Media questions about the oak trees removed from McLean Park in Fairlie.
Response
Background
Council received complaints from members of the community about the condition and health of trees at McLean Park, including concerns about increasing numbers of aphids.
Staff sought professional arborist advice which recommended that 16 to 20 trees be removed because of overcrowding and the poor health of the identified trees, and in order to support the long-term health of the remaining trees.
Following feedback from the community, a number of meetings and discussions were held involving community members, neighbouring landowners, councillors, Community Board members and staff from the Public Facilities, Parks and Places team. Advice was also sought from other arborists.
The views expressed were at times conflicting. Council needed to balance the community’s views about the appearance and amenity of the park with the health and condition of individual trees, the risk of failure where trees were in poor condition, the long-term health of surrounding trees affected by overcrowding, and Council’s responsibility to ensure its trees do not create an unreasonable nuisance for neighbouring property owners.
Management of Council-owned trees is an operational matter undertaken by staff under delegated authority. Given the level of community interest in this particular issue, staff nevertheless sought and considered extensive input from the community, the Community Board, elected members, neighbouring landowners and professional arborists before determining the final scope of the work.
Ultimately, 10 trees were removed, rather than the 16–20 originally recommended. A further five trees identified as being of concern have been retained but will require ongoing monitoring of their condition.
Council recognises that the removal of mature trees can be an emotive issue. In this case, the work was undertaken on the basis of professional advice and is intended to support the long-term health of the trees within McLean Park. The removal has opened up the area and will provide more space for the remaining trees to flourish.
Council thanks the Community Board and members of the community for their input into an issue which has taken more than a year to resolve.
Questions and responses in blue
1. Which elected member decided that 10 trees, rather than 5, needed to be removed and what was the reasoning?
No individual elected member made the decision to remove 10 trees.
Before work took place, the Mayor sought assurance that the views of the three Opuha ward councillors had been considered and that they were supportive of the proposed approach to remove 10 trees.
2. How was this communicated to the Community Board, the community, and contractors?
Representatives of the Fairlie Community Board were involved in on-site discussions with staff, the arborist and a councillor representative on 10 August, and the Chair of the Community Board was informed between 12 and 14 August that 10 trees would be removed.
The contractor was instructed by Council staff to undertake the work once the final scope had been approved.
No further public communication was undertaken before the work proceeded. The Communications team was not asked to undertake any further communications. Given the extensive engagement that had already taken place over more than a year, the professional advice received and the contractor being on site to undertake the work, the operational decision was made to proceed without further delay or additional cost to ratepayers.
3. What were the associated costs for removal, contracting, cleanup, etc. of the trees?
The quote for the work was $10,500 (ex GST), and included the tree removal work, chipping, stump grinding, and removal of usable logs to the Fairlie MenzShed.
4. When was this decision made? And could you please send me the relevant agenda for this decision?
The in-principle decision on the scope of the work was made on 12th August and subsequently approved by the councillors for the Opuha Ward before the work was carried out. Elected members had previously indicated that they did not require further formal council decision making with regard to this matter, and the final decision was made by staff in consultation with arborists and the Opuha ward councillors.