Can the subsidence not be addressed in other ways? This tree adds greatly to the street's look. Plus the health benefits

Thank you for submitting your objection to the proposed removal of the thorn tree outside 11–13 Ellora Road. As the Local Authority, we aim to retain and preserve healthy street trees wherever possible due to the significant environmental and amenity benefits they provide. However, the Council also has a legal responsibility to act where there is clear evidence linking a tree to structural damage. Over the last three years, the council has received two separate lots of evidence implicating firstly the Chitalpa tree at 15-17 and then the Thorn tree at 11-13 to two separate incidences of damage consistent with shrinkage of the underlying clay subsoil. In this case, on the balance of probabilities, the available evidence demonstrates that a property has been affected by subsidence damage attributable to vegetation-related soil moisture variation. Key findings include: • The hawthorn tree (Crataegus spp.) is a high water-demand species under NHBC Chapter 4.2 Standards and lies within influencing distance to the property. • The site is underlain by high to very high plasticity clay, which is susceptible to volumetric change in response to moisture fluctuations. • Roots identified beneath the foundations at depths of 800–1300mm belong to the Pomoideae subfamily, which includes hawthorn species, thereby providing direct evidence of influence from the nearby highway tree. • Level monitoring data (April 2024–February 2026) shows significant seasonal movement consistent with shrink–swell behaviour which occurs as a result of trees. The pattern and direction of movement correlate strongly with the location of the implicated highway tree, with the greatest magnitude of movement occurring closest to the tree. • Other causes have been tested for and ruled out. Taken together, this Arboricultural, geotechnical, and monitoring evidence demonstrates a clear link between the tree and the subsidence damage and is sufficient for the third party to make a valid claim against the council according to case law precedent. Initially, the tree crown was reduced in March 2025 as a mitigation strategy to reduce the tree’s water demand. However, subsequent monitoring has shown that this intervention has not been effective, with seasonal movement continuing. As a result, removal of the tree is considered the only reasonable and cost-effective solution to prevent further damage. The council does aim to increase its canopy cover over the whole borough, a programme which is set out in the Urban Forest Strategy document, available online at: https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-11/Lambeth%20Urban%20Forest%20Strategy.pdf Subject to available funding, the Council will consider suitable replacement tree planting at this location with a low water demand tree as part of its wider planting programme. Any replacement planting will be prioritised in line with the criteria set out in the Urban Forest Strategy. We have logged a request to replace the tree near the junction of Natal Road and Streatham High Road. This border is managed by the leisure centre and the tree would be maintained by leisure services, we are willing to work with the leisure centre to support planting at this location but planting will be subject to available funding.