The owner, left, faced a barrage of questions from locals who say the 90-year-old oak tree was a feature of the streetscape, sacrificed to the 10/30 rule.
By Kath Gannaway
THE destruction of a 90-year-old oak tree under the State Government’s 10/30 rule has angered residents of St Leonard’s Road in Healesville.
Yarra Ranges Council told the Mail it is powerless to do anything – with the Government announcing an 18-month extension of the rule, which allows any tree within 10 metres of a house be removed – but the developer insists he acted on safety concerns and had done nothing wrong.
The tree was cut down on Sunday by the new owner of the vacant commercial block, which has shops on one border and a house on the other.
St Leonard’s Road resident Robyn Johnson accused the owner of the block of taking advantage of the 10/30 rule for commercial advantage.
“The tree being destroyed today was a beautiful old oak tree, there were no signs of any rot in the tree,” she said.
“If you look at Marysville, haven’t most of the old oaks in Marysville survived?”
Ms Johnson, who was joined by several local residents on site as the tree came down, said it set a frightening precedent.
“The bigger worry is that many other beautiful old trees will meet the same fate,” she said.
The owner, who gave his name as John but declined to give a surname, told the Mail he had done nothing illegal and added that he was within his rights to remove the tree.
He said a council by-laws officer, alerted by Ms Johnson, measured the tree as being 8.6 metres from the adjoining house – within the 10-metre guideline.
He said concerns about the potential danger the tree posed came up in discussions with his legal liability insurer shortly after he purchased the property a month ago.
“People were using the land to park cars and walk through it. There were also concerns about the tree hanging over into the adjoining property,” he said.
He said his insurer advised him there were risks, including fire risk.
“In our minds, prevention was better than cure,” he said.
Yarra Ranges Council communications manager James Martin said councillors had expressed their concerns to the State Government that the 10/30 rule could be used inappropriately by some owners and developers to remove otherwise healthy trees that posed little or no fire risk.
Ryrie Ward councillor Jeanette McRae branded the removal “opportunistic” and said, before the 10/30 rule, the owner would have had to get a permit.
“This tree was magnificent and significant in the landscape of Healesville,” she said. “It was most unfortunate that the owner did not take into consideration the value of our exotic trees for which Healesville is renowned.”
She said other measures, such as fencing of the land, would have addressed the trespass issue, and added that there was evidence to show that exotic trees were not as volatile in a bushfire. John told the Mail he was acting in good faith.
“If you go to a solicitor, to the council, go to a surveyor, and it’s indicated to you that the condition (10/30) applies, it makes it very clear you are not required to apply for a planning permit.
“There was no (vegetation) overlay. Maybe what needs to be done is for the rule to be changed to require council be informed of any intention to remove a tree so it is quite clear to owners where they stand,” he said.
“I didn’t create this rule, and I didn’t go against the rule,” John said.
“I had no intention to upset anybody by the removal of this tree, but these controls have been put in place for these reasons – where you are reducing the risk (to yourself) and the risk to adjoining properties,” he said.
