Peterborough MP calls for “no stone to be left unturned” to find solution to protect ‘ancient’ tree

The saga into the oak tree in Ringwood, Bretton, that campaigners claim is over 600 years old, is set to continue after a decision that was due to be made this week (January 6) was deferred until an extraordinary meeting next month.

Campaigners have long been fighting Peterborough City Council’s decision that the tree must be felled due to damage it is doing to the foundations of a nearby property.

They have challenged the assertion that the tree’s roots are causing subsidence and have even suggested that removing the tree would make matters worse for those inside the property as the roots would no longer be there to soak up excess moisture.

Their claims have been supported by an independent arboricultural report, which concluded that the cause of subsidence at the property was much more likely to have been caused by a geological process called heave.

Ground heave is the upwards movement of ground, due to the expansion of clay soils when wet. If this were found to be the cause, the report states that removing the tree would only make matters worse.

Mr Bristow has long supported the campaigners and called on the council to explore ways in which the tree can be saved and called for further investigations to be carried out by an independent structural engineer.

He said: ““Since an initial investigation, there has been new research from an arboriculture specialist. This suggests that felling the tree would not solve the homeowner’s problem.

“The specialist concludes that the underlying issue is ‘heave’, which is caused by excessive moisture, not subsidence. The Council has no responsibility to prevent heave. Moreover, removing the tree could actually make the problem worse.

“When I met the homeowners, I saw the damage to the property. They are decent people who have enjoyed the tree, but they are right to want a solution to the problem, however, even the appointed loss adjuster states that the tree merely ‘could’ be the cause of the damage.

“Further investigation into whether this is a case of subsidence or heave is required and should be carried out by an independent structural engineer.

“It would be a crying shame to remove such an old and much-loved tree. No stone should be left unturned to find a solution that saves the tree and protects the house. I sincerely hope that the committee takes the same view when it meets.”

RELATED:

Decision on future on ‘ancient’ Peterborough oak tree delayed by a month

Campaigners seeking to save ‘ancient’ oak tree in Peterborough claim its removal could worsen homeowner’s problems as issue set to be debated by council

Special meeting to decide row over future of ancient Peterborough oak tree

E-petition to save 600-year-old oak in Peterborough triggers council debate

Protesters hold rally to save 600-year-old oak tree in Peterborough

Peterborough councillor calls for increased transparency in council’s bid to fell ancient oak tree

Peterborough residents keep 24 hour watch in bid to save 600 year-old oak tree from being felled

Peterborough MP offers support to campaigners fighting to save ancient 600-year-old oak tree

Council ‘deeply saddened’ but felling of 600-year-old oak tree in Peterborough to resume ‘shortly’

Peterborough MP and campaigners remain defiant as council insist ancient oak tree must be felled