Large tree close to the house...

[88v8]

.... we had ended up with more land than we had initially planned......
I would never describe myself as a tree hugger but I have to admit a great fondness for all such plants ...........

Gosh. And I thought we were going it with 30 trees in the quarter acre of our previous house.
Can't imagine how you have time for the house.
How many trees does it take to offset the carbon footprint of a 1 ton pizza oven? And what does one do with a ton of pizza?

Pollarding or coppicing oddly enough does seem to prolong the life of some trees.
Weeping forms such as the OP's are a particular pruning problem as taking the top off or shortening the branches turns a beautiful tree into an ugly shaving brush.
If one is willing to lose the weeping effect, but wishes to continue enjoying the foliage, the bark, and the simple presence of an ancient life form as well as the insects and birds that they support - and ash supports one of the largest variety of insects - then coppice or pollard could indeed be a good solution. It also removes weight, which can be helpful.

Tree surgeons come in many shapes and sizes. Some are little better than vandals. Even if one chooses a surgeon who is 'qualified', that does not necessarily help, as it may mean little more than qualified to use a chainsaw.
http://www.tree-care.info/findanarb/qualifications
Hope the OP finds someone who actually knows about trees.

The local Woodland Trust may be able to recommend.
https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/

Ivor

 

[CliffordPope]

Hope this helps.

Yes, to some extent. Thanks.

I suppose what I was getting at is is there a compromise option for managing a large tree which avoids both the dangers of it causing future damage as it grows even bigger, or falls over, and of damage from decaying roots or ground heave if it is cut down and killed?
Can it be managed reasonably safely on a scaled-back basis, with for example no radical change in ground water uptake?

 

[Cubist]

I suppose what I was getting at is is there a compromise option for managing a large tree which avoids both the dangers of it causing future damage as it grows even bigger, or falls over, and of damage from decaying roots or ground heave if it is cut down and killed?
Can it be managed reasonably safely on a scaled-back basis, with for example no radical change in ground water uptake?

That's a tough one to answer Clifford as it depends on so many factors - current age of the tree, where it may be in its potential growth, the species, the weather and no doubt others I have not even thought of. That said however I think it would be fair to assume that, wherever it may be in its life, pollarding or coppicing would result in the tree diverting much of its energies toward the growth of a new canopy at the expense of the root system. Feasibly, if the tree is well established, further development of the root structure might even be completely arrested. So it may be possible to 'manage' future risk through prudent pruning/pollarding/coppicing but frankly I think there can be little guarantee - theres a better than even chance that a real arborealist reading this would say "What a load of @$%^@!"

Sorry to say then - I'm back to Yes and No. :roll:

 

[Pennyviz]

Hope this helps.

Yes, to some extent. Thanks.

I suppose what I was getting at is is there a compromise option for managing a large tree which avoids both the dangers of it causing future damage as it grows even bigger, or falls over, and of damage from decaying roots or ground heave if it is cut down and killed?
Can it be managed reasonably safely on a scaled-back basis, with for example no radical change in ground water uptake?

I believe that is what crown reduction or thinnning does to a limited extent.

 

[88v8]

I believe that is what crown reduction or thinnning does to a limited extent.

That would be logical. But one cannot crown-thin a weeping tree without uglyficating it.

And, as you say, only to a limited extent. The root system must constantly extend into new territory as it uses up the particular cocktail of nutrients that it needs.

Ivor

 

[Cubist]

uglyficating

I really like this word and think it should be formally adopted by the membership to describe some of the less sympathetic enhancements made to period homes.

 

[overlander matt]

The Forge pointed out checking the LBC for the windows/doors...

How easy is it to check the LBC status for a house going back 30 years? There have only been two applications for LBC since the records went electronic that appeared in the conveyancing searches. Any changes made by the current owner would have been carried out in the 1980s and were always discussed with the CO but no formal applications were made. I was told the patio door was fitted before the current owners moved in but I have no proof of that (nor cause to disbelieve it). The owners have not carried out any significant work here for years but as the house was listed in the 1960s then technically anything should have gone through the CO. I wonder how strict COs were in the 1980s?

As for the other windows - all of the ground floor windows at the rear are newer, wooden casement windows. Originally there was another structure (a pantry perhaps) along the back wall of the house.

Any suggestions would be very helpful. There is something not quite right with those doors...

Matt