HOLROYD Council - HolyCow - How Hopeless!

Eric Frei · 19th March 2011, 07:37 PM

In this article skip the typical garbage about pruning around service wires and go about half way down to THE PACE CASE.

I have uploaded the PDF on the council's website which shows the umbrella tree as exempt from protection (P3 Section 8.0).

Check out how the council badgers this bloke, utter tossers!

Quote:

17 Mar, 2011 04:00 AM
Environmental vandalism is what Girraween resident Ron Killingley has branded tree-cutting around power lines in his street.

For more than 30 years Mansfield Street resident Ron Killingley has seen contractors come and prune his trees many times but never like this.

"To my mind they've been attacked and mutilated," he said.

"I fully appreciate Integral has the right and responsibility to keep our powerlines clear for safety reasons but there's been no attempt whatsoever to shape the trees and now many trees throughout Girraween are little more than stumps."

Mr Killingley was most furious that trees within his neighbours' properties, not just on the nature strip, had been "attacked".

"If my neighbour had gone and cut that themselves they'd be taken to court by the council in a flash and so they should be," he said.

Several Mansfield Street residents had tried to contact Endeavour Energy (formerly Integral) about the pruning but had been ignored.

After The Sun contacted Endeavour Energy a spokesman said its contractors were trained by fully-qualified arborists who were taught according to the Australian standard for the pruning of amenity trees.

"There's a street lighting conductor mounted at the lowest point on the power poles in Mansfield Street which requires a minimum two-metre safety clearance," the spokesman said.

"When dealing with live electricity, safety has to be your first priority."

Mr Killingley said that these particular trees looked like they had been cut much more than the required two metres from the wire.

THE PACE CASE

HOLROYD Council has been unable to prevent energy companies from hacking at trees but has come down hard on residents who do so.

The Sun has received letters that Greystanes resident Joe Pace believes shows council hypocrisy and substandard customer service.

¦ THE ACT:

Last year Joe Pace cut down an umbrella tree on his property.

Before he removed the tree he checked the tree policy on the council’s website.

The Tree Management Order states the schefflera actinophylla (umbrella tree) is on a list of species exempted from protection because of their weed potential and undesirable nature.

¦ THE FIRST LETTER:

A short time later Mr Pace received a letter from the council demanding he contact them within seven days to explain why he cut down a tree without their permission.

The letter threatened legal action if Mr Pace did not reply. He immediately sent two emails from separate accounts. He received a read receipt back from the emails proving they were at least opened by someone at Holroyd Council.

He also called the Environmental and Planning Services Department and left a message on their answering machine.

¦ THE SECOND LETTER:

Last month Mr Pace received a second letter dated February 14 from the council that reprimanded him and claimed he had failed to reply to their first letter.

The new letter demanded he plant a tree or face possible penalties of more than $1 million and legal action.

¦ THE FIGHT BACK

Mr Pace felt he should never have been reprimanded in the first place for cutting down a pest tree.

He returned fire with a letter of his own on February 8.

Mr Pace was disappointed the council was ‘‘threatening people with prosecution, massive fines and court action while mis-stating that this tree was protected under the council’s Tree Management Order when it isn’t’’.

He awaits council’s next response.

Apocalypsse · 19th March 2011, 08:53 PM

Ignoring the first half of the article. I don't know how to describe how badly council screwed up there. Maybe they wanted him to walk into a council office and have a good ole chat instead of using methods for the modern day person. Would like to see the letter he wrote back to council and whats happening from here on in. I can see some council employees getting slapped in the face with some rebar by the big wigs for this monumental screw up.

derwoodii · 19th March 2011, 09:57 PM

I'm dealing with a LG screw up, City had approved some road res removals of nuthin great. Then they find out they had breached new local area heritage controls even though they are the responsible authority so should'a known, they back pedal and leave the innocent owner with legal threats fines and grief by State Heritage dept, even though he was given permit by City and trees were clearly marked by City Arb for removal

