviously you'd need to assess the tree in question to decide how much compromise it'll take, the RPA is basically theoretical, some trees will tolerate a lot more disturbance than others. Notwithstanding this, some 'C' category trees just don't merit working around, with something like a Leyland cypress, that's been topped at 4m the main reason for recording it is so the engineer to can assess it's impact on the foundation designs. Regarding liability, I'd be primarily concerned about the damage that might occur if the tree in question became unstable - i.e. as opposed to worrying about reducing it's life expectancy.
  12. Giles Hill
    The main reason for categorising trees on neighbouring land is to identify constraints so that you can inform the design process; some trees are worth working around, others aren't. When space is tight, it might be best to compromise the RPA of 'C' category tree if this allows you to provide more space around an 'A' category tree. Another reason for categorising neighbour's trees is to provide some baseline info for the arb impact assessment. eg the impact might be considered to be low if the trees affected are of no merit or vice versa. It doesn't matter too much if the neighbour likes the tree or not, the categorisation needs to be objective.
  13. Giles Hill
    The main reason for categorising trees on neighbouring land is to identify constraints so that you can inform the design process; some trees are worth working around, others aren't. When space is tight, it might be best to compromise the RPA of 'C' category tree if this allows you to provide more space around an 'A' category tree. Another reason for categorising neighbour's trees is to provide some baseline info for the arb impact assessment. eg the impact might be considered to be low if the trees affected are of no merit or vice versa. It doesn't matter too much if the neighbour likes the tree or not, the categorisation needs to be objective.
  14. Giles Hill
    Lets hope the Badgers are familiar with BS5837.
  15. Giles Hill
    Have you looked at Gleditsia?
  16. Giles Hill
    It could just be adaptive growth following a partial stem failure caused by mechanical or other physical damage.
  17. Giles Hill
    Was it this one? http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/tree-health-care/26648-whats-evergreen-trees.html
  18. Giles Hill
    That's not to say the LPA won't ask for a detailed method statement at this stage, but its worth having a chat with them if you're unsure. Don't be afraid to admit to them you're newly qualified / just starting out or whatever, they won't hold it against you!
  19. Giles Hill
    I'd suggest having a chat with the LPA to find out what they are after. The current BS recommends that detailed arb method statements are dealt with under planning condition and that for the application you would only provide an arb impact assessment and possibly heads of terms for a method statement - just enough info to demonstrate that what the developer wants to achieve can be carried out in accordance with the BS.
  20. Giles Hill
    Paulownia for the last one I think.
  21. Giles Hill
    You don't have anything to worry about with the roots at that distance, just make sure your engineer is aware of the trees when designing the structure. I don't think they will have any cost implications on the structure.
  22. Giles Hill
    They look like they've been cut back hard, the browning could be the thinner 'shade' foliage getting scorched.
  23. Giles Hill
    Portugal laurel and Norway maple. Edit: Might be wrong about the NM - it does naturalise and become invasive but the leaf doesn't look quite right.
  24. Giles Hill
    Not sure what it is, but it's definitely not a sycamore and if the leaves aren't opposite, which they don't appear to be, then it's not any kind of Acer
  25. Giles Hill
    What do you think will happen to the form of the trees in the longer term David? Do you think the canopies will shrink as the branches are lost or will the regrowth be sufficient to replace the missing bits? Or maybe they will they end up as pollards or shredded pollards? Or does the fungus eventually kill the stem?

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

Articles

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

  I accept