Dead Tree Removal - Council Insists on 3:1 Replacement Planting, Any Way I Can Get Exemption

AT1013 on 02/08/2023 - 15:04

Hi all,

Just looking to see if anyone got any suggestion on dealing with council.

There's a dead tree at the front of the property which is located in the City of Kingston - VIC. It has been certified by the council's arborist that it's dead, and a permit has been issued for the removal. However the condition is that there must be a 3 to 1 ratio replacement planting, meaning for every 1 tree removed, 3 replacement trees must be planted.

I found that a bit unreasonable as my primary concern is the safety risk the dead tree poses to the surrounding area. There are two large trees around it so it's not like I'm trying to get rid of all the trees so I can develop.

In response, I've requested an exemption from the 3 to 1 ratio replacement planting or an alternative solution from the council that can address the hazard without such strict replacement conditions. Unfortunately, the council's response stated that an exemption cannot be granted and didn't offer any alternative options.

Just to be clear, I did not poison the tree; it died for some unknown reason in the past year. Two other large trees within a 5-meter radius of the dead tree remain in perfect condition.

Any advice on how to persuade the council to grant exemption of the replacement planting? I've suggested pruning the tree to make it less hazardous but that would mean that I have to prune it every year until it decays by itself. I would be okay if it's 1 to 1 ratio, but somehow this council is very insistent on 3 to 1 ratio.

I've mentioned that I'm trying to minimize the legal liability in the the letter to request exemption should the tree fall one day during a storm or on a windy day and causes harm to people or property damage, but the council seems to not wanting to budge on this matter. Is there a way to ensure that I protect myself from future legal liability, if the council refuses to grant exemption of 3 to 1 ratio replacement planting and I just leave the tree to decay on itself own. (Putting the legal liability on the council that they wouldn't provide a reasonable solution, from my point of view anyway, to remove the dead tree).

Thanks in advance

Home & Garden

Comments

  • USER DC on 02/08/2023 - 22:23
    +2

    This is exactly the brains of modern councils LoL

    Spend $millions on overseas trip to see Airports.
    Jack up the rates for everyone
    Chuck wheelie council bins in trash too (so they get missing for public)
    Make new/amending current housing plan changes difficult etc so much
    Care for dead trees,

    Next let me guess what is coming up for you next OP, pay to arrange a $10K funeral for the dead tree.

  • trustnoone on 03/08/2023 - 00:43
    +1

    Whats the fine for not planting the three trees?

    • Protractor on 03/08/2023 - 09:58
      +2

      Fine is a penalty, in kind.
      Plant 10 trees for every failed plating

      • trustnoone on 03/08/2023 - 10:17

        And whats the fine for not planting those 10 trees :O

        • Protractor on 03/08/2023 - 10:27
          +1

          (start singing ten green bottles backwards)

  • Waltervp on 03/08/2023 - 09:01

    I just dont see the problem. How much to remove the tree $1500? versus planting three new ones $250?, just plant three trees and go wow that was a bit silly. And when one of the other trees dies then maybe one of those three will be good to have!

  • 2esc on 03/08/2023 - 09:59

    What is the visibility issues coming out of your driveway? Often a small tree is more likely to obcure visibility until its lower limbs are above vehicle height. If its a standard width house block 3 trees might be excessive.

    Councils forget the environmental impact of pruning works, harder for street sweepers to clean the curb, tree roots getting into storm water, power line maintenance cost etc. We have thousands of kilometres of unused road easements around this country without a single tree yet people want to put trees where we done need huge numbers.

    Right now I'm parked beside a unused easement that is approximately 3 kilometres long maybe 50 meters wide that's got maybe 5 trees. But no let's go plant trees beside roads so it cost us money in maintenance, risk of fire from power lines, roadkill deaths because we don't see animals to last second.

    • ssfps on 04/08/2023 - 02:00

      Hit the nail on the head, it's all about appearing affluent and desirable. I've done tree plantings where barren lands are repopulated, and there are plenty of barren lands to go, but instead of funding that they're all-in on micromanaging peoples verge to all our detriment.

    • Subada on 04/08/2023 - 11:51

      What value to the community would an extra 100 trees provide on that easement?

      Those trees wouldn't shade the footpath or road, essential to encouraging active transport. They wouldn't reduce the urban heat island effect since you've still got kilometres of bare concrete and asphalt. They wouldn't beautify the areas that people actually live in. Studies show spending time in green spaces has a positive impact on mental health. Anyway why shouldn't our streets and public spaces be beautiful?

