fagus

Unfortunately I have seen several of this Totem pole style pruning of Yews, often in churchyards by volunteers co-opted to 'tidy up' the area so that they can waste petrol and mow more easily. Yes the Yews will live as they turn from reddy brown totem poles to green totem poles. I have not seen what happens if one is left to its own recovery long term, often they then kept cut with a hedge trimmer. Ouch again, I reckon it could take some good formative pruning and maybe half a century to get back into something like they were.

Whilst the isssue of the tree may/should have been considered in the planning stage I am not very hopeful of a decent outcome in this matter.The tree has evidence of decay so a tree report could be pretty damning on the health of the tree which would be hard to dispute. Plus ! An application is not required for tree works necessary to implement a development which has the benefit of full, detailed planning permission and where the trees are directly in the way of that development which is about to start. Seems a contradiction to me and I have never fully understood this but it makes a gigantic loophole in my view. Loophole closed by more enlightened LA's requesting Arb reports but if trees on site are not shown on the drawings or the drawings not seen by TOs the lash up occurs.

One that got through the net.Only way to control these situations would be for LA to be notified of land sales which would be too onerous. I would have thought through their Community Led plans or whatever they are called these days the LA might have been aware this land had development potential but big site Leeds and environs. Better for LA's to concentrate on macro tree cover in their area (the big picture) than get on the treadmill of dealing with individual tree pruning requests and workload.Far more trees are protected this way.

Good stuff EdwardC. Not sure about your footpath analogy though.The footpath right is the ability to pass and repass over the land unhindered.

One of my better stories is about a guy telling me that the tree was dead. I said `It is flowering.' It was a Cherry flowering pink over just before the leaves. His reply was - `Oh well I am not a gardener.'

I am going with winter heliotrope Petasites fragrans and it flowers with the scent of vanilla. No flowers at any time if the year? Are you sure. I would bet good money such a plant will flower, sometimes a regular maintenance practice can affect/stop flowering.

The reality is that we are talking here about small overhanging branches clipping double decker buses and high sided vehicles; the work is minor and as Dalton has said is unlikely to be very detrimental to the tree however it is done. I know authorities who survey by a trip in double decker bus,and prune with an open topped D decker, also at night to see the tree effect on street lighting.;then follow up with Highway notices to private properties. Anybody pruning large branches without permission likely has a different agenda. Large branches would have caused vehicle damage and been reported earlier.Bus companies soon report troublesome areas.

People on here are saying you must follow BS3998 or do work to acceptable arboricultural standards. Where does it say that? It doesn't. Often authorities have a leaflet Re work on protected trees where it will be said.I would describe it similarly to a client, if not it is tantamount to saying just chop it off i.e anywhere on the branch structure. I also take issue that removal of branch has little significance to tree health;no matter what the size- a wound is a wound to pest and disease organisms. There are other pedants about :-) Work on or adjacent the highway is Arborists advertising hoarding to the public, good or bad work is noted. 'Oh that is how it is done, I could do that.'

I agree with Skyhuck, detail what works you intend to do so it can be monitored.Highways should have notified their tree officer if it is same Council. I agree with Skyhuck. `One of the exemptions for the need to submit a formal application (for trees subject to a tree preservation order or a ‘Notice of Intent’ for trees growing in a conservation area) is where the work involves ‘the cutting down or cutting back a tree in line with an obligation under an Act of Parliament.' i,e Highways Act The work needs to be done to acceptable arboricultural standards.

Ask your insurance company for advice and to get involved they have an interest here. Unless he is documenting his inspections they are not happening; take photographs winter and summer of their current state and anything falling off them;document when you took the photos.

Different highway control regulations over there methinks.

Excellent description Dalton.

a good step in the right direct. Did he explain what CTI stands for, I cannot see it ,did I miss it.

Worcester permain is a tip bearer so pruning will remove the fruit buds,needs a balanced pruning adn not severe

Re Stowe by Chartley, always makes you wonder in these situations how the tree is getting its water.I have seen many street trees where the highway and sewer construction around negates much root growth unless very deep which is often the case. It then begs the question that the roots must be in the subsoil and getting nutrients mostly from there, except for some that gets through the paving cracks.

As I experienced a sale will not be completed until the boundary lines are established as it will not be known what is being sold or bought by the parties concerned i.e a conveyance plan cannot be completed or registered.

Property deeds should define the boundaries, or if absent the Land Registry can decide, both might cost to investigate, LR certainly. The view the boundaries cannot be identified is myth; they might be blurred by vegetation but they can be ascertained by measurement and research. Recently happened at the sale of a property of mine.

Great reply agg221,reduce competition and feed.

Not so much the house which looks fine but it establishes a residential use for the land and then Charlie's plot becomes highly valuable and saleable for who knows what in the future in the countryside.

Clearly real risk has to be present. My understanding is that that the LA has responsiblity under Highways Act to remove risk if within falling distance of the highway. If the owner is present notice can be served; if as often happens the owner is not known or absent (often abroad) the issue is to remove the danger first and find out the owners later.The LA costs involved can be held till ownership is resolved.I recall the Land Registry will investigate and pronounce on title for a fee. Prudent of the LA to look at the original planning permission to see what the intention was for the area. With LA legal approval it is prudent to take action and not to risk injury or worse; could be embarrassing and costly to find out later the council do own and are responsible and therefore by not taking action were negligent. Tree work would be hundreds of pounds negligence thousands. A tree contractor could do the work but at the LA's instruction.

To the list Council should have added satellite dish signals.

(It may be that the council engineer uses over engineered foundation depths to allow for a probability of new tree planting, whilst commercial builders choose to work to the cheaper alternative when no trees are present.) I think that is a fair assumption. Evidently it is legal requirement to build to the national building regulations so nhbc and local authority will both enforce these. I understand that local gvt officers system is more inspection based, at a cost, and NHBC rely more on warranty i,e Buildmark and builder registration.My experience is that certainly L Gvt Building Regs officers interpret the Regs and have been known to request a deeper foundation than was being prepared. I question the reluctance against root barriers, yes they could be breached but takes years and good growth /soil conditions.Most of us know and see on a regular basis that root plates are not very deep.I think a root barrier is ok if the tree value and soil types are properly assessed.E.g not for a big willow on shrinkable clay.When the barrier trench is taken out it should be clear the no roots are anywhere near.

Unreasonable to request tree removal on the premise that could cause subsidence. Legally the complainant has to provide the evidence.Therefore even if subsidence is alleged entirely reasonable to ask for soil analysis to prove shrinkable clay on site, evidence of building movement and roots actually present. Amazing how many people think they have xray eyes in these situations. Foundations must suit the situation if through Council Building Regs the councila re liable if not suitable ,hence seemingly over engineered foundation depths requested. Don't know about NHBC suspect less robust.

The big print giveth and the small print taketh away.

Mmm... mulching is food for thought as the soil would be less liable to temperature and moisture fluctuations.PHD anyone.