Locals ‘deeply upset’ as 200-year-old tree cut down

A council has said the decision to cut down the tree was a ‘last resort’

Residents in part of St Ives have been left feeling “deeply upset” after a 200-year-old tree was chopped down. Huntingdonshire District Council insist that the tree felling was a “last resort”, as the tree was causing “structural damage” to three nearby homes.

However locals say they were not told about plans to cut down the tree, and feel that a prominent part of their street has been lost. Local resident Rod Izatt’s friend told him that the mature oak tree in the Crescent, St Ives had been felled at the end of July. Rod went to see the tree for himself and was upset to see it had been cut down.

He shared a photo of it to Facebook and it gained over 170 comments, with many residents sharing their upset towards the loss of the tree. Rod and other residents feel they were not informed about the tree being cut down and he feels the street has lost a prominent sight.

He said: “My major concern is that this tree was over 200 years old – many people are deeply upset. With global warming and flooding occurring more, we need to change our focus from trees being obstacles to trees being solutions. They are living entities and support thousands, if not millions of species of wildlife.

“Essentially by cutting down this tree, we are breaking that link in nature. We need our woodlands, and that comes down to single trees in the end.”

Huntingdonshire District Council made the decision to fell the tree as it was causing “structural damage” to three nearby homes. A HDC spokesperson said: “We understand why people are upset by the loss of this mature oak tree.

“The tree was removed following a complex insurance subsidence claim affecting three neighbouring properties. Independent investigations concluded that it was a significant contributing factor to ongoing structural damage.”

The council spent three years trying to find options to retain the tree, however “no viable alternative was identified”. They added: “Although the tree appeared healthy, healthy trees can contribute to subsidence due to soil conditions and moisture demand.

“Removal was therefore a last resort, based on the evidence gathered and the need to prevent further damage to the affected properties.”