Chris at eden

I use the active tab 3. You can pick them up refurbished for less than £200 and does the job. As said previously though heavy rain can be an issue. Battery lasts about 6 hours but I just use a power bank to top up between jobs or at lunch time, it’s quicker that the car charger. You could put the power bank in your pocket and connect to the tablet while using to top up as you work. That is why I bought it but have never had to use that way as it charges quick. I think the active 5 lasts longer though. It’s worth getting the rugged case for about £25 it it has a strap to hang round your neck so frees your hands up when needed and it has a holder for the stylus, the tablet itself doesn’t. The GPS isn’t great, about the same as a phone. 2-4m. You can get the archer 4 which is sub metre accuracy with the expansion pack but it’s mega expensive.

Looking for a part time surveyor on sub contract basis to undertake BS5837 surveys and QTRA surveys Requirements: Level 4 Arb ideally, would consider level 3 with experience (essential) PTI (essential) QTRA (desirable) Full UK drivers licence and access to vehicle (essential) Contact me on [email protected] if interested. Thanks Chris

The discovery sport is a nice family car. Smaller than the disco. Not cheap but very nice and plenty of power. 240bhp for the big diesel spec. The hybrid is about 300bhp I think. Never towed with it so no idea on that front.

What are you looking for pay wise? Subby or on the books?

The bit at a time probably isn’t a bad idea. As someone else said the LPA shouldn’t really be putting a TPO on low quality tree. But if you are removing a lot of trees that could have a bigger cumulative impact on visual amenity and they could consider using the group designation.

You can’t use the felling licence route as trees in gardens are exempt. Plus the FC wound consult the LPA anyway if it was a CA.

Zone of influence relates specifically to indirect damage and is detailed within NHBC chapter 4.2. I.e. the distance at which trees have been observed to cause subsidence. the ZOI for birch is 7m. For conifers it will depend on the species but off the top of my head I think Leyland cypress are 25m. Whether or not there is a risk depends on several factors. Soil type, tree species and water demand, foundation depth, geographical location, etc. I do this type of tree report pretty often. Sometimes the surveyors are just passing on liability but sometimes they know a bit about the area and how common tree related subsidence is locally. Hope this helps Regards Chris

Ps. What ever you do, make sure it is recognised by Ofqual and is on the qualifications framework otherwise it may not be recognised over there. I.e. the NQF, QCF, RQF or whatever it is called these days.

ISA cert Arb is probably the only route you can take to get it in by Jan. you’ll need to check exam dates and work to that. It isn’t difficult though and you can turn it around pretty quickly. Or maybe the SEG level 2 if you they let you start straight away. I think it typically starts in September though and runs for a year. It would give you the opportunity to progress to level 4 which covers surveying so a plan for when you are no longer climbing. And I think you can do it all online so maybe it would carry some weight if you had started it and carried on over there. Level 3 will take you 2 years at a college usually. Give tree life a call and ask them your options. They do the SEG qualifications and I think ISA as well. You can just do ISA on your own though by getting the study guide. Good luck. Chris.

He did my training for the Q74 via WhatsApp. I also did the advanced user training at their place a while ago.

Have you tried Treesource?

What do you mean? Turn around time for a report once surveyed or lead time to get a survey done?

That isn’t really a pollard although it is often what tree owners want when they ask for a pollard. It’s been topped. Topping is not great for trees and although trees often grow back you are kind of rolling the dice. Pollarding is done from when trees are small and on a regular basis. The cuts are small and become occluded forming the bolling over time. This means they become resistant to decay and they are not site for entry of pathogens. It does not take much energy to occlude them and you are not removing much stored energy in the small branches removed. Yours has lost a lot of stored energy from large branch removals and the wounds are too large to ever successfully occlude. Plus, they are quite prone to frost damage so pruning in January may not be the best time. You could try decompaction and mulching to improve the rooting area but it’s a long shot. And Enerbite injections to give the top a boost. That’s an even longer shot as trees have to be actively transpiring and the more the better. Yours only has a bit of leaf area. Chris

The problem with the old 20% offset was that some folk were offsetting them in the direction of, and under roads to create more build space in gardens. That doesn’t make sense as the soft garden area is likely to be ideal rooting whereas the road will be suboptimal. Some folk were reducing instead of offsetting as well. The new standard does allow for changing the RPA to reflect barriers to root growth but it says deviation from the circle should be justified by the Arb. I personally think there is some scope to offset slightly or at least there should be. I did an AMS a few weeks ago which was secured by condition, bad start I know. The building footprint occupied less than 1% of the RPA, from memory I think it something like 0.2%. A tiny amount. I suggested hand digging and root pruning under supervision. My logic was that roots at this distance will not be bio-mechanical, and any fine roots can be replaced around the rest of the RPA as the build was only to the east. This was all presented in the AIA. The TO came back saying that there was a road in the opposite direction so we couldn’t offset. There isn’t, the road is to the south. I pointed out that roots could be replaced to the north and west. He said no and insisted on pile and beam. For 0.2%. Problem was that as the LPA had secured the info via condition, there was no scope to appeal. I am okay with the 12 x Dia but I think that it should be clarified that some offsetting could be possible if justified based on common sense as above. I think a standard off setting of 20% is too much though without a robust justification. This is a bit off piste but one of the other things he objected to was the removal of a Cat U tree that was next to the proposed drive. It was split at the base and hung up in the adjacent tree. He first said that there was no justification. I pointed out that the condition was advised in the survey schedule and also in the specification of tree works in the AMS. He then said okay you can fell it but I want a separate TPO application and it needs to be shown as retained on the TPP. Bizarrely, he didn’t want a condition survey with the TPO app even though this is a requirement of the one app! What is the point! Cheers Chris

Not really. There are loads of engineering solutions to avoid damage and he clearly wants to retain the tree. In that case it’s either engineer around it or move the house. Planting replacements is all very well but none of us will see them at maturity. If the OP want a big tree in the garden then fell and replace isn’t an option.