***

Mr Beck monitored the trees over the next few weeks. The retaining walls developed large cracks and, on Thursday March 4, “at 6.15am the owners phoned me to say the western retaining wall had fallen over”, Mr Beck states in his report to council.

A meeting was arranged for Tuesday March 9 with representatives from council. Mr Beck’s report specifies he told a council representative “if the trees became any more dangerous to surrounding infrastructure that I would remove them immediately”.

Mr Beck outlined the process of measuring the trees movement, saying he ran a line and plumb and bob from the tree to the house to measure movement in the tree closest to the house. Over Thursday afternoon and the rainy Friday on March 5, the bob lowered 70mm. Then overnight it lowered another 110mm. Mr Beck made the decision that the trees were in imminent danger of falling. Given that the trees were growing very close to the eastern side of the house, both lives and the historic home were at risk.

“I’d never put the lives of my clients in danger,” Mr Beck said. “Safety is my number one priority. I knew it may not be a popular decision, but in my position, you have to be prepared to act. I’ve got an obligation to my clients. I had to make the call and I did. I’d do the same thing tomorrow if I had to.”

Mr Beck’s decision is supported by Mr De Szell.

“Given the circumstances, Chris [Beck] was realistically left with no other option than to remove the palms,” Yass Valley Council’s Director of Planning said. “In these circumstances if the palms had not been removed and had fallen on the dwelling or a person both council and Chris Beck are likely to have been found liable.”

Mr Wales maintains Mr Beck should have called a council officer before beginning work on the Saturday morning. He alleges the contractor has exploited a loophole in council’s Tree Preservation Order.

The order requires anyone intending to do anything to a tree that may damage its health or appearance obtain council approval before the tree is changed. However there is an exemption if the tree is dangerous and poses an immediate risk of causing damage to property or endangering human life. That decision can be made by someone with five years or greater experience in tree diagnostics and removal.

Mr Wales is concerned that Mr Beck is not a qualified arborist or tree surgeon.

He accepts Mr Beck has experience in tree removal, but questions his diagnostic and horticultural skills.

Mr Wales acknowledges the Dying or Dead or Dangerous provision for tree removal is valid, but asserts it should only be used in genuine cases where an immediate decision is required - for example during a storm - and should not be allowed to be used to circumvent council processes.

“Further, these decisions should require some degree of independence. In the case of the trees the contractor had a conflict of interest because he had a financial interest in the decision to remove the trees and to destroy any evidence as to the wellbeing of the trees.

“While it is too late for the trees, the community needs to call on council to properly protect our heritage buildings, our landscapes and streetscapes for future generations,” he said.

***

Owners of the historic property, Anne d’Arx and Michael Bailey, also loved the palms.

“They were very majestic and beautiful trees. It was a very difficult decision to make,” said Ms d’Arx. She told the Tribune she and her husband want to restore the early brick cottage, built in the 1860s-1890s, to its original condition.

“I would prefer to keep the heritage of the house safe, and the lives of the people in it, rather than the trees, beautiful though they were,” she said.

There is a postscript to the story, about life and renewal.

A number of seedlings had grown near the old palms. A neighbour has taken one to plant, and several have gone to be planted on a property near Burrinjuck.

The cycle of life continues and Canary Island palms may once more flourish in Yass.