Kylus Sylvestris

anybody recognise it?

In light of the fact that UK LPA's have a Duty to make provision for the preservation of trees.... isn't it a shame that retained aged trees aren't TPO'd before planning consent is granted. We've really got to pull our socks up. And perhaps start doing what is meaningful, rather than what is expedient. DETAILS, DETAILS, DETAILS.

Are PALMS considered to be TREES? This is not a straightforward question as ‘TREE’ is not a scientific term. Even the Courts have wrestled with this - where it has been determined that a tree is anything one would ordinarily call a tree, however, that was in relation to plant age (of typical native woodland ‘trees’) rather than scientific classification. And the scientific community hasn’t always agreed either way. In the same sense there is no scientific definition of ‘shrub’, which can include ‘tree’ species less than 5-10m in height. In broad terms one might consider ‘trees’ a source of useable timber, which palms are not as they don’t grow annual rings or produce wood. Although, the fact that palms are regularly called 'palm trees' adds confusion. In my opinion having worked with trees for over 30 years, I haven’t ever considered palms to be ‘trees’. But I understand the confusion and accept there will be contrary points of view.... and I do know of TPO'd cordylines in the SW.

Is it entirely dead? Looks like Holly at the base? 😂 And, I agree with the 'lottery' comment!

Why don't you reduce the width of the dropped kerb so it's outside the RPA. You're 4.5m wide access is rather large.

No I didn't have it wrong - it's unadopted POS. I've since found out that a management company was set up by the developer and they manage various bits around the site, funded by the residents. I'm waiting to hear back from them... ironically the management company is a trading arm of the original developer. Nepotism is fine when you keep it in the family!

A cluster**************** of a TPO related scenario that's really shocked me in the last couple of days. In short... 1900-2015 open-grown field oak, loving life. 2017 planning consent for circa 200 houses. Oak retained in Public Space (not adopted). 2018-2019 half of the tree's roots chopped off, soil levels altered, trenches dug within 6-7m, and houses built partly under canopy on one side. Tree pruned to remove branches overhanging property. 2023 (March) TPO request made to LPA (yes, me) 2023 (April) LPA serve TPO 2023 (June/July) Some ****************wit hacks it about without consent. No application on planning portal. Tree Officer not aware of any consented work. Nobody really knows who owns the tree as the consortium of developers will be very hard to find. And to top it all, a copy of the TPO is still attached the adjacent lamppost. The mind boggles. Question is, how to winkle out the culprits?

The previous 2009 application will be on file - check the online planning portal. The refusal notice has to state the TPO to which it applies.

I went to the dentist for a filling the other day. On entering my mouth with his tools he discovered a longitudinal crack in the tooth - not externally visible, and not apparent to me as the root had been killed a few weeks earlier. In any case, I left with a temporary filling and three quotes for a crown.... which he advised me to consider and act on within the immediate future. If your 'contract' is with the neighbour (and assuming the pruning of overhang is otherwise legal) then you could proceed as intended. Taking a little weight off can't be all that damaging in the grand scheme of things. Did the tree owner know about the work? Did you trespass to climb the tree? Have you contacted the tree owner and mentioned what you've found? etc etc...

Sorry if I panicked you further. My tone was one of frustration against the LPA as much as anything. The TPO should have been modified or replaced soon after the development was completed. I sympathise with your situation. But I wouldn't worry too much. You've done the right thing coming clean and touching base with them. If I were you I'd chase them up - perhaps try and find the Tree Officers direct line/email.

I would keep the bush neatly trimmed, to your satisfaction, not withstanding the often over-egged risk of subsidence. In times of drought - water it!!

Irrespective of how affable the local tree officer might be, if you are cutting trees covered by a woodland TPO without consent, you are breaking the law. Of course you need to be aware of the TPO boundary, type of Order etc etc. In any case, I would advise caution before accepting any advice about whats' right/wrong... If part of your property now falls within an area designated "woodland" under a TPO then I should jolly well find out a few details. Particularly if you have a long garden! Perhaps the Local Authority won't give a shit if you cut some tree bits on your cad BUT you should understand the ramifications. Maybe you could start a dialogue with the LPA by asking whether the TPO should be reviewed? As it may not be entirely palatable to have garden space included in a woodland Order. The fact that the Tree Officer doesn't mind a bit of pruning is no defence should the operations become subject to scrutiny!!!

I think that right is limited to an 'actionable nuisance'.... one which unduly interferes with the use or enjoyment of land. It needs to be a VERY serious matter! In any case, the trees would most likely only qualify if they're either a) completely FUBAR'd and very high risk to persons/property or b) have extended to the land of their neighbour and interfered e.g by causing physical damage. Tell your client to park on their own property rather than the road!

