7 Chesterfield Parade Bronte NSW 2024

Remove one (1) Eucalypt from rear RHS corner on boundary.

External link Read more information

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

(Source: Waverley Council, reference TPO-171/2021)

7 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Ana Strophe commented

    I object to the removal of trees, and especially native trees. To go on permitting this just makes council’s commitments to greening and climate change adaptation seem utterly hypocritical. We cannot keep removing habitat for birds and pollinators and we’re going to need all the shade we can betas the years go by. Home owners should know that research shows that trees can add $50,000 of value to their property. Just Google it.

  2. Julie Huber commented

    When the state has lost such a huge number of animals and trees in the bushfires, removing large trees in NSW is anachronistic. We are at an ecological tipping point following the bushfires.

    Many bird species have sought refuge in the city while the burnt forests recover.. They have lost their normal nesting sites and food.

    The biodiversity hotspot of the state was the Shoalhaven, which is a huge pregion south of Sydney extending to the far south coast. 80% of the Shoalhaven was burnt out including 90% of its national parks.

    The Shoalhaven has lost 72% of its terrestrial animals and the bird loss has not yet been calculated. The percentage loss in other parts of the state from the 2019/2020 fires, and from the drought, is not available, but is massive.

    Our surviving wildlife is in extremis and we need to include this in consideration of any tree removal.

    And apart from the fauna loss, there is a huge percentage of tree loss, which means there are less trees to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, so the speed of the onset of climate change is increased. If we don't want our planet to turn into a hard brown rock like our sister planet Venus, which was a blue and green planet before it overheated, then we must start being serious in all that we do to slow climate change.

    Any trees, especially mature ones, should be retained now unless they pose a danger.

  3. Angelika Knoerzer commented

    I would like to object to the destruction of the tree at 7 Chesterfield Parade, Bronte. The tree is a native, mature, and well-established. It provides habitat for many species, especially birds and pollinators, as well as a beautiful outlook.

    Under the current circumstances no mature tree should be removed. Every effort should be made to preserve trees. They give shade, which we need desperately in the city. They also absorb carbon dioxide, which is crucial to fight climate change.

    Please decide for the preservation of this tree.

    Yours sincerely,
    Angelika Knoerzer

  4. Ana Strophe commented

    Mature trees are irreplaceable and this one should not be removed. Obviously they provide habitat and shade and we will only need them more as time goes by. And yes, they remove CO2 from the atmosphere. They are also beautiful. Home owners should know that mature trees can add $50,000 to the value of their houses: see
    https://theconversation.com/trees-can-add-50-000-value-to-a-Sydney-home
    To allow the destruction of trees runs counter to Council’s green policies.

  5. Kelsey Att commented

    I strongly object to the proposed removal of this tree at 7 Chesterfield Parade Bronte. It is incumbent on the council to preserve mature trees for the obvious benefit they provide to habitat, community and health. There is no reasonable excuse in the current climate to remove a tree. Architects and home owners must adjust their design to accomodate existing trees, not the other way around.

    If the removal of this tree is sanctioned by the Council it will be met with community protest.

  6. Kelsey Attwells commented

    I strongly object to the proposed removal of this tree at 7 Chesterfield Parade Bronte. It is incumbent on the council to preserve mature trees for the obvious benefit they provide to habitat, community and health. There is no reasonable excuse in the current climate to remove a tree. Architects and home owners must adjust their design to accomodate existing trees, not the other way around.

    If the removal of this tree is sanctioned by the Council it will be met with community protest.

  7. Ana Strophe commented

    Mature trees are irreplaceable and this one should not be removed. Obviously they provide habitat and shade and we will only need them more as time goes by. And yes, they remove CO2 from the atmosphere. They are also beautiful. Home owners should know that mature trees can add $50,000 to the value of their houses: see
    https://theconversation.com/trees-can-add-50-000-value-to-a-Sydney-home
    To allow the destruction of trees runs counter to Council’s green policies.

  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

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts