You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘tree removal’ tag.
This was the Council Meeting. The following is how I understood the meeting & all mistakes are mine. Note: MC = Marrickville Council.
The Councillors & Wards are as follows – LABOR: Iskandar/Central, Haylen/North, Tsardoulias/West, Woods/South. GREENS: Phillips/Central, Ellsmore/North, Brooks/West, Leary/South. LIBERALS: Gardener/North, Tyler/West. INDEPENDENT: Macri/Central, Hanna/South.
Notice of Motion by Clr Leary – Community request for park – High Street & Ruby Street, Marrickville – One resident spoke: The proposal is to remove the road reservation restriction. Because of the restriction MC hasn’t put much into this space & it’s become weed infested. Because of MC’s support, residents are weeding this area & we have started to get to know each other. I think it’s important to be taken to the community. Names I am suggesting are: Four Sisters Park – after Ruby, Harriet, Charlotte & Myrtle or Quarry Park. Making it a park will improve the amenity of the area.
Clr Leary: One of the staff’s suggestions is the need for a report. I don’t think we need a report, just to give staff direction. No way a road will be built here. It’s a steep cliff with stairs. I think we could get on with it. Motion – for designation of community land with a Plan of Management. Clr Woods: I endorse Clr Leary’s comments. There will be no road down there. It will become a fantastic little park because it has been neglected.
Clr Hanna: I’m voting for it, but we are taking the consultation out of it. We are not asking those next to it. To do something without telling the residents is not something we have done before. Staff: We would normally do community consultation, but it’s up to the Councillors whether they go ahead. Clr Leary: I am always happy with community consultation. My drafting didn’t reflect that. Vote: unanimous.
Removal of street tree outside 3/195 Wardell Road
Petersham (I think the tree is in Dulwich Hill. No suburb name was given in the papers)– From Council’s report: “The Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad Leaved Paperbark) tree is considered to be in good condition & health with no visible structural issues. It is located under powerlines & has been continuously lopped by Ausgrid. This has affected the trees shape & habit, but it still provides good canopy & contributes to the overall landscape amenity of the area. Damage to the front brick wall of 195 Wardell Road is evident, as is some lifting of the footpath, but the footpath damage is not considered excessive & could be reasonably repaired and/or made safe. It is considered that the single skin low brick wall (which appears to have been constructed on a substandard single brick footing) is not a “significant” structure & that it can be repaired by reasonable & practical means enabling a healthy & viable street tree to be retained.”
One resident spoke: 3 residents want his tree removed. For the last 10-years we have wanted to repair the heritage fence, but two builders say it can’t be done. Two criteria are met – high damage to a significant structure of private property & front wall is damaged by roots & preventing owners from doing important underpinning work. The staff say the damage is not excessive. The footpath is damaged & hundreds of people walk here. It’s inevitable that this tree will be removed because it has grown above the powerline. The residents are prepared to pay $2,800 to remove the trees & replant another tree.
Clr Tsardoulias: This tree is inappropriate & causing significant damage to the building & footpath. It’s evident that the footpath has lifted & cracked. We could be liable for damage to this property. This is about getting the basic infrastructure right & moving on.
Clr Ellsmore: I understood last year we talked passionately about retaining trees when they damage the footpath. Staff: It’s impossible to gauge future damage. We can repair the footpath, but it will be ongoing. Has staff investigated the footpath? Staff: No. Cutting the root will destabilize the tree.
Clr Brooks: When we had a council workshop we were told that damage is caused by younger trees & that older trees have stopped growing. Staff: In similar circumstances we provide reconstruction of the footpath. Clr Gardener: The speaker says damage is caused inside the building. Do you have evidence? Staff: No. It would change my view.
Clr Phillips: I foreshadow that we get that information from staff. This is a healthy, significant tree doing minor damage. The crack in the fence could be fixed. This is a significant tree & a valuable asset for the community. I don’t believe MC should remove it unless sure that it is causing more damage. We should take the staff’s advice & the report.
Mayor Macri: This is a significant issue. Ausgrid has been hacking it. Once the crown reaches the powerline, the less tree you have. It has a large canopy. The roots reach out to the dripline. It’s a renewal issue. We should replace with a number of trees. Managing risk is when people start coming with claims.
Clr Hanna: I support taking the tree out. I always put myself in the same position. I’ve been saying 10-years ago that MC has been planting the wrong trees.
Clr Ellsmore: I would change my opinion if I could see a report on the damage [to the building]. Other Councils find innovative ways to retain their trees. One month will not make a difference. The tree is healthy.
Vote: to remove the tree – Mayor Macri, Clrs Iskandar, Tsardoulias, Haylen, Woods, Hanna & Tyler. Against – Clrs Phillips, Leary, Brooks, Ellsmore & Gardiner. The tree will be removed.
