My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Vet Tech wrote:

My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Oak - bloody hell, yes - try to get a buyer if the tree is healthy!!! There
will be some serious cu-feet's worth in a tree that big.

Have you got a timber mill or even a yard (who knows of a mill) in your area
that deals with hardwoods? It's worth talking to them first because they may
prefer the tree cut down in a certain way (eg minimum lengths of trunk and
major branches) whereas by default a tree surgeon will cut it down in little
lumps as makes his life easiest.

They may even be able to arrange the contractor to do this. I would
certainly expect a net input of money in your neighbour's general direction
(and a cut for you if you arrange it).

If you draw a blank, at least buy a log splitter - you and your neighbour
could make some decent beer money selling seasoned firewood next year, but
that would be a bit of a waste of a good tree....

--
Tim Watts

On 27/10/2011 12:40, Tim Watts wrote:
Vet Tech wrote:

My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.



This beast is 1000 years old and was only 16 metres high in 1990

http://www.eyemead.com/majoroak.htm


I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart noble wrote:
On 27/10/2011 12:40, Tim Watts wrote:

Vet Tech wrote:

My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

This beast is 1000 years old and was only 16 metres high in 1990

http://www.eyemead.com/majoroak.htm

I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann

On 27/10/2011 13:31, fred wrote:
On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart wrote:
On 27/10/2011 12:40, Tim Watts wrote:

Vet Tech wrote:

My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

This beast is 1000 years old and was only 16 metres high in 1990

http://www.eyemead.com/majoroak.htm

I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann

I wonder if shrapnel from WW2 still gives them problems

On Oct 27, 11:51*am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Yes that's a valuable-for-timber tree.

But don't get too excited - standing timber or even a recently felled
trunk isn't a whole lot of money (I wouldn't know about pricing).

There may be rot in the heart, twisted grain etc. - and not apparent
until it's milled.

After conversion, and significantly after it's been seasoned into high
quality straight-grained useful boards, the value rises.

Someone has to pay to have it lying around in their yard for quite
some time, for the costs of kilning, and to insure the fire risk.

In message
,
" writes
On Oct 27, 11:51*am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Yes that's a valuable-for-timber tree.

But don't get too excited - standing timber or even a recently felled
trunk isn't a whole lot of money (I wouldn't know about pricing).

There may be rot in the heart, twisted grain etc. - and not apparent
until it's milled.

After conversion, and significantly after it's been seasoned into high
quality straight-grained useful boards, the value rises.

Someone has to pay to have it lying around in their yard for quite
some time, for the costs of kilning, and to insure the fire risk.

Chap I use has a Lucas mobile mill. Cuts up to 8" x 8". The
motor/trolley can be carried by two strong blokes and the rest is ally
extrusions. Charges 300 ukp/day.

Sawn green Oak is around 30ukp/cu.ft.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

On Oct 27, 11:51*am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

harry wrote:
On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.
Not necessarily. If it is causing damage and it is in poor condition,
they can overrule preservation orders.

On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
harry wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51Â*am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?
--
Davey.

"Vet Tech" wrote in message
o.uk...
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had to
get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much more
than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Obviously the tree pre dates both your properties. If the tree is causing
subsidence now, if you remove the tree you may well experience heave as the
ground moisture will increase and cause the soil to swell. This may actually
give you more grief than the subsidence particularly if you are in a heavy
clay area.

Phil

Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
harry wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.

Phil Everett wrote:
"Vet Tech" wrote in message
o.uk...
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had to
get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much more
than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Obviously the tree pre dates both your properties. If the tree is causing
subsidence now, if you remove the tree you may well experience heave as the
ground moisture will increase and cause the soil to swell. This may actually
give you more grief than the subsidence particularly if you are in a heavy
clay area.


Indeed. This is generally the time you got for pollarding, tree root
truncation and serious deep underpinning.


Phil

On Oct 27, 6:12*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
harry wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.

the fines for TPOs are beyond sanity


NT

On Oct 27, 6:00 pm, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)



harry wrote:
On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.

heheh you;ve obviously never been there....

next prob is your definition of "dangerous" may not be accepted by the
local TPO bod - so *you* have to fork out for "arboricultural
consultants" (i.e. some bods who have more qualis than the council bod
does) to "officially" tell him it's dangerous, so he feels like he has
done his jobsworth job, and makes you replant as well..

So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?

you mean if it has a TPO and you chopped it? fine upto £20K on
conviction.

if no TPO then chop away quick and (top tip) at least "knacker it" on
a weekend whe no-one's going to get called out and TPO it "on the
spot" ;)

Jim K

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
harry wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.

round here it's a few thousand pounds. That might be minimal to some

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16

"NT" wrote in message
...
On Oct 27, 6:12 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
harry wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.

the fines for TPOs are beyond sanity


Last year a local bloke took out an ash tree, about 80ft high, that had a
TPO on it.
This was reported by the parish council to the local kremlin (council) who
reprimanded him. No court, no fine, no issue whatsoever. Just a meekly
slapped wrist, and this in a supposed conservation area.
The tree was supposedly shadowing his abode. Although it was 20m north of
his/her dwelling.
I'm not a member of any council and would never want to be.
Honesty still works for me.

