PlanningAlerts

7 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. Please do not remove these trees. Trees and canopy cover (ie the cover provided by mature trees, not young trees planted as substitutes when mature trees are removed) are critical for all the reasons we know so well: supporting birds and other wildlife, combatting heat and other effects of climate change, providing shade and privacy between properties, etc. We desperately need more trees in our municipality, not less, and given developers' ongoing resistance to this obvious fact we depend on Waverley Council to do the thinking for them. Please Waverley Council, do not approve this application.

2. UNSPEAKABLE to CHOP DOWN THREE? MORE TREES !!!!!

   HOW MUCH $$$$$$ DO THEY WANT TO TAKE TO THEIR GRAVES ?

   WHAT ARE THEY DOING TO KEEP AUSTRALIA BEAUTIFUL !!!!

3. There are no documents to view on council’s website so I will assume that there are no good reasons for the request to fell four trees. Waverley Council claims to care about trees and canopy cover and have tree policies in place, and yet they grant approval to remove mature trees more often than I can bear to acknowledge. Why must we continually bang on about the obvious health benefits? The earth is scorched. We need a moratorium on tree felling across the entire LGA. And it’s not just about us. Our native animals are dying in front of us and their dire circumstances must be more than a passing thought across someone’s desk. Please do not grant this application.

4. Without stating the obvious benefits of trees, some common sense or facts wouldn’t go astray. Trees, and particularly the right trees, aren’t necessarily planted in appropriate locations to start with. Some also have an end of life and need to be removed. Would those ranting, and especially those who live nowhere near the property in question, donate their parcel of land to the community, for natural open space? Somehow I think not. Object and comment on applications but inform yourself beforehand.

5. It is true that trees are not necessarily planted in the right locations however, it is also true that it is too easy to propose the removal of trees rather than taking steps to ensure their protection.Furthermore those commenting who don't necessarily live nearby may still express their concerns over tree removals as their loss further contributes to the overall loss of vegetation and greening in the municipality and affects the fauna dependent on them for habitat etc. and shade.

6. Further to previous comments - the application says 'These trees are unsuitable & unsustainable in their location. There are insufficient space for these trees to flourish and mature in good health and vigour.' Something wrong about this given it is probably the size and scale of the development on this site that means the trees don't have room to grow and flourish. How about we look at it differently: if there is no room for trees to grow it's likely to be because the development is unsuitable for its location and should not have been approved in this form.

7. i would assume any tree is suitable where it is. more likely the development is oversized and unsuitable for the site. try and keep some canopy of green in bondi.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Waverley Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment