The Battle of the Ridgeway, West Harrow - Plymouth Brethren acting as developers destroy rich natural habitat ahead of ecological survey

 

UPDATED: Harrrow Council warn Plymouth Brethren that killing slow worms at The Ridgeway, Harrow, development site would be a criminal offence

Slow Worm

 

Steve Whitbread, Harrow Council’s Biodiversity Officer, has responded to the concerns expressed by Emma Wallace (Green Party GLA candidate for Brent and Harrow) over destruction at the Ridgeway development site LINK.  It appears that slow worms (often called ‘legless lizards) a protected species may come to the aid of the struggle against environmental vandalism. Protection of slow worms has delayed development elsewhere. LINK

 

The destruction carried out by the Plymouth Brethren

 

He wrote:

 

Whilst I can't comment on whatever reason the owners of the site might have had for the clearance of the trees and shrubs on their land, they were within their rights to carry out such work since these had no direct impact on protected species or  their shelters. I have advised the local Wildlife Crime Officer accordingly.

There was nothing that the Council could have done to prevent the clearance. However, I can assure you that the consideration of any planning application for the site will still take the vegetation into account as if it had never been carried out.

This has already been emphasised to the applicant and their agent and they have confirmed that there will be no disturbance of the felled area where protected slow-worms are likely to be hibernating.

The Council is due to hold a meeting with local residents and councillors to address resulting concerns next week. For your information, I have appended the comments I provided to interested parties last month, attempting to ensure that everyone understood the both the situation and the constraints within which the Council is working:

Dear Residents, Councillors and Colleagues,

Beverley Kuchar, the Chief Planning Officer, will be seeking to organise a virtual meeting, early in the new year, to discuss the situation in relation to the Ridgeway development proposals and the weekend clearance of the trees and shrubs along the boundary with the allotment site.

Ahead of that meeting, I thought it might be helpful to address points raised in relation to biodiversity matters. That is mainly to separate out what legal protection measures might be relevant to the species found on or adjacent to the site from what will be of 'material consideration' in relation to any planning application.

What I should emphasise is that the belt of woodland and its role within the green corridor and local ecological network will continue to be of material consideration regardless of the recent clearance. The recent actions will make no difference to how the scheme will be appraised and, where evidence is lacking, the approach will be to assess what has been lost at the highest reasonable value, taking account of other information as needed.

Considering protection for biodiversity relevant to the site, the ecological consultancy Ecosa was appointed by the applicant to undertake required surveys and prepare an Ecological Impact Assessment in the wake of the comments I provided on the original Preliminary Ecological Assessment (produced by Ecology By Design in 2018).

 

The Ecosa consultant discussed the survey proposals and inquired about potential offsite compensation opportunities. He also contacted Simon Braidman for his views based on the investigations that he and others had already undertaken. I had the opportunity to view the draft EcIA and provided my comments on this. I have no definite knowledge of whether a final version has yet been provided to their client, but I would assume that this was done some time ago.

Taking different species groups in turn, whilst all birds and their nests, eggs and young are protected from destruction during the breeding season, this does not extend to protecting habitat in which they might nest. Whilst there are exceptions and additional protection for certain vulnerable species, these don't apply in this case.

Similarly, whilst bat roosts and hibernacula are protected, whether bats are in occupation or not, habitat areas which bats use for commuting or foraging purposes aren't protected, unless the sites of which they are part are appropriately designated, e.g. as a Site of Special Scientific Interest.

 

It should be stressed that under current legislation, this would not extend to the SINC area. Whilst such wildlife sites identify important areas for wildlife locally, and their protection is of material consideration within the planning system, such designation does not preclude the landowner from damaging or removing the features of interest unless this would otherwise conflict with the law or statutory obligations, such as harm to protected species.

Simon Braidman, Huma Pearce and others have done an excellent job of recording wildlife in the environs of the proposed development site, and there is every likelihood that West Harrow Allotments now has a longer recorded species list than any other Harrow allotment site.

Protection for badgers also relates mainly to the animals themselves and their setts. The report of a sett entrance having been filled is necessarily of concern, but this appears to have been carried out at some time in the past. The information provided via surveys of the development site indicate that whilst it provides some suitable habitat for setts and foraging there was no evidence of any onsite activity that could be attributed to badger.