On Oct 27, 6:03*pm, "Phil Everett" wrote:

If you remove the tree you may well experience heave as the
ground moisture will increase and cause the soil to swell. This may actually
give you more grief than the subsidence particularly if you are in a heavy
clay area.

Wouldn't cutting it down leave the stump to regrow?

I went with a small timber mill owner to look at some storm falls. Not
oak. He had a book to assess the value. It worked out only a couple of
hundred quid, maybe £220 -I don't remember exactly. The owner was so
amused he just said that after all that time growing it he'd only get
that? (About a pound for every year it had been in his family.) He
said he'd let it rot.

Taking a tree down in an urban environment would probably require its
destruction piecemeal. It would come down as logs only useful for
small work. But you could make decent stuff out of it if you wanted
(think desks, chairs and tables not ships, houses and saloon bar-tops.)

On Oct 27, 6:03*pm, "Phil Everett" wrote:
"Vet Tech" wrote in message

o.uk...





My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had to
get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much more
than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Obviously the tree pre dates both your properties. If the tree is causing
subsidence now, if you remove the tree you may well experience heave as the
ground moisture will increase and cause the soil to swell. This may actually
give you more grief than the subsidence particularly if you are in a heavy
clay area.

Phil- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

True.

On Oct 27, 6:12*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
harry wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes they can and yes the are.

On Oct 27, 5:59*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet Tech wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

Not necessarily. If it is causing damage and it is in poor condition,
they can overrule preservation orders.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have been through all this. The council employs some greenie who
only knows one two letter word. They three letter one is outside
their ken.

On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:51:01 +0100, Vet Tech wrote:

My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which has to
come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies. It is about
24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the main trunk and
branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we had
to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find that the
contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was worth much
more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT

Have been through this. No-one interested in purchase. Tree feller
couldn't suggest anyone who would buy either.

Up to £20,000 fine per tree if felled without authorisation in our
area which has TPO on every tree over 20 years old.

Initially authorisation was refused. On appeal another, senior,
council official called and agreed that the trunk was touching the
building and would cause damage soon. Immediate agreement given to
felling.

It turned out that the officer who refused removal was on his last day
in the job - clearly said "no" to avoid getting involved in last
minute paperwork.

km

On 27/10/2011 13:31, fred wrote:
On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart wrote:


I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann

Just to provide additional detail, we are in South London and access is
via a 1 metre wide passage down the side of the house.

Because of the subsidence issue, permission has been granted to have it
removed but given the prospect of heaving, I'm more inclined to be
receptive to the idea of pollarding rather than cutting it down completely.

VT

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:22:42 +0100, Vet Tech wrote:

On 27/10/2011 13:31, fred wrote:
On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart wrote:


I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann

Just to provide additional detail, we are in South London and access is
via a 1 metre wide passage down the side of the house.

Because of the subsidence issue, permission has been granted to have it
removed but given the prospect of heaving, I'm more inclined to be
receptive to the idea of pollarding rather than cutting it down completely.

VT

A friend in Reading had a pine tree removed from her back garden. The soil
isn't heavy (I had to dig a post hole, so I know) and the tree was about 15
yards from the house. The chap who did the job took it down in 3 pieces over
about a month. If it had been a deciduous tree he would have semi-pollarded
it then pollarded the next year then finished off, as it wasn't near the
house and wasn't urgent. He went to a lot of trouble to avoid damage to a
holly sapling growing by the trunk - one of the few who care about trees.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

Vet Tech wrote:
On 27/10/2011 13:31, fred wrote:
On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart wrote:


I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann

Just to provide additional detail, we are in South London and access is
via a 1 metre wide passage down the side of the house.

Because of the subsidence issue, permission has been granted to have it
removed but given the prospect of heaving, I'm more inclined to be
receptive to the idea of pollarding rather than cutting it down completely.


Whatever else happens you are almost certainly going to have to underpin.

My niece had this problem in a commercial building she bought: The
choices were underpin and pollard, or underpin and cut down.

The tree was a weeping willow, and because it looked nice, and was
cheaper to pollard, that's what she did.

IIRC underpinning is about 1000 quid a meter and probably something your
insurance company will both fund and insist upon.




VT

Huge wrote:
On 2011-10-28, Vet Tech wrote:
On 27/10/2011 13:31, fred wrote:
On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart wrote:
I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc
Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann
Just to provide additional detail, we are in South London and access is
via a 1 metre wide passage down the side of the house.

