Protected Tree Removal

[Brent George]

Owner of $16.5m Auckland Mansion Fined $52k for Chopping Protected Pōhutukawa

Stuff - Environment:23-Nov-2022

An Auckland man has been fined $52,500 for having a protected pōhutukawa tree removed from his beachfront property.

Cole Arnott​ had contractors chop down the tree at his property in Takapuna’s Park Ave in November 2020.

According to Auckland Council, Arnott’s property has a capital value of $16.5 million. It boasts views of Rangitoto Island and leads onto Takapuna Beach.

[Arguably the $52.5k fine will be less than the increase in value to the property generated by the newly created vista.  
... and will also likely be 'chump change' for a wealthy landowner...]

[Brent George]

Fight Over Enormous Protected Tree on Woman's Property Heads to Jury Trial
Stuff - National: 25-Nov-2022

A massive protected tree deemed so dangerous a house cannot be built nearby has led to a court case where its owner faces up to two years in prison.

Tracy Fleet owns a section in Ashburton that has a 23m-high Tilia tomentosa, or silver lime, that is protected under the local council’s district plan.

It takes up about 45% of the section.

She has been charged under the Resource Management Act with breaching the district plan by allegedly trying to destroy or remove the tree in 2020. She has pleaded not guilty and elected trial by jury for the charge, which is punishable by a $300,000 fine or up to two years in prison if she’s found guilty.

Wow.  The key take-aways from my reading of this report is:
- whilst Council has no liability they will box on with their application of an impractical view 
- landowner and all supporting submitters views are ignored even though they are an overwhelming majority
- the tree has an historical record of danger and problems
- a planner and 1 arborist views are supported by Council - multiple other arborists views are overlooked
- the tree has 5-10yrs life left (is this really worth the jury trial and court costs and possible fine (let alone the on-going tree works required to "maintain safety"
- the tree is not even a native
- in today's risk-averse world it is a wonder that Council are taking this tack