Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Beautiful mature street tree in Cavendish Road scheduled for removal -- help!
Coming home from yoga tonight, I noticed, with shock, that the beautiful tree outside no. 42 is scheduled for removal.It's the usual: the tree is healthy, but there is, it seems, an insurance issue. On the sign around the tree, it says that it "has been implicated in damage to an adjacent property". And that "works will commence shortly". No 42 is up for sale, so I imagine this is how this has come up.
I feel devastated by this. I can't let this happen. My younger daughter is in tears. The tree has been there since when we moved into the house opposite, when she was born, and has been an important presence for all of us ever since.
Is the nicest remaining street tree on Cavendish Road (a tall tree was removed not long ago near the top of Cavendish Road, and the site has been paved over, so I think there are no plans to replace it), and tends to be full of birds and birds' nests (though less so this year, as it has been pruned recently).
I've written to the planning department, but I'm not sure how much that is going to help in the face of an insurance company.
I'm happy to do pretty much whatever it takes to stop this -- any help, advice or support is appreciated.
Tags for Forum Posts: cavendish road, cavendish tree, insurance, protection, tree removal, trees
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by EMC2 on
-
(Pic is extension foundations) We also had subsidence but couldn't have conventional underpinning due to a Thames Water objection (sewage pipe) so we had to have 8 internal piles (?) at 6M deep in the kitchen floor with a concrete base holding up the walls. The Insurance Co never contacted the neighbour as far as I know...
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
You're right, trees are one of the culprits that need to be looked at in the case of property damage. The problem is that the default position seems to be to chop them down and ask questions later.
-
Permalink Reply by Maren Meinhardt on
-
Thank you everybody -- for the links, Alex, the information, Hugh, and for putting better than I would have been able to what I suspect may be the case with regards to the insurance industry, Chris. I'll get on to one of the tree officers and see if I can find out more.
-
-
And here's a picture of the tree -- pruned and at what looks to me a fair distance from the nearest house.
-
Permalink Reply by JulieB on
-
We had a beloved tree out side out house which was cut down by the council last year, and my children like yours were very attached to it. My son really struggles with change so he was inconsolable when I had to tell him it was gone. There was no notice put on the tree, I just had a knock on the door asking me to move my car because it was being chopped down.
However it was at least twice the size of your tree, so probably a sensible decision by the council. I asked the council if they would replace it and they told me that they could only replant if I paid £250 as a tree sponsor.
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
They may replace it but it wont be with one of the grand old trees, it will be cherry or ash or similar which will be much smaller and only live for 25-30 years.
Will be interested to hear their justifications. If it's been pollarded, why not wait to see how much that helps with any suspicious behaviour?
How does felling all the big old trees fit with the crisis re air pollution?
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
I was interested to see that the Council's tree strategy includes "Trees may also be removed which are over mature and require annual or bi-annual pruning". Isn't that tantamount to a policy of removing as many big old trees as possible?
In this era of big data someone somewhere must have done some comparative analysis of how other London councils are dealing with their street trees. Anyone?
-
Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on
-
Spent years trying to balance my understanding of London's trees, Hugh. Trees UK-wide are managed by each Council Tree Service, which always consists of an Arboriculturist officially known as a 'Tree Officer' - like most industries, they band together in Associations. As Chair of Haringey Tree Wardens, I managed to get us associate membership status of the London Tree Officers Association.
So I've been able to spend a good deal of time with Tree Officers from far and wide, not forgetting ours here and in Islington, also attending CPD presentations from the wide range of professionals involved (Tree Surgeons, Civil and Structural Engineers, Surveyors, Consultants etc) and ceremonies like the London Tree and Woodland Awards and the occasional teach-in and nursery visit. Also took part in the London I-Tree Survey as a Team Leader so have on-the-ground experience of how little I really know about tree species compared to other residents I've worked with.
Have a strong interest in the significant increase in both the transparency and granularity of our democracy that open-source can bring about. It has been shown to open the potential hidden in the data Councils so jealously guard. I've badgered the GLA to try to do a 'TfL' on London's tree info for the reasons you mention, among others.
TfL is an object lesson in how a public body can go from hiding data in secret silos to enriching us all (and themselves) by not only opening up all their data but also actively promoting its use. For instance, they facilitated a game (Chromaroma) in which you could earn badges for specific types of journey, eg energy efficient badge, aimed at the young. The app stores have useful, free routeing apps because data is freely available.
