Tree fellings to cost Wonga Park family up to $80k

derwoodii · 25th February 2011, 01:09 PM

Tree fellings to cost Wonga Park family up to $80k - Council - News - Manningham Leader

A WONGA Park family who lopped trees without a permit will have to pay up to $80,000 in court costs after losing a 15-month legal battle with Manningham Council.

Shaun and Christine Page - or any future owners of the property - will also have to pay to regenerate the affected area for 10 years.

The long-running dispute ended this month when the Victorian Civil and Administrative Court backed the council’s enforcement order and determined the family should pay costs.

VCAT member Philip Martin said he agreed with the council’s argument the Pages had been “inconsistent, unreliable, unreasonable and wasteful” during the proceedings.

The saga started in 2008 when the Pages cut down trees on their property to make way for a pool.

The council fined Mr Page $567 and followed up with VCAT action in 2009, ordering the family to “revegetate, protect and maintain” the area for 10 years.

Mr Page unsuccessfully appealed the order in VCAT and the Supreme Court, arguing the council could not take further action because he had already paid the fine.

The failed appeal has already cost the Pages $30,000 in court costs.

They are now waiting for a decision about the costs associated with the VCAT enforcement order, which total almost $50,000.

The Leader was unable to contact Mr Page, who was overseas last week. The land management plan to regenerate the affected area will be recorded on the title of the property.

Apocalypsse · 25th February 2011, 03:09 PM

Boomsnap. Not even the normal 'Im scared the tree is going to drop a branch', its just for a pool... Don't you have to get a permit to fill a pool as well?

Eric Frei · 25th February 2011, 05:47 PM

Hence why contrary to American belief a lot of properties with trees are worth less because people cannot do what they want .... no pool, no triple garage, no deck, no spa, no extensions etc etc etc.

I know of one case where a resident just hinted they might want a tennis court and the council went and protected everything on their 10,000m2 property over 3m in height regardless of DBH.

In another due to a large protected fig tree the land value went down $437,500 as basically it cannot be improved on, and that was the judges decision.

In the case you mention why cannot the arrogant council re-vegetate elsewhere so everyone can have their cake and eat it to? Like I have written before about covenants it's not about tree protection but land control, they want to commandeer the use of peoples land.

Sure the Page's may have done the wrong thing but there could have been a better way out for all.

Manningham Council

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Frei

Some councils run replant programs where replacement plantings do not even have to be replanted on the same property .... the future is thinking outside the hard cornered box so many live in today, replace the canopy cover elsewhere, relax the red tape, boost the economy with building work and move ahead.

Here lately the Brisbane City Council green faction cronies are shoving covenants on peoples properties to protect trees. It's worse than VPO's I assure you, and every fool you talk to is as bright as a charcoal on a dark night about it.

Follow the illogical trail, here we go.

Mr Smith buys block from Mr Developer. Block has a covenant which has 3 trees within it. The genius that decided the covenant area is likely an ecologist from council who wouldn't know if his ass was on fire when it comes to tree integrity, form or health. Nor would the ecologist know how much land is truly required to sustain a tree (or group of trees) and that's why this tree was cut down for example.

So now Mr Smith calls me and is curious as to what all this mumbo jumbo means and what can he do about these trees.

I check it out (visit the site), the trees are storm damaged and they should be removed, even had severe die back prior to the storm event and were a real bad call for retention.

So I write a report and the trees go but in many cases the covenant stays.

Logic says that the covenant area was for the trees, so once the trees are gone the need for the covenant area is gone. Not so, the council often forces replanting in the covenant.

So what is the council doing? Commandeering the use of your land regardless of the trees. And if the covenant area is enforced, replanting elsewhere is not on although a viable option. This is called the silo effect.

Good luck.

derwoodii · 25th February 2011, 07:21 PM

Yep agree must be a better way, if the Pages was a Councilor Mayor or MP I bet no issue. Bet the VCAT judge has got his pool and so the lawyer who stitched em up.
I canna get LG they want to be seen savin a few trees, ain't that just nice. But are quick n happy to allow urban sprawl to eat up fields and don't see their hypocrisy. Allow a developer to destroy a forest but then tell new home owners they must protect the few old trees left as tokens in streets named after trees.
I'm all over the place with these decisions some I agree some I just don't. Think its because LG & State veg laws are far to hard on the poor little dumb guys while the judges let the rich smart ones get away all the time, I see it daily.

25th February 2011, 01:09 PM	#1
derwoodii Mature tree Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Melbourne Posts: 406	Tree fellings to cost Wonga Park family up to $80k Tree fellings to cost Wonga Park family up to $80k - Council - News - Manningham Leader A WONGA Park family who lopped trees without a permit will have to pay up to $80,000 in court costs after losing a 15-month legal battle with Manningham Council. Shaun and Christine Page - or any future owners of the property - will also have to pay to regenerate the affected area for 10 years. The long-running dispute ended this month when the Victorian Civil and Administrative Court backed the council’s enforcement order and determined the family should pay costs. VCAT member Philip Martin said he agreed with the council’s argument the Pages had been “inconsistent, unreliable, unreasonable and wasteful” during the proceedings. The saga started in 2008 when the Pages cut down trees on their property to make way for a pool. The council fined Mr Page $567 and followed up with VCAT action in 2009, ordering the family to “revegetate, protect and maintain” the area for 10 years. Mr Page unsuccessfully appealed the order in VCAT and the Supreme Court, arguing the council could not take further action because he had already paid the fine. The failed appeal has already cost the Pages $30,000 in court costs. They are now waiting for a decision about the costs associated with the VCAT enforcement order, which total almost $50,000. The Leader was unable to contact Mr Page, who was overseas last week. The land management plan to regenerate the affected area will be recorded on the title of the property.

25th February 2011, 03:09 PM	#2
Apocalypsse Veteran Heritage Status Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Victoria, Australia Posts: 1,152	Re: Tree fellings to cost Wonga Park family up to $80k Boomsnap. Not even the normal 'Im scared the tree is going to drop a branch', its just for a pool... Don't you have to get a permit to fill a pool as well?

25th February 2011, 07:21 PM	#4
derwoodii Mature tree Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Melbourne Posts: 406	Re: Tree fellings to cost Wonga Park family up to $80k Yep agree must be a better way, if the Pages was a Councilor Mayor or MP I bet no issue. Bet the VCAT judge has got his pool and so the lawyer who stitched em up. I canna get LG they want to be seen savin a few trees, ain't that just nice. But are quick n happy to allow urban sprawl to eat up fields and don't see their hypocrisy. Allow a developer to destroy a forest but then tell new home owners they must protect the few old trees left as tokens in streets named after trees. I'm all over the place with these decisions some I agree some I just don't. Think its because LG & State veg laws are far to hard on the poor little dumb guys while the judges let the rich smart ones get away all the time, I see it daily.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
family tree	deblauweballon	Ask an Arborist here	3	12th October 2010 12:26 AM
cost to prune a huge eucalyptus tree	janecocchia	Ask an Arborist here	1	10th October 2010 09:56 AM
Australian Plant Family Index\| eucalyptus identification	Eric Frei	Tree Information and Facts	2	22nd November 2009 04:08 PM
Cost of gas where you live	Therrin	Non Tree Related chat	177	30th December 2008 09:46 AM
Save the private tree cost $260,000 paid by Brisbane City Council	Eric Frei	General Tree Chat	12	6th December 2007 01:57 PM