There's three scenarios that come to mind in which it's somewhere between "acceptable" and "totally fine for some reason".
One, it's conifer hedge (the types popular in the UK) as these typically respond very well to being topped. It's what makes them a nice tidy hedge. I'm specifically referring to hedges above 3 meters in height. If you ever worked a hedge like this you'll quickly realise the topped stems are the platform to work off. These hedges can be maintained like this for years. For some reason, topped hedges are completely fine with being topped.
Two, it's either topping or removing. Arguably neither is ideal, but some retention is better than no retention. Topping puts the tree on senescence pathway and gives the ecology time to transition from alive to dead and dying. Whereas removal just makes the local fauna get confused about where the tree went.
Three, veteranisation in woodland settings. If there's a distinct lack of standing deadwood and age variation in a population of species in a given woodland NVC type, the topping and verteranising could be a positive management approach on a sample of trees.
This advice is very specific to the UK and especially on point three to the NVC woodland types. Generally though, prune properly at the correct locations, using proper technique being mindful of the structural loads and balancing of the tree. Topping generally, "because reasons" isn't an ideal approach at all.
One of the cities on the east coast did a complete ban of planting anything but dwarf trees under utility lines. I don't know if you've ever seen an oak or a big leaf maple pruned to not tear down power lines but they look like something out of a Tim Burton movie.
Going forward, the answer should be removal, because otherwise the public will never learn, and you're enabling bad behavior, in the codependent sense of enabler.
Is this why the council recently topped a tree on my road that's been breaking up the pavement? We thought they were cutting it down since they dug up all the tarmac around it, but they just knocked the top off, taking something like 98% of the leaves with it, and then put fresh tarmac over the exposed roots. We've been puzzling over that for a week...
Or perhaps literally just grinding (or otherwise prepping/cleaning by however is suitable given the presence of these roots) the fractured asphalt to improve bonding, and following with a good layer of fresh asphalt over top thick enough to keep the roots deep/the pavement surface resilient against the next decade of the root's growth? Ofc. including start&end ramps to not make an excessive speed bump.
If it's thick enough future crack fixing should probably only require a prius-parking-spot-sized heat lamp/"grill" placed over the cracked asphalt until it's soft throughout the full depth of the cracks, and then run a compactor/stomper over it to smash the malleable asphalt smooth. If needed that's the perfect time to spread a wheelbarrow of fresh hot asphalt in the heated cracks to restore decent coverage thickness over top of the roots. Maybe first grind it down an inch or two to get rid of the weathered topmost bit, but otherwise asphalt is pretty much unlimited recycling suitable, or at least we haven't yet really run out of demand for fresh asphalt to get rid of the used asphalt we're digging up by cleaning it a bit before mixing with new ingredients to dial in target softening temperatures and gravel composition...
they do it where I live because the branches bang against apartments' windows when it's windy. I don't think there's another low-maintenance solution.
More generally, I've found as the maintainer of a building that while mainstream practices (of property generally, not specifically trees) often undershoot good practice, heritage techniques are often impractically expensive, and function more as a status signalling mechanism than really as a way of doing better. Even more generally, economy-wide; there is a tendency to criticise the mainstream but then promote expensive, semi-artisanal products and services, which while better, simply offer an escape valve to pressure for reform. Better techniques can only benefit the populace as a whole if they are cost reduced under the discipline of serving the mass market, not just offered as a premium version for the well-to-do.
The real advice I should've given was to construct protection for a window or hire a certified arborist to do a proper thinning of the canopy. But I wanted to remain on the topic of interest dendrology info
Different level of "Tree DB", I know, was still reminded that I at one point did something that required us to have a pipeline for downloading these trees location.
Apparently our city as 1/4 million trees and over 500 different species! https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/espaisverds/en/management-a...
Trees can use all these signals to know which branches are being shaded or dealing with a lot of wind, which side it's being pulled towards more, etc.
Trees also optimize for their overall wind profile. Dropping branches that cause it more drag than they are worth in the sugar they make. The lower their wind profile, the lower the risk of the whole tree being uprooted during a storm.
When humans cut the wrong branches, it throws everything off balance.
Kind of annoying when all the fruit is several meters out of reach