DIY cut costs home-owner $19K RANDWICK

Eric Frei · 2nd February 2011, 07:55 PM

Sydney man fined for breaching tree preservation order

Quote:

February 2, 2011
IT WAS a DIY repair-job gone wrong that has now cost a Sydney man $19,000.

Peter Petrou, 43, was digging outside the house he shares with his parents and children in Randwick on July 31 last year, searching for a leaking pipe that was causing water to gush over his front steps and footpath, when he cut into what he described as a ''fat root'' belonging to an old native brush box tree.

Although the cut did not kill the tree, it had to be removed, the council said, for safety reasons. Mr Petrou was ordered to pay $19,000 by Waverley Local Court for breaching a tree preservation order, thought to be the largest penalty of its kind ever issued in the local government area.
Advertisement: Story continues below

''It's not like I was drilling holes in the night to get a view,'' said Mr Petrou, who used to climb the tree when he was a child.

''It was just a duty-of-care issue. There's kids that walk along that path, and my elderly parents use the front steps … I didn't think one root could kill a tree.''

The mayor of Randwick, Murray Matson, a Green, applauded the hardline stance taken by the court, which he said would make others think twice in the future about damaging public trees.

"The presiding judge on the case, Justice Milledge, described the actions of the person as disgraceful, and I entirely agree,'' he said in a statement. ''Trees not only beautify otherwise stark urban streets, but they offset carbon emissions, provide shade and attract native wildlife.''

The fine is believed to be the largest of its kind ever issued in the Randwick local government area, a council spokesman said.

Mr Petrou's solicitor, Tim Mitchell, said the punishment was a ''denial of natural justice''.

''There was no malicious intent whatsoever,'' he said.

A Randwick Labor councillor, Tony Bowen, said it would be preferable if the council could resolve these issues amicably and focus on educating residents instead.

''It's a lot of money,'' he said. ''It might be a better approach to have them replace the tree and receive some sort of modest fine.''

Jeff Darby · 2nd February 2011, 08:37 PM

I think better education for the residents to properly understand the value of the roots to a tree from a stability point of view. Obviously the root that this resident severed the " Fat Root " was a main anchoring root and its removal along with the amount of water from the broken water pipe seriously underminded the tree to the point it had to be removed.

Quote:

''It's a lot of money,'' he said. ''It might be a better approach to have them replace the tree and receive some sort of modest fine.''

I feel a better option for cases where no intent to harm the tree is evident is to give them choice of replanting a suitable sized replacement and also be responsible for its maintenance until it reaches a similier size to the tree they through their ignorance caused the trees demise.

Apocalypsse · 3rd February 2011, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayD

I feel a better option for cases where no intent to harm the tree is evident is to give them choice of replanting a suitable sized replacement and also be responsible for its maintenance until it reaches a similier size to the tree they through their ignorance caused the trees demise.

I like the fine but I also like that idea. Councils provide minimal education to residents and 99% of residents don't care or only believe what they were taught decades ago by their grandparents. Being forced to maintain a new tree would be great. Simply pleading ignorance and this "I didn't think" crap just doesn't cut it, information is readily accessible these days by anyone, anywhere.

jmcg.insight.gardens · 3rd February 2011, 09:05 PM

When you think about it, some people might have enough money to easily cover a fine like that, might even think it was worth it, if it improved their veiw enough, like, if it added substantial dollars to the value of their home.

I like the second option, but how would it be checked if they are doing what they are meant to over the long term. I believe that just has been done to a serial offender on the Central Coast, I seem to recall a newspaper article on a guy that kept removing reserve trees to improve his waterfront veiw, so they were making him maintain the last replacement planting.

3rd February 2011, 09:05 PM	#4
jmcg.insight.gardens Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Mannering Park, Australia Posts: 623	Re: DIY cut costs home-owner $19K RANDWICK When you think about it, some people might have enough money to easily cover a fine like that, might even think it was worth it, if it improved their veiw enough, like, if it added substantial dollars to the value of their home. I like the second option, but how would it be checked if they are doing what they are meant to over the long term. I believe that just has been done to a serial offender on the Central Coast, I seem to recall a newspaper article on a guy that kept removing reserve trees to improve his waterfront veiw, so they were making him maintain the last replacement planting.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Home-owner removals	Eric Frei	General Tree Chat	44	4th July 2011 07:28 AM
Tree cutting home owner injuries	Garry Brockley	Tree Industry injuries, accidents and fatalities	2	5th May 2010 12:41 AM
Home-owner poisons own tree and caught but how?	Eric Frei	General Tree Chat	4	29th June 2008 01:37 PM
Home owner felling gone wrong!!	treerat	Picture Forum	12	23rd June 2008 07:34 PM
Home-owner removal goes wrong	Eric Frei	The Video Forum	19	5th September 2007 06:16 PM