Rudman's city: Privet big loser in street fight

Two months ago, I promised an update in a year on the drawn-out battle over the great privet hedge of Balmoral.

Me of little faith. Far from dragging on for another year, the fighting has fizzled out.

Whether you would actually call it peace in our time is another matter, but thanks to the shuttle diplomacy of Auckland City councillor Maire Leadbeater we do have a ceasefire with both sides claiming a victory of sorts.

Indeed, the only loser in the whole dispute is the innocent party - but isn't that the way with warfare?

We're talking here of the ancient privet and tecoma hedge, more than 3m high and stretching the length of the disputed no man's land on the south side of Queens Avenue.

In a few days, the council's peacekeeping team, led by streetscape operations manager Surendra Dass, will move in to begin the surgical extraction of the offending privet from the mixed plant hedge. In the gaps will go mature and inoffensive pittosporums.

For the daughter of anti-hedge campaigner Carol Woodward this should end the need for regular trips to hospital for asthma treatment.

It may also mean a neighbour, who Woodward says has had to wear dark glasses for 10 years "because the privet gets into his eyes and he can't see," will be able to toss his specs away.

For all I know, removing the privet may also mean a reduction in the incidence of hay fever, bring an end to a local plague of rats and eliminate 101 other "health hazards." That's if the war propaganda circulating during the peak of the 14-month long conflict is to be believed.

Because as the war heated up, the hedge became a symbol of all that was wrong for both sides.

Now it is set to become the main victim.

You may recall how for many years the residents of Halston Road have tried to gain a second street crossing into their properties via Queens Ave, which runs along the back of their properties. Unfortunately for them, access is blocked by a 30cm wide strip of unmarked land running between their properties and Queens Ave.

It is a "spite strip," registered with city officials back in 1918 as No 4 Queens Ave by the developer of the Queens Ave subdivision.

He created this sliver of no man's land to stop the rival developer of the Halston Rd block from getting a free ride on the road he had built for his houses. And so it has remained to this day, an unseen, but very real barrier, to residents of Halston Rd.

Halston Roaders have tried and failed to breach the wall in the past. The latest attempt began in September last year when neighbours Bruce Parr and Carol Woodward sought permission from the council for a back entrance. They also alleged the privet in the back fence - planted many years before by the council - was a danger to health.

With privet not listed as a health risk by the council, officials were reluctant to rip out a functioning hedge, particularly when Queens Ave spokesmen, family therapists Ann and David Epston, were kicking up blue murder at the very mention of any such assault on their "green belt."

The other obstacle for Halston Roaders was that No 4 Queens Ave - the spite strip - though invisible, was a legal barrier the council had no way of breaching even if it had a mind to do so.

As for the Epstons, they had no intention of allowing their neighbours access to their avenue.

Stymied on the issue of access, the Halston Roaders turned up the heat on the privet issue.

In the interests of peace, the council has conceded the health issue and proposed a staggered replacement of the privet, starting outside the homes of those who have complained loudest. Nearly $29,000 has been budgeted for the work.

Is it peace? Well, perhaps not in this generation. Clear winner Ann Epston can't resist a quibble about the need to touch the privet.

The health risks "are not scientifically validated."

As for Carol Woodward, she might be happy the privet is going, but is still very grumpy about the access problem.