 

It is likely that common newt and potentially common frog and common toad occur within the development site, at least at its margins as part of meta-populations centred on the allotment site. However, protection for these species only extends to sale or barter. Nothing protects habitat on the basis that these species are present.

The situation is somewhat different in relation to slow-worms, however. Whilst these do not enjoy the same level of protection as rarer reptiles, it is not only an offence to sell but also to kill slow-worms. Whilst the felling of the belt of trees would be unlikely to have caused any direct harm to slow-worms, any efforts to excavate ground in which slow-worms are presently hibernating would be likable to result in mortality. This would constitute a criminal offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. The developer's agents have been advised accordingly.

In recognition of its alarming decline, the common hedgehog will be added to Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act under the provisions of the Environment Bill, and it is presently protected from being killed or captured. It is highly likely that hedgehogs would move between the allotment and the development site and, whilst the latter does not contain a significant area of foraging habitat, there is certainly potential for hedgehog to be hibernating within the felling area.

Whilst not subject to legal protection, the other species mentioned in correspondence and reports, taken as a whole and, in some cases, individually would be of material consideration in relation to the determination of the planning application. It is useful to have knowledge of what is found in the vicinity in this regard.

Lastly, queries were raised about the making of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) to cover the trees in the identified area. TPOs are made a local planning authority in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), for amenity and landscape purposes, where these would be impacted adversely were the tree(s) or group of trees to be removed. Usually this depends on how visible the trees are from highways and publicly accessible space, but trees that have landscape value, contribute to the character of a conservation area or have historical importance may be TPO-worthy.

Given the nature of the trees and the fact that, other than from the development site, they could only be viewed from allotments to which access is restricted, they did not satisfy the necessary criteria. I should add that whilst biodiversity, as well as climate change considerations, might be taken into account in the making of an order, a TPO could not be applied on such grounds alone.

I hope that helps to explain the Council's viewpoint as to why the actions over the weekend did not constitute a wildlife crime and why a TPO would not have been appropriate in this instance. As stated, however, any planning application will be assessed as if the trees and shrubs were all still there, in accordance with the code of practice provided by the British Standard BS 42020:13.

Responding today Emma Wallace, Green Party GLA candidate for  Brent and Harrow said:

I am pleased to hear from Harrow’s biodiversity officer Steve Whitbread that the Council will act as if the removal of the tree belt by the Brethren just before Christmas had not occurred when considering the 265 The Ridgeway planning application.  This unfortunately does not negate the fact that this act of eco-vandalism has been carried out and that this green space is now much depleted because of it, removing habitat for wildlife and breaking up a green corridor.  

 

It is disappointing to hear that Mr Whitbread does not believe the Brethren should be held to account for their actions, due to not having "direct impact on protected species or their shelters."  Of the protected species, there is no clear evidence that slow-worms do not directly inhabit the area or indeed hedgehogs, who may have been hibernating there, and consequently, have now been impacted by this destruction.   In regards to the many other species listed as having been found in the area, these would have travelled, foraged and made their home, which has now been eradicated.  How can this be ok?

I understand Steve Steve Whitbread listing in his response the individual legal protections of the animals recorded in the area and how, bats, badgers, birds and the common newt, frog and toads do not fall under the relevant laws of protection in these circumstances, or at this time of year etc.  This dispassionate response does not reflect the fact that the sum of these species together, forms a rich eco-system that depend on each other to survive and flourish.  As has been diligently recorded by Simon Braidman and others, this whole area is a haven for a diverse range of wildlife and no one species should be considered of lesser importance – they form a whole that needs protecting.  

 

The Council has declared a Climate emergency, has created and published a Climate Change Strategy and also, has a Biodiversity Action Plan, committing to “conserve, enhance, and promote biodiversity in Harrow” https://www.harrow.gov.uk/downloads/file/23181/harrow-biodiversity-action-plan I hope Harrow Council stand by these words and recognise the essential role they play in protecting this rich, biodiverse space and the species that inhabit it.

 

In an email to Emma, Cllr Adam Swersky said:

Thanks very much for getting in touch. I read your blog with interest - thanks for the sincere and factual account of what took place.   