Because of the subsidence issue, permission has been granted to have it
removed but given the prospect of heaving, I'm more inclined to be
receptive to the idea of pollarding rather than cutting it down completely.

What does the insurer/loss adjuster/structural engineer/arboriculturist say?


The issue here when I built the house was that provided I dug the
footings below tree root hair level the BCO and structural boys were
happy. The footings had poly slabs either side in case of heave. In that
case the trees were left alone and are still fine

If the tree is healthy, and the engineers agree, (and you like it) it
may be possible to simply underpin a bit deeper.

On 28/10/2011 16:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Vet Tech wrote:
On 27/10/2011 13:31, fred wrote:
On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart wrote:


I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann

Just to provide additional detail, we are in South London and access
is via a 1 metre wide passage down the side of the house.

Because of the subsidence issue, permission has been granted to have
it removed but given the prospect of heaving, I'm more inclined to be
receptive to the idea of pollarding rather than cutting it down
completely.


Whatever else happens you are almost certainly going to have to underpin.

My niece had this problem in a commercial building she bought: The
choices were underpin and pollard, or underpin and cut down.

The tree was a weeping willow, and because it looked nice, and was
cheaper to pollard, that's what she did.

IIRC underpinning is about 1000 quid a meter and probably something your
insurance company will both fund and insist upon.




VT

In my experience most insurers will try and avoid paying for
underpinning these days.
It will probably be necessary to continue with the existing insurers
because it will be difficult to get insurance with anyone else in the
future.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...subsidence.htm

http://www.savvywoman.co.uk/c6-pages...php?art_id=365

On 28/10/2011 22:58, Huge wrote:
On 2011-10-28, Hugh - Was wrote:
On 28/10/2011 16:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Vet Tech wrote:
On 27/10/2011 13:31, fred wrote:
On 27 Oct, 13:13, stuart wrote:


I guess the value depends on how close you are to the mill and what the
access is like etc

Mills don't generally like 'Domestic' timber due to the risk of
embedded objects. New teeth on one of those giant resaws work out very
expensive, never mind the down time.

Paul Mc Cann

Just to provide additional detail, we are in South London and access
is via a 1 metre wide passage down the side of the house.

Because of the subsidence issue, permission has been granted to have
it removed but given the prospect of heaving, I'm more inclined to be
receptive to the idea of pollarding rather than cutting it down
completely.


Whatever else happens you are almost certainly going to have to underpin.

My niece had this problem in a commercial building she bought: The
choices were underpin and pollard, or underpin and cut down.

The tree was a weeping willow, and because it looked nice, and was
cheaper to pollard, that's what she did.

IIRC underpinning is about 1000 quid a meter and probably something your
insurance company will both fund and insist upon.




VT

In my experience most insurers will try and avoid paying for
underpinning these days.

Mine too. And we have a history of subsidence here. (


It will probably be necessary to continue with the existing insurers
because it will be difficult to get insurance with anyone else in the
future.

No "probably" about it.

A while back I was looking at possibly buying a property locally which
had had a small amount of underpinning done (properly, with all the
right guarantees etc). Mindful of the insurance issues I obtained the
name of the existing insurers to get a quote off them - they simply
refused me, point blank, no comeback or explanation. Needless to say, I
walked away...

On 27/10/2011 19:32, NT wrote:
On Oct 27, 6:12 pm, The Natural
wrote:
Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border which
has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our properies.
It is about 24 metres high. It is very well proportioned and the
main trunk and branches are all pretty straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so what
lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India, we
had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised to find
that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the timber was
worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it, most
oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on it.
You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for a map with
them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the 'should'
part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an order if
you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.

the fines for TPOs are beyond sanity

In defence of the authorities, though; if you're going to have TPOs then
the penalty for infringement has got to be substantial for the TPO to
have any teeth. There have been plenty of cases where trees deemed
worthy of protection have stood in the way of some developer's zillion
pound project, and said developer was perfectly prepared to accept the
fine for chopping them down. And at that point, it's too late to
replace them, as has been said.

Whether particular trees (or any at all? - discuss!) should have TPOs is
a whole different matter.

As I think I've mentioned here befo my parents were particularly
aggrieved some years ago when selling off the bottom of their garden for
a building plot; the selling price of the plot was dramatically reduced
by the existence of a TPO on a very ordinary weeping willow which they
themselves had planted about 20 years previously. All protestations to
'them' were to no avail.

(The TPO was lifted and the tree was removed a few weeks after the sale
went through. Go figure.)

