... there's a very likely imminent threat to a number of established trees on the corner of the Pembury Estate (Dalston Lane) (opposite Pembury Tavern).

I am personally NOT OPPOSED to the contemporary build being proposed on that corner of the estate. I've lived on the estate nearly 16 years. I've lived in the neighbourhood nearly 19 years. I welcome a bit of shiney contemporariness in that spot. Plus there were previously homes on much of the proposed site. They were demolished just a couple of years back.

But at the 2 consultations I've attended so far there remains an attitude that the trees on the site are mostly disposable. They can always be "replaced with NEW ones" etc.

I do my best to say to some of them, including the architect, why plant new when the majority of the established ones are of great enough value to preserve and respect and design the build AROUND? Why not accomodate these beatiful living things.

Plus I point out that nearly 120 "noo trees" were planted around the estate just a few years back with (typically) no budget or thought given to the all important AFTER CARE new trees need in their first few years in the ground. And I've of course highlighted that at least 30% of those are now dead or dying. While there's a limit to how many of those poor neglected trees that us unwaged tenants can personally take responsibility for on the estate. I certainly do my best with the ones I have taken under my wing this past few years (and 99% of those are alive in their 3rd summer).

In the face to face consultations I've attended the people involved in the proposed new build are smokey around exactly how many established trees on the site are seen as being merely disposable.