in article , Kay Easton at
wrote on 22/9/03 7:23 am:

In article , Sacha
writes
in article , David
@chapelllhouse.demon.co.uk at David @chapelllhouse.demon.co.uk wrote on
21/9/03 6:50 pm:

In article , Sacha
writes
This is not true. If it were, there wouldn't be even the glimmering of a
beginning to control their use. Of course leylandii are problem plants in
urban and suburban use.

I think the cases that have been highlighted are so extreme that it was
felt something had to be done, look at the numbers though Sacha, the
problems are very much in the minority.

snip

Look at the numbers, David and tell me of ONE other single hedging plant
being considered for legislative action because of its antisocial use. Just
one.

Laurel.

The draft legislation refers to any evergreen, not just to leylandii

That makes sense but it is the leylandii mis-use that has led to the need
for this legislation. One hardly - if ever - reads of another hedging plant
allowed to grow to 70' or more and cause a nuisance to neighbours.

--

Sacha
(remove the 'x' to email me)