David

On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 11:00:53 +0000
Lobster wrote:

On 27/10/2011 19:32, NT wrote:
On Oct 27, 6:12 pm, The Natural
wrote:
Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border
which has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our
properies. It is about 24 metres high. It is very well
proportioned and the main trunk and branches are all pretty
straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so
what lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations
also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India,
we had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised
to find that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the
timber was worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it,
most oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on
it. You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for
a map with them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the
'should' part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an
order if you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.

the fines for TPOs are beyond sanity

In defence of the authorities, though; if you're going to have TPOs
then the penalty for infringement has got to be substantial for the
TPO to have any teeth. There have been plenty of cases where trees
deemed worthy of protection have stood in the way of some developer's
zillion pound project, and said developer was perfectly prepared to
accept the fine for chopping them down. And at that point, it's too
late to replace them, as has been said.

Whether particular trees (or any at all? - discuss!) should have TPOs
is a whole different matter.

As I think I've mentioned here befo my parents were particularly
aggrieved some years ago when selling off the bottom of their garden
for a building plot; the selling price of the plot was dramatically
reduced by the existence of a TPO on a very ordinary weeping willow
which they themselves had planted about 20 years previously. All
protestations to 'them' were to no avail.

(The TPO was lifted and the tree was removed a few weeks after the
sale went through. Go figure.)

David

In that case, I would be tempted to go to the local newspaper with a
potential story of corruption, and try to sue the council for the loss
of the potential value due to the TPO being improperly imposed and then
lifted. Anything is worth a shot.
--
Davey.

On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 11:56:26 -0000, Huge wrote:

On 2011-10-30, Lobster wrote:

As I think I've mentioned here befo my parents were particularly
aggrieved some years ago when selling off the bottom of their garden for
a building plot; the selling price of the plot was dramatically reduced
by the existence of a TPO on a very ordinary weeping willow which they
themselves had planted about 20 years previously. All protestations to
'them' were to no avail.

I think if it had been me, the tree would have mysteriously died. No
point
in a TPO on a dead tree, eh?


Just been a case about that at Sandbanks, near Poole:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-12152452

--
Rod

In article ,
Lobster wrote:
In defence of the authorities, though; if you're going to have TPOs then
the penalty for infringement has got to be substantial for the TPO to
have any teeth. There have been plenty of cases where trees deemed
worthy of protection have stood in the way of some developer's zillion
pound project, and said developer was perfectly prepared to accept the
fine for chopping them down. And at that point, it's too late to
replace them, as has been said.

But not too late to stop that part of the development the tree was
blocking. Which would be more effective than a fine.

--
*Dancing is a perpendicular expression of a horizontal desire *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 30/10/2011 11:52, Davey wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 11:00:53 +0000
wrote:

On 27/10/2011 19:32, NT wrote:
On Oct 27, 6:12 pm, The Natural
wrote:
Davey wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
wrote:

On Oct 27, 11:51 am, Vet wrote:
My neighbour has a fairly big oak tree on our common border
which has to come down as it is causing subsidence to both our
properies. It is about 24 metres high. It is very well
proportioned and the main trunk and branches are all pretty
straight.

The question is - is the timber worth much for resale and if so
what lengths should it be cut into. Any other recommendations
also?

I'm prompted to ask, because when we lived for a time in India,
we had to get a tree removed and we were pleasantly surprised
to find that the contractors paid us money to do the job as the
timber was worth much more than the labour for doing the job.

Wish it was like that here.

VT
You want to find out if it has a Tree Preservation Order on it,
most oak trees have.
Beware. If you ask the council about this, they may slap one on
it. You need to find out without revealing anything. eg ask for
a map with them on.
Do not reveal your name or address.
If it has you're b****d.

If it's dangerous, then this should not be a problem. Note the
'should' part of that sentence.
So what happens if you cut down a tree that would have had an
order if you had asked, but didn't?

Very little IME.

They cant ask you to put it back..can they?

And I would guess that the fines are minimal.

the fines for TPOs are beyond sanity

In defence of the authorities, though; if you're going to have TPOs
then the penalty for infringement has got to be substantial for the
TPO to have any teeth. There have been plenty of cases where trees
deemed worthy of protection have stood in the way of some developer's
zillion pound project, and said developer was perfectly prepared to
accept the fine for chopping them down. And at that point, it's too
late to replace them, as has been said.

Whether particular trees (or any at all? - discuss!) should have TPOs
is a whole different matter.

As I think I've mentioned here befo my parents were particularly
aggrieved some years ago when selling off the bottom of their garden
for a building plot; the selling price of the plot was dramatically
reduced by the existence of a TPO on a very ordinary weeping willow
which they themselves had planted about 20 years previously. All
protestations to 'them' were to no avail.

(The TPO was lifted and the tree was removed a few weeks after the
sale went through. Go figure.)

David

In that case, I would be tempted to go to the local newspaper with a
potential story of corruption, and try to sue the council for the loss
of the potential value due to the TPO being improperly imposed and then
lifted. Anything is worth a shot.

Mm. As I said to my Dad at the time (must be about ~15 years ago now?)
but I think he didn't want the aggro

David