Extract distilled from a 5 pages of tryn hide the facts letter to which I say, doth protest too much, methinks Hamlet, Act III, scene II

In November 2009, an approval under a local law was inadvertently granted by the Shire Council for the owner ---that the proposed landscaping was originally approved by Council but this approval has been withdrawn.-----At this stage Council is still to determine a formal position on this matter and further advice will be provided prior to the hearing following the Council meeting on the 15th March 2011

Dumb sods don't know how to just say sorry we screwed up so use words like "inadvertently" as does not say our fault. So they spend my rates for lawyers to find a hole to wriggle in to. I guess about $5000 in letters and legal brief so far spent & it twas a few Ti trees n weedy Pittos...

you stuffed it don't try n leave the grief with your customer.

Darrell Mcleod · 20th March 2011, 08:57 AM

I am dealing with five council tree / planning related issues right now and what I find is council officers can hide behind their positions within councils as a habit and not respond as we probably would in the real world

If they make a decision and are wrong what happens?

If say a developer has control of a site where someone makes a decision that is wrong and goes awry they can be and are fined if the ‘offence’ is deemed by council to be serious enough

Nothing though happens to the council officer in the same sense – are they prosecuted and fined if they are wrong?

Dunno if I am right about this but appears in some instances councils turn over their staff a bit meaning two years back it was done this way and now it is done this way and oh by the way so and so has left

There is hypocrisy out there as an example - school sites down here where local tree protection laws do not apply – what the eff? Why not?

Or in very inner Melbourne – beautiful leafy inner Melbourne as of last year as far as I understand no tree protection laws in place to protect a beautiful maturing English Elm although I had to protect it from neighbouring trenching where my client stood up and threatened a court injunction which unfairly cost him heaps

Same site a Tulip Tree which a consulting arborist said was one of the best examples in Melbourne was given the chop – no consistency there nor protection

Although this is a little too close to home right now – in my view an effed large tree the proposal developer wants chopped, the owner want chopped and the neighbours want chopped – the consulting arborist has said retain it – is that because the council wants to keep it and they do work for councils?

SShhheeeessshh - should I have said that?

I could go on ...........

As these projects conclude maybe I will discuss more

Eric Frei · 20th March 2011, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cruisin_long

school sites down here where local tree protection laws do not apply – what the eff? Why not?

I can help with this one.

If the land is owned by either State or Federal (and this is most state schools) then a lower local law doesn't apply.

Examples:-

Controversial pruning on protected trees Durack Primary School - QBuild

Mary Street Birkdale

Another example would be the RAAF or Army base here where they do whatever they want

Darrell Mcleod · 20th March 2011, 10:57 AM

Last time I checked AS 4970 was not referenced in the Building Code of Australia

If that is still so - that is a big hole

Apocalypsse · 20th March 2011, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cruisin_long

<snip>

I know how retarded some of the rules can be in the inner areas. On my old crew we took down a tree west side of Punt Rd in Sth Yarra, that was City of Melbourne which seems to be lacking in rules for trees. Then directly across the road is Stonington who are super strict.

Darrell Mcleod · 20th March 2011, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apocalypsse

On my old crew we took down a tree west side of Punt Rd in Sth Yarra

What sort of tree was it?

Apocalypsse · 20th March 2011, 01:20 PM

Peppercorn, 130 odd y/o.

19th March 2011, 08:53 PM	#2
Apocalypsse Veteran Heritage Status Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Victoria, Australia Posts: 1,152	Re: HOLROYD Council - HolyCow - How Hopeless! Ignoring the first half of the article. I don't know how to describe how badly council screwed up there. Maybe they wanted him to walk into a council office and have a good ole chat instead of using methods for the modern day person. Would like to see the letter he wrote back to council and whats happening from here on in. I can see some council employees getting slapped in the face with some rebar by the big wigs for this monumental screw up.