      The safety argument isn't cut and dry either. The more open a road is visually, the faster people drive and the less safe the road becomes especially for pedestrians and cyclists. Drivers may feel safer on a 4 lane road with a 5m clear zone on either side but that's to the detriment of everyone else who would like to exist outside a car.

      Urban / residential areas need to be 30km/h. Above that speed the risk of death to pedestrians in a crash goes up exponentially. What kind of environment encourages a 30km/h speed? A complex, tree lined boulevard or a bare road with massive clear zones in either side?

  • YesPleaseThankYou on 03/08/2023 - 11:18
    +4

    The planet is dying. We need trees. Plant the trees.

  • Sensiekatie on 03/08/2023 - 13:58
    +2

    We had to fight to get 2 trees considered noxious weeds by our council removed. They initially flat out refused. The particular tree is known to fall over in wind, storms or torrential rain. It had raised and cracked our paths and driveway as well as the kerb. It had already burst a water main nearby. They were prepared to allow us to file an insurance claim to fix the driveway and paths. They put in a request to replace kerbing.

    I contacted our councillor. I referred to the legal liability should it fall. I then talked about economics: how it would be cheaper to remove the trees now rather than have the tree roots continue to cause mayhem and damage for years to come which they would be liable to.replace. I also mentioned that as well as the water main which had already cost the water company a day to fix on a Sunday, we had a fire hydrant and the telecommunication box for the whole street all with a metre or so of one of these trees. Therefore, I said I had no objection to the trees being replaced but not on our footpath due to these vital things being on this section of the footpath.

    The councillor had a meeting with the appropriate people on our footpath first thing the next morning before we were even up for work. I got a call to say they were being removed. It took a while for them to go but they did go. Quite a while later they planted several small trees in the street without asking anyone. None at our place thankfully.

    Instead of dealing with the bureaucracy of council employees, try dealing with a councillor. Invite them to come to see the property. If canopy coverage is their thing, see how much your property already offers without that tree. For me, it was cost benefit analysis that won them over. For you, it will need to be in terms of their agenda.

  • Tomstars241 on 03/08/2023 - 14:09

    I’ve got a property in Kingston and yes they are crazy about their overlay

  • BeamMeUp on 03/08/2023 - 15:14
    +3

    There are many new residents moving into areas who don't know or don’t want to garden. We are all busy, learn to.
    Many houses are getting bulldozed, block foliage clear felled, and boundary to boundary energy hungry mega boxes built. We all have a responsibility for the lungs of the planet. Pull out the dead tree and plant 3 new ones.
    Dob in the neighbour for illegally removed the trees and also because the yeller would be frigging annoying.

  • cfuse on 03/08/2023 - 15:18
    +1

    If you plant in the ground inside a net barrier (flyscreen, for example) that will prevent the plant from growing beyond the size supported by the stunted root mass. Basically the same principle as bonsai.

    • YesPleaseThankYou on 03/08/2023 - 16:58
      -3

      Are you suggesting that means be taken to contravene or impede the intent of the Council requirement?

    • idonotknowwhy on 04/08/2023 - 09:29

      If you plant in the ground inside a net barrier (flyscreen, for example)

      Just to make sure I understand, does this mean you just wrap the roots / part of the tree which is burred, in fly screen/netting?
      I've seen tree roots push through and crack concrete on the footpath, wouldn't they just do the same thing to the flyscreen?

      • cfuse on 04/08/2023 - 14:22

        The principle is to choke out the roots before they get big enough to compromise the barrier. The tip of the root is tiny but the girth is what does the damage. You stop the tip from advancing and the roots don't have the leverage to cause damage (and this principle is also what kills pot plants if you don't repot them. The roots hit the pot and turn back on themselves and eventually choke. Roots that loop effectively guarantee a plant an early death).

        This won't work on every species because some have incredibly invasive habits. Not every plant species is the same, some of them will happily compromise whatever containment you provide if there's so much as a single millimetre gap anywhere.

        A tree is always going to want to be a tree. Forcibly dwarfing a tree requires effort and maintenance. This is not a 'nice' thing to do to a plant and it will compromise its longevity and health as a result.