For what it's worth... I think you need to be mindful about what exactly you're doing? Typically you are instructed to help solve a problem. That problem comes from a (often under-explored NEED) whether that be a TPO app, Tree Risk Assessment, Planning Report, Expert Report... whatever. You are being paid for your opinion. Your opinion should be the 'sweet-spot' between you're knowledge & experience. Clearly you have knowledge & experience. Don't commit to, or rely on any deviation from where you are confident. A detailed Inspection may or may not be required to assess risk... and vice versa. Whatever you do report, you should have enough underpinning evidence/experience to be able to withstand cross examination. By Tree Officers, clients, solicitors...who ever. Personally, to assess risk I use whichever system is most appropriate .... or I simply make recommendations based on observation/facts/experience and underpin with appropriate evidence. In my opinion the most valuable off the shelf Tree Risk Management tool is VALID because it is the most robust, and is supported by essential risk management tools e.g. Tree Strategies etc. I am also slightly bias as Mr Evans & I share a love of negroni's and a penchant for simple, effective reporting.

Also worth a quick postcode search on the LPA planning portal to see if there's been any previous TPO apps nearby.

Or, you can go to the Local Authority main office... where they have to keep a copy of any Order available for inspection at ALL reasonable hours. I've done this before and got a puzzled response. re: Town & Country Planning (Tree Preservation)(England) Regulations - para 5(3).

Bad conditions are often used to mitigate bad decisions!

Planning consents typically come with any number of useless conditions. Often landscaping or tree issues include nonsense like "all new planting shall be maintained for a period of 5 years..." I don't know the particulars but if the LPA wanted to secure the tree long-term they could have served a TPO in the last four years? In any case, a planning condition MUST pass ALL six tests, whereby the condition is: (i) necessary (ii) relevant to planning (iii) relevant to the development permitted (iv) enforceable (v) precise (vi) reasonable in all other aspects It's all about the wording of the condition. In your case ...does the condition pass (iv) (v), or (vi)??? Its probably just some self-flagellating bureaucrat, who may technically be correct. But if they haven't provided any details, and the trees aren't otherwise protected, I'd check the planning consent against the above... and crack on!

typo!

Quite right. But I guess the point was, we don't know enough about the site to make an appropriate evaluation. We can debate whether it'll impact the trees until we have a bit more of an idea about where the roots are. Dig a hole.

hi, I've just noticed this thread, and bear with me as I've had a few plymouth gins...taking ginspiration from Ernest Hemingway who used to write drunk, edit sober.. For what it's worth, I would go back to first principles- refute the central point, and dismiss arguments from ignorance (draws a conclusion based on lack of knowledge or evidence without accounting for all possibilities). Whoever they are, don't like the fact you're within 12x DBH. What a ****************ing joke... (sorry - that's the gin talking). Try this for example... The RPA is starting point for an intelligent (!) discussion nothing more. It does not know, or define where the tree roots are operating. I don't know, you don't know and they don't know. Perversely the oxymoronic RPA, on open grown trees protects about 1/2 the root system. And actually serves to protect a 'volume' of soil sufficient to sustain the tree. That volume doesn't follow radii at text book depth in urban areas. It's determined by site conditions. The starting point of your argument with xyz is all too cock. Yes typically fibrous roots are thought to be in the upper regions of the soil. But when said soil is capped with tarmac who knows where the roots are? Trees in urban areas will rarely have a symmetrical root system. The question you need to answer is.. what effect will your dropped kerb have of the trees? The answer is a product of sensitivity (of the tree) x the amount of damage. I'm guessing it a really tough urban tree. Thats fully tolerant of a little pain/pleasure. If everyones else has a dropped kerb and you haven't had mass tree death - whats the real risk? Dig a hole on your side of the fence and send my a pic.Even dig it 300mm deep, soak it thoroughly, fill it with water and time it to drain... and do a soil texture test...blah blah...you can build a reasonabley robust argument based on evidence rather than rules of thumb and assumption.... goodnight. “The depth to which roots penetrate, and hence the area of ground required to provide the necessary soil volume, will need to be ascertained by digging trial holes… D. R. Helliwell (1986) THE EXTENT OF TREE ROOTS, Arboricultural Journal, 10:4. Roots are opportunistic and will grow wherever environmental conditions permit. Root depth and extent can be severely limited and highly irregular in urban settings. Ref-3 P. E. Gasson & D. F. Cutler (1990) TREE ROOT PLATE MORPHOLOGY, Arboricultural Journal, 14:3. “Soil type has a large influence on the spread and depth of the root system, as does the level of the water table.” Susan D. Day, P. Eric Wiseman, Sarah B. Dickinson, and J. Roger Harris. Contemporary Concepts of Root System Architecture of Urban Trees. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 2010. 36(4): 149–159 “studies suggest that vigorous trees less than 30 cm diameter may be able to tolerate roots being severed on one side as close as three times the trunk diameter without a major loss in stability or crown decline. Larger trees, such as those on which the specifications were based, may be less tolerant… Gary W. Watson, et al. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 2014. 40(5): 249–271 J. ROBERTS, N. JACKSON & M.SMITH. Tree Roots in the Built Environment. TSO 2006 “A tree growing next to a road or building is likely to have virtually all of its roots growing on the opposing side of the tree” pg 245 “a commonly observed effect of root severance after trenching near trees is loss of vigour in above-ground growth” pg249