In October last year there was a planning application to fell this lovely mature tree in the garden of 27 Dukes Avenue. The application was from an insurance company claiming the tree is the cause of subsidence at a house two gardens away at 2 Elms Avenue. Any evidence that the tree is the cause of the problem is unlikey and minimal, and even though there is a tree protection order (TPO) that should protect it, the council is being bullied into having it felled. No decision has yet been taken, but it soon will be. It’s not too late to protest and to raise an objection – it’s planning application HGY/2022/2764 and all the details are on the council’s planning website, which sadly is not easy to use. The planning officer concerned is Matthew Gunning and objections can be sent direct to him at matthew.gunning@haringey.gov.uk .
The council has no obligation to give notice of applications like this and relatively few residents are aware of what is at risk. Please object before it is too late!
Replies
GOOD NEWS! I have just heard the council has refused the application to have this tree removed. The council has held out against the insurance company and has recommended crown reduction. Good sense prevails.
That's great to hear, Colin! What a relief.
Do you think this is a one-off, or does it carry implications for other trees threatened with removal?
I hope it is not a one-off and hopefully it’s an indication of the council taking a tougher line with the insurance companies that want to offload their obligations onto the council. It has taken over a year to get a decision on this, during which time there have been direct appeals to the houseowner who claims subsidence damage, lots of objections, actions by councillors (Muswell Hill and Alexandra) and a campaign by Haringey Tree Protectors to save trees more generally – all of which must have helped. I don’t think there is yet a decision on the big oak tree in Scout Park, which is still at risk.
that's just incredible, there's already been attemps to taking the tree down as part of a planning application on 27 Dukes Avenue, and a lot of back and forward of emails. Now this. Thanks for the head's up Colin. Even if now technically this is Muswell Hill ward I will try to find out more
Alessandra, thank you for picking up on this. The council does seem to be at the mercy of ruthless insurance companies who prefer to blame damage from tree roots rather than other more likely causes for which they would have to pay up. Let’s hope you can push the council to take a tougher stance on this and similar applications. The council’s planning website still indicates this application as being “under consideration”, but it doesn’t show any comments since 5 December and we know there have been some. This is a newly updated website, but it seems to be even less friendly and more difficult to use than the old one. Is this something you could look into as well? Thanks, Colin
Dear Colin, I hope to have more information soon,but in the meantime I have submitted an objection and it has been published. I have noticed that the application page mention additonal comments under the 'Files' section ['Comments that were submitted using our old (legacy) system can be found in the FILES area above. Comments made on this system will appear below.'] Would it be possible to check and confirm if the objections you refer to are there? If not, would you please email them to me at alessandra.rossetti@haringey.gov.uk so I can check and ask they are added? Thank you!
Dear Allesandra, thank you for taking this up. Your objection should be influential. One additional comment that hasn’t appeared online is the one from a respondent on this group (not now visible) who quoted from a message he had sent direct to the planning officer, perhaps because the new planning website is so difficult to use. Best wishes, Colin
Dear Colin, officers have confirmed that all 'old' comments and objections have been published under the File tab: https://publicregister.haringey.gov.uk/pr/s/planning-application/a0... . So if something is missing please ask the respondent you refer to contact me directly so I can check what's happened. With respect to the tree itself, I have been told that further information has been sought in order for this application to be determined, with a response still awaited from the applicant. I have also been told that while more monitoring results are collated in the interim, there would be no objections to works like 50% crown reduction being carried out so I have asked if this is being planned.
Dear Alessandra, thank you - I don't think anyone would object to 50% crown reduction. That tree has been in need of proper maintenance for several years. Colin