Man loses battle over conifer trees as council orders them lopped down

Man who went to war with neighbours over 32ft-high conifer trees in his garden that he refused to trim because ‘it would kill them’ is ordered to lop them after losing court battle

• A man has lost a neighbourhood battle to keep his 32ft conifer trees untrimmed
• Terry Saville in Kirriemuir, Angus swore trimming the trees would kill them 
• But Angus council sided with his neighbours, Neil and May Kidd, over the trees
• The Kidds appealed to the Scottish government to argue for further trimming 

A man who claimed trimming his 32ft trees would kill them has been ordered to lop them after losing a battle with his neighbours.

Terry Saville had been locked in a war of words with Neil and May Kidd over the trees between their properties in Kirriemuir, Angus.

The frustrated couple had applied to Angus Council to have the conifers lopped under high hedge legislation amid complaints of loss of light to their home.

They were left disappointed when the council issued an order for the trees, which stretch for 82ft in length, to be cut down to 12ft in height.

The Kidds appealed the ruling to the Scottish Government and argued the trees should be trimmed further.

Photo shows trees owned by Terry Saville in Kirriemuir, Angus, from the garden of Neil and May Kidd

The trees will have to be chopped from 32ft to 12ft after a Angus council ruling found they were infringing on the neighbour’s garden 

Saville also went to the government and insisted that reducing the trees to 12ft would kill them off.

He also said a ‘tree preservation order (TPO)’ in place at the property had been breached by the council and that the trees provided a backdrop to a new housing estate.

The government upheld the council ruling but issued a slight variation on the trees affected.

Saville now has until September this year to carry out the work.

In their appeal document, the Kidds said: ‘We wish to appeal the high hedge notice because reducing the conifer trees to 3.85m will not remedy the adverse effect on our property.

‘The hedge is to our west and the evening sun is low in the sky so a hedge 3.85m up to 4.35m high will not let much sun into our garden or windows.

‘The trees forming the hedge to the south of the boundary also create shade and should be included.’

Saville said: ‘We have abided by the TPO which wasn’t difficult for us as we purchased the property because we love the trees so much and were glad that they had a TPO to protect them.

‘However, our neighbours, started to ask for lots of trees to be removed as soon as we completed the purchase of our home.

‘They purchased their property two years before this and so obviously the trees were there when they purchased and they were also aware of the TPO.

‘The council have served us with a notice to cut the trees down to a height of 3.85 meters without coming to view the very trees they originally wanted us to preserve.

Terry Saville who owns the adjacent garden where the conifers are located went to the government and insisted that reducing the trees to 12ft would kill them off.

Saville said the council had told him to cut the trees down to 3.85 meters without coming to view them, and that tree surgeons had told him doing so would destroy the trees

‘If they had have visited to view the trees, they would see that reducing the trees to the height of 3.85 meters will in fact kill the very trees that they stated on the TPO provide a backdrop to the new estate.

‘In order to comply with the notice, we have obviously received three quotes for the work to be carried out by local tree surgeons.

‘However, all three tree surgeons have stated that they cannot reduce the trees to the councils’ suggested height without killing the trees and leaving my garden with dead stumps and of course no screen to the new estate.’

Government reporter Steve Field said: ‘I confirm the decision by Angus Council to issue the high hedge notice, dated 11 November 2021, but vary the notice and issue a revised high hedge notice.

‘Overall, I conclude that the hedge, including the three deciduous trees, meets the definition of “high hedge” set out in the act and the height of the hedge adversely affects the enjoyment of the house and garden which the occupiers of the premises could reasonably expect to have.”

Source: Read Full Article