Residents on a Worcester street are in uproar after their local council refused to remove 100ft-tall trees which could topple over into their homes during storms.
Homeowners on Columbia Drive have voiced their growing frustration at Worcester City Council, which continues to block their attempts to fell trees they believe pose a serious risk to their safety.
Several residents have warned of issues with massive trees dropping branches on cars and lifting pavements with their roots – but strict restrictions on removal or maintenance have rendered them unable to act.
In one recent case, a Columbia Drive resident requested permission to fell a 100ft silver birch which was dropping branches on his car and causing ground uplift near his property.
Worcester City Council continues to block locals’ attempts to fell trees they believe pose a serious risk to their safety
The homeowner even offered to replace the tree with a different species.
But Worcester City Council rejected the application, with officials stating: “No evidence has been provided to suggest that the tree is in poor health or poses an immediate risk.”
The council’s Tree and Landscape Officer added that silver birch trees are “naturally lightweight species” and told residents to instead carry out maintenance themselves to address falling branch concerns.
Justina Wrobel, 40, who lives on Columbia Drive with her husband and two children, shares similar concerns about the trees.
MORE NEIGHBOUR ROWS:
Several houses along Columbia Drive are dwarfed by the hulking trees
GB NEWS
“The tree is dangerous. It is bent out of shape and could come down and kill someone or destroy someone’s car,” she said.
Local residents claim the council’s strict stance emerged after one tree was cut down without permission.
“They put Tree Protection Orders on everything after that,” said one resident who wished to remain anonymous.
“They expect the residents to fork out for tree maintenance but tree surgeons cost a fortune and nobody is doing it.”
One family faced significant costs after battling with the council over a maple tree on their property.
Local residents claim the council’s strict stance emerged after one tree was cut down without permission
Jess, 33, and her family were initially denied permission to remove the tree in 2017, despite its roots damaging communal pavement used for bin access.
The council finally allowed removal after the pavement damage made it a trip hazard, but the family had to pay over £1,000 for tree removal plus planning fees.
They are now left with an unsightly stump which must be removed within a year and replaced with another tree.
The family must also cover the cost of repairing the damaged pavement.
Helen, a 76-year-old resident of ten years, also voiced her concerns about her own 100ft silver birch during stormy weather.
“It bothers me to death every time we have a gale,” she said. “I just cross my fingers and hope for the best.”
She revealed that trimming quotes of £400 would only allow for cutting back 10 percent of one year’s growth.
But local gardener John Harvey, 64, said: “I love trees and I think if they are healthy and not about to fall over they should be left alone.”
A fallen tree was spotted nearby, prompting resident Pete, 58, to criticise the council’s approach as being like “an arm of Extinction Rebellion.”