Triple stemmed Sycamore - Remove. The tree is about 14m tall and has been previously crown reduced at about 7m. There is bark inclusion between each of the stems that prevents strong unions and increases the risk of failure of 1 or more of the stems which is possibly a reason why the crown has been previously reduced to lessen the sail area. The tree is 3.75m from the side of the applicant's garage where there are 4 vertical cracks running the full height of the internal skin, 1 crack is about 15mm wide. No exploratory work has been carried out to ascertain the cause of cracking but there is a good chance that the tree is implicated. It is considered that the Sycamore does not have any significance in the conservation area or to local amenity generally. Ongoing cyclical reductions of the tree to maintain its safety is not considered to be cost effective when removal will not cause any significant detriment to amenity. The applicant is willing to plant a replacement tree elsewhere in his garden in a position that will allow its full and maintenance free development.

I'm not sure if the tree has an individual tpo as the map doesn't allow me to check from my mobile but it is in the conversation area and I did include it in a previous application for 52 the crescent to prune it for safety to reduce wind sail - app was granted. Permission now requested to remove the large pollarded horse chestnut situated close to the building and over the neighbours impending permitted development of a new garage soon to be erected. The tree is mature and last year lost a big limb in the storm it was hanging in the canopy over the neighbours current outbuilding and driveway so they couldn't park underneath it. Iv looked at the tree for pruning but there are no sufficient growing points to prune back to inline with bs3998:2010 because the canopy is in effect a huge coppice growing from old rotten wounds. The cause of the big limb failing was poor fusion of the new crown due to topping. I think removal is warranted because the tree is structurally defected due to improper pruning. If it is decided the removal is not agreeable can we request a report to send to the clients insurance company, supporting the retention of the tree and also some advice regarding a pruning programme that is appropriate and will minimise risk to public and property. HAR.CA10, TPO#: 72N.

T1 Ash - fell to ground level Reasons - the tree has a limited long term future due to Ash Dieback Disease and the client is going to replace the current garage which is derelict with a larger modern version. The tree is close to the rear of the current garage. The tree appears to be structurally sound but has significant dead wood within the crown (see attached photo). The prospect is then one of the development taking place and the Ash tree dying. The tree tends to lean towards the garage and the owner is trying to pre-empt this scenario.