Despite modifying the motion on the run in the hope of attracting enough votes for it to pass, the motion was still rejected.

Councillor Nugent pointed to recent debates around the future of trees on Anson Street near Woolworths and around the precinct for the new $25 million sporting stadium near the Bloomfield campus and Jack Brabham Park.

"It's not just about those two developments," Cr Nugent said.

"It's about every DA [development application] that comes to council.

"Most DAs involve the loss of some trees.

"This motion is about getting as much information before councillors about what the cost of that removal is, or what the value of retaining the trees is."

Councillor Nugent said the value of a tree was "not just the cost of cutting them down and taking them away, but the loss associated with carbon absorption ... the visual amenity, the contribution those trees make to urban heat reduction and the contribution they make towards lower energy costs".

"There are all of those flow-on effects that aren't very visible, but that are real costs."

Councillor Tony Mileto said he admired Cr Nugent's "passion for trees" but was "a little bit confused" by the motion.

"I'm not quite sure why council should be trying to calculate the value of a tree on land they don't own," he said.

"I think this motion relates more to developers than council as a whole."

Councillor Russell Turner was strident in his opposition: "The bureaucracy is mind-boggling ... I don't know what it will achieve".

Councillor Joanne McRae supported further investigation into the proposal.

"I think it would be quite interesting to see the value of the trees when it comes to insurance," she said.

Mayor Reg Kidd supported investigating the idea of putting a value on trees, but questioned who would be responsible for employing the staff to put a value on trees around the city.

Send us a letter to the editor using the form below ...