Hornbeamfella

All 3 neighbours get on well but neighbour 3 is adamant that the only way the sycamore might come out is if the hornbeam stay. The hornbeam do not cause them any issues...

**update**So I've done some digging today. The trees are not shared by the 3 properties,all 3 properties just use the land and in the event of the full tpo being lifted would share the full cost of removal. I stand corrected. They sit in no mans land behind our houses (basically at the back of our fences where we all put our bins) but the title plan shows us owning the land of 3 of the hornbeams. Neighbour 1 owns 1 sycamore and 2 hornbeam and neighbour 3 (who has requested the work) owns half a sycamore, with the other half on our Land. The council specifically say that the trees (hornbeams) can be felled or cut as proposed within 2 years as they add no value. There are lots of sycamores on our street but only these 2 are protected. The tree surgeon did request work on the hornbeams with the LA. This was to reduce height by 2.5m and thin (unsure of amount). Neighbour 3 says the tree surgeon is submitting the exact same request as previously submitted. To fell the sycamore and re plant and to trim the hornbeam by 2.5 Metres. If this appears on the council website we will add comments in reference to the LA previously stating the hornbeam could be felled. Its also worth mentioning a person in the estate behind ours opposes the cutting of any trees and has been complaining to the council and as far as I'm aware, that person got the TPO's placed about 10 years ago.

The council have part declined and part approved a TPO (opposite way to what was requested) :- Request to fell 2 sycamores and crown lift 5 hornbeam. Its come back saying that the sycamores add value. These are shared trees at the back of 3 properties and we didn't request the tpo lifted the neighbour did. We are however in favour of the way the decision has gone as the hornbeams back onto our property rather than the sycamore. The appeal date has past with no objections but the tree surgeon is submitting the same request again to fell the sycamore but not the hornbeam, apparently the council thought the decision might be wrong and that in fact its the hornbeam that add value not the sycamore (opposite reason stated in tpo decision) is this likely to be overturned and the tpo placed back onto the hornbeams by the council? We have 2 years from Feb to fell the hornbeam according to the decision. The ideal scenario would be for all trees to be felled. Not sure if we should fell what's been agreed now or wait to see if the others can be lifted but don't want this if the tpo goes back on those. Will a new application make this decision null and void?