122 Beaconsfield Road Chatswood NSW 2067.

Application to remove one (1) Sydney Blue Gum from the rear garden.

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website 30 days ago. It was received by them 1 day earlier.

(Source: Willoughby City Council, reference TVPA-2021/248)

7 Comments

Have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. M.W.Pickles commented

    We are aware that the leaves falling in the pool make more work but it is not a good reason to remove a Blue Gum. If every tree that caused a mess was removed there would be no tree coverage in Sydney.

  2. Mary Ann Irvin commented

    We need to keep as many Sydney Blue gums as possible. They are an iconic species and should be given maximum protection

  3. David grover commented

    So important to retain the Sydney Blue Gums, the feature of the district and of Chatswood. Agree with other responders that maximum protection must be given to these important trees. Agree leaves dropping in pool is not a sufficient reason to remove such an iconic feature tree.

  4. Jodi commented

    The law dictates that it cannot be removed because it is a native, protected species. The application is an abuse of process and must be rejected.

  5. Faith commented

    The Sydney Blue Gum is an iconic tree and truly spectacular. They provide a canopy during the hot Sydney summers, as well as providing shelter for an abundance of wildlife that continue to lose habitat to our ever growing human population. We choose to live in these gorgeous leafy suburbs because they have not yet become concrete jungles. Please rethink your decision and invest in a pool cover (if leaves in your pool is pushing this decision).

  6. Marcela commented

    We need more trees in the area instead of removing them. The blue gum is a protected species and a home for wildlife.
    This application must be rejected.

  7. Meredith Foley commented

    According to Council records, Willoughby LGA has lost 12.61 hectares of tree cover (the equivalent of 483 tennis courts) from residential land since 2011. As this is a native tree that is an important part of the canopy and benefits the community and local biodiversity I would be opposed to its removal unless it was shown to be diseased or evidence was submitted to show it was a danger.

  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