A dispute between neighbors of more than the 20-year-old trees ended up in court after a homeowner complained that they hindered his view of Lake Lake.
Peter Economos has requested an order via the NSW country and environment for three trees to be removed from the neighboring garden of John and Angie Warden in Mount Warrigal on the southern edge of Lake Illawarra.
Mr. Economos has argued that the trees, which are six to seven meters high, block his view of the lake.
The Warden – who have lived with the building since 2014 – claimed that the trees gave a level of privacy for them, so there is no opinion about their property.
Mr. Warden claimed that they would like to cut the trees up to a height of 2.5 meters, above the 1.5 meter fence between the properties.
However, Mr. Economos fully argued in court for the removal of the trees because they were a 'serious' risk to block his vision if that height was not constantly maintained.
Land and Environment Court of NSW acting Commissioner Peter Nichols explained that the trees were not recently pruned because of the physical limitations of Mr Warden.
In his ruling, Mr Nichols rejected the application for completely removed the trees, and claimed that the trees were not at a size or location to hinder the opinions or property value of the Lord Economos.
Mr. Economos asked an order to reduce the three trees in his neighbor's garden (photo)
Mr. Economos argued that the trees were a 'serious' risk to block his view of Lake Illawarra (photo) from his rear raised deck if they are not maintained
The opinion of the Lord Economos were “present from the raised deck to the west and east, over the lake and the district over side borders,” said Mr. Nichols.
'Pruning the trees will be ordered, so that the view of the lake is retained for the applicant (up to a height of 6m above ground level), while most benefits of the trees of privacy and landscape facilities are retained for Mr. Warden.
“This will lead to little loss of facilities for the respondent and a considerable advantage for the applicants.”
Mr Nichols explained that there was no real reason to prune the trees in addition to maintenance and that the benefits of pruning went directly to the Lord Economos.
For this reason, Mr Nichols ruled that the costs of future tree pruning on the Lord Economos would fall.
The court ordered Mr. Economos to involve and pay an AQF level 3 -tree grower to prune the trees to a height of 2.5 meters above the existing fence.
The court also ruled that pruning would be carried out every three years after the first work, whereby Mr Warden is obliged to offer reasonable access to his property to contractors.
The three trees are protected under the tree management controls of the Shellharbour -municipal council.
The court rejected the request to have the trees removed in full, and claimed that they were not on a measure or location to hinder (depicted, the ownership of Mr Warden) the opinion of Mr. Economos)
