Tree Saved


The owners applied to fell the sycamore tree in the back garden of 77 Osbaldeston Road. Prompt action and persistent emailing by CAAG resulted in its being given a Tree Protection Order. It is now illegal to ‘cut down, uproot, prune, lop or damage’ the tree.

We’ve saved a valuable piece of greenery – something that brings colour, life and movement to Filey Avenue.

There will be other threats to our neighbourhood. If we’re alert, we can prevent future harm.

Through CAAG, you can make your voice even louder.

For those interested in the fuller story, here are extracts from the correspondence between CAAG and Nick Jacobs, Hackney’s Tree Officer.

17th September 2013 Application [2013/3065] to remove tree in the garden of 77

CAAG telephoned Nick Jacobs objecting to the application and pointing out that it was listed under 79 not 77 Osbaldeston Road

19th September, 2013; Nick Jacobs replies to CAAG:

‘From the street and probably from adjoining gardens the larger sycamore is a a good chunk of greenery, but up close the tree is multi-stemmed from just above ground level and has been crudely pollarded.  I’m afraid I don’t think this tree a good enough specimen to Tree Protection Order.’

20th September, 2013: CAAG replies – 

‘The tree is part of the conservation area, and provides welcome greenery in its current location. The overdevelopment of the site at the rear of this property will be an eyesore in itself before you agree to removing the greenery the tree provides that would at least have softened it.

Sensible pollarding seems the way ahead, not complete removal. Felling would be a failure to protect our conservation area environment.’

20th September, 2013

CAAG draws Nick Jacobs’s attention to the criteria for granting a TPO:

A Tree Preservation Order (TPO) is an Order made by a Council in respect of a tree(s) because the tree is considered to bring amenity value to the surrounding area.  The order makes it an offence to cut down, uproot, prune, lop or damage the tree in question without first obtaining the Council’s consent.  A TPO can apply to a single tree, a group of trees or a woodland.

‘The criterion given here is quite simply that “the tree is considered to bring amenity to the surrounding area.” Our argument is that this tree does precisely that. In this your earlier email [above, 19th September, 2013] seems to concur when you state: “From the street and probably from adjoining gardens the larger sycamore is a good chunk of greenery.” We cannot think of a better way of saying “it is considered to bring amenity to the surrounding area”.’

20th September, 2013: Nick Jacobs replies to CAAG –

‘Thank you for your views and clear objection, which I note, along with those of all the others who have made the same or similar points.’

He promises to consider the objections.

22nd September 2013:  CAAG dispels the idea that a tree has to be a particularly fine specimen to gain a TPO

‘Being in a specimen beauty competition is not part of the criteria.’

4th October, 2013: Nick Jacobs writes:

‘I’m talking to the agent and looking to keep the work to a crown reduction with some thinning. I’ll keep you posted.’

20th October, 2013, CAAG highlights a false statement in the planning application for 79 Osbaldeston Road – affecting the tree in 77

‘The applicant [at 79 Osbaldeston Road] has answered question 16 on his form, asking whether there are trees on the property, and whether adjacent trees will be affected, with ‘no’ in both cases. This is false.’

21st October, 2013, Nick Jacobs comments on the false statement in the application:

‘I too noted that the planning application for 79 Osbaldeston Road incorrectly stated there was no tree likely to be affected.’

21st October, 2013: from Nick Jacobs to CAAG: The Tree is Saved

‘Please note that the sycamore at 77 Osbaldeston Rd now has a tree preservation order on it.’


With vigilance and tenacity we saved the tree.