Land and Environment Court of New South Wales CITATION : McDonnell v Miller and Buchanan [2007] NSWLEC 582 APPLICANT Barry McDonnell PARTIES : RESPONDENT M B Miller and J B Buchanan FILE NUMBER(S) : 20384 of 2007 CORAM: Brown C - Thyer AC KEY ISSUES: Trees (Neighbours) - Neighbour Application :- safety LEGISLATION CITED: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 DATES OF HEARING: 24/08/07 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 24 August 2007 APPLICANT In person LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT Ms I Pickel, solicitor SOLICITORS Irene E Pickel Solicitors JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES Brown C with Thyer AC 24 August 2007 20384 of 2007 Barry McDonnell v M B Miller and J B Buchanan JUDGMENT 1 COMMISSIONERS: This is an application made pursuant to s 7 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 by Mr Barry McDonnell of 188 Erith Street Bundanoon concerning 11 Pinus radiata trees located close to the common boundary with 192 - 198 Erith Street Bundanoon owned by M B Miller and J B Buchanan. 2 The extemporaneous decision was given on site on 24 August 2007 and the judgment reflects the findings and the background documentation provided as part of the proceedings. 3 Mr Barry McDonnell's application is to require the removal of the 11 trees as: o branches fall from the trees o the falling branches pose a serious safety risk for people, including his grandchildren, in the driveway area of his property. 4 Alternatively, all overhanging branches are to be cut back and all dead timber is to be removed. 5 No compensation is sought. 6 Mr Miller opposes the removal of the trees. He would however accept orders that require the removal of that portion or portions of any of the subject trees, if any, that the Court considers has caused, is causing, or is likely to in the near future cause damage to the applicant's property or is likely to cause injury to any person. 7 The 11 Pinus radiata trees form a row along the common boundary. A further five trees originally extended this row however these trees have since been removed as part of the redevelopment of an adjoining property. Rows of Pinus radiata are a common landscape element in the Southern Highlands and contribute to its particular character. 8 The subject trees are in the order of 30 m in height and in a mature, but not over mature state. For ease of description, we have numbered the trees from the street frontage. Pruning has occurred from Mr McDonnell's side of the boundary leaving a number of stubs extending from the trunk to near the common boundary. Some deadwood is located in the trees and one tree appears to have been struck by lightning and is in decline (Tree 5). Based on our observations on the health of the trees we are not satisfied that all 11 trees should be removed. Tree 5 should be removed because of the damage caused by lightning and there should be the removal of all deadwood and some pruning of branch stubs and selective pruning of Tree 3. Inspections and deadwood removal having a diameter of greater than 30 mm should be undertaken regularly. 9 For these reasons we have concluded that the application should be upheld, in part. 10 The Orders of the Court are: A) The application is upheld, in part. B) The respondent is to undertake the following works: 1) Tree 5 is to be removed. 2) The removal of all deadwood having a diameter of greater than 30 mm from all trees. 3) All branch stubs are to be cut back to the branch collar at the trunk in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4373-2007 Pruning of amenity trees. 4) Selective pruning of Tree 3 of between 20% and 30% of the canopy to reduce heavy wood overhanging the boundary. 5) All work required by orders 1, 2, 3 and 4 is to be carried out within a period of 3 months from the date of this order. 6) All pruning is to be undertaken by an experienced arborist with AQF Level 3 certification or equivalent or higher recognition. 7) The trees are to be regularly inspected and all deadwood having a diameter of greater than 30 mm is to be removed, at intervals of no longer than 5 years. 8) All work required by these orders is to be carried out at full cost to the owner of the land where the trees are growing. ________________________ G T Brown Commissioner of the Court _________________________ Peter Thyer Acting Commissioner of the Court DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.