Contact
Newsagent
Login
A tree falls in Brooklyn – and no one had a chance to save it
by Billy Naylor
8 Kopiko Way is an “L” shaped piece of land in Brooklyn. The “long” part is in corner-to-corner contact with my property. The “short” part is three houses away.
About a year ago i received a notification about work on 8 Kopiko Way, but was confused as to where it was. So i rang the WCC officer whose number was on the notification.
After some discussion i realised that the notification was for a house on the “short” part of 8 Kopiko Way; as it was nowhere near my property, i had no objection. I never heard anything more of this, and the house was duly built, i assume that the WCC officer noted my lack of objection.
I did however ask about the “long” part of 8 Kopiko Way, and was told that there were no plans laid, which i now know to be untrue (ie, in 2007 RC165757).
I also asked to be informed of any development on the “long” part. I was given a verbal assurance that i would be. But no one contacted me.
About 2 weeks ago i was awakened to the sounds of diggers and chainsaws, as earthworks and tree clearing began on the “long” part of 8 Kopiko Way.
The chainsaws were cutting down a 120 year old pine tree, which is at least partly on the land of 33 Reuben Avenue. I have since contacted the owner of 33 Reuben who had given no permission for the tree felling and no permission for the trespass on her property. She had received no notification of work, and was distressed at loosing such a beautiful tree.
Yesterday, i talked to my neighbours at 33 & 35 Reuben Avenue. This morning the owner of 33 Reuben rang me to say that she…
– bought the house BECAUSE of the big tree
– got the runaround from WCC
– believes that the tree was on her land
– can’t afford to get into a private civil fight with the developer.
We weren’t notified because a WCC officer stated (incorrectly)
that he believed we would not be impacted at all – even in a minor way.
But we are.
The issue is what the council considers minor.
The rules appear to lead to decisions labelled minor because “otherwise we would have to notify ”
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
WCC have a mentality that any non native tree must die, hence the wholesale clearance of large tracts of pines from all over the city. Hardly surprising they did this. Also there is a common theme when it comes to developers and this sort of behaviour, the saying “it is easier to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission” comes to mind…
I am very annoyed at this! The developer is to blame as he is ruining the neighbourhood.
Perhaps I will buy a lotto ticket and if I win it can be used to help fight the property developer as he is nothing but trouble and not cooperative
Brooklyn has a developer who has knocked down an exotic pine. How should that rate against another developer of formally Open Space B land in Khandallah who has:
1. A conviction for illegally cutting down native vegetation.
2. Is currently appealing to the Environment Court to have protections removed that were obviously put in place to minimise damage to an important ecological corridor.
There’s more than just an exotic pine at stake here – the same developer is taking over the old Brooklyn Rise development that landed Lance James in jail for fraud, then bankrupted the next two developers to take it on – the Council appears to be giving this guy a free ride to breach consents and encroach on other residents’ boundaries, so that he can ‘get on with’ fixing the major flaws in the infrastructure of the failed part two of Brooklyn Rise, which currently has several very concerning problems with retainer walls and uncompleted drainage on the site, which are affecting nearby residents’ properties.
There appears to be a culture of laissez-faire approval for any kindof speculative development in WCC, whether such development is sustainable, costed properly, or merely another attempt at fraud by one of the local wide-boys – how Terry Serepisos managed to continue to secure loans against his series of ever-more-wildly speculative projects beats me – the requirement for equity that private home loans insist on is obviously not there for property speculators.
This is indicative of wider problems within the housing industry, as both lending institutions and local government seem hell-bent on saddling ordinary tax-payers and rate-payers with the risks of poorly designed outcomes.
Perhaps some bright spark could call our mayor and invite her to pop along for a photo opportunity with the neighbors [ratepayers all] and a statement to the assembled media on whether she condones such activities?
The least she can do is call for an investigation.
Whether she has the cojones to tackle her Chief Executive on the issue is, of course, completely open for debate.
The result will be useful when considering to re-elect her as mayor.
Wellington’s mayor is selective as to her responses on various issues. Photo-ops are high on her list of priorities so we should not hold our breath Dave on her major decision-making that you’ve suggested. I hope she is “on her bike” come the next WCC election.
Hear hear Mr Evans! Could just one person from the WCC tell me one mitigating fact that balances the non-notified resource consent granted to the property developer that will make up for the lost bird life and more than minor negative impact on the residents?
What is really ironic is that the property developer and the owner of 8 Kopiko Way also co-own a company together called… wait for it… “The Way of Nature”.
Clearly Chinese medicine at “The Way of Nature” does not extend to preservation of 120 year old trees.