Council rethinking tree chop

Tauranga City Council will revisit their investigation into whether prosecution and a fine are likely to be issued to a 13th Avenue motelier who chopped down branches of a ‘notable tree'.

Last week 13th Avenue Redwood Motel manager Catherine Thompson was issued a police warrant to enter her Fraser Street property after it was found she had cut branches from a Camphor Laurel tree.


Margaret Buchanan, 79, and Catherine Thompson with the tree cuttings council are continuing to investigate.

Tauranga City Council say Catherine breached section 9 of the Resource Management Act and rule 6B of the Operative Tauranga City Plan by removing a branch from one of 399 ‘Notable Trees' in the city.

But following a meeting between council staff, councillor Murray Guy, and Catherine this week, council has agreed to revisit the incident.

Catherine says city arborists visited the motel and ascertain whether a breach of the RMA and Tauranga City Plan was reached, and if so whether a prosecution and a fine are still a possibility.

Last week Catherine told SunLive was not aware the tree was notable when she chopped off branches for fears it was endangering her family and business.

The branch was removed three weeks ago because it was banging against the house and had become tangled in the wires. The day after, on September 16, council officials arrived at the property.

The tree was made one of Tauranga City's 339 individually Notable Trees in 2001 – 10 years after Catherine's family purchased the motel.

Catherine says her family has not been treated respectfully by council in the past when presenting submissions to remove the tree and this is just another case of them flexing their muscles.

'They know I have taken full responsibility for my actions. The warrant is still hanging there and they have basically told us they have prosecuted in the past and brought up the guy prosecuted recently for $45,000 so that's just a little tweak,” says Catherine.

'They do not want to do it at this stage but they can if they want.”

Council have made their side extremely clear the cutting of the branch might be in breach of the law, but they also need address her side of the account, says Catherine.

'I personally believe every tree should be dealt with on a personal basis rather than a blanket approach.”

Murray, acting as a mediator in the process, believes the incident highlights a deteriorating relationship between council and property owners throughout the city.

'What this issue has identified is there are some real big gaps in our processes and a real big gap in our ability to manage our relationship with our community; that's where the buck ends,” says Murray.

'The property owners and the department manager weren't aware of the process open to residents in that situation; can council ring council, can they ring Arbor Care 24 hours a day? We understand there is a 24/7 Arbor Care type of response but the owners of protected trees haven't been made aware of that.

'We need to make sure for the owners they are provided with all the rules and options in the event of an emergency.”

9 comments

,

Posted on 04-10-2013 12:42 | By whatsinaname

what would of happened if this branch had broken off


Nonsense

Posted on 04-10-2013 13:31 | By Poseidon

Come on TCC time to stop the harassment and nonsense. Catherine did the right thing protecting her family and property, any further action by council staff or governance is harassment plain and simple. There is nothing to be gained by a fine or any sort of legal action. TCC Please note: stop wasting our money with this sort of nonsense.


Thinking and rethinking?

Posted on 04-10-2013 14:28 | By The Master

Thinking is whathas cause the current problem, "rethinking" is nto likely to craete anything a lot better from the same corner.


TCC has 1 foward gear and 4 reverse

Posted on 04-10-2013 15:09 | By Openknee8ted

How many times do we see this. First a knee jerk decision and then an about face. No wonder the place is going backwards.


Did she know?

Posted on 04-10-2013 16:55 | By mistarex

If she was informed by the council previously that the tree was protected, she has brought this on herself. If the council don't notify property owners that there is a protected tree in the vicinity, how can they then prosecute / bully etc when the tree is on the landowners property? Bureaucracy gone mad, considering the tree concerned is a weed!


So They Should

Posted on 04-10-2013 18:10 | By tabatha

Thanks to Murray Guy getting involved so they should re think by saying let us for get and make arrangements on how to manage trees on said list so no one else has the same problem, the so called city arborist should get out of his office and check out things, like the privet along the edge of Otumoetai golf course.


Gosh

Posted on 04-10-2013 18:25 | By SonnyJim

The poor motel owner clearly did not see the 2m x 1m Protected Tree sign, the huge brass plaque and the electric fence! And going by the number of trees leaving the plant shops, Tauranga is going to stay green despite the clearance of some senselessly sited trees.


Sensible prunning

Posted on 05-10-2013 11:41 | By Plonker

If the motelier is in trouble for this little bit of sensible pruning and so the message to us all is don't touch no matter what ... does that mean that TCC will be liable for all OSH issues, insurance claims from damage and all prosecutions say ex OSH/DOL or whoever in the future? After all in the rest of the world this "protected" tree is classified as a weed, over grown at that to.


Did she know

Posted on 05-10-2013 18:45 | By Whata

I have a mate that has a Council protect tree on his property. He said, that the Council told him that tree was protected as part of the City Plan process. How could this person not know the tree is protected.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.