The 2nd Avenue pohutukawa tree set to get the axe has been given reprieve after an appeal against its felling.

Tauranga residents Sandy Scarrow and Keith Frentz yesterday appealed to council's Strategy and Policy Committee to stop the felling and pruning of two pohutukawa trees outside No.10 and 2 2nd Ave.

The two trees on 2nd Avenue will no longer be felled and pruned after appeals from tree protectors.

Their earlier submissions against the felling failed when the Tree Management Sub-Committee voted on June 26 to cut down one tree and prune the other.

The decision came at the request of 2nd Avenue residents who asked council to remove the trees because of shading, and claimed flood damage caused by tree debris blocking drains and gutters.

The appeal was based on the sub-committee's acting chairman, Murray Guy's, decision to use his casting vote to pass a resolution that one tree be felled and another be heavily pruned.

Sandy submitted that it is the convention when using a casting vote to uphold the status quo, which would be in favour of keeping the trees.

The sub-committee's recommendation also contravenes council policy, says Sandy.

She says removing the trees will not maintain the visual amenity, character and natural features of the city, and therefore removing them is inconsistent with Council's policy. Removing them will not protect the city's mature tree asset and is therefore inconsistent with Council's policy.

Keith's submission challenges the city council's approach to managing the city's trees on behalf of their owners - the public.

Councillors' short three year tenure means long term decisions are difficult, and policy guides long term decision making. Making decisions inconsistent with its tree management policy is not something the council can take lightly, says Keith.

Particularly as the council recently went through an extensive planning process that reduced protected trees on private property from about 1800 to 350, to allow higher density living that may be restricted by mature trees on private property.

'In that process Council provided a landscape assessment that showed that our city is valued for its mature trees, especially when viewed from our harbour,” says Keith.

'The trade-off then was that Council would protect its mature tree asset on public land, so that private property could be developed to its highest potential.”

Keith says any consideration to remove a mature public tree should be measured by an appropriate landscape assessment, which has not been done.

Protected trees are valued using the Standard Tree Evaluation Method. Keith, who is not an arborist, used the method to derive values of 186 points for the tree outside No.2, and 156 points and 150 points for the two trees outside No.10. A protected tree requires a score of 130 points.

To go against its own recommendation the council legally has two options; it can, with a notice of motion signed by one third of councillors, rescind the recommendation, or it can call for a staff report.

Chairman David Stewart called for the staff report and Mayor Stuart Crosby says he will produce the notice of motion. Both the report and notice of motion will appear at a future meeting.