Don't Cut Orchard Park Trees — plant new ones.
Don't Cut Orchard Park Trees — plant new ones.
The Issue
Don't Cut Orchard Park Trees. Plant more. A campaign by Orchard Park residents — Graham Road, Cambridge
The Facts: What the Tree Surgeon's Report Actually Says
Seven mature Robinia trees on the eastern side of Graham Road, from the junction with Topper Street, are scheduled for removal by Cambridgeshire County Council. The council's own arboricultural report recommends it — citing root damage to the footway as a safety liability under the Highways Act 1980. Others may be identified on Topper Street and Circus Drive.
According to the report, the proposed footway reconstruction works require extensive root pruning to reset tree pit frames and remove root material beneath the pavement. The arborist concluded that the extent of root severance required would:
- Remove significant structural and physiological roots
- Severely compromise tree health
- Result in a high likelihood of tree decline and mortality within two to three years
- Increase the potential for instability and windthrow during storm events
- Create an unacceptable future risk to highway users and adjacent properties
The report cites both the Highways Act 1980 and the Environment Act 2021. It acknowledges that the Environment Act recognises the importance of retaining street trees wherever reasonably practicable — but argues that in this case, removal is a "justified and proportionate intervention". Estimated cost of removal: £2,000–£3,000.
We get it. The roots are lifting the pavement. There is a real problem here. But the question is: why are we solving it by removing trees, rather than by designing streets that can accommodate them? Couldnt the current larger pits be extended and covered with grass and meadow flowers, leave trees flowrish.
The Double Standard: The South Cambridgeshire District Council Can Cut Our Trees, But Won't Plant Them
Residents on Topper Street asked — repeatedly — for trees to be planted following the completion of Marmalade Lane and the L2 development. The council's answer was silence. No trees. No response. No plan.
And here is the kicker: Cambridgeshire County Council's own Tree for Street scheme — the programme that allows communities to request new street trees — does not apply here. Orchard Park's trees, in South Cambridgeshire, fall outside that framework.
One rule for taking. Another for giving.
There Is a Better Way: Rain Gardens, New Trees, Not Removal
Cutting seven mature trees and replacing them with saplings is a sticking plaster on a structural wound. Orchard Park's streets are dominated by concrete and tarmac with many streets having partial tree planting. We already live with heat, flooding risk, and poor drainage. These trees provide canopy cover, biodiversity, and community character that took decades to grow.
What if, instead of removing and replacing, the council planted all requested and missing trees and invested in rain gardens — sustainable urban drainage features that work with root systems, reduce surface water runoff, and genuinely transform the streetscape? Rain gardens:
- Absorb and filter stormwater, reducing flood risk
- Provide additional planting space compatible with existing root zones
- Contribute to biodiversity and urban cooling
- Are being adopted in urban neighbourhoods across the UK as standard good practice
Yes, it costs more upfront. Yes, it requires joined-up thinking. But it is precisely the kind of proactive, long-term investment that Orchard Park has been denied — while other Cambridge neighbourhoods receive it as standard.
The Bigger Picture: Orchard Park Deserves Better Than Reactive Maintenance
This is not just about seven trees. It is about a pattern: Orchard Park only gets attention from the council when something becomes a legal risk to them — not when residents raise requests, not when we ask for improvements, not when we propose a greener and more liveable neighbourhood.
South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridgeshire County Council must:
- Respond properly to the requests from Topper Street residents for tree planting following the latest developments on Graham Road and Topper Street
- Clarify why the Tree for Street scheme does not apply to our neighbourhood — and offer an equivalent for this urban part of South Cambrigeshire
- Explore rain garden infrastructure as an alternative to tree removal on Graham Road
- Commit to a proactive green infrastructure plan for Orchard Park — not just crisis management when trees become a liability
Save our trees. And demand the investment Orchard Park deserves.
Sign the petition. Share this document. Contact your councillor.
This document was produced by Orchard Park residents. It draws on the official arboricultural report commissioned by Cambridgeshire County Council (Graham Road, Orchard Park – Highway Tree Inspection Report, 2026).