Marrickville Council has given notice that they intend to remove 2 Weeping Bottlebrush (Callistemon viminalis) in Park Road Sydenham outside Sydenham Green. Council gave the following reason for removal -
- “Two trees have been ring barked in an act of vandalism & are dying/ dead.”
They say they will replace them with 2 Brush Box trees (Lophostemon confertus) during 2013 planting season.
It was sad to see these trees. They have lost most of their bark, yet both are producing re-growth. I cannot work out why these trees were vandalized. They do not impede on a view or on the streetscape in any way.
I love that Council are planting Brush Box trees as they are a substantially sized tree that will green up the street as well as proving shade. They are also great for wildlife.
I thank Council for using sticky tape to fix the notification of removal signs to the trees.
The deadline for any submissions ends on Friday 26th April 2013. I will not be putting in a submission. email@example.com
Marrickville Council has given notification that they intend to remove 2 trees in Camdenville Park.
Tree number 1: a Blue Gum (Eucalyptus bicostata). Council gives the following reason for removal –
- “Tree is dead & poses a risk to public safety.”
Unfortunately this tree is very dead.
Tree number 2: a Blue Gum (Eucalyptus bicostata). Council gives the following reason for removal –
- “Tree is in a state of decline with extensive epicormic growth & previous damage from borer.
- Tree poses a risk to public safety.”
This tree is on its way out with obvious areas of borer damage & a canopy in decline.
Both trees will be replaced with two Blue Gums (Eucalyptus bicostata), though Council does not indicate when these trees will be planted.
I am very happy that the same species will be used as replacement trees as the Blue Gums here are spectacular trees. They are large & grand with big trunks. Their canopy cascades, creating great shade. Their leaves are the longest Gum leaf I have ever seen with the average length being around 30cms (12 inches). It would be great to see these trees in other parks around Marrickville LGA.
In November 2011 Marrickville Council removed another large tree next to these two trees. I assume it was also a Blue Gum as there is a whole row of this species of tree in this location of the park. This tree was not replaced, so it would be good if Council could replace this tree when they replace the other two they are about to remove. Three trees removed & three trees replaced. See – http://bit.ly/tDXtAo
I thank Council for using sticky tape to fix the notification of removal signs to the trees.
The deadline for submissions ends Friday 26th April 2013. I will not be sending in a submission for either tree. firstname.lastname@example.org
Marrickville Council has given notification that they intend to remove 2 trees in Petersham.
Tree number 1: a Chinese Tallowwood (Sapium sebiferum) outside 44 Charles Street Petersham. Council gives the following reasons for removal –
- “Tree is causing significant damage to private property & public infrastructure.
- The damage &/or possible future damage to private property cannot be overcome by any practical means.”
Council says they will replace with a Crepe Myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica) during 2013 planting season.
Unfortunately this tree has two large roots travelling directly underneath the house. It has caused a couple of cracks to the brickwork of the porch.
Of interest, this tree is regarded as a ‘weed of local significance’ in neighbouring Leichhardt Council. It is also included in the Regional Weed Management for Sydney by NSW Department of Primary Industries. I have noticed these as street trees in many of the surrounding streets.
Tree number 2: a Jacaranda (Jacarand minosifolia) outside 15 McRae Street Petersham. Council gives the following reason for removal –
- “Tree is dead & poses a risk to public safety.”
Council says they will replace with a Tallowwood (Eucalyptus microcorys) during 2013 planting season.
Sadly the Jacaranda tree is dying. I thank Council for using sticky tape to fix the notification of removal signs to both the trees.
The deadline for submissions for both trees ends Friday 26th April 2013. I will not be sending in a submission. email@example.com
Marrickville Council has given notice that they intend to remove a Coral tree (Erythrina x sykesii) growing beside the children’s playground in Petersham Park, Station Street Petersham.
They give the following reasons for removal -
- “Tree has decay pockets, cavities, branch failures greater than 100mm, & crossing & rubbing branches.
- Coral Trees are also not considered a suitable species over play areas due to soft wood & potential for branch failure.”
Council say they will replace this tree with a super advanced Port Jackson Fig (Ficus rubiginosa) at 800L size “in a nearby location as part of the Petersham Park Playground Upgrade.”
That Council will be replacing with a super advanced Fig tree is great. It would be nice if this were done for all tree removal in parks.
This tree is big with around a 2.5 metre girth & quite lovely. However it has a number of holes & visible evidence of branch failure, which is not good as it is right next to the playground. Coral trees are classified as weed trees in Sydney because they have the potential to invade natural areas & will grow from fallen branches.
I thank Marrickville Council for using tape to secure the Notification of Removal sign onto this tree.
The deadline for submissions ends on Thursday 11th April 2013. I will not put in a submission.
