Local groups determined to save mature oak

The hearing of the appeal against Enfield's rejection of the application to fell this tree was held on 5th March at the Civic Centre and subsequently on site. This was a long and complicated process and what follows is my gloss on the proceedings and arguments and I apologise for any errors in my account.

The Planning Inspector held an informal meeting at which the appellant's representative, the Council arboriculturist Stephen Downing, Ward Councillor Martin Prescott (and very local resident), Andy Barker Chair of the Fox Lane and District Residents Association, and Colin Younger Chair of the Lakes Estate Conservation Area Study Group and members of the public were all able to speak, answer the Inspector's fact finding questions and discuss the issues.

There was extensive exploration of the community appreciation of the tree, the history of the problem, technical discussion of soil structure, soil dessication, the potential impact of "heave" should the tree be felled on the garages and the neighbouring flats, and the ecological value of a 400 (?) year old protected tree.

What is clear that once such matters involve insurance claims, whatever the wider arguments, it boils down to the balance the Inspector has to draw between the amenity value of the tree and the cost of remedial action needed to repair and protect any affected structure.

Though these figures are disputed by the opposing sides, they were presented by the appellant as £70,000 to underpin the garages and reinstate them in the original (uncracked) condition, and £140,000 as calculated by the tree officer as the tree's amenity value.

On site there was further discussion of the ecological value of the tree and the precise extent of damage to the garages.

The process is that should the appellant be given consent to fell the tree, only at that stage will a full bat survey be required, and depending on its results it is possible that this would prevent felling.

We now await the Inspector's report.

Colin Younger

I'm pleased to report that the Planning Inspector has dismissed the appeal against the LBE refusal to allow the oak tree in Lady Shaw Court to be felled.

The full decision is attached.

It is now open for the appellants to seek compensation from Enfield. In their case they argued that only a full piled raft, which they estimated at costing £70,000, could reinstate the garages. I'm seeking views on this, because it seems to open the prospect of planning permission being sought for demolition and rebuilding the garages on the raft, which might put the health of the tree at risk. Of course LBE could reject such an application, which could lead to another appeal....

Colin,
In the past I have done feasibility cost plans for a major supermarket where ground conditions were not ideal. We occasionally used the piled raft solution for the building. This was usually in Northern Ireland where the site was covered in very deep peat. The piled raft basically does not place any load on the surrounding ground. This would seem extreme in the case above. I don't know what damage the tree is causing but I assume its cracking to the walls and slabs due to roots sucking all the water from the ground. I am not an engineer but a thicker slab with heavy gauge mesh would remove the risk of cracking. I presume to install this you would need to demolish the existing and re-build. If you need any budget costs for this I would be happy to provide you some advice.
Kind regards,
Tom

PS - having read the 1st post I agree with the group trying to save the tree. If I was costing the scheme and was aware of the tree then I would have allowed for additional mesh and a slighting thicker slab and maybe deeper strip foundations. They should speak to the engineer who did the original design. They maybe able to claim on his PI if its less the garages are less than 12 years old. To have designed the garages to resist movement at the time of construction would have resulted in very small increase in the overall cost.

The battle over this tree continued after the Inspector ruled against felling. An application to insert supporting piles around th garages was made and has now been approved. The attached report notes that there will be minor damage to the trees root system but that this will not be significantly damaging or harmful to the tree.

It is instructive to note the reservations noted about the applicant's plan, which also forms part of the formal decision granting permission for the work. It remains to be seen whether this expensive work will be undertaken and if attempts are made to claim against Enfield.

Latest on this, as reported by Fox Lane Residents' Association , is that a new application has been submitted to fell the oak.

To recap, the original application to fell failed after an appeal heard by a Planning Inspector. The applicant then appiled to support the garages by an extensive and expensive scheme of supporting piles. This was approved even though it might damage some tree roots.

However, there was a delay in sending the approval notice and the second application to fell was made before it was recieved. There is therefore no reason to continue with the application to fell, but who knows what the applicant will do next. In the end this seems to be heading for an argument about the costs of the piles, and perhaps whether this proposal is justified, versus the value of the tree.

Could this result in unjustifiable costs being levied on the Council so that they are forced to agree to the tree being felled?

This article from Horticulture week (hortweek.com) on 13 July 2015, by Elizabeth Henry,suggests there may be a lot more tree benefit than envisaged so far

Living on a tree-lined street could have the same impact on health as earning an extra £6,440 per year or being seven years younger, new research shows.

The study, published in online journal Scientific Reports, looked at data for residents of Toronto in Canada. It combined satellite imagery and tree data with questionnaire-based reports of general health perception, cardio-metabolic conditions and mental illnesses from the Ontario Health Study.

A research team led by Omid Kardan found those people living in neighbourhoods with a higher density of trees on their street reported better health, even when controlling for socio-economic factors and demographics.

Researchers found the improvement in health perception from having 10 more trees on a block was equivalent to earning an extra $10,000 (£6,440) per year, being seven years younger or living in a neighbourhood where the median annual income was $10,000 higher.

It also found that having 11 more trees in a city block, on average, was correlated with an improvement in cardio-metabolic conditions in ways comparable to an increase in annual personal income of $20,000 (£12,880) or moving to a neighbourhood with $20,000 higher median income or being 1.4 years younger.
The study specifically looked at tree canopy on streets, rather than other types of planting such street shrubbery or flowers.