As you know, having, I seem to recall, cited it previously, the GLA set up the London Data Store a while back to realise some of the potential benefits of open data, also donating open-source in-house apps like the London Ward Atlas. I try informally to convince them to aggregate tree data (they 'liaise' with the Tree Officers), without which I don't see how we can effectively proceed.
The problem seems to me common to all Councils I've even consulted for - they insist on doing generic tasks 'their local way'. Each chooses different commercial packages. Vendors have no interest in interoperability - they want stuff as proprietary as possible. My view is that the Tree Officers have missed a trick - their intellectual investment is being divided and conquered because they don't agree on common standards that are often a feature of strong industry segments.
I've also been on to a few Unis as this area is fertile for research. Both the GLA and the Unis (e.g the marvellous CASA at Bartlett) have low-cost LiDAR licences (no derivative work allowed) from the satellite providers. I can see that some software techniques applicable to the datasets would provide automatic, London-wide surveys and feign shock at the lack of a London Tree Map, which has now (finally!) come about (even though, incredibly, it's based on an old 2014-15 snapshot and only for street trees).
The software potential is immense and being largely ignored here - New York, for example, is one of the many places streets ahead of us. I regularly come across breakthroughs that, for instance, can not only identify tree species from above (frankly, old hat nowadays) but identify tree health - a vital tool in the constant rearguard action globalisation has made even more urgent, facilitating as it does, the apparently unstoppable dissemination of disease. An opportunity is to promote biodiversity (although that's not as easy as it sounds).
Unless and until someone bangs enough heads to at least get each London borough to do more than the minimum (provide basic info to the GLA) and keep them updated (no statutory duty so they're not), no big data benefit is practical IMHO. The short-sightedness of Council's IT Depts in not being interoperable is such a shame because it's not that hard to do, they just won't embrace open data because the politicians don't 'get it' so no need and councils insist on seeing their IT systems as somehow 'unique' to the borough. So, for example, one borough can have a good, up to date tree map whilst a neighbour has none. The Tree Officers collectively do bear some responsibility but their departments have been savagely cut so their 'power' diminished accordingly. I blame the Cabinets of the Councils who are fast asleep, despite lots of hot air.
-
-
Thanks Chris. It seems that Haringey have yet to submit their data for the tree map?
-
-
Too true - Alex promised me he'd make the tree data open but it's so far down his list I'm not surprised it hasn't happened yet.
-
-
Our Tree Service, in my direct experience, care very much about our trees on our behalf and I've seen them go the extra mile on enough occasions to be assured of their sincerity.
They have lots of (often angry) contact with residents because the Tree Service is intricately bound up with the planning service. Tree Officers are constantly required to give their expert opinion on every planning application that affects trees - huge numbers do. This is all meticulous indoor bureaucracy taking up oceans of the time of officers who only really want to be outside.
I've often heard informal comments as to how many mistakes have been made in the past. Those mistakes can persist for over a century. It seems to me that the average life of most of the 40,000+ trees in our care here is around 50 years. That makes it hard to change as so many have so long to go before they can be reasonably replaced, even though more seem to fall prey to disease than previously. Our Tree Service claims to replace more than they fell.
Even developers are aware of trees nowadays. Trees make places more valuable. Trees are self-sustaining so cost practically nothing whilst delivering their bounty. When you see the brutalism of places like the Barbican, it just goes to show how much concrete there could otherwise be.
The environmentalists among us ('tree huggers' like the Green party) deserve huge congratulations. You can no longer get an application through unless sensitive account is taken of existing trees and new ones are provided where relevant - it was never like that, now it is so kudos to them! This is a big, underappreciated success. Many tirelessly campaigned for the role of trees in our urban lives to be recognised and it's worked - 'green' policies are now considered normal and relevant, placed centre-stage, having been heavily derided in the past as originated by 'loonies'.
Not only has our tree service taken up this cause, they go to lengths (given the cuts) to encourage residents to express their opinion and then publish it as a draft tree strategy. Really, if you or anyone contacts them with an opinion, a point of view, a suggestion, a query or absolutely anything, they really will incorporate anything they can use in the end result.
