[johnmac]

I live at the end of a cul-de-sac. My perimeter fence borders the end of the cul-de-sac along the whole length of the side of the house and to the rear. The land adjoining is open grass land owned by the local authority. My problem is that of trees that were planted, I believe at the time the estate was built (some 15 years ago. I myself have only lived in the house for 5 years). These trees are approximately one and a half meters (the width of a garden paving slab and the timber fence) from the pine end of the house. The height of the trees range from 4 to 12 meters the tops of which are all but touching the pine end. Last year the local authority attended for a similar problem after repeated complaints, as some of the tops of the trees were hitting the house roof. At this time 4 of the offending trees were cut down. These were just the tip of the iceberg.

Although the trees are not necessairly growing further upwards, they are still `spreading` and these trees are of such a height and density that when we have strong winds from the south west or west which are our prevailing winds, the remaining trees of which there are many, hit the pine end of the house. Besides the risk of damage by this action, there is also the risk of structural damage caused by the roots of the trees, though the option of uprooting the trees is out of the question.

My greatest fear because of proximity of these trees to the house, is that of FIRE. The tree line extends some 15 meters or more back from the boundary fence onto open grass land. Because of the density of this tree line, all the `small stuff` in the middle is so dry due to the `canopy` provided by the high trees, that one can break it by hand. This is the perfect `fuel` for a fire, as it is so tinder dry. Should a fire be started deliberately or accidentally I can say goodbye to my home.

It has been established that the land on which these trees stand and that of the open grass land at the back of the tree line, is indeed owned and maintained (I.. e. grass cut & trimmed etc) by the local authority. My request is that these trees be trimmed to a managble height and the `small stuff` cut to ground level to reduce the risk of damage and fire.

At the time of planning the estate, there must have been consent at this stage to the planting of trees, shrubery etc, as I have seen a basic plan of the area with trees etc. shown, but what I cannot understand is why so close to residential property. My neighbour at has a similar problem with trees but not so close a proximity to the house.

Additionally, whilst I appreiate that no one `has a right to light`, there must be a legal definition as to what can be expected. I`m afraid I am fighting an up-hill battle with the local authority.

My question is, where do I stand as to the management of these trees, i.e. whose responsibily (although I feel the local authority has set a precedent on this by cutting down some trees last year), and what is my recourse to the law regarding this problem.

Any help/advice would be appreciated.

John McKay
I live in South Wales, UK

[smoothy]

I live at the end of a cul-de-sac. My perimeter fence borders the end of the cul-de-sac along the whole length of the side of the house and to the rear. The land adjoining is open grass land owned by the local authority. My problem is that of trees that were planted, I believe at the time the estate was built (some 15 years ago. I my self have only lived in the house for 5 years). These trees are approximately one and a half meters (the width of a garden paving slab and the timber fence) from the pine end of the house. The height of the trees range from 4 to 12 meters the tops of which are all but touching the pine end. Last year the local authority attended for a similar problem after repeated complaints, as some of the tops of the trees were hitting the house roof. At this time 4 of the offending trees were cut down. These were just the tip of the iceberg.

Although the trees are not necessairly growing further upwards, they are still `spreading` and these trees are of such a height and density that when we have strong winds from the south west or west which are our prevailing winds, the remaining trees of which there are many, hit the pine end of the house. Besides the risk of damage by this action, there is also the risk of structural damage caused by the roots of the trees, though the option of uprooting the trees is out of the question.

My greatest fear because of close proximity of these trees to the house, is that of FIRE. The tree line extends some 15 meters or more back from the boundary fence onto open grass land. Because of the density of this tree line, all the `small stuff` in the middle is so dry due to the `canopy` provided by the high trees, that one can break it by hand. This is the perfect `fuel` for a fire, as it is so tinder dry. Should a fire be started deliberately or accidentaly I can say goodbye to my home.

It has been established that the land on which these trees stand and that of the open grass land at the back of the tree line, is indeed owned and maintained (i..e. grass cut & trimmed etc) by the local authority. My request is that these trees be trimmed to a managble height and the `small stuff` cut to ground level to reduce the risk of damage and fire.

At the time of planning the estate, there must have been consent at this stage to the planting of trees, shrubery etc, as I have seen a basic plan of the area with trees etc. shown, but what I cannot understand is why so close to residential property. My neighbour at has a similar problem with trees but not so close a proximity to the house.

Additionaly, whilst I appreiate that no one `has a right to light`, there must be a legal definition as to what can be expected. I`m afraid I am fighting an up-hill battle with the local authority.

My question is, where do I stand as to the management of these trees, i.e. whose responsibily (although I feel the local authority has set a precedent on this by cutting down some trees last year), and what is my recourse to the law regarding this problem.

Any help/advice would be appreciated.

John McKay

You've given us admiral detail... except what country and locality you are in.

In most parts of the world your rights and obligations end at your property line. And trees have grown for millions of years without being managed by man. The local authorities are only obligated to do what they feel is necessary... not what the locals want done.

[johnmac]

You've given us admiral detail...except what country and locality you are in.

In most parts of the world your rights and obligations end at your property line. And trees have grown for millions of years without being managed by man. The local authorities are only obligated to do what they feel is necessary...not what the locals want done.

I agree with what you say about trees not managed, but this is a man made problem not one of nature.

[smoothy]

I agree with what you say about trees not managed, but this is a man made problem not one of nature.

Doesn't matter to the nature crowd... but since laws vary... where are we talking about. All I know is you are likely in an English speaking country. Most likely NOT the USA since you use metric Measurements

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes where you are at, makes a big difference. But liability as to "what could happen" is not a reason to force others to do action on their property, Yes there may be a fire and if you can show after the fire that they were warned about this and requests were made to fix it, at least in the US you would have legal grounds for a law suit but can not sue for issues that may happen.

In the US you are allowed to cut back any tree or bush to your property line, so houses would sit back far enough from property line by code, that they would not hit the house if trimmed back to your properly line, that is your responibility to trim them to your property line.

In some areas, I know some Canada and US cities old trees are actually protected as are their roots within so many meters of the tree.