 

I am really appalled by [the Brethrens'] actions. I've told their representative in no uncertain terms that I fully oppose their application and find their behaviour deplorable. I will be throwing my support in full behind the thousands of local residents who oppose the proposal.

 

 

 

Plymouth Brethren's Destruction of Tree Belt and Damage to Green Corridor at 265 The Ridgeway, Harrow

Guest post by Emma Wallace, Green Party GLA candidate for Brent and Harrow 

 

After the destruction

 

The proposed development

 Brethren

 

On the morning of Saturday 19^th December 2020, a team of volunteers arrived at the Pavilion site, 265 The Ridgeway, adjacent to West Harrow Allotments with chainsaws and chopped down the trees and foliage in the green corridor running North of the site boundary.  The group of volunteers behind this were Harrow Gospel Hall Trust, otherwise known as the Brethren, part of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church.  LINK  

 

 Whilst their website states that their values are “caring and respectful of others and we recognise the rights of all humanity within society”, the Brethren volunteers ignored requests from both Adam Swersky, West Harrow Councillor and Dave Corby, Community Engagement manager at Harrow Council, to stop.  Adam Swersky has tweeted since that it’s the “Worst thing I’ve seen in 6 years as a cllr.”  The tweet includes video of the destruction in progress.  LINK   

 

 

Indeed, the Brethren have shown contempt for the Council by removing the tree belt against their wishes.

 

The Covenant

 

The swift decimation of this tree belt green corridor by the Brethren on Saturday can perhaps be seen in response to a request from Harrow Council to carry out a second Ecological report of the biodiversity found here.  The Brethren have instead damaged the wildlife potential of the Green Corridor and of the Pavilion site, hoping to push through their major planning application to build a seven-storey tower block, including 178 residential units on this site. 

 

The land was originally sold to the Brethren over twenty years ago for limited use as a place of worship, under the terms of a covenant made with Harrow Council.  The issue of the covenant was discussed at a Harrow Council meeting in the summer, where Harrow Council leader Cllr Graham Henson stated “it would not, at this stage, enforce a covenant at the site in The Ridgeway, West Harrow, that only permits non-residential use.”  LINK  

 

Both the Brethren and Harrow Council appear to not be honouring the original covenant agreement, with the Brethren looking to sell the land to property developers for huge financial gain, part of the 265 The Ridgeway development: LINK  .

 

Birds eye view of the site and its trees

 

The Tree Belt and Tree Protection Orders (TPOs)

 

This is wanton destruction of part of an extensive wildlife corridor, one that links the green spaces of West Harrow allotments to the West Harrow Recreation Ground.  It will also affect the wider Green Corridor that extends from Rayners Lane to West Harrow.  The habitats here were a belt of young trees including Sycamore, Oak, Ash and Elm.  A Tree Protection Order (TPO) had been requested by the West Harrow allotment holders on some of these trees, believing they had landscape value, contribute to the character of a conservation area and/or have historical importance.  Unfortunately, Harrow Council’s TPO officer Rebecca Farrar visited the site independently in October and found that the trees were not of TPO value, because the individual trees did not constitute protection and that the tree belt was not visible from the highway or other public open space.  Campaigners believe that the tree belt was TPO worthy because the allotments do include public open space and are accessible to the public, as a result of the footpath through it.  For anyone walking through the allotment now, they will notice the loss of privacy, countryside and shelter belt effect that was afforded by the tree belt. 

  

The tree belt had also hidden the Brethren’s prayer hall, which is now fully exposed

 

 

The allotments are now exposed

 

Ecological Report

 

The Brethren had been asked by Harrow Council to carry out a revised ecological report to their 2018 one (see here LINK ).  This was seen as necessary as the 2018 information is now out of date, and as Simon Braidman from Harrow Nature Conservation Forum has stated, the initial report was inadequate as it failed to identify any SINC (Site of Nature Conservation Importance) land was part of the Pavilion site.  Whilst the SINC land, located to the West of the Pavilion site, was not destroyed on Saturday, the action carried by the Brethren provides no confidence in them preserving such an important and legally protected area of biodiversity.  

