A FORMER British Army chef tried to remove a “dangerous” tree from his front drive – only for a neighbour to tip off the council.
Stephen Petrowsky, 59, and his late wife Frances saved up £3,000 over years to cut down the 14-metre tree in Sholing, Southampton.
4
4
The tree had been causing them stress by way of constant verbal complaints by passers-by, lack of sunlight and rising fuel bills.
He said he and his wife always hated the tree, a Robinia.
Over the last 26 years, Petrowsky said he has received at least 40 complaints from injured by-passers who say they’ve been hit by a branch.
But, just as the Petrowsky’s reached their saving target earlier this year, an anonymous neighbour caught wind of their plan to fell the tree and informed the council.
The council then ordered the tree could not be cut down.
Petrowsky raised an objection to the order but a council town meeting on Tuesday blocked that, saying “verbal complaints” is not a “legitimate reason” to remove the tree.
The former Army chef said: “It’s a danger. Over the years, so many people have knocked on the door and said ‘A branch has fallen and stricken me on the head’.
“It’s people’s health and safety, and during the summer months that tree – it blocks the light.
“My fuel bills have gone up – lets me put it that way.”
Earlier this year, Mr Petrowsky had a professional look at the tree to work out the next steps in having it cut down.
He said: “We got someone round to take a look at it. Somebody saw that happen and they applied for the tree preservation order.
“We have been saving up for two years and we put the money together so we were at the stage of removal, but we got the TPO that prevented that.”
Records from the council said in July a phone call was put through to the tree team with “significant concern” that the tree at the Petrowsky’s home was going to be felled.
It said: “The caller requested that a tree officer visit the site to look at the tree to see if it is suitable to be protected by a tree preservation order.”
Petrowsky said he and his wife – who passed away from cancer last month – were frustrated, having spent years saving money that could have been spent elsewhere.
He added: “I contacted the local authority and asked them how come a protection order had been placed on a tree that my wife and I had been saving money for years in order to have it removed.”
During a council meeting on Tuesday last week, the objection was rejected and Mr Petrowsky was informed that if he wanted to appeal it he would have to take it to the High Court.
He said: “I can’t afford to go to the High Court.
“I don’t think, as a council taxpayer, [the council] were interested in what I had to say in the slightest.”
In the letter of objection, the council’s tree team said: “(We) cannot take negative verbal comments made to the tree owner as a legitimate reason for not protecting the tree.
Your rights with Tree Preservation Orders
If a tree on your property is protected by a Tree Preservation Order then there is a right to appeal to the local planning authority along certain grounds.
Petrowsky does have an appeal claiming the tree is dangerous, but the council rejected it.
But, if the planning authority confirms the order following the 28-day period, there are limited options for the homeowner.
The only appeal one has after the order is confirmed is to the High Court, which has to be within six weeks of the order being made.
Trees can be selected for a TPO on an individual basis if the singular tree merits protection, such as if it is a native tree or if it positively affects the surrounding area.
Entire woodlands can also be protected by the order.
If you cut down a tree that has an order covering it then you could be taken to court by your council.
4
4
