A Mount Maunganui community's differences of opinion over the fate of an Ocean Beach Road Pohutukawa tree will go before a council committee today.
The beachside residents are torn on whether to remove the large roadside tree to prevent further root damage to water mains and the footpath or leave the large 50-60-year-old landmark tree.
The decision to remove the Ocean Beach Road Pohutukawa tree will be debated in a council committee meeting today.
Problems with the tree were brought to Tauranga City Council's attention in May when the neighbouring property owner found the tree's roots had damaged a water supply pipe creating problems with the property's water meter.
The roots were cut back and the pipe repaired, but it was decided the tree would be cut down to allow more root pruning for permanent repair.
The tree's roots have also found to have damaged the Ocean Beach Road footpath and the property owner claims the tree is also damaging the boundary wall, which will involve more root pruning.
When neighbours within 100 metres of the tree were informed of the decision Tauranga City Council arborist Richard Conning received four phone calls about the tree.
He says two were for the removal and two were against, and one changed their mind once they heard the reasons behind the removal.
One dissatisfied caller took the issue to Mount Maunganui councillors David Stewart and Wayne Moultrie in an effort to save the tree.
When the property owner learned the removal of the tree was going before the Strategy and Policy Committee he began soliciting neighbourhood support to have it removed – as did the tree's supporters.
Ocean Beach resident Graeme Horsley is campaigning to keep the Pohutakawa and has so far found an additional 17 residents who are also in favour, while the affected property owner has three wanting it cut down.
Graeme's challenging the assertion that felling the tree is in line with council policy.
'To say the removal of this Pohutukawa is consistent with the Vegetation and Tree Management Policy is clearly wrong,” says Graeme.
The tree is not a threat to public health or safety; individual health or safety; public or private property and is not diseased or dying. It is in fact an excellent example of a native Pohutukawa, says Graeme.
He says alternative solutions are available that do not involving cutting the tree down, which is a prominent landmark.
'This is a significant Pohutukawa, a native tree that has been growing here for longer than any of the houses which surround it. In most areas where Pohutukawa grow it would be protected and would enjoy the highest priority for conservation.”
Graeme says consideration for the tree should have been taken into account when the footpath was first laid on that side of the street two years ago.
The new footpath is concrete except around the Pohutukawa where the contractors recognised the root issues and changed the seal to asphalt paving, says Graeme.
It was a short sighted mistake and a wooden bridge should have been built over the tree's roots at the time, says Graeme.
The issue will be debated in council this afternoon.
19 comments
NOT A SAFTEY HAZARD?
Posted on 11-09-2012 12:57 | By YOGI
Ok the roots of the tree are being cut (then there is the foot path and retaining walls are affected) so what part of "no risk to the public" is Graeme taling about? Less roots on a tree would appear to be "important" when it comes to the tree staying upright ... or did I miss something here? Perhaps the "missing" something is only important if you are under it like the adjacent property owner
TREE LOVERS AND HUGGERS
Posted on 11-09-2012 13:05 | By YOGI
Why not just take it home Graeme, then perhaps in 10 or 20 years you will maybe figure out what the problem is here. PS you organise, pay for it and take it away.
Solution
Posted on 11-09-2012 13:20 | By the kurgan
Cut down all the ugly man made abominations and plant more trees, then mankind can start getting back to his pristine "roots" living in harmony with the natural world. Boo hoo for your poor little water pipe and precious footpath. Mankind was meant to live in harmony with nature, not against it like he does by covering up the precious life giving ground with toxic concrete and tar, so he can build ugly monstrosities to live and work in. get out in your bare feet and Hug the Earth.
DESTRUCTION
Posted on 11-09-2012 13:41 | By PLONKER
The tree is nice of course, but to be realistic the tree is going to keep on growing and the problems will only get worse. Better to plant these huge trees in a sensible place where there is plenty of room for them to expand to there full potential.
Rubbish
Posted on 11-09-2012 13:58 | By Jitter
What an absolute load of **** Graeme Horsley is talking. Because it is not affecting him personally he obviously does not give a stuff re the effect the tree is having on the other resident. I would be bloody upset if a tree on council ground had caused and was still causing damage to my property. there are still plenty of Pohutukawa trees in that area so nobody will miss one if it is removed.
GRAEME
Posted on 11-09-2012 15:06 | By PLONKER
Is that the same leeching type blood sucker that rail roaded the Council into yet another year of $870,000 for the Art Gallery, surely not, has he not had a feed enough from the public coffers for more than a lifetime? If so then this bloke needs a sharp shift sideways and over the hill if not already ...
Get rid of the dam thing
Posted on 11-09-2012 15:56 | By Butch
They are a bloody weed anyway!!!, why Councils insist on planting these trees is beyond me, as there are far better native options, that can grow on a sand belt, and they are protected, no worries though soon we will not have any water to feed them, and they will die anyway.
Posted on 11-09-2012 18:26 | By pomarie
Totally agree with you Kurgan, it's about time man included his environment in all things.
Not effecting neighbours - Go Destruction
Posted on 11-09-2012 18:51 | By Sandyshirl
Yes neighbours - say to keep it. It doesn't effect you. It needs to definitey come down.
and yet
Posted on 11-09-2012 20:22 | By traceybjammet
i like the trees but obviously there are associated problems but the council keep planting them along the same street Cannot we try planters or alternate local trees suggestions welcome
?
Posted on 12-09-2012 08:12 | By Capt_Kaveman
footpath is nothing / run a new water line elsewhere / dont let idiots build walls near the tree / when people buy a property im sure they see the tree there or council could uproot it and place it on the main beach
I love trees BUT
Posted on 12-09-2012 09:42 | By mattldo
That is often the opening line for those that would have us living in a desert like city. People lean on the argument that "the tree affects me so you dont have the right to comment" Sorry folks the tree is part of our city environment. Everyone that passes down the street whether they notice it or not is affected by that landscape. Yet there is a solution. Recognition it is the way the structures are built that opens them up to a problem and a bit of imagination and vision from city planners and building designers
YEAH IT IS A GUNNA GO
Posted on 12-09-2012 12:46 | By PLONKER
Better decisions could have been made years ago, the same decisions sadly are still being made today e.g. in the CBD where a tree is cut down for being to big, TCC then recommends potentially an even bigger species to replace it, like this is certainly planning for failure, like we have never seen that before from TCC!
CLEAR PROBLEM
Posted on 12-09-2012 22:50 | By YOGI
It is obvious even to a novice tree hugger that it has got to go, why the debate about it ?
YEAH
Posted on 13-09-2012 19:49 | By YOGI
The tree is a gunna go!
OBVIOUS DECISION
Posted on 14-09-2012 11:16 | By TERMITE
Why take so long about it.
34 minutes wasted!
Posted on 18-09-2012 12:25 | By YOGI
The meeting should have only taken one minute not 35, waste of time and effort there.
MUCH BETTER
Posted on 19-09-2012 10:31 | By PLONKER
That it is going, I hope soon, don't know why there is such a fuss about these things, if the infrastructure is being damaged and more than remove it, next time plant it in a better place.
GONE
Posted on 21-09-2012 16:39 | By TERMITE
I like that idea, best hurry before a tree hugger gets to it first ....
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.