Jump to content

roythegrass

Member
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About roythegrass

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No subsidence now or any sign of movement. Between the house and tree there's a dwarf retaining wall with no cracks. The tree is 17m, the house was built in '86 on what had been church property and the tree predates the house by many decades.
  2. Following a Sonic tomograph survey I’m having an oak extensively pruned to relieve the load on the trunk which has moderate Ganoderma resinaceum fungus in the basal area. Both the arborist and tree surgeon advise having a further Sonic tomograph inspection carried out after two years as the fungus may have spread, the tree becomes dangerous being close to the house and may need to be felled. I read that if an oak on clay soil is removed it could cause heave due to re hydration of the ground. Is this the case? The tree is 7 metres from the house.
  3. If you can demonstrate that the council have been unreasonable you may be entitled to recover costs.
  4. UPDATE Firstly thanks for all the input. I have this afternoon received an email from the council formally granting consent for the works as specified in the application. (A month after the 'decision by' date!) One minor issue in the conditions states " ...the works for which such consent is granted may only be carried out once..." A layman could read this as preventing any future pruning to the tree. Given the decay in the trunk and that in x years time the tree will have grown sufficiently to necessitate further pruning then surely this can't be right. Perhaps my interpretation is wrong.
  5. I’m a householder not an arborist. Following a report from an arborist showing decay in the trunk of a TPO oak we applied for permission to have the tree pruned to alleviate stress and load on the trunk. The council were due to make a formal decision by 3rd December but to date the matter remains undecided. However the council have issued an online “Report” stating that the works should be carried out as per the arborists specification without any objections or conditions including words such as “Approved” and “consent is valid”. However the council’s report also states “intended decision”. At best this is contradictory. A layman would accept the council’s report as a determination and proceed with the works but given that it remains undecided I’m inclined to await a formal decision notice. The council have not replied to my emails requesting clarification. Thoughts?
  6. The only comment by the tree officer is that they would only allow the amount of pruning previously allowed - 85cm. Leaving or removing only 85cm of the spindly 'twigs' at the tip of the branches would make no difference to the potential damage were the tree to fall.
  7. We have an 18m TPO oak tree in our garden 11m from the house. We are on the coast and regularly experience severe winds and gales during which the tree sways considerably. The house was built in 1986 since which time 5 other trees in the garden have been felled by high winds. Applications to have the tree pruned by the previous property owner have been limited by the council to a maximum of 85cm. We propose applying for pruning/pollarding to a safe height of 11m. The council’s tree officer has already indicated that such an application will be refused so we will go to appeal. Specifically in reference to compensation (should the tree fall onto the house) our application will, amongst other compelling reasons, include the following statement: 3) DUTY OF CARE Occupier’s obligations in respect of safety see Occupiers Liability Act 1957 & 1984 Section 2 Self explanatory - we would be exposed to a claim for negligence under the above acts if it were shown that we failed to take appropriate precautions to mitigate a known foreseeable risk of injury or damage to property. Further, inaction on our part would be no defense as would our failure to repeat our application to the council and on appeal to The Secretary of State every twelve* months not least to cover our and our insurers position in respect of compensation under section 24 (2) (a) of The Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation) (England) Regulations 2012. Twelve month limit of council’s liability after decision on application/appeal and to comply with our household insurers terms of insurance – notifying and mitigating a known risk. *In reality a repeat application would need to be submitted every 10 months to allow for the 8 week delay between application and the council’s decision. Perhaps I’m misinterpreting the law but would appreciate others opinion. Thanks Roy
  8. We are laying a patio partially within the RPA of a TPO tree (upon application the LA didn’t want to know!) In compliance with Arboricultural Practice Note 12 (APN12) and BS5837 the layers are as follows, starting from the ground up: Ground Geo textile membrane Geocell (or similar) cellular root protection system in filled with aggregate. Geo textile membrane Sharpe sand. Pavers. The infill for the Geocell is specified as angular sub base aggregate. However angular aggregate has sharp edges which could puncture the overlaying Geo textile membrane with the weight of the sand, pavers and foot traffic thereby allowing the sand to wash through. How can this be resolved? Two layers of Geo textile? Any advice would be much appreciated.
  9. Thanks for the input folks. My scanner is playing up so bear with me for a couple of days and I'll post my drawings of the proposed patio, materials to be used and it's location to the tree. I would be fine using a timber edging resting on the surface but would not stakes spaced at say 600mm be interpreted as 'damaging' the roots? Roy
  10. I wish to lay a raised garden patio about half of which comes within the root protection area of an oak tree with a TPO. I propose using permeable block paving on a sharp sand bed which it turn would lay on Terram Geocell over a Geotextile. This would comply with the ‘no-dig’ requirement within the RPA. Two questions. 1) Whatever the construction of the patio it must be contained within a fixed edging or kerb to prevent lateral spread. Such edging would have to be laid onto a concrete footing –albeit only 150mm or so deep- which defeats the no-dig principle. Any observations would be appreciated. 2) Would I need to submit my proposal and drawings to the LA for planning permission or submit an Application for Tree works to trees with a TPO. Or, indeed, would the local tree officer approve/disapprove without a formal application? For the moment I would prefer not to discuss the matter with the tree officer. Thanks in advance. Roy

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

×
×
  • 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.