Proposed law on trees disliked

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33776, 24 February 1975, Page 2

Proposed law on trees disliked

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, February 23.

A provision in the Property Law Amendment Bill for the removal of trees on privately-owned land could cause arguments, the Statutes Revision Committee studying the bill has been told.

The Wellington City Council said it was apprehensive of the clause, which gives a magistrate the right to order the removal of trees on privately - owned land under' certain circumstances.

One instance is that they can be removed if the trees are annoying or could cause injury to the occupier.

The clause is intended to apply to trees and structures on land and streets.

“This being the case;” the council said, “it can be foreseen that arguments will develop as to the public benefit

of such features, measured against the private detriment to an applicant’s property. "Perhaps from an avenue of trees, the removal of one tree may well- benefit a particular property, yet the same removal may have a detrimental effect from an environmental point of view.” The council said that gen-

erally the court would have to determine which aspect was of greater importance.

TOO LOOSE’

The Royal New Zealand Institute of Horticulture and the Institute of Park and Recreation Administration in a joint submission also , opposed the bill where it related to trees.

The bill mentions “any tree, shrub or plant” and the institutes said it was too loose a definition of a tree.

They also said that all trees, however much they might obstruct when viewed from the angle of one property owner, at the same time enhance the view achieved by many other property owners. The matter of the degree of obstruction, and also of who would suffer the greater loss, would be “nighimpossible” to assess, they said.