Request to remove non-existent tree from protected list

Margaret and Guy Cardno have asked the Dunedin City Council to remove a redwood tree from a list...
Margaret and Guy Cardno have asked the Dunedin City Council to remove a redwood tree from a list of protected trees. The tree, which the council believes once stood in the area circled, is listed as being on the Cardnos’ Tainui property but "doesn’t seem to exist at all". PHOTO: STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER
A redwood tree that "doesn’t seem to exist at all" is expected to be removed from a council list of significant Dunedin trees.

The Dunedin City Council has identified 12 possible additions to the schedule of trees, giving them greater protection from removal or modification without consent under changes to the district plan.

Several public submissions asked the council to removed trees from the list — including Margaret and Guy Cardno, who said the dawn redwood listed as being on their Tainui property was no longer there.

Mrs Cardno told the Otago Daily Times the tree was protected on paper when the couple bought their Gresham St property about 10 years ago.

She said when an arborist came to remove a damaged tree following the October floods, he said the redwood was not on the property.

"[He] wondered if it had existed at all."

The couple could only go by the arborist’s comments, having not noticed the particular tree before, she said.

"I don't know if it had been previously taken out by someone else or what the story was.

"We're just wanting it removed from whatever council list [it’s on], because it doesn't seem to exist at all.

"It just would be confusing people."

The couple did not oppose a protected Norfolk Pine on their property remaining on the schedule.

A council spokesperson said the tree was added to the district plan in 2002, following a "comprehensive survey" of significant trees.

"We can confirm the tree existed," they said.

A council arborist’s assessment report at the time found it was 15m-20m tall, more than 40 years old and in "very good" form.

In a report to the plan change hearing panel on behalf of the council, arborist Mark Roberts said a site visit revealed "no sign" of the tree on the property.

If the tree existed, it could not be listed as being on the Cardnos’ property, he said.

In her section 42a report to the panel, council research and monitoring analyst Mia Tangney recommended the tree be removed from the schedule.

Scheduled trees require a resource consent, which is free, to remove or maintain them — landowners qualify for financial assistance of up to $250 per tree from the council.

A hearing for the second stage of the council’s plan change 1 is set down for August 18 and will include proposed changes across a broad range of topics, such as significant trees, acoustic insulation requirements and stormwater setbacks.

ruby.shaw@odt.co.nz

 

Advertisement