 |
| May 23, 2025 |
Welcome! Click here to Login
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Click to visit the
Official Town Site
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 17, 2009
To the Editor:
You like your trees, but a neighbor doesn’t, so he gets a court order and forces you to top them or cut them down. They’re blocking his view, and his right to a view trumps your right to your trees. Because he lives in the View Preservation District and there is no Tree Preservation District, your trees get turned into logs and the tallest becomes a forty-foot stump.
This is what happened to Daniel Degroat last fall, and according to a village ordinance, the Scenic Resource Protection Law, it’s perfectly legal. That’s the law that allows cutting or topping at the owner’s expense of trees that grow higher than they were in the early nineties, if they get in the way of people who live in designated areas. It’s legal, but is it fair?
Maybe the unfairness is not so egregious to you personally. Maybe you’re just a member of the public who likes his or her public river view with a little foreground. Maybe you prefer the natural shape of mature trees and their ramifications from trunk to twig over the truncated, maimed look of topped trees. Maybe the mudslide five years ago or the recent erosion that’s been causing so much commotion at recent village board meetings has made you think about what’s good for the land and not just for somebody’s supposed property values. Shouldn’t your kind of view count too?
And what about the unfairness of the way that the law, which also affects structures, has been applied? Important people get variances; others get sued.
I know there are a lot of people who think the view law is a good law, but there are very few who have actually asserted their right to destroy and devalue the property of others. Without the law we’d be back to the civilized way of doing things, where neighbors talk things over and work things out.
Dan Degroat wants to go back to that way of doing things. He’s been going around with a petition that he’s planning to present at Monday’s Village Board meeting, trying to get the view law repealed. It would be good if he got some support.
For more on the view law and tree-topping, and for pictures of the damage to Degroat’s property go to www.cornwall-on-hudsontrees.com.
Barbara Farabaugh
Cornwall-on-Hudson
Comments:
|
Barbara Farabaugh,
"This is what happened to Daniel Degroat last fall, and according to a village ordinance, the Scenic Resource Protection Law, it?s perfectly legal. That?s the law that allows cutting or topping at the owner?s expense of trees that grow higher than they were in the early nineties, if they get in the way of people who live in designated areas. It?s legal, but is it fair?"
Did Mr. DeGroat actually pay to get those tress that got topped? Could you please clarify?
Thanks, Pat Welch
posted by P W on 04/24/09 at 8:30 PM
|
|
No, but according to a law he could have been.
My point is that the law is unfair. I used Degroat's case to illustrate this.
It's also bad for the evironment and, in my opinion for the beauty of the scenery, but this letter is focused on the unfairness.
Thanks for asking.
posted by Barbara Farabaugh on 04/27/09 at 3:15 PM
|
Add a Comment:
Please signup or login to add a comment.
|
 |
|
|
|