 

The Wildlife and Biodiversity

 

A diverse range of native species have been found in this area, including seven different species of bat, which have been recorded in the vicinity.  Other wildlife recorded foraging, nesting, breeding and travelling through this corridor, include:

• Badgers (a set had been previously, illegally blocked
•  Song Thrush (red listed) were recorded from the trees destroyed 
• Tawny Owl and Bullfinch recorded from the SINC land to the West of the site 
• Slow Worm from both the allotment site and the SINC land on West Harrow Recreation Ground  to the South of the Pavilion site
•  Green woodpeckers, Starlings and House Sparrows

 

If this building goes ahead it will be an ecological disaster for the area and the neighbouring park. The threats to wildlife and habitat include:

 

•   Increased light levels and lighting in public access from the resultant development to West Harrow Tube Station. Two bat species: Brown-Long Eared Bat and Daubenton’s Bat will be detrimentally affected in terms of foraging and transit from roost to feeding grounds – they will not cross brightly lit spaces and in the case of Brown Long-eared Bat, will not cross areas where there is no continuous or nearly continuous vegetation  
• Any increased lighting will cause insect distribution disturbance from natural patterns. Bright reflective metal will mimic water under artificial light and insect with aquatic life stages will lay their eggs on the metal, thinking it is water.
•  The high-density development will cast shade onto the gardens of the town houses and intruder lighting will disturb circadian patterns of amphibians.  The increase in domestic animals will mean an increase in predation of birds, reptiles and small mammals.
• There is a threat of tree thinning directly to trees in the SINC land, reducing habitat for birds to forage and nest
• There will be a high possibility of increased flooding to the allotment plots. The area is a flood plain and the allotments already flood.  Hard surface standing especially the town houses could increase flooding and make plots untenable.
• Most of all the threat is to the landscape and how the local people view the area.  Anyone visiting the allotment will be aware of how beautiful and well set it is, providing great views to Harrow on the Hill and a place for people to relax, away from the pressures of the town.

 

Campaign against the development

 

West Harrow residents, West Harrow Allotment and Garden Association, Harrow in Leaf and Harrow Beekeepers have been campaigning against the proposed Ridgeway development since 2019, launching a Change.org petition, which has garnered nearly 3000 signatures: LINK .  The local campaigners have been calling on Harrow Council’s Planning Group to reject the planning application submitted in April 2020 (view here: LINK ) , citing that the tower block is not in keeping with the local area, will have a detrimental impact on the local neighbourhood, park and allotments and also impact local infrastructure.  Whilst a decision by the Council’s Planning Group has been delayed until early 2021, Harrow Council have not seemingly been supportive of local campaigners.  Indeed, when Harrow Council were asked for comment after the act of wildlife vandalism on Saturday, their response was that Brethren were in their legal right: “Officers have looked into this matter and it is not considered that the developer has conducted any illegal or authorised activity.…Provided no harm is caused either directly or indirectly to protected sites, species or habitats nor works that would otherwise require a license or consent from the relevant authority undertaken without approval, a landowner is within their right to conduct such operations on their land as they choose, with the proviso that this does not amount to a change of use in planning terms nor cause nuisance to others.”  

 

I am calling on Harrow Council to do the right thing and reject this short-sighted and hugely detrimental development in West Harrow.  It is completely out-of-keeping with the rest of the low-level area and will have a negative impact on local wildlife, surrounding green spaces, local residents, as well as the roads and local infrastructure.  Harrow Council must do all it can to preserve green spaces in borough, in line with its Climate Change Strategy, which states: “We will ensure that our natural environment is protected from and helps to protect us, from the adverse effects of climate change.  We take care to preserve our community’s many green spaces and trees, and to protect its biodiversity.” Harrow Council must stand by their words. LINK

 

Please contact the local MP Gareth Thomas or the West Harrow councillors to express your concern about what is happening and request the rejection of the 285 The Ridgeway planning application:

 

Gareth Thomas gareth.thomas.mp@parliament.uk

West Harrow Councillor Kairul Kareema Marikar kairul.marikar@harrow.gov.uk

West Harrow Councillor Christine Robson christine.robson@harrow.gov.uk

West Harrow Councillor Adam Swersky adam.swersky@harrow.gov.uk

 

Related articles:

https://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/news/18043607.protestors-proposed-195-homes-harrow/

https://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/18590072.harrow-council-responds-ridgeway-covenant-concerns/

https://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/news/18584406.west-harrow-residents-oppose-ridgeway-housing-plans/