Council’s tree policy sparks fury

FINGAL County Council has been criticised for felling a large number of trees in the Swords area. And one local man has claimed that the

“senseless

? felling of a beautiful, mature tree outside his home has devalued the price of his property.

However, the council has defended its tree policy, highlighting how it paid out almost

?¬630,000 in compensation claims from trips over the last four years.

Glenn Evers, who lives on Cherry Avenue, Rivervalley, Swords, is furious that the council felled a cherry blossom tree that has been outside his home for almost two decades.

Mr Evers, who even threatened legal action against the council, is calling on the local authority to justify how and why the tree was cut down without warning or consultation with residents.

“I thought the council would just trim it back a little to tidy it up,

? he told Northside People.

“I was absolutely shocked and horrified to find nothing but a tree stump there when I returned home.

“I just couldn’t believe it and I can’t understand it.

“The apparent reason for this is supposedly due to so-called restriction of light from the street lamp beside the tree.

“This is absolute nonsense as when the street lamp is required in winter, there are obviously no leaves on trees so it was never restricting the light at all.

“We know this to be true as we have lived here for 18 years. It wasn’t as if the street was plunged into darkness because of the tree.

“Would it have killed them to knock on our door to ask if the tree was affecting the lighting?

“Yet again, Fingal County Council has let us down as residents, so bothered are they by the supposed restriction of light by this tree.

“Also, if that was the case would it not have made more sense to trim the tree back?

?

Mr Evers believes the tree was an asset to his property, especially as it was one of two cherry blossom trees on a street named Cherry Avenue.

“Nonsensical bureaucracy has the country ruined,

? he stated.

“There’s absolutely no room for a common sense approach. I wouldn’t mind but I’ve paid for the tree thousands of times over through my taxes.

“All that’s been left is an unsightly tree stump which the council has told us will stay there until there are enough stumps in one area to justify the hire of a stump grinder.

?

A spokesperson for Fingal County Council said that of the 8,107 street trees in the Swords area, 1,104 have been identified as lifting paths and damaging properties. A further 898 trees are within five metres of public lights.

“This is a much higher proportion of problematic trees than across the county, and is probably due to the age (and hence the size) of trees in older estates in Swords,

? a spokesperson told Northside People.

“Each year the council receives numerous complaints about dark streets due to trees blocking or limiting public lights.

“In these circumstances tree pruning, which has been considered, is not an appropriate solution.

“This is because repeated pruning causes a profileration of growth, exacerbating the original problem; repeated pruning can also weaken the new growth shoots which in the long-term may be unsafe; and it is unsustainable to commit to pruning this many trees on an ongoing basis to ensure proper functioning of street lighting.

“Over the past four years, Fingal County Council has paid out

?¬628,000 in 28 trip claims attributed to trees, and there are an additional 75 claims in the pipeline.

“Therefore, efforts to eliminate such trip hazards is considered necessary.

?

The council insisted that it had a clear tree strategy that was adopted after a year-long public consultation process.

“Would it have killed them to knock on our door to ask if the tree was affecting the lighting?

“Yet again, Fingal County Council has let us down as residents, so bothered are they by the supposed restriction of light by this tree.

“Also, if that was the case would it not have made more sense to trim the tree back?

?

Mr Evers believes the tree was an asset to his property, especially as it was one of two cherry blossom trees on a street named Cherry Avenue.

“Nonsensical bureaucracy has the country ruined,

? he stated.

“There’s absolutely no room for a common sense approach. I wouldn’t mind but I’ve paid for the tree thousands of times over through my taxes.

“All that’s been left is an unsightly tree stump which the council has told us will stay there until there are enough stumps in one area to justify the hire of a stump grinder.

?

A spokesperson for Fingal County Council said that of the 8,107 street trees in the Swords area, 1,104 have been identified as lifting paths and damaging properties. A further 898 trees are within five metres of public lights.

“This is a much higher proportion of problematic trees than across the county, and is probably due to the age (and hence the size) of trees in older estates in Swords,

? a spokesperson told Northside People.

“Each year the council receives numerous complaints about dark streets due to trees blocking or limiting public lights.

“In these circumstances tree pruning, which has been considered, is not an appropriate solution.