19th March 2011, 09:57 PM	#3
derwoodii Mature tree Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Melbourne Posts: 406	Re: HOLROYD Council - HolyCow - How Hopeless! I'm dealing with a LG screw up, City had approved some road res removals of nuthin great. Then they find out they had breached new local area heritage controls even though they are the responsible authority so should'a known, they back pedal and leave the innocent owner with legal threats fines and grief by State Heritage dept, even though he was given permit by City and trees were clearly marked by City Arb for removal Extract distilled from a 5 pages of tryn hide the facts letter to which I say, doth protest too much, methinks Hamlet, Act III, scene II In November 2009, an approval under a local law was inadvertently granted by the Shire Council for the owner ---that the proposed landscaping was originally approved by Council but this approval has been withdrawn.-----At this stage Council is still to determine a formal position on this matter and further advice will be provided prior to the hearing following the Council meeting on the 15th March 2011 Dumb sods don't know how to just say sorry we screwed up so use words like "inadvertently" as does not say our fault. So they spend my rates for lawyers to find a hole to wriggle in to. I guess about $5000 in letters and legal brief so far spent & it twas a few Ti trees n weedy Pittos... you stuffed it don't try n leave the grief with your customer.

20th March 2011, 08:57 AM	#4
Darrell Mcleod Mature tree Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Victoria Australia Posts: 242	Re: HOLROYD Council - HolyCow - How Hopeless! I am dealing with five council tree / planning related issues right now and what I find is council officers can hide behind their positions within councils as a habit and not respond as we probably would in the real world If they make a decision and are wrong what happens? If say a developer has control of a site where someone makes a decision that is wrong and goes awry they can be and are fined if the ‘offence’ is deemed by council to be serious enough Nothing though happens to the council officer in the same sense – are they prosecuted and fined if they are wrong? Dunno if I am right about this but appears in some instances councils turn over their staff a bit meaning two years back it was done this way and now it is done this way and oh by the way so and so has left There is hypocrisy out there as an example - school sites down here where local tree protection laws do not apply – what the eff? Why not? Or in very inner Melbourne – beautiful leafy inner Melbourne as of last year as far as I understand no tree protection laws in place to protect a beautiful maturing English Elm although I had to protect it from neighbouring trenching where my client stood up and threatened a court injunction which unfairly cost him heaps Same site a Tulip Tree which a consulting arborist said was one of the best examples in Melbourne was given the chop – no consistency there nor protection Although this is a little too close to home right now – in my view an effed large tree the proposal developer wants chopped, the owner want chopped and the neighbours want chopped – the consulting arborist has said retain it – is that because the council wants to keep it and they do work for councils? SShhheeeessshh - should I have said that? I could go on ........... As these projects conclude maybe I will discuss more

20th March 2011, 10:57 AM	#6
Darrell Mcleod Mature tree Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Victoria Australia Posts: 242	Re: HOLROYD Council - HolyCow - How Hopeless! Last time I checked AS 4970 was not referenced in the Building Code of Australia If that is still so - that is a big hole

20th March 2011, 01:20 PM	#9
Apocalypsse Veteran Heritage Status Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Victoria, Australia Posts: 1,152	Re: HOLROYD Council - HolyCow - How Hopeless! Peppercorn, 130 odd y/o.

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
any aus workers had council troubles?	imagineero	Local law regs, start thread with County then State then Country	23	20th January 2012 08:51 PM
Brisbane City Council's $6K RIP OFF!	Eric Frei	General Tree Chat	12	16th May 2010 04:19 PM
Do you agree with Council decision?	James Taylor	General Tree Chat	6	28th May 2009 11:36 PM
Some more UK council trimming madness	Eric Frei	General Tree Chat	8	23rd April 2009 12:49 AM
Brisbane City Council	Eric Frei	Local law regs, start thread with County then State then Country	7	20th September 2008 11:12 PM