Closed
Tree survey innacurate
Sent to Peterborough City Council less than a minute later. Council ref: 7972659.
There seems to be something wrong with your tree surveying. There is no tree at this location. And the other trees have large dead branches despite a recent survey and contractors visiting to cut down dangerous dead branches. Is this an error or a scheme where the survey contractor can increase the number of jobs at a given location?
Updates
-
Enquiry received
Thanks for your enquiry regarding a council-owned tree. This has been sent to Aragon Direct Services for further investigation. We will endeavour to provide a further update within 3 working days
-
Inspection Arranged
Thanks for your enquiry regarding a council-owned tree.
Your enquiry has been allocated to one of our qualified tree surveyors who will carry out an inspection and provide an update within 20 working days.
-
Good morning
Thank you for your recent enquiries in relation to the trees in Bainton. We have investigated each of these and have responded to each of your points as below, given they all relate to the trees in the same area.
We did have contractors undertaking works to the Lime trees and they were following a work order that was issued following approval from Peterborough City Council for works in the Conservation Area. We did receive an enquiry regarding dead branches and the trees were subsequently inspected and works were raised to remove the most significant dead branches based on the priority rating from the inspection. Whilst we do appreciate your concern over dead branches we do not remove every dead branch as a high priority, minor deadwood was noted on the inspection of this tree, but works were not ordered at this time for reasons which we will go on to later. Essentially, we have carried out works to highest risk trees at the time of inspection and other minor works such as ivy stripping and epicormic removal are to allow for a full future inspection of the trees.
We have inspected the works undertaken and we are satisfied they have carried out what was requested as per the work order. It is standard procedure that our crews will only carry what is specified on the work order especially as these trees are in a conservation area and the restrictions this therefore imposes.
In response to the allegation of inaccurate surveying, we have checked our recorded and identified some inaccuracies of plotting data and this has since been adjusted. The number of trees plotted was correct but the location on the display was not fully accurate and clear. Our GPS devices are not sub meter accurate and hence there is sometimes a slight error in the position on the map, but this does not affect the inspection of the tree or the recommendation of the works.
You are correct that the display for the Pinfold does indeed show three trees and as you state this tree was felled (2021). This is not an error, but as there is a stump at this location we therefore still hold a record of the tree on our system. It does not necessarily mean that each point on our mapping is a tree, it is also showing as a potential planting location.
We trust this answers the points you have raised, and we are satisfied with the works undertaken to date and the accuracy of our inspections.
We would also like to make you aware that this was the first stage of a planned programme of works to this area, and we have recently met on site with the PCC tree officer to discuss this. There is clear evidence that the trees along the end of Tallington Road have been reduced in the past and we are currently considering future management options but will of course be subject to a planning application and approval being granted.
This report is now closed to updates from the public. You can make a new report in the same location.