The
Panel received a presentation which provided an update on the works
to Stanhope Bridge along with further updates on other tree related
issues in the borough. The presentation was introduced by Simon
Farrow, Head of Parks and Leisure, as set out in the agenda pack at
pages 27-41. Mark Stevens, AD Direct Services and Alex Fraser,
Tree & Nature Conservation Manager
were also present for this agenda item. The following arose during the discussion of this
agenda item:
- The Panel noted that
there were twelve bridges on Parkland Walk, ten of which were
managed by Haringey and the other two were managed by Islington. Of
the ten bridges managed by Haringey, seven were the responsibility
of Parks and three were managed by Highways. £11.6 m funding
had been secured over five years for works to the bridges. Stanhope
Road Bridge was undergoing refurbishment due to sustained
progressive failure of the bridge’s abutments. The design
work for this project had been completed and Planning Permission
received.
- Two small groups of
trees had already been removed from the site and survey work had
identified a further five trees that needed to be removed. Two of
which had already been removed, leaving a remining three trees that
required removal. Of the five trees, these were all on the east
side of Stanhope Road. The Panel noted that the current abutments
were wider than what was required for a footbridge and that the
height of the bridge also had to be raised to 5.3 metres in order
to meet current highways standards. The trees needed to be removed
as part of the excavation work to the abutments which would involve
adding between 0.5 and 1.25 metres of soil on to the root plate of
the three trees, which would kill them eventually.
- In relation to
heightening of the bridge, officers advised Members that this was
not related to any attempt to increase the size of vehicles on that
route. This was being done to meet current highways standards and
prevent bridge strike. This would also future proof the route if
TfL subsequently wanted to direct double decker busses under the
bridge.
- The Panel sought
assurances about what would be done to ensure that additional trees
were not felled by mistake, as had happened previously. In
response, officers advised that the trees had been clearly marked
up and that Alex and his team would be closely supervising the tree
felling. Officers also advised that they had agreed with the
relevant Cabinet Member that a fresh tree survey would be
undertaken for every tree within five metres of future bridge works
and that ground penetrating radar would be used to accurately plot
their root systems. Officers also assured the Panel that they would
undertake a walkabout with stakeholders and concerned residents at
each bridge site.
- In response to a
question around alternative courses of action, officers set out
that the fundamental problem was that the bridges had deteriorated
due to the proximity of trees and so interventions were required to
protect the future of Parkland Walk in the long term. Officers
provided reassurances to the Panel that the works would be carried
out in conjunction with the development of a new conservation plan
for Parkland Walk.
- Officers commented
that sycamore was the most prominent tree on Parkland Walk and that
they suffered from a disease which caused die back. It was hoped
that by managing those affected sycamore trees effectively, this
would open up space for self-seeding native trees.
- The Chair suggested
that, given this was third bridge of seven, the Council needed to
look at its comms around tree felling on Parkland Walk as the
concerns from residents would continue. It was suggested that the
Council should get ahead of any negative communications by erecting
large notice boards at the site of any trees being felled at
Parkland Walk. It was commented that Parkland Walk was a high
footfall area and that a simple notice board setting out the
reasons the tree was being felled would counter a lot of negative
communications. In response, officers advised that they had started
the process of getting messaging out through the Council’s
Communication team and that they would look into putting notices
boards on site. The AD Direct Services also agreed to look at
publishing the presentation on the website. (Action: Mark
Stevens).
- The Panel noted the
comments of one of the Panel Members that one of the key reasons
the works were given Planning Permission was that theywould make
Parkland Walk more accessible to wheelchair users.
RESOLVED
Noted.