Agenda item

This report outlines the progress to date of the first tree strategy for Hammersmith & Fulham, detailing the vision of the strategy, how this will be achieved, and why the borough needs a tree strategy.

Eugene McGee (Arboricultural Officer) introduced the draft tree strategy which had been compiled with a significant amount of input from internal and external stakeholders. He explained the rationale behind the strategy was that in 2019 the Council declared a climate emergency and made a commitment to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2030. Trees are known to be highly efficient at reducing carbon emissions, and as a result, effective tree management has been weaved into both national and international policy. Eugene McGee provided details of Trees and Woodland Strategy toolkit (commissioned by Defra) which had been used to inform Hammersmith and Fulham’s Tree Strategy.

Eugene McGee and Jessica Bastock (Service Manager Healthy Streets) provided a presentation which covered the following aspects:

·       The need for a tree strategy.

·       The structure of the tree strategy.

·       The vision (and process for developing the vison) of the tree strategy.

·       Delivering the vision.

·       The Tree Strategy - next steps.

·       Details of ongoing consultations.

The Committee noted that the strategy included three main aims: increasing the canopy cover, preserving and improving existing trees and working closely with residents and stakeholders. Details were provided of how these three core areas broke down into a further twelve sub-sections.

Councillor Ashok Patel asked three questions. Firstly, if officers could provide some idea of what the likely costs would be involved in the tree strategy (and to what extent was the Council relying on private funding). Secondly, he commented that he was surprised that Hammersmith and Fulham was only 28 greenest borough (out 32) and asked for some feedback on that. And finally, he asked for further information to be provided on the private land (and the vision of planting one tiny forest per year and promoting Forest Schools). He asked how many Forest Schools there were currently.

In response, Eugene McGee explained that, thankfully, there were a considerable number of funding opportunities available. At present, two funding applications were ongoing (The Urban Tree Challenge Fund and Local Authority Treescapes Fund). Eugene McGee confirmed that all the action points within the draft strategy had been costed, with the majority of these being met internally, however, officers would be looking for as many external funding opportunities as possible. Jessica Bastock explained that the Tree Service was cross-cutting throughout the Council (Planning, Climate Change, Parks) and the actions had been costed and built by the service areas responsible for delivering them.

Clarifying the statistic, 28^th greenest borough, Eugene McGee explained this referred to access to green space, so this needed to be reworded when the draft strategy was finalised. With regards to private land, Eugene McGee confirmed that the only influence the Council had was in relation to protecting trees through the planning process or by encouraging the land owner to plant trees and working in partnership with land owners the Council held joint assets with like TfL. In relation to the tiny forests, Jessica Bastock confirmed there were a couple already and officers would be looking within parks and the Council’s housing estates for opportunities to develop more. Officers confirmed there was currently one Forest School situated at Wormwood Scrubs and the Council was encouraging more nurseries, schools and after school’s clubs to book these spaces.

Councillor Adam Peter Lang commented that a significant proportion of his casework related to trees. Recent topics included: that trees were pruned at the wrong time of the year, for dead trees to be removed and replaced and finally, a group of residents had asked how they could go about getting trees planted in their road. While he commended the planting of more trees, he noted that there was a paucity of dates within the draft strategy and asked if the draft could be strengthened by the inclusion of some key milestone dates. Echoing the previous item, in relation to communication, he asked who the officer contact point was for tree queries. He said while it was important to raise expectations, it was essential any pledges were realistic and deliverable given the current financial climate. And finally, he asked who the Tree Council were.

In response, Eugene McGee confirmed The Tree Council were a committee that had been constituted by Defra. It was formed to provide Local Authorities with guidance on the arboriculture through the tree and woodland toolkit to fulfil a commitment made in the England Trees Action Plan 2021.

Jessica Bastock agreed that the points made about future communications needed to be taken forward. She confirmed there was a key piece of work about communication. So key information, such  tree inspections and when works would be undertaken and why, were key messages that needed more prominence.

Councillor Adam Peter Lang asked about the merits of events possibly being held in the north, middle and south of the borough, being held by officers in conjunction with the Tree Council to inform future strategy development. Jessica Bastock explained she was aware that public engagement was an area that Parks colleagues pursued  and resident engagement on trees and open spaces and this was something that tree officers could contribute to.

