A tribunal has ordered the removal of at least 10 palm trees after a central Queensland neighbourhood dispute that has lasted almost two decades.
Thomas and June Young, of Barlows Hill just north of Yeppoon, took neighbour Stephanie Salmon to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal over palm trees Mrs Salmon had planted, which the Youngs said had caused damage and obstructed their water views.
Mrs Salmon, meanwhile, countered that the Youngs had trespassed and poisoned some of her trees so as to restore their ocean views.
In his recently published decision, QCAT member Paul Favell noted the dispute had been going on since the trees were planted in 1997-98.
"(The Youngs) say the trees 'affect negatively' their property valuation, their lifestyle, their happiness in their old age, their health and the sea views they had before (Mrs Salmon) purchased the low set house to the east of their property," he said.
"They believe the enjoyment of their land has gone and that the trees should be removed completely at (Ms Salmon's) cost."
The Youngs said their attempts to sell their property had fallen through in 2005 when prospective buyers did not like the trees.
They also told the tribunal that four of the trees had fallen towards their house during Cyclone Marcia in 2015.
"Their gutters were overflowing because of litter from trees, which caused ceiling leaks," Mr Favell said.
"The dividing fence was damaged and there was at one stage a serious water supply leak caused by root invasion.
"They are concerned about the potential of the trees on the boundary to cause damage in a cyclone or other extreme weather event."
The Youngs said a total of 37 trees – 22 on the northern and 15 on the eastern boundary – overhung their property.
In response, Mrs Salmon said there was an ongoing dispute regarding roof and surface water from the Youngs' property, which had caused erosion on her property.
"(Mrs Salmon) says that she has been advised by engineers that removal of the trees would magnify damage to her property during future heavy rain episodes," Mr Favell said.
"She contends that if any order is put in place requiring removal of the trees the applicants should be ordered to pay half of the cost of removal as they caused the problem by not controlling surface water.
"She says that she had to plant trees to control their water. I accept that there is a water flow over Mrs Salmon's property and that vegetation is a method of minimising erosion."
Neighbours accused of poisoning palm trees
There were also allegations of trespass and poisoning directed towards the Youngs.
"Mrs Salmon says that since moving to her residence she and her husband have been subjected to a barrage of malicious damage to their garden and the subject of frivolous and vexatious complaints," Mr Favell said.
"She says that plants have been poisoned are in a direct line from the balcony at (the Youngs' address) to the sea view.
"She says that most of the flora was growing when the house was built in 1990.
"... I accept that plants were poisoned so as to create a view line."
Mr Favell ordered the removal of 10 mature palm trees that were within one metre of the property boundary.
Overhanging fronds and fruiting material would also have to be removed every six months at the time the palms began to fruit, Mr Favell ordered.