This is the way local government should work and very clearly doesn't in lots of areas in Haringey. I think it's because our tree officers have such close contact with incandescently furious residents who get hugely worked up to the point of bursting about tree issues in their own back yard.
So, for example, a development by some faceless profiteer is going to cause the removal of a screen of trees at the end of, say, five resident's gardens. Technically, it's the developer's land so nothing can be done to prevent a whole lot of new people in cramped flats eyeing your once private garden. It falls to the tree officers to restrict the developer to protect the resident's interests. This they usually manage, even though the right-wing government have passed legislation to allow developers to build (and demolish) without planning permission.
Residents default position seems to hate on the council and see them as inhuman robots deliberately doing things against the interests of local people. Some Councils do seem appalling on first glance.
A lot of the fate of trees is decided by central government legislation (and the insurers - don't get me started) that cannot be opposed locally. Our Cllrs set the local 'rules', detailing all those things within our control and are 100% open to anyone anywhere with not only ideas but also wishes for our trees.
Tree issues revolve around the local tree strategy that tree officers recommend Cllrs adopt (thus sometimes overruled by Cllrs). Tree strategies often spend years in draft and miss deadlines by miles because nobody cares enough - eyes glaze over at the deadening bureaucracy. They read like a 'protect our backs' exercise but they really are all we have to depend on so their contents matter.
Most residents probably don't even know a Tree Strategy exists, let alone want to participate in it - that's our fault as residents and gives us no leg to stand on if we don't like it. Ours is dated 2008. Consultation closed on the 2014-18 draft of its replacement ages ago - was anyone even aware there was a consultation? It should have been signed-off by our Cllrs in 2015 but still hasn't been. This is the sort of thing it contains (from the latest draft):
4. Trees in Haringey
4.1 Street trees
4.1.1 Highways maintenance works
4.1.2 Tree renewal
4.1.3 Vehicle crossovers
4.2 Trees on Housing land
4.3 Trees in Parks and Open spaces
4.4 Trees in Woodlands and Conservation Areas
4.5 Trees on Educational land.
4.6 Trees on private land
4.7 Veteran trees
5 Climate Change and its impact on trees
6 Trees and subsidence
6.1 Subsidence in Haringey
6.2 LTOA - Risk Limitation Strategy for Tree Roots Claims
7 Managing and maintaining Council owned trees
7.1 Council services that share responsibility for trees
7.2 The Councils Arboricultural team
7.3 Tree maintenance contract
7.4 Tree surveys
7.5 Planned inspections and maintenance regimes
7.6 Reactive and emergency works
7.7 Reasons for tree pruning and felling
7.8 Recycling of green waste
8 Tree planting programme
8.1 Right tree, right place
8.2 Species selection
8.3 Forward plan
9 Community engagement
9.1 Public information on tree works
9.2 Tree warden scheme
10 Placing a monetary value on trees
11 Action planThat above is basically the law applied locally. Tree Officers cannot depart from it. It's how and why tree actions are undertaken. A necessary read for those interested. For instance, I found it surprising that, if there is a street tree outside your house that is majorly obscuring the view, say, from your lounge, the Council won't prune it especially for you. In doing tree walks around the borough, I've seen lots of houses with big windowed lounges entirely overshadowed by bloody great street trees. You're stuffed if you want that to change unless it's in the Tree Strategy.
I'm a harsh critic of the Council in many other spheres but I really do admire the work done by our tree service - you can see it all around you every day.
They really will incorporate anything that residents want if they can so please, get involved in trees (through your nearest Friends of Parks Group) if you want them to grow around you.
-
-
I agree with you, Pamish, but it'll be difficult to get an explanation, I'm beginning to think. Both numbers given for the tree officers (8 489 5656 / 5631) are "temporarily out of service". Haringey is "sorry for the inconvenience", naturally. The general council number, given on the notice on the tree (8 489 1700) is busy, but doesn't have a queuing system and hangs up on me. The other number is Clare P. (I didn't quite catch her surname on the answerphone, but somebody else had mentioned her to me), and she won't be back until Tuesday. I fear thing may progress without there being a chance to ask for explanations, or discuss the alternatives you suggest (which sound like the obvious and sensible thing to me, too).
Any ideas what else I could try?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