Councillor Jackie Borland commended the ward-by-ward tree surveys which were undertaken and asked if this information could be made available to ward councillors. She reiterated the comments made by Councillor Lang about residents’ requests for more trees and asked if there was ‘a buy a tree for your road’ option and if it was possible to crowd fund along a specific road. It was mooted that perhaps some of the more affluent areas of the borough could buy their own trees which could then free up some budget capacity for trees elsewhere in the borough. Councillor Jackie Borland also highlighted the plight of hay fever and asthma sufferers as a result of (pollen from) plane trees and asked if officers also considered the species and allergens (impact) when trees were due to be planted.

In response, to the contributions for tree planting, Eugene McGee confirmed that one of the key contacts was Trees for Streets which was an organisation that facilitated donations for tree planting. It was noted that the Parks Team already had a well- developed system for making donations and the Highways Team were looking to emulate them. Eugene McGee explained that officers had costed tree donations within the action plan. At present, the Highways Team were looking at expanding the donations system used by the Parks Department.

In relation to allergen levels, Eugene McGee confirmed officers did consider these and were looking to design a species selection matrix to prioritise those species which were most beneficial for biodiversity and did not exacerbate existing allergen levels. In doing so, the aspiration was the right tree would be planted in the right place. However, it was noted that the costs associated with highways planting was higher than for parks.

Councillor Jackie Borland asked how much a tree on a street cost. In response, Jessica Bastock confirmed that to purchase and plant the tree (and in the case of highways to excavate the hole through a civil works contractor) it cost between £800 and £900 per tree. However, there was the caveat that more than one hole might be required if utilities were struck when digging. Officers hoped that by opportunity mapping the borough, there would be a better understanding of where trees could be planted in future.

The Chair, Councillor Rory Vaughan commented on the key policy driver of extending the canopy cover by 10 percent, from 14 to 16 percent. He asked officers where they envisaged this increased canopy cover would come from given the complexities of planting on the highway. In response, Jessica Bastock confirmed that if possible, trees would be planted in the footway. If not, then officers looked to use the carriageway into the road space (such as a parking bay or where there were road lines). However, using the carriageway was more expensive. In relation to housing estates, officers confirmed it was a case of working with residents to find out where the preferential planting sites where and then to make assessments based on the complexity of planting the trees. Trees situated by street properties also required monitoring and husbandry to ensure dead trees were removed and live trees were managed and pruned. There were also trees in parks to consider.

Eugene McGee confirmed while the Council had data on trees it owned, it had outsourced data collection to a private company to establish how many private trees there were. Data analysis from aerial photography suggested there were approximately 45,000 trees and so to increase the canopy cover by 2% in a 7-year period, 1125 trees needed to be planted approximately or 160 trees per year. In 2020/21, Eugene McGee confirmed that 120 trees were planted using the Urban Tree Challenge.

In relation to improved communication, the Chair, Councillor Rory Vaughan suggested that the Council’s website could be updated to include some FAQ’s on trees / tree issues. The Chair confirmed that one of the amenity societies had passed on some comments which he asked officers to consider in developing the strategy. The issues they raised included the type of materials used at the base of trees (the need for a permeable surface), the promotion of watering some street trees by local residents and in town centre areas, cages were required around some saplings.

In response, Jessica Bastock confirmed the FAQs were currently being developed. In relation to comments that were sent through, officers agreed that permeable surfaces should be used over tree pits, or left as open soil where possible. In terms of watering, officers confirmed that new trees were watered twice a week and residents were encouraged to help water a tree for the first 2 years of life when it was most vulnerable. And cages were used where appropriate to protect the base of some trees.

At the invitation of the Chair, a resident from the Crabtree Estate asked several questions (in the context of supporting tree planting). These included that the consultation list did not include residents themselves and insurance premiums / cost of living crisis and proximity of trees to properties was significant. He asked if the Council still planned to plant plane tree as street trees. Eugene McGee confirmed that plane trees were still being planted as they were very efficient at absorbing particulate matter and it was a balancing act between allergens and mitigating climate change effects. He explained given the proximity to buildings, a right tree, right place, right person, right time approach was taken.

The resident highlighted the issues created by trees very close to properties and Eugene McGee confirmed that trees within the pollarding scheme were ideally pruned every three years. However, if trees had never been pollarded they would be reduced in accordance with British standards (no more 30% of a tree should be removed at one time).

Jessica Bastock confirmed the draft tree strategy consultation document was due to go out at the end of September / early October but the duration of the consultation had not been finalised. The Chair asked officers for the consultation to be circulated for a long as possible so that residents had a good opportunity to provide their views.

Summing up, the Chair confirmed the committee were interested in increasing the canopy cover, agreed that enhanced communications about trees was required, and the committee wished to look at the final strategy and how this was progressing in due course.

Resolved

1.  That the Committee both note and comment on the report.