Tree upkeep should rest with council

0
Have your say

RE: THE Irton Beech tree.

I agree that the protected tree in question looks lovely and I can therefore understand that some residents want to keep it. However, the tree is growing tight against another resident’s wall causing them concern.

Observe the mass of branches and foliage on it and consider that there is likely to be a similar amount of root growth commensurate with that which will be undermining the boundary wall and buildings and possibly causing damage to the foundations and any drainage or sewage pipes therein.

People who apply to have such trees protected only do so when they affect someone else’s property and never their own.

Preservation orders are passed without consulting private owners who are stuck with their decision.

Owners are sent a copy of the order with a sketch plan of the area including any other protected trees therein and once passed the owner is obliged to request permission from the council to even prune or lop branches from their own tree on their own property and they will tell you what you can or cannot do and you must employ a reputable tree surgeon at your own expense.

I firmly believe that the cost of any tree maintenance, eventual felling, or damage caused by the tree should therefore become the responsibility of the council.

They insist on controlling your tree so they should pay for it.

Charles Agar

(Who also has a preservation order)

The Grove, Seamer