Protected tree ‘had to go’

Press, 30 August 1986, Page 8

Protected tree ‘had to go’

A protected tree in Merivale was cut down yesterday without council approval, but the architects who ordered its removal said it had to be done to make way for a historic building. The 60-year-old blue cedar in front of Rangi Ruru Girls’ School in Merivale Lane was cut down in the morning to make way for the arrival of the St Andrew’s Church tomorrow.

The tree was “protected” in the City Council’s District Scheme.

Mr Barry Dacombe, a director of Warren and Mahoney Architects, Ltd,

said the trees fronting Merivale Lane, including the cedar, were only recently given "protected” status. They were retained on the basis that a formal landscaping proposal would be made, which might involve the retention of all or some of the trees. The intention was that the trees would provide a visual screen between residents and the construction — the installation of the church and the building of new facilities — taking place in the school grounds. The firm’s formal landscaping proposal

would be presented to the school's board of governors next month, said Mr Dacombe. Any removed trees would be replaced by new planting. It was only in the last few days that the contractors had realised that the cedar would have to go to make way for the church, he said. The firm sent a letter notifying the City Council of its plan to remove the tree. The letter was received yesterday — after the tree had been felled. Mr Dacombe said what had to be considered was

whether it was more important to retain an important historic building or retain a tree, which might be replaced by something far better. Moving the church from its Tuam Street site to the school was an expensive undertaking for the school. The building would otherwise have fallen into disrepair, he said. The deputy general manager of the City Council, Mr Harold Surtees, said the council was given no warning of the felling. Several upset residents

had called the council to complain. Normal procedures meant that any "protected” tree could not be touched without a dispensation from the council, he said. The public was always notified of applications for dispensation and could air their views.

By cutting down the cedar without permission the architects had usurped those rights, said Mr Surtees. The council will send a letter to Warren and Mahoney asking for reasons and details about the felling.