Doctor wins partial victory over 28ft Cypress leylandii trees casting shade over £660k Scottish home
Doctor wins partial victory in dispute with antique dealer neighbour over 28ft tall Cypress leylandii trees casting shade over his £660,000 Scottish home after council rules they must be lopped to 23ft
Dr David Watts is in a fierce dispute with his neighbour over a row of 28ft treesThe trees in Stirlingshire, are owned by antique dealer James Henderson, 68Dr Watts won a small victory when the council said the trees should be trimmedYet he plans to appeal to the Scottish government to have the trees cut further
<!–
<!–
<!–<!–
<!–
(function (src, d, tag){
var s = d.createElement(tag), prev = d.getElementsByTagName(tag)[0];
s.src = src;
prev.parentNode.insertBefore(s, prev);
}(“https://www.dailymail.co.uk/static/gunther/1.17.0/async_bundle–.js”, document, “script”));
<!–
DM.loadCSS(“https://www.dailymail.co.uk/static/gunther/gunther-2159/video_bundle–.css”);
<!–
A doctor who is locked in a fierce dispute with his neighbour over a row of 28ft high trees has won a small victory in reducing their height.
However, Dr David Watts has asked the government to order the trees’ owner to trim them even shorter.
He insists his family’s lives are being made a misery by 15 cypress leylandii blocking light to his £660,000 property.
The trees in the upmarket area of Bridge of Allan, Stirlingshire, Scotland, are owned by antique dealer James Henderson, 68, and stretch more than 80ft along the boundary between their homes.
Dr David Watts is in a fierce dispute with his neighbour, who is an antiques dealer, over a row of 28ft trees (left)
Talks about the hedge broke down between the two men when Henderson said he would not reduce the height because it would make his home less private.
Dr Watts won a small victory when Stirling Council ordered Mr Henderson to keep the trees at no more than 23ft in height.
Yet Dr Watts said the trees should be trimmed further or else his home and garden will be in the shade.
He said he would cut down trees in his own garden to gain access to more light.
An expert hired by Dr Watts recommended the hedge be reduced to 16ft.
Dr Watts said the conifer trees (pictured rising above the house) stop light from reaching his home
Watts said he wanted to appeal because a 23ft hedge would still stop light from reaching his home and prevent him enjoying living there.
‘The year-round shading of our property by the hedge is considerable with loss of light to the garden and house throughout the day after early morning,’ he said.
However, in a letter to Watts, Mr Henderson said: ‘We value our long-standing privacy, which works both ways, and do not wish the trees reduced in height.
Dr Watts said the lack of light means he is unable to fully enjoy living in his home in Bridge of Allan, Stirlingshire, Scotland
Yet Mr Henderson said trimming the trees even further than the Council requirement of 23ft would mean they are ‘stumped, hideous [and] unattractive’
‘Unlike deciduous trees that can be shaped and will regrow in an attractive manner when heavily pruned, conifers trees having their height reduced look an absolute eyesore, resulting in dead vegetation on top, and will not regain their shape.
‘Were they to be reduced in height they would be stumped, hideous, unattractive and extremely detrimental and counterproductive to both parties.’
Dr Watts has appealed to the Scottish government, which will send an expert from their Planning And Environmental Appeals Division to view the hedge and make a decision.
