• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Residents cut down a wood on Bristol railway line without permission to improve their views

Status
Not open for further replies.

vicbury

Member
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Messages
901
Location
Bristol
From the Bristol Post this morning:

Residents of a street in Bristol are being investigated after they hired a tree surgeon and chopped down dozens of trees along a railway line to improve the view from the backs of their house.

Network Rail said the residents of Cromwell Road did not have permission to send the tree surgeon company onto the embankment next to Montpelier station, and said the incident was serious enough for a full-blown investigation to be launched.


Furious residents living nearby have been left shocked after discovering their neighbours had clubbed together to hire a tree surgeon company, and sent them onto Network Rail land on Wednesday and Thursday last week to start cutting down a large swathe of woodland.


The work was done, neighbours claim, to improve the views from the backs of the homes on Cromwell Road, and to allow more light into their rear gardens.

This raises many questions:

  • Why were the tree surgeons not arresting for trespassing on the railway?
  • Why did Network Rail not turn up until Friday when the works happened on Thursday and Friday?
  • Is the stability of the embankment now compromised?
  • Can the tree surgeons be prosecuted for these works?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,035
Location
No longer here
You’ll probably find the “tree surgeons” responsible are, ahem, mobile. Very difficult to trace.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
From the Bristol Post this morning:



This raises many questions:

  • Why were the tree surgeons not arresting for trespassing on the railway?
  • Why did Network Rail not turn up until Friday when the works happened on Thursday and Friday?
  • Is the stability of the embankment now compromised?
  • Can the tree surgeons be prosecuted for these works?

The answer to all of the questions you raise is: Don't know. There is insufficient detail in the linked article to know more than that.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
You’ll probably find the “tree surgeons” responsible are, ahem, mobile. Very difficult to trace.

They say tree surgeon, I say hiring a Huskvarna from HSS.

I say bloke who cut down a tree in my back yard for cash and isnt really an arboriculturalist but has tree surgeon on his van because it sounds better than gardener

The railway is the worst thing to come after you for costs because everything is expensive for seemingly no reason.

chortle, chortle, chorlte - what jolly japes.
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
If the trees are in a designated 'conservation area' then it is a criminal offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act to cause any damage to them without permission from the local authority - permission which requires a minimum of 6 weeks consultation time and also requires the consent of the landowner.
This area of Bristol lies in the Clifton & Montpelier Conservation Area, though by interesting coincidence, Cromwell Road is excluded from the Area. The boundary appears to run along the northernmost running rail of the railway so that the northern embankment (behind Cromwell Road) is excluded; but I'm not sure how accurately the map I'm using has been drawn - perhaps the boundary was intended to be drawn as the perimeter of the railway property, along the south facing end of the residences.
 

mallard

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2009
Messages
1,304
I wonder if when it's looked into we'll find something like the trees were overhanging local properties, recent high winds made them appear unsafe or even caused actual damage and despite repeated requests NR ignored residents concerns, actively refused to do anything and/or quoted rediculous amounts of money to address the problems...

The claim that the work was done "to improve views" seems to have come from the "furious and shocked" residents rather than the people actually responsible.
 
Joined
9 Nov 2017
Messages
260
If I were the local residents and/or tree-surgeons, I'd be more than a little concerned. Trespass onto the Railway is one thing. But there are also plenty of ecological and enviornmental laws which may have been flouted - bats, nesting birds and any prohibited herbicide use.

What's more, any timber left on the embankment and NR will probably charge a hefty fee for removal; if they've removed any themselves, then that's theft.

the trees were overhanging local properties

Then the local residents could have cut the overhanging branches from their own gardens - you're allowed to cut foliage that overhangs onto your property, regardless of whether the tree is rooted the other side of a boundary. The only caveat to this is that it's unadvisable if the trimming leaves a heavily unbalanced tree.
 

al78

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2013
Messages
2,400
Then the local residents could have cut the overhanging branches from their own gardens - you're allowed to cut foliage that overhangs onto your property, regardless of whether the tree is rooted the other side of a boundary. The only caveat to this is that it's unadvisable if the trimming leaves a heavily unbalanced tree.

