PlanningAlerts

10 Comments

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

1. This application should be rejected.
   The two Melaleucas are mature trees and would have to be at least 20yrs old. They frame and soften the building and provide an attractive entrance.
   The country has lost millions of hectares of vegetation in the recent bushfires. These mature trees not only help carbon capture they provide shade in hard surface areas, a wildlife corridor and food for struggling urban wildlife which I have witnessed being killed in increasing numbers on the roads trying to find food or shelter. With the recent catastrophic fires there will be an influx of birds looking for food and shelter. All native trees should be preserved.
   What possible reason could there be for their removal? Are they blocking someone’s view?

2. This application should be rejected.
   The two Melaleucas are mature trees and would have to be at least 20yrs old. They frame and soften the building and provide an attractive entrance.
   The country has lost millions of hectares of vegetation in the recent bushfires. These mature trees not only help carbon capture they provide shade in hard surface areas, a wildlife corridor and food for struggling urban wildlife which I have witnessed being killed in increasing numbers on the roads trying to find food or shelter. With the recent catastrophic fires there will be an influx of birds looking for food and shelter. All native trees should be preserved.
   What possible reason could there be for their removal? Are they blocking someone’s view?

3. So many applications to remove trees. Are these trees being replaced? I agree with the above writer. We need more native trees for the precious little wildlife in this area.. Llandaff Street has already lost trees through unit development.

4. There needs to be a moratorium on tree felling. It is unbelievable that in this day and age of catastrophic climate change that requests for tree removal are being considered. Please reject this request and make improvements in our tree policy so that our vegetation remains preserved.

5. Whilst I respect all the comments posted: please understand that the tree in question poses a direct threat: it has already imploded into the silo (which houses the garage fan unit) - we are currently looking at a depth of 30cm damage and gaining momentum daily... If the tree continues to implode (even sporadically) and with these fierce winds that we have been experiencing of late - well then we might have an accidental death on our hands, as this tree is in the direct pathway of the LLandaff street pavement, which is used daily by many patrons. I’m all for saving trees and the environment, but when it comes to negligent death(s)...conclusion: the tree will have to be removed...

6. I anticipated this response when talking to the Chairperson of the building committee. These trees are an example of poor prior planning! They are fabulous but inappropriate in that location. They can keep growing for another 30 odd years but will eventually fall across the road possibly killing a pedestrian! This is why the Aborist and council have ordered the removal! The trees are planted in a raised garden bed and the retaining wall on the west side of the tree is broken cracked and structurally compromised. The trees are leaning on the air ventilation structure to the right of the entrance compromising that structure. The whole thing is like a catapult! When the wall eventually gives away under the weight of the tree canopy against the vent building acting as a fulcrum it will, without notice shoot the wall out across the entrance to the building and the tree will crash into the street! Then who is responsible? Yes, I agree with the above writers about the loss of habitat and have commented about tree removal on a number of PA on this site. I suggested that the removal of these 2 trees be offset. I'd suggest the planting of a new Grevillia and Hakea hedge along the boundary on the east side where there is a scrappy hedge of introduced exotic species that provide no habitat to the Kookaburras, Currawongs and other birds that inhabit the location. 2-8 Llandaff St is a significant property in Bondi Junction with proper garden management and planning would be outstanding and exemplary. I wonder why Council doesn't have Costa from Gardening Australia on an advisory committee on how to green the suburb. Costa is a resident of Waverley council! Forward-thinking? Goodness that would be outstanding leadership

7. Ditto to the comments re potential danger if this tree remains. We have enough issues in this locality without adding to the news headlines.
   I currently live in this building caring for my ageing mother. This building has many aged residents who move along the footpath with rollators and other mobility aids cautiously. There are residents with babies and prams etc. Many people are distracted by their children, phones and their inability to hear and so are unable to react to a sound such as a tree about to go over. I love the shade, the cooling and habitat that this tree provides as do the residents of this building so comments about "spoiling a view" are misguided. This is Bondi Junction not some parkland or harbourside, some of us are doing everything we can to aid native cohabitation and retain green space in this commercial and traffic infested wasteland.
   If it wasn't necessary this tree would not be removed. A sad state of inappropriate planting that time has caught up with.

8. I'm a resident of 2-8 Llandaff St, and had a good look at the two lovely trees and their location as i passed near them today. I agree with Rodney and Nami completely, that the trees have to be removed for safety reasons (inappropriate planting as Naomi writes). Rodney's suggestion that they need to be offset with suitable trees that provide shelter for native birds is excellent.

9. I am on the Strata Committee of the relevant property. The Committee has received expert advice that the tree is not stable and as such, could pose a danger to people and property. You can clearly see that the small retaining wall supporting the tree has large cracks. As a Committee, we would be negligent if we did not act appropriately. As such, I agree with the sentiments expressed by Naomi and Valli that the tree needs to be removed.

10. Completely understand the need for this tree to be removed given its position - as long as another native tree is planted to replace it. We need more suitable habitats for birds in the area.

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