Trees marked for removal

Arkady · October 2010

I've noticed several healthy-looking trees on Stapleton Hall Rd and its environs that have been marked for removal 'becasue they are no longer suitable for their location'? Any idea what that's all about?

David · October 2010

Some on Florence too. Also looking perfectly fine, not uprooting the pavement or anything.

dion · October 2010

It is the local council cuts.

poxy · October 2010

Islington Council too. Trinder / Shaftesbury / Ashley / Heathville Roads all have trees marked for removal.

sincers · October 2010

Its probably cheaper to cut them down than to trim them every other year.

Mirandola · October 2010

I've written to Islington asking why this is happening.

Ali · October 2010

Councillor’s can you find out and let us know why ?

Arkady · October 2010

Thanks Mirandola, saves me a job.

Mirandola · October 2010

No problem Arkady. Someone needs to write to Haringey too.

Arkady · October 2010

Actually I'll do the same for Haringey. COUNCILLOR WILSON!!!???

Papa · October 2010

I saw this too. Very vague. Those trees are a major part of the character of the entrance to the nice bit of Stapleton Hall Road. The council needs to explain.

Arkady · October 2010

Anyone want to go all Swampy and build a protest treehouse?

miss annie · October 2010

Yes! But there may be some debate about the preferred architectural style of the treehouse.

lizbet · October 2010

There are also some marked for removal on Corbyn Street & Almington Street...

Arkady · October 2010

miss annie, I was thinking rococo.

miss annie · October 2010

Oooo lovely, with cherubs on the gables?

Arkady · October 2010

As many as possible.

Mirandola · October 2010

I've also written to the Islington Tribune asking them to look into it. Addresses confusingly are: editorial@camdennewjournal.co.uk
and letters@camdennewjournal.co.uk

dorothy · October 2010

I rang Islington Council, Green Spaces, who are going to get back to me (maybe). They don't give out their number to the public. Haringey Tree Officer said the trees were subject to subsidence insurance claim and so had to come down. The person I spoke to couldn't tell me much more, but I might email later, Alex Fraser or Clare Carter are the contacts. It does seem very odd. Are they the cherry trees or other ones. I'd be sorry to see the cherry trees go.

Mirandola · October 2010

Thanks Dorothy.

I thought cutting mature trees down often made subsidence worse.

miss annie · October 2010

Arkady, perhaps we could start with one of these and customise it. <http://www.highlifetreehouses.co.uk/index.php>; They also make bespoke hobbit holes and they're based in Highgate...very exciting!

[Deleted User] · October 2010

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Arkady · October 2010

Very expensive too! Damn cool though.

dorothy · October 2010

I got this back from Haringey, nothing from Islington: ''Hello Thanks for your email about the trees we are removing in Stapleton Hall Road and Florence Road. Unfortunately, we are having to remove these trees as they are the subject of insurance claims against the council for subsidence damage. We contest all insurance claims that we receive, but some we just cannot win. Sadly these trees will have to be removed because of this. Best wishes Babs Babs Millington Assistant Arboricultural Officer London Borough of Haringey''

Arkady · October 2010

Bummer. Treehouse time.

Papa · October 2010

I had a feeling this was going to be subsidence related. Very dry summer etc. Shame the councils appear to be just rolling over and failing to contest this from the sound of things. I'm not sure replacing elegant established trees with some tiny new saplings will quite keep the character of the tree-lined roads.

Brodiej · October 2010

My house has subsidence as a direct result of trees outside the house. A claim was made against the council a couple of years ago and the house was underpinned and repaired etc but the trees remain at large. I suspect the problem will return in the next 2-3 years. I love the trees and wish they didn't have a negative effect on the property, but once again the costs associated with repairing everyones house outweighs the benefits of greenary. In the world of litigation, the owners of the trees (the council) have caused a problem out of my control and are therefore liable. For those with no sympathy, try living in a house where it shakes everytime a bus passes and cracks emerge every month or so and let water into your living room. Not cool.

miss annie · October 2010

'Trees remain at large' sounds like something from a Victorian Crimewatch.

Klinneract · October 2010

If Islington and Haringey councils had just stated this perfectly understandable reason on their notices in the first place, no-one's time would have been wasted!

tosscat · October 2010

I know you think they are mad, but do you imagine that one of their priorities is lopping down trees just to piss you off?

nick_m · October 2010

The insurance thing is bollocks. The trees are not causing the subsidence. It is a standard response from insurance companies when faced with subsidence claims. It happended to us. And the arbocultural report made a vague reference to the large plane tree in front of the house, but it was clearly not causing the subsidence, which was at the rear. They wrote to the council to chop down the tree and I intervened. Basically, the council is shit scared of the insurance companies, which are have a blanket policy to remove all trees in the vecinity when faced with subsidence claims. Subsidence is caused by drier summers and by the increasing volume of traffic on the roads - and not by trees that provide structure to the subsoil. Chopping down the trees will make matters worse, not better. And make the urban environment we all live in considerably less pleasant.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Top Posters

Trees marked for removal

Comments