Ely Gardens tree felling postponed by council

Residents in and around Ely Gardens in Borehamwood came out of their homes early on Thursday morning after contractors suddenly turned up to take down an oak tree, which campaigners had fought to save.

Earlier this year, the executive committee at Hertsmere Borough Council approved a recommendation to cut down a tree which is allegedly causing subsidence issues to a number of nearby homes.

Residents and campaigners have told the Times that they were under the impression it was the smaller of two trees in Ely Gardens that was to be cut down, based on a meeting they had with senior council officials last year.

When contractors turned up to cut down the larger oak tree in Ely Gardens, with the support of police, residents accused them of felling the wrong tree – and after discussions with senior officials at the council, the felling was postponed.

However, the council says it was postponed because too many people were in the area and says it is “satisfied” the right tree was earmarked for removal.

The two trees pictured in the winter. The bigger one at the front is the one the council planned to fell on Thursday

Why does the tree need to be cut down?

There were once six trees in Ely Gardens, but four have already gone.

The council said the remaining trees had to go to due to the subsidence damage being caused by their roots.

While housing association Clarion Housing Housing said “several” of its properties in Ely Gardens have structural damage, which it says “appears to have been caused by subsidence” – which is being linked to the oak trees.

Following independent investigations and insurance claims received by the council, it was concluded in March that one tree is felled, and replaced with four new trees on site.

Why do residents think the wrong tree was going to be cut down on Thursday?

Sandra Green, who lives opposite the Ely Gardens trees in Nicol Way, says when campaigners were invited to a meeting at the council offices at the end of last year, council representatives showed them a map and pointed out which tree would be chopped down – the smaller one.

“We were gutted to hear one of the trees was going to go but we thought at least we had saved the big one. We would have continued the campaign if we knew the big tree was under threat.

“We’ve seen no evidence the big tree has to go.”

Campaigners pictured in Ely Gardens (pre-Covid)

What evidence does the council have that the trees need to go?

In 2016, a survey was carried out on the instructions of the insurers to assess whether the trees were playing any role in the damage to properties.

The report concluded that although the overall condition of the big tree was poor, only the smaller tree and a third tree should be removed.

And when a campaigner presented a petition to save the trees at a council meeting in February, minutes published on the council’s website from state that Cllr Seamus Quilty, portfolio holder for the environment, told the petitioner the “council had adhered to the recommendations contained in the arborculturist’s report, which had stated that the tree furthest away from the properties [the bigger one] would be kept under observation, whilst the other tree was to be felled”.

When the final decision was made in March, the council officer’s report did not state which of the two trees was to be felled.

The council claims the decision to fell the big oak tree is not made solely on the 2016 report but by its own investigations as well.

Campaigners decorated the trees

Resident Ms Green said: “What defining evidence has the council received to change its mind so drastically? We’ve never had any communication to say reports have changed. For this to be flipped on its head with no notification is wrong.”

Ms Green’s comments come after council leader Morris Bright and managing director Sajida Bijle both admitted at a meeting in March that the council could have been more “open earlier on in the process” with residents about why the tree needed to be felled.

Borehamwood Kenilworth Labour councillor Rebecca Challice said: “The council’s continued lack of clarity has added to the upsetting situation in Ely Gardens

“Contractors arrived on Thursday and attempted to move the big tree which according to the report was not meant to be removed.

“Thankfully, the work of residents, councillors, and activists prevented this.

“We need to protect our ecology and biodiversity and this includes transparency from the council and the actions they take.”

A third tree was cut down a couple of years ago - residents claim 'in error'.

What have the council said?

“Our tree officer and contractors arrived at Ely Gardens before 8am to begin work on removing one of the two trees at the site.

“Unfortunately the number of people and cars in attendance posed serious health and safety concerns, therefore we were unable to proceed with our intended action and the works are being deferred to a later date.

“Numerous and long discussions have been held on this issue dating back more than four years, including most recently, a presentation to our executive in March during which questions raised by petitioners were addressed.

“We value all our trees in Hertsmere. The decision to fell this tree was based on expert advice and in consultation with our insurers. Damage has been caused to a property in Ely Gardens and this work has to be carried out in the public interest and for the safety of those living in the affected property.

“We are satisfied the right tree was earmarked for removal today. We are monitoring the condition of the other tree.”