  • mrvaluepack on 03/08/2023 - 20:06
    +1

    How will the "tree planting" be enforced? I bet you the council wont even bother to check.

    • ssfps on 04/08/2023 - 02:02

      Some councils fly drones around these days, they can also use automated drone/satellite image comparisons to monitor and flag changes to canopy, structures, etc.

      • mrvaluepack on 04/08/2023 - 04:47

        Yes thats mainly for infrastructure inspections. But for 3 small newly planted tree plants? Come on…

  • SolitaryMan on 04/08/2023 - 00:25

    Council perhaps would prefer tree dies, falls on someone and kills them, then they can make a coffin out of the tree.

  • Thaal Sinestro on 04/08/2023 - 05:52
    -1

    I am a tree lover and hate when vibrant trees are cut down for no valid reason. Sometimes when people move into a home in a leafy suburb, they murder all the trees in their yard, which infuriates me; if you hate flora, live in an apartment in the CBD.

    However, in your case, I have no problem with a dead/dying/decaying tree being felled as long as it is replaced with a tree that will eventual reach a decent height. If the council was at all reasonabe, they would permit a 1:1 replacement. However, bureaucrats are incredibly inflexible and insist on adhering to the rules.

    You explained the situation very well.

  • Davo1111 on 04/08/2023 - 07:35

    Let it die and fall

  • Cheap Gamer on 04/08/2023 - 07:48

    Don't worry, they'll never check. It's an honour system.

  • idonotknowwhy on 04/08/2023 - 09:31

    that would mean that I have to prune it every year until it decays by itself

    If it's dead, why do you need to prune it every year? It's not like it'll grow back.

  • newjerseydamo on 04/08/2023 - 10:56

    Ah good old Kingston council. Been a resident here for 6 years.
    I've had to fight the council about the tree on the nature strip (so council land) because it was encroaching on my land with big long branches at quite a height.
    We get a lot of wind here and the risk of branches falling and damaging fencing etc. is real. The council inspected the tree and said it was fine. I had to take photos from the footpath showing the encroaching branches and fight them to trim it.

    Their priorities for things and their rules aren't the most logical.

  • subroc on 04/08/2023 - 12:45
    -1

    Wait, you need to check before you can remove a tree on your own property? Even in your own backyard? Err whoops….

  • SkMed on 04/08/2023 - 14:02

    I have a small unit in melbourne with a tiny 2x6m courtyard. When I bought the unit there was a large 16m mountain ash growing against the wall of the unit. Had to get a permit from council to remove it with an arborist report. My permit said I needed to replace the tree like for like. I.e. A tree which would grow to the same size (18+m) and 2m at time of planting etc.

    I managed to talk them down to three small trees. Became clear even that wasn't possible in such a small space… I planted a banksia in the common area and a banksia in my courtyard and just didn't bother with the third.

    Its now about 2 years on. The one in my courtyard has died, and Council haven't checked in since. I'm planning to replace the dead tree, but no idea what kind of tree to try next which might be more tolerant to the small space, lack of sunlight and poor soil.

    • annyfication on 04/08/2023 - 15:29
      +1

      poor soil can easily be rectified. google says mandarin trees are shade tolerant: https://www.blericktreefarm.com.au/product-category/browse-b…
      speak to a nursery for more options

      • SkMed on 06/08/2023 - 22:15

        Tha ks, yeah I tried several nursery's, all of them said they don't recommend putting a tree in such a small space :/

        I was looking for something native ideally, and needs to be evergreen to prevent blocking a drain beneath it which is the drainage for the entire unit block, it also needs to be able to be pruned heavily so I can walk underneath it still once established and is contained in a cortan steel ring. Lots of variables to consider.

  • annyfication on 04/08/2023 - 15:25

    it's honestly not worth your sanity to fight them for it. just plant 3 trees, count your loses and move on with your life.
    yes, it definitely sucks but do you rather spend your mental energy to fight them?

  • newbo on 04/08/2023 - 15:49

    Can you plant all three trees together so they grow into each other to make 1 mega tree?

  • [Deactivated] on 04/08/2023 - 17:18

    Once you've annoyed the council they aren't going to give you exemptions, end of story.

  • iand on 04/08/2023 - 18:04

    plant the new trees remove the old one and remember don't say anything to the council and if the new ones die in a year or 2 just leave them where they are a dead two year old tree is unlikely to be much of a hazard

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join