You are allowed to cut overhanging branches but strictly you have to give the branches back to the owner of the tree (or at least ask if they want it back). It is easy to see how this works with neighbours but how would that work if Network Rail owned the tree? I'm not sure slinging the branches over a boundary fence back onto NR owned land would be a good idea.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,267
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
This area of Bristol lies in the Clifton & Montpelier Conservation Area, though by interesting coincidence, Cromwell Road is excluded from the Area. The boundary appears to run along the northernmost running rail of the railway so that the northern embankment (behind Cromwell Road) is excluded; but I'm not sure how accurately the map I'm using has been drawn - perhaps the boundary was intended to be drawn as the perimeter of the railway property, along the south facing end of the residences.

In legal terms, is it not the case that exactitude of map details is critical when exclusion areas are under discussion.
 

gingerheid

Established Member
Joined
2 Apr 2006
Messages
1,488
There must be more to this?

Nobody wants an improved view of a railway line?
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
What's interesting from the photo is that there's a second fence between where the trees were and the railway line

image1JPG.jpg
 

greaterwest

Established Member
Joined
23 Nov 2014
Messages
1,423
I think you'll probably find these are the same sort of people who would complain about noisy railways when they opted to live next to one...
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
You are allowed to cut overhanging branches but strictly you have to give the branches back to the owner of the tree (or at least ask if they want it back). It is easy to see how this works with neighbours but how would that work if Network Rail owned the tree? I'm not sure slinging the branches over a boundary fence back onto NR owned land would be a good idea.

My understanding is that is prevent issues such as an apple tree overgrowing and the neighbour deciding it's a good time to cut off the branch when it's got lots of apples on it or similar. However, normally cutting them off and throwing them over is more likely to cause conflict than disposing of them yourself!
 
Joined
9 Nov 2017
Messages
260
What's interesting from the photo is that there's a second fence between where the trees were and the railway line

image1JPG.jpg

That's a shocking job - stumps all uneven and timber just left where it fell.

Whilst I can't share the map itself, I've looked and, from what I can see, the NR boundary extends right up to the rear of the gardens. Are you sure that 2nd fence isn't actually on the other side of the cutting, closest to the camera?
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Perhaps they are all train spotters......

Judging by the photo either the houses are split in to flats or they probably have millionaires living in them. If their flats I wouldn't be surprised if some people have no knowledge of what would happen until it happened.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
That's a shocking job - stumps all uneven and timber just left where it fell.

Whilst I can't share the map itself, I've looked and, from what I can see, the NR boundary extends right up to the rear of the gardens. Are you sure that 2nd fence isn't actually on the other side of the cutting, closest to the camera?

I don't know why there's a second fence but it seems everything between the track and the second fence is untouched.

Surprisingly in conservation areas it's common place for stumps to be left and for sections of trees to be left to rot when trees are cut down. Near me that's happened in Tatton Park apparently because it creates homes for certain types of insects.
 

Deafdoggie

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2016
Messages
3,035
It depends what you pay for too. If you want them to take the stumps right down and clear away the debris they will...but at a price.
 

B&I

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
2,484
If it can be proved that the householders instructed someone to go onto someone else's land, and inflict damage to it by cutting down trees on it, I think they'd be liable in a civil action for trespass. As the losses caused to NR would potentially include the cost of remedial action to stabilise the embankement, the householders in question may be looking at value-of-house level damages. I really hope, for their sakes, that they had a better reason for doing this than improving the view and adding a few quid to their house price.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,267
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
I really hope, for their sakes, that they had a better reason for doing this than improving the view and adding a few quid to their house price.

Can you be more precise than just stating "a few quid" that I have emboldened in the extract from your posting shown above....How much would this "few quid" be in reality in the area in question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top