164
The Issue
Don't Cut Orchard Park Trees. Plant more. A campaign by Orchard Park residents — Graham Road, Cambridge
The Facts: What the Tree Surgeon's Report Actually Says
Seven mature Robinia trees on the eastern side of Graham Road, from the junction with Topper Street, are scheduled for removal by Cambridgeshire County Council. The council's own arboricultural report recommends it — citing root damage to the footway as a safety liability under the Highways Act 1980. Others may be identified on Topper Street and Circus Drive.
According to the report, the proposed footway reconstruction works require extensive root pruning to reset tree pit frames and remove root material beneath the pavement. The arborist concluded that the extent of root severance required would:
- Remove significant structural and physiological roots
- Severely compromise tree health
- Result in a high likelihood of tree decline and mortality within two to three years
- Increase the potential for instability and windthrow during storm events
- Create an unacceptable future risk to highway users and adjacent properties
The report cites both the Highways Act 1980 and the Environment Act 2021. It acknowledges that the Environment Act recognises the importance of retaining street trees wherever reasonably practicable — but argues that in this case, removal is a "justified and proportionate intervention". Estimated cost of removal: £2,000–£3,000.
We get it. The roots are lifting the pavement. There is a real problem here. But the question is: why are we solving it by removing trees, rather than by designing streets that can accommodate them? Couldnt the current larger pits be extended and covered with grass and meadow flowers, leave trees flowrish.
The Double Standard: The South Cambridgeshire District Council Can Cut Our Trees, But Won't Plant Them
Residents on Topper Street asked — repeatedly — for trees to be planted following the completion of Marmalade Lane and the L2 development. The council's answer was silence. No trees. No response. No plan.
And here is the kicker: Cambridgeshire County Council's own Tree for Street scheme — the programme that allows communities to request new street trees — does not apply here. Orchard Park's trees, in South Cambridgeshire, fall outside that framework.
One rule for taking. Another for giving.
There Is a Better Way: Rain Gardens, New Trees, Not Removal
Cutting seven mature trees and replacing them with saplings is a sticking plaster on a structural wound. Orchard Park's streets are dominated by concrete and tarmac with many streets having partial tree planting. We already live with heat, flooding risk, and poor drainage. These trees provide canopy cover, biodiversity, and community character that took decades to grow.
What if, instead of removing and replacing, the council planted all requested and missing trees and invested in rain gardens — sustainable urban drainage features that work with root systems, reduce surface water runoff, and genuinely transform the streetscape? Rain gardens:
- Absorb and filter stormwater, reducing flood risk
- Provide additional planting space compatible with existing root zones
- Contribute to biodiversity and urban cooling
- Are being adopted in urban neighbourhoods across the UK as standard good practice
Yes, it costs more upfront. Yes, it requires joined-up thinking. But it is precisely the kind of proactive, long-term investment that Orchard Park has been denied — while other Cambridge neighbourhoods receive it as standard.
The Bigger Picture: Orchard Park Deserves Better Than Reactive Maintenance
This is not just about seven trees. It is about a pattern: Orchard Park only gets attention from the council when something becomes a legal risk to them — not when residents raise requests, not when we ask for improvements, not when we propose a greener and more liveable neighbourhood.
South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridgeshire County Council must:
- Respond properly to the requests from Topper Street residents for tree planting following the latest developments on Graham Road and Topper Street
- Clarify why the Tree for Street scheme does not apply to our neighbourhood — and offer an equivalent for this urban part of South Cambrigeshire
- Explore rain garden infrastructure as an alternative to tree removal on Graham Road
- Commit to a proactive green infrastructure plan for Orchard Park — not just crisis management when trees become a liability
Save our trees. And demand the investment Orchard Park deserves.
Sign the petition. Share this document. Contact your councillor.
This document was produced by Orchard Park residents. It draws on the official arboricultural report commissioned by Cambridgeshire County Council (Graham Road, Orchard Park – Highway Tree Inspection Report, 2026).

Supporter Voices
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on 19 June 2026