A tree at Poverty Point
there’s a tree at risk of removal in the Poverty Point reserve….
we know because you told us!
“Dear BE Net,
This is by way of a distress signal from Poverty Point – it was part of the old Ballarat East, so please include this story!
A few years ago a developer came and built five (five!) units on a block that would comfortably have taken three – or, its just possible that it is one of those East blocks that never should be built on at all; at least, not the back half, which runs up under the cutaway hillside at Poverty Point, and the hillside is capped with some enormous gums.
At the time I “objected” to the development; I really was trying to make both Council and developer see that there were future problems – parking (that old chestnut), channeling, run-off from the hill/drainage (non-existent), and the fact that the units would be in almost perpetual shade from a combination of hill and trees.
None of this got through to anyone and the project merrily went ahead. Now there are people in the units, and now the Council has been requested to remove one of the trees. (I’m surprised its only one.) The tree stands in the Poverty Point reserve, on public land. The reasons for removal are ‘concern about the size and condition of the tree.’
The Council states in its letter to me that the tree is healthy, but that it has “structural problems”. I have been in this area about 30 years and have not known the trees on the hillside to lose limbs. And they catch a lot of wind up here.
This particular tree is a currawong nesting place. The kookaburras sit there, magpies and ravens love the height of the trees, and I have observed various birds of prey using it as a lookout. The lorikeets swoop in, in the summer evenings. The tree provides beautiful shade on the paths on hot summer mornings, and after rain sends out magnificent fresh eucalyptus smells. The insect life supported by the tree is probably enormous – when the tree flowers bees come from miles around. I also wonder about the hydrology of the tree, and how much rain it prevents from rushing down the steep bank where it stands. The tree is clearly visible from the Poverty Point carpark, indeed from Geelong Road, aiding the ‘bush’ atmosphere that prevails there.
In my mind, I am afraid the tree is a lost cause. Council will not allow a tree to stand which might conceivably fall on a house. But the fact is, it is the unit that is too close to the tree, not the other way around. I am deeply bitter, that a developer can ‘do his thing’, and then just buzz off, and leave the neighbourhood with this terrible legacy. I have no doubt that without this development, the tree would be standing for many many years to come. And removing one tree, I am afraid will set a precedent, so that the next tree, and then the next, will be found to have “structural problems” and soon they will all go.
Council is inviting “comment”. I would love it if BE Netters felt themselves able to comment. The tree is, after all, on public land. We have until Friday 16th May, Nicholas Benyon, Supervisor Arboriculture is the chap to comment to: his email is nicholasbenyon@ballarat.vic.
gov.au. With thanks in anticipation and best wishes for all your great work
Yours Edith.
Tags:tree
Comment (objection) lodged with Nicholas.
Tell Council to pay for an independent arborists report which must include a thorough tree health assessment.
Make as much noise as you can about this. With future votes in mind, can you convince the local councillor/MP that there is wide support for this issue, then get the local paper to photograph them on site.
Make the council do heaps of paperwork, which will also mean they’ll have to schedule internal meetings which are time consuming. In hindsight this is what worked locally.
Construct a bureaucratic nightmare: objections, a barrage of phone calls, an ambush of very polite but time consuming customer service counter visits, simple and complex letters requesting written responses …..
This will result in the Council being more pro-active next time.
It is just one tool among many to force the Council to consider the rights of the trees at the early point of assessing Planning Permit Applications.
A similar story to yours happened in Geelong:
– VLOT remnant red gums on roadside reserve adjacent to vacant land
– multi lot development Permit Application submitted
– developer wants all trees gone
– objection lodged, tree saved.
– plans approved for a reserve created under tree making a flood control pond servicing the whole multi lot development.
– without consulting all departments one department moved the reserve to another lot and approved a unit to be built next the tree.
– owners move in and one of the three large main limbs grows towards the unit with one branch over the front room.
– unit owner requested tree/limb to be removed.
– Council paid for a major arborists report including x-rays.
– Council considered it’s future liability if the limb did fall on the unit or a resident. (even though they approved the construction)
– one large main limb removed reducing the tree size by one third.
– tree and birds looking a bit sad.
Experience tells me that any tree which is requested to be removed will just be labelled as “structurally” unsafe. The council will do what they want. Development and growth at any cost! BTW, did you hear the council is currently calling for submissions on significant trees – what for!
Edith, I have a background in this field. Could you email be at elmshort@gmail.com . I would like to have a look at the tree with you.
Thank you Edith for bringing this to our attention. I’ll pop it up on my Facebook site and write an email to Nicholas.
We are behind you Edith. It’s such a shame, it has happened to us in Brown Hill too. Trees removed for units, then one the units were built, MORE trees removed. All the best with this one!