9 Coles Green, Loughton, IG10 2QS

9 Coles Green has an approved rear extension on the planning record.

1. Aug 2010
   ConservatoryFull

   Outcome in report

   Extension: Rear of property

   Rear conservatory/orangery extension.

   Extension

   Documents

   8 docs on file

   Reference

   EPF/0937/10

   Full record in report
2. More recent applications — locked
3. Tree WorksSept 20169 COLES GREEN TG1 Works - REMOVE ALL TREES WITHIN 17m OF HOUSE. AREA A1 OF THE ORDER Reason: The above trees are considered to be responsible for root induced clay shrinkage subsidence damage to the subject property - 9 Coles Green, Loughton, Essex IG10 2QS Investigations in to the damage have been conducted and the following information/evidence obtained: 1. Engineering opinion is that damage is due to root induced clay shrinkage subsidence. 2. Foundations extend to 1050mm bgl bearing on to plastic clay. 3. The clay subsoil has a medium to high volume change potential (NHBC Guidelines). 4. Suction values indicate severe to very severe desiccation in BH1 (BRE Digest 412) located to the rear left of the property and close to the offending trees. Suction values of this amplitude only arise from an external force i.e. soil drying by significant vegetation. 5. Live oak roots have been recovered from below foundation depth in TP/BH1 to a depth of 3m (BH3) below ground level. 6. The observed desiccation is coincident with recorded root activity. 7. Desiccation is at depths beyond ambient soil drying effects and entirely consistent with the soil drying effects of significant vegetation. 8. Level monitoring for the period 30.09.15 to 02.08.16 clearly shows a cyclical pattern of movement indicative of the effects of the offending trees on soil moisture and volumes to the rear of the property. The uplift phase of the building can only be attributable to an expanding clay soil from a desiccated sate due to the soil drying effects of the trees. 9. Drains can be discounted as a causal factor given the recorded desiccation and by reference to the level monitoring data. Established evidential and legal tests pertinent to subsidence damage claims have been met and the evidence confirms there can be no other cause of the movement and associated damage at the rear of the property other than the indirect influence of the subject trees. Given their proximity to the rear of the property, removal offers the only predictable arboricultural solution in abating their influence. Pruning does not constitute a viable long term alternative solution in restoring stability to the property. The installation of a root barrier is unlikely to be a viable option in this case due to the proximity of trees to the boundary, restricted access for plant and the topography of the site.Decision
4. Tree WorksSept 2016TPO/EPF/22/84/A1. TG1: Oak - Fell all Oaks within 17m of building.Decision

Floor Area for 9 Coles Green runs comfortably ahead of the street norm.