By Kath Gannaway
A Warburton woman who says she has endured 18 years of fear has lost a bid to have two large gum trees removed.
Marilyn Hand pleaded with Yarra Ranges Council on Tuesday night, 14 February, to ignore the recommendation by Council’s Environment and Engineering department, and have two gums on the nature strip of her Riverside Drive property removed.
Ms Hand told the councillors she had lived in fear for the last 18 years as a result of falling branches and had five insurance claims over that period.
She said the first major damage was in 2000 and that she had four more claims on her car since then.
“One car was totalled and one was stolen because we have to park off the site for fear of falling branches,” she said.
She said one of her sons had also had his car written off.
“I cannot use my property, I can’t put up a carport, because of the ongoing, established threat that these trees drop limbs, not necessarily in storms, but whenever they feel the need,” she said.
Cr Jim Child argued strongly against the recommendation, proposing an alternative recommendation to remove the trees, but was outvoted.
He had brought the matter before the council.
“The community has grave concerns about these trees,” he said.
“People have been raising concerns about these trees for 18 years, and there have been five insurance claims.”
He questioned the lack of information in the officer report on the history of complaints about the trees and on the installation of cables designed to make the trees safer.
“We have this history of dropping limbs and the report tells us all the falling limbs have been addressed … well, have they ?” he said.
“I can’t leave this chamber unless I realise our duty of care to the community,” Cr Child said.
“If something happens and we have to go to the Coroner’s Court, I have put forward that these two trees should be removed and I have put that on record.”
A number of other councillors raised concerns about the lack of history in the report and mayor, Cr Noel Cliff proposed the matter be deferred until further investigation, and confirmation of that history as presented by Ms Hand.
That was, however defeated.
Cr McAllister said she was uncertain of what was the best decision in the circumstances.
“I am having a new set of evidence presented to me tonight which is not reflected in these papers.
“We’re being asked to make a quasi-judicial decision and I’m not happy with that,” she said.
Cr Avery also said he was torn by the information put before them.
Cr Cox however said the council had heard from Mrs Hand but had no idea what insurance claims there were or how serious they were.
“I don’t know what to think about that,” he said.
“We pay our arborists to give advice. If we are going to ignore our arborist advice, what’s the point of having an arborist spend a lot of time giving us that advice?
“To me, these trees look in pretty good nick and I can’t see the point in deferring the matter,” he said.
Cr Clarke wanted to absent himself from the vote, but was reminded it was not an option.
The recommendation to retain the trees was passed with councillors Cliff, Cox, Heenan and Stevenson in favour and councillors Avery, Child, Clarke and McAllister against. Cr Cliff used his casting vote to break the tie.
Ms Hand told the Mail she was ‘bitterly disappointed’ with the decision.
“I am disappointed that this is not being approached as a risk-management issue,” she said.
“I am disappointed and dismayed that the council has 18 years of emails regarding the major damage these trees have done and it was not supplied to the councillors so they could make a considered decision about the risk management.
“I think those councillors should be asking why they are being asked to make a decision when they acknowledged that they were not fully appraised of the situation,” Ms Hand said.
She said she believed the prudent thing for the councillors to do would have been to defer the matter.
She said a good outcome would be to revisit the matter when the council has all the information, and in the context of risk management, rather than the health of the trees.
