Photo: Lasitha Leelasena
Photo: Lasitha Leelaseena
Residents of Barn Hill were shocked to find that what they saw as a beautiful health oak tree on an open space, between Brampton Grove and Basing Hill, had been felled by Brent Council.
Apart from the main Barn Hill open space there are remnants of Humphry Repton's landscaping present amongst the 1930s housing on the hill. Its oak trees create a unique green environment, apparent from many vantage points, and contribute to the area's clean air.
Survivors amongst the housing
Some residents were aghast and asked Brent Council why the tree had been felled - was it disease or something else?
Kelly Eaton, Head of Parks and Green Infrastructure responded to residents:
I am afraid that we had to remove the tree because of an insurance claim related to property subsidence. In these instances we undertake a rigorous process of assessment of damage caused and liaise closely with our insurance team and loss adjusters. We considered every possible option to save the tree before having to make the difficult decision for its removal. I offer my assurance that the Parks Service did not take this decision lightly, especially when a healthy tree needs to be removed. It leaves us all with a great sadness when this has to take place. I am sorry that we did not inform neighbours before this work was undertaken. We cannot replant in the same location but will work with colleagues to identify alternative locations for any tree replanting.
Local historian Philip Grant adds:
This is a very sad loss, as this was a tree planted as part of Humphry
Repton's landscaping of Richard Page's Wembley Park estate lands in 1793. You
can read about this at the end of Part 1 of my 2020 local history series about
Wembley Park:
https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-wembley-park-story-part-1.html
Although they are now more than 230 years old, you can still follow the lines
of oak trees that Repton had planted around the boundary of Richard Page's
estate, and as a landscape feature framing the summit of Barn Hill when viewed
from the Wembley Park mansion on the northern slope of Wembley Hill.
I have sent Martin a copy of a map from 1920, a few years before developers
started to build the Barn Hill estate. This (above) clearly
shows many of Repton's lines of trees, with an arrow added to point out the row
of trees retained when Basing Hill and Branpton Grove were developed by
Wimpey's in the 1930s.
One of those oaks is the casualty of Brent Council's response to an insurance
claim. It was not the tree's fault, because it had its roots in that ground
more than a century before the houses were built
Shame on you, terrible decision. Why not do a Sheffield, it would save money.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very sad loss, as this was a tree planted as part of Humphry Repton's landscaping of Richard Page's Wembley Park estate lands in 1793. You can read about this at the end of Part 1 of my 2020 local history series about Wembley Park:
ReplyDeletehttps://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-wembley-park-story-part-1.html
Although they are now more than 230 years old, you can still follow the lines of oak trees that Repton had planted around the boundary of Richard Page's estate, and as a landscape feature framing the summit of Barn Hill when viewed from the Wembley Park mansion on the northern slope of Wembley Hill.
I will sent Martin a copy of a map from 1920, a few years before developers started to build the Barn Hill estate. This, if he can include it, clearly shows many of Repton's lines of trees, with an arrow added to point out the row of trees retained when Basing Hill and Branpton Grove were developed by Wimpey's in the 1930s.
One of those oaks is the casualty of Brent Council's response to an insurance claim. It was not the tree's fault, because it had its roots in that ground more than a century before the houses were built!
These trees are supposed to be protected by a Tree Preservation Order.
ReplyDeleteIf an insurance company demanded that this tree should be felled to protect a house, they should have to pay for replacement trees of an equivalent canopy.
If the tree was of that great age and healthy, which it would seem to be from the photos, and it was protected with a Tree Protection Order then it should not have been cut down at all!!!
DeleteYou can see from the way it’s been hacked down that Brent Council had little respect for the history of the tree.
Also believe tree has been cut down illegally during bird nesting season which runs from March till end of August!!!
Bet the insurance claim was for a property that had been extended in all directions - it's shameful that Brent have buckled and cut down this majestic tree.
ReplyDeleteThink they've tried to get the tree removed before, but prevented by the previous tree officer who was warned directly. Suppose the home owner learnt. Is the head if parks an easy
DeleteIt had a one metre extension. The roots of the tree extend a great deal further than that
DeleteAre commenters here actually more qualified than Brent council officers or are there a lot of unfair assumptions being made here?
ReplyDeleteLet's see the actual proof from Brent Council that this tree which had a tree protection order on it needed to be removed!
DeleteThe tree was planted in 1793 the houses were built in the 1930s - the tree, part of our vital green environment, should have been protected from destruction.
The head of parks is not a tree officer. What did the tree officer say? Was the
ReplyDeletecouncil tree officer consulted?
This shows 2 Brent Council tree officers ... https://www.ltoa.org.uk/boroughs/brent
ReplyDeleteWould like to know whether they were actually consulted regarding this protected tree???
Philip Bromberg comments by email: It may be true that there are "a lot of unfair assumptions being made here", but readers of Wembley Matters don't need to be told that Brent Council is - how shall I put it? - not universally admired. Unfortunately there is no automatic assumption that what council officers tell us is true. I hope there was a genuinely rigorous assessment in this case, but, as Philip G has pointed out, this was a mature tree when the houses were built on Basing Hill, and it was a mature tree when the current owners bought their house. It's loss is certainly very sad, but it also just seems wrong.
ReplyDeleteJust found completely by accident quite a few Brent Council 'consultations' on tree felling on the Brent Council website - you might want to take a look... https://haveyoursay.brent.gov.uk/en-GB/folders/tree-felling-consultation
ReplyDeleteThere is little doubt that the felling of the historic oak tree is just plain wrong. It was home to a pair of owls whom we had just heard duetting, in my garden and next door . The owls , whom mate for life, had had their home in the oak tree for years.. It was horrific to witness this destruction, cutting and hacking of the old oak tree. which went on for hours. Why did no one know about this fait accompli? Never mind we residents whose, friend, neighbour, and guardian of nature this tree had been in the case of my family for 90 years, but it appears the tree officers did not know either. I think we should be told.
ReplyDeleteIt's truly horrendous how these so called tree officers at Brent Council behave - we went to work one day and came home to find they had hacked down 6 huge mature trees in short section of our road stripping away all of the green environment us neighbours looked out onto in one go with no warning at all - the tree stumps were healthy so no reason for the trees to be removed - and yes, you guessed it, they did it in nesting season too :(
ReplyDeleteBrent council tree people are completely insensitive and incompetent. This should be brought to the attention of our MPs.
ReplyDeleteThe situation is critical and
some serious changes of personnel seem absolutely necessary.
See above comments
ReplyDeleteChecks! What checks were carried out before Brent Council cut down the majestic old oak and can residents get a copy of these checks?
ReplyDeleteThis is shameful. We loved this tree. We should look into whether this is legal.
ReplyDeleteThe tree had been there for over 100 years when the houses were built so Wimpey should have removed it before building. But 100 years later the tree and its roots had grown ever larger to the point that it could no longer co-exist with the house, so one had to go. All the politicians want to build more houses, and next to Fryent Country Park, and with plenty of other trees within yards of this one, you can’t have everything you want.
ReplyDeleteHow many extensions have been built on the house???
ReplyDeleteHow much concrete is there on the front and back garden of the property???
Have they got a concrete shed or outhouse???
We need trees to live.
And and wildlife need trees for habitat.
Please stop destroying our natural world.