Moyne Shire Council investigating destruction of gum trees in Koroit

Two large eucalypts were chopped down on July 24, apparently by the developer of a neighbouring property at 316 Lake View Road.

About half a dozen neighbours complained to the council about the destruction of the trees, demanding to know why they were cut down.

Clarke Street resident Ross Maloney said he had been shocked to find the entire streetscape changed and wanted justification for the trees' removal.

"I am making no allegations but simply inquiring why a substantial streetscape feature for the residents of Clarke Street and Koroit and the Shire of Moyne have been destroyed," Mr Maloney said.

"Why were the trees removed? What authority was granted, if any, for the trees to be removed? Who removed the trees? And if the trees were removed without permission, what penalty if any will be imposed?"

Moyne Shire environment, economy and place director Jodie McNamara said the council had been "made aware of the issue shortly after the trees were removed".

The Standard asked Ms McNamara whether there was a council-approved permit to subdivide the nearby land and whether the removal of the trees was endorsed in that permit.

"There is a current permit for subdivision which council is now investigating in terms of its compliance," Ms McNamara said.

"We will not make comment on potential penalties or actions until the investigation is complete."

In a letter, the developer said it had an arboricultural impact assessment stating the trees "displayed a significant amount of deadwood" and recommended their removal. The developer also said the council had approved that report.

The trees were on council land some distance from the boundary of the development site, with one of them at least 60 metres away, so it is unclear why the developer needed or had the authority to destroy them.

Mayor Karen Foster said she didn't want to pre-empt the investigation by the council's compliance officer, but said the officer's report would stipulate whether a penalty was necessary.

Melbourne University arboricultural expert Greg Moore said "illegal tree removals" were "not uncommon".

"Without having inspected the trees I can't say whether this was improper, but in Victoria fines for illegal tree removals are so low that many developers just think of them as a minor cost of doing business," Dr Moore said.

"A copy of the arborist's report should be made available to make sure that it is both independent and professional."

Dr Moore said the two eucalypts were "very significant trees" that could easily have been worth more than $30,000 each.

"The residents of Clark Street have lost a huge community asset, but there's strong evidence to suggest their property values have also been affected," he said.

"There is Australian research that shows a tree-lined street can add $30,000 to property value in that street compared to the same sort of property in a street without trees."

Dr Moore said if the trees had been removed illegally the council needed to "pursue compensation for the full value of the assets lost".

"If, on the other hand, they were removed with council approval then the first question is why did the council grant that permission and what kind of compensation calculation was done," he said.

"Any deal that suggests you can replace one mature tree with one young tree isn't legitimate. You need between eight and 20 young trees for one mature tree, and even then you don't get the benefits of the new trees for at least 10 years."

The developer indicated it planned to plant five trees to replace the two that had been removed.

One resident said she had been "devastated" by the removal. "It's horrific, I'd say those trees were between 80-120 years old.

"Those trees haven't dropped any deadwood since I've lived here. When they chopped it down you could see there was no rot or decline there."