“This is because repeated pruning causes a profileration of growth, exacerbating the original problem; repeated pruning can also weaken the new growth shoots which in the long-term may be unsafe; and it is unsustainable to commit to pruning this many trees on an ongoing basis to ensure proper functioning of street lighting.

“Over the past four years, Fingal County Council has paid out $628,000 in 28 trip claims attributed to trees, and there are an additional 75 claims in the pipeline.

“Therefore, efforts to eliminate such trip hazards is considered necessary.

?

The council insisted that it had a clear tree strategy that was adopted after a year-long public consultation process.

Continued from p.1

“Would it have killed them to knock on our door to ask if the tree was affecting the lighting?

“Yet again, Fingal County Council has let us down as residents, so bothered are they by the supposed restriction of light by this tree.

“Also, if that was the case would it not have made more sense to trim the tree back?

?

Mr Evers believes the tree was an asset to his property, especially as it was one of two cherry blossom trees on a street named Cherry Avenue.

“Nonsensical bureaucracy has the country ruined,

? he stated.

“There’s absolutely no room for a common sense approach. I wouldn’t mind but I’ve paid for the tree thousands of times over through my taxes.

“All that’s been left is an unsightly tree stump which the council has told us will stay there until there are enough stumps in one area to justify the hire of a stump grinder.

?

A spokesperson for Fingal County Council said that of the 8,107 street trees in the Swords area, 1,104 have been identified as lifting paths and damaging properties. A further 898 trees are within five metres of public lights.

“This is a much higher proportion of problematic trees than across the county, and is probably due to the age (and hence the size) of trees in older estates in Swords,

? a spokesperson told Northside People.

“Each year the council receives numerous complaints about dark streets due to trees blocking or limiting public lights.

“In these circumstances tree pruning, which has been considered, is not an appropriate solution.

“This is because repeated pruning causes a profileration of growth, exacerbating the original problem; repeated pruning can also weaken the new growth shoots which in the long-term may be unsafe; and it is unsustainable to commit to pruning this many trees on an ongoing basis to ensure proper functioning of street lighting.

“Over the past four years, Fingal County Council has paid out $628,000 in 28 trip claims attributed to trees, and there are an additional 75 claims in the pipeline.

“Therefore, efforts to eliminate such trip hazards is considered necessary.

?

The council insisted that it had a clear tree strategy that was adopted after a year-long public consultation process.

Continued from p.1

“Would it have killed them to knock on our door to ask if the tree was affecting the lighting?

“Yet again, Fingal County Council has let us down as residents, so bothered are they by the supposed restriction of light by this tree.

“Also, if that was the case would it not have made more sense to trim the tree back?

?

Mr Evers believes the tree was an asset to his property, especially as it was one of two cherry blossom trees on a street named Cherry Avenue.

“Nonsensical bureaucracy has the country ruined,

? he stated.

“There’s absolutely no room for a common sense approach. I wouldn’t mind but I’ve paid for the tree thousands of times over through my taxes.

“All that’s been left is an unsightly tree stump which the council has told us will stay there until there are enough stumps in one area to justify the hire of a stump grinder.

?

A spokesperson for Fingal County Council said that of the 8,107 street trees in the Swords area, 1,104 have been identified as lifting paths and damaging properties. A further 898 trees are within five metres of public lights.

“This is a much higher proportion of problematic trees than across the county, and is probably due to the age (and hence the size) of trees in older estates in Swords,

? a spokesperson told Northside People.

“Each year the council receives numerous complaints about dark streets due to trees blocking or limiting public lights.

“In these circumstances tree pruning, which has been considered, is not an appropriate solution.

“This is because repeated pruning causes a profileration of growth, exacerbating the original problem; repeated pruning can also weaken the new growth shoots which in the long-term may be unsafe; and it is unsustainable to commit to pruning this many trees on an ongoing basis to ensure proper functioning of street lighting.

“Over the past four years, Fingal County Council has paid out $628,000 in 28 trip claims attributed to trees, and there are an additional 75 claims in the pipeline.

“Therefore, efforts to eliminate such trip hazards is considered necessary.

?

The council insisted that it had a clear tree strategy that was adopted after a year-long public consultation process.