Can you help keep PlanningAlerts running? — Your donation is tax deductible.

34 Boronia Avenue Epping NSW 2121

Tree Application - 9 x TREE REMOVAL

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website over 2 years ago. It was received by them 1 day earlier.

(Source: Parramatta City Council, reference TA/665/2018)


Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Christine commented

    9 trees to be removed
    Totally unacceptable- forcwhat reason ?- not given Us residents are unhappy with any tree removed after four years of development these past approaching five years . Buildings and mature trees murdered without any consultation from residents.
    No no no— reasons for removal not given. Even then it would be completely unacceptable to make a beautiful street with mature trees become a desert and so hot without shade .

  2. Norman Jessup commented

    I strongly object to this application.

    It seems most unlikely that nine trees would suddenly become a hazard at the same time. It also seems strange that the the property is already the subject of a contentious DA to demolish the property and that on the neighbouring site (32 Boronia Ave) to construct a health centre. As this Development Application (DA/769/2018) appears to also include removal of the trees, one has to wonder why this application has been lodged, and why the concern about claimed damage to a property which is vacant and the owners wish to demolish.

  3. JDawes commented

    I strongly object to this application.
    The trees in this street are an important part of the overall streetscape and the microclimate and the removal of so many trees will affect the quality of the streetscape. The concern with branches falling in the storm can be addressed with appropriate pruning by a qualified arborist. Since the intention in another DA under consideration is to demolish the property, the motivation for the removal of the trees is questionable.

  4. M.McCartney commented

    I object to the removal of these 8 trees which includes high value indigenous trees. I observed 32 Boronia Avenue from the street today and could not see any broken roof tiles. The trees requested for removal are not touching the building at 32 Boronia Avenue and do not appear to be causing any damage. The removal of these trees, for the reasons given, is contrary to the City of Parramatta Council DCP 2011 and cannot be justified.
    The arborist report (28/09/2018) for the DA at 32-34 Boronia Avenue identifies trees 5, 6, 7 and 9 to be structurally 'good'. It is unlikely these trees structural strength would have changed so significantly in the short time since the September report. I note a subsequent arborist's report is not evident on the website. There are also no engineer or building reports to back up the allegations of the trees causing damage. Without these reports the allegations of the trees causing damage seems subjective and without sufficient evidence.
    The arborist report also identifies tree 5 as a spotted gum to consider retention and tree 8 as a lemon scented gum to also retain. These 2 indigenous trees should be protected.
    Please consider that these trees form a grove between the two houses for which there is a Development Application and this tree permit application is to help facilitate the approval of the DA. The previous DAs have been refused. It would not be in the public interest if these trees were permitted to be removed only to find the current DA is also refused. The trees would have then been removed for no reason.
    It will significantly change the streetscape if these trees are removed. The trees are needed to keep the area cooler and for Epping's wildlife. Tree 8, a Lemon Scented Gum is a bountiful source of food during the winter months for Epping's birdlife.
    Please refuse this tree removal application.

  5. Kath Lee commented

    There is a DA (DA/769/2018) for both 32 & 34 Boronia Ave to build a day surgery. This tree removals are to facilitate the above DA. I OBJECT to both the DA and this tree permit as I do not see the need for removing trees given those trees are "good". We need the shade, air. We human are smart enough to incorporate nature into plans. Parramatta Council has agreed to cut down 5 trees including 1 on nature strip on my street recently citing "it is in the public interest" when easily the architects could plan around it. Therefore I OBJECT to removing all unnecessary trees.

  6. Julia commented

    Parramatta City Council manages Epping suburb on behalf of the community and should have a holistic approach towards the environmental management of the area,
    which would include keeping ratepayers informed of destructive actions proposed for their area.
    I’m sure the council has the welfare of the community at heart but the removal of nine trees from 32/34 Boronia Ave Epping ,2121 is an erosion of the streetscape, and in fact will leave a bleak streetscape with a concrete front yard and side yards The trees are not a risk factor and removal will course loss of privacy and wildlife. There is no next time for a tree. These trees in an urban environment provide a critical link to the natural world and make life more pleasant, nature is an important component of people lives.
    I’m sure Epping Eye Property Pty Ltd should have no problem trimming the tree branches. They own both properties (32 and 34) and this is just a ploy to advance their over development of the site.

  7. Kylie Kellett commented

    As a nearby resident I strongly object to the removal of 9 trees from the property 34 Boronia Avenue Epping. The developers who own this property and 32 Boronia Avenue are seeking approval to remove these trees as they want to build an eye hospital in a R2 low density residential zone. All the trees are healthy and two are significant indigenous gum trees of some 20 plus metres. The arborists report supplied by the developers in DA/769/2018 states they are in "good" health and should be considered for retention. The report also states and I quote;

    “The ecological significance and habitat value of the trees has
    not been assessed and is beyond the scope of this report.”

    Why have they not been assessed?

    These trees provide streetscape and landscape of our residential area. They provide homes for birdlife. They cannot be replaced and are more valuable to local residents than an eye hospital.

  8. Neil Donovan commented

    I object to this application.

    The streetscape in Boronia Ave will be adversely affected by this application. It is one of a few remaining streets where the canopy is truly unique. I live in the area and use Boronia Ave often. The street is a source of tranquillity in an over-urbanised environment.

    The trees are healthy and mature. We do not need this type of development in this area.

  9. Lizzie commented

    Please stop removing trees from Epping. We have lost so many old homes and their established gardens and far too many trees. The suburb is being stripped. Please do not spoil Boronia Avenue for yet another building site.

  10. M.McCartney commented

    This TA has been approved, although there were 9 objections lodged through Planning Alerts. It seems community consultation has not been considered. Can we have Conciliation meetings introduced for TAs which have 7 or more objections in a similar way to the DAs? This is another tragic loss of trees for Epping. Does this mean the DA for the site will also be approved as the only reason the trees, which have been there for years, are inappropriately located is because they in the way of a new building?

  11. Paul commented

    They're in the process of cutting down a healthy gum tree on the property. Even the arborist report included in the DA indicates that it should be kept.

  1. Have you made a donation or gift to a Councillor or Council employee? You may need to disclose this.

  2. Please use your real full name if possible.

  1. We never display your street address. Why do you need my address?

This week