In January 2011 I posted about a Development Application submitted by Railcorp to Marrickville Council to demolish the Sydenham Station Master’s cottage, remove mature 21 trees & remediate the land at 117 Railway Road Sydenham. http://bit.ly/Xai3TE
In April 2011 Marrickville Council recommended the Councillors refuse the application, “on the basis of a lack of information in relation to the heritage potential of the former station master’s cottage.” http://bit.ly/16hEzLg
In June 2011 Railcorp’s Development Application to demolish the Sydenham Station Master’s cottage went before the Sydney East Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP). The JRPP gave Railcorp one month to deliver a Heritage Report. http://bit.ly/kZvDvW
I have just received a letter from Marrickville Council saying that at the latest meeting of the JRPP, Railcorp’s Development Application was approved – no mention of the Heritage Report.
So there you have it – a historically important building for Sydenham that looks incredibly similar to the lovely Station Master’s Cottage one station down at Tempe, except it has been left to decay, will be knocked down. 21 mature trees will also be removed. To say this is a disappointment would be an understatement. Perhaps the next DA will be for a 10 or 20-storey unit development?
I was shocked to read that power company Essential Energy wants to chop down some very significant trees in Gilgandra NSW to install a new power line route from Gilgandra to Dubbo.
The trees affected are rare Fuzzy Box trees aged between 150-200 years, of which there are “less than 50 hectares of Fuzzy Box protected in the world.”
Also on the removal list is an Aboriginal scar tree & ‘Wheat Carter’s Tree,’ which is culturally significant to the town.
“Residents have bemoaned the lack of appropriate community consultation & believe the problem could be resolved by moving the proposed pole around the tree.”
Gilgandra Shire Council had “decided to wash their hands of it.”
To their credit Essential Energy is consulting with the Gilgandra Aboriginal Lands Council as well as the Office of Environment & Heritage regarding two of the trees “identified as having potential cultural significance.”
I have a strong belief that Aboriginal scar trees, rare trees & historic trees belong to the whole of Australia, not just one town, city or state. Significant trees link us all with our past & with the environment. Many thousands of people travel around Australia to see historic trees or special environmental landscapes every year.
When the two ghost gums painted by famed artist Albert Namatjira were burnt down by vandals in January 2013, many across Australia, & indeed the world, grieved at their senseless loss. Most Australians would not have visited the Murray River to see the River Red Gums, but ask them whether they care about them, most will say yes. It is the same with the Daintree Forest in Far North Queensland.
We care about Tasmania’s Huon pines, the Tarkine, the Wollemi pines north-west of Sydney hidden away to keep them safe & the ancient Jarrah trees of Western Australia to name just a few.
We may not have heard of the ‘Wheat Carter’s Tree,’ but most likely visitors to Gilgandra would go & visit that tree & the Tourist Information Office would recommend they do because it is a landmark tree & part of the town’s history. Trees are part of Australia’s cultural heritage & are important to many.
Sure, people who don’t care about trees wouldn’t blink an eyelid if any of these historical or rare trees were chopped down or even made extinct, but there are many of us who feel connected to trees & want to keep the special ones. There must be something else that can be done. I applaud those residents who are trying to save Gilgandra’s special trees & hope that they are successful in saving these trees. To read more see – http://bit.ly/103QBpq
Marrickville Council has given notice that they intend to remove a Tallow Wood (Eucalyptus microcorys) outside number 37 Edwin Street Tempe.
Council gives the following reasons for removal –
- “Tree had a significant limb failure due to high winds & an included branch junction (poor branch attachment) & is now unsafe due to a large exposed wound & lack of structural wood to support the upper canopy.
- Many upper branches have borer damage & are also included & are susceptible to failure.”
Council says they will replace with another Tallow Wood (Eucalyptus microcorys) during 2013 planting season.
This tree was not included in the list of proposed street trees for removal for Tempe in the recent Tree Inventory.
The tree lost a branch leaving a large hole essentially halving the trunk. This means that the top half of the tree is not sufficiently supported & this is easy to see. There is also a large area of visible borer damage in the upper trunk. I will not be writing a submission.
The deadline for any written submission ends on Friday 5th April 2013 – firstname.lastname@example.org
Yesterday I received an email informing me that Marrickville Council chopped down a large tree, thought to be a Brush Box, from Enmore Park. The tree stood at the Victoria Road entrance to Enmore Park, opposite Addison Road, so it is one of the highly visible trees in the park.
Those removing the tree said that it, “had a fungus, was rotten & split in the middle.”
I find it interesting that this tree was not included in the list of trees proposed for removal as a result of the recent Tree Inventory. See - http://bit.ly/STufHw
Neither was this tree listed in the notifications of tree removal on Council’s website as is their usual procedure. Council has notified the community regarding tree removals in parks before, including two trees in Enmore Park.
Perhaps the tree was an extreme danger to the community & Council will inform the community ‘post removal.’
Apparently the stump has been painted pink. I can only assume this is a chemical to prevent regrowth & that Council have done this because they don’t intend to remove the stump for a while. If this is the case, then there will not be a replacement tree planted for a while either.
Marrickville Council has given notice that they intend to remove a Broad-leaved Paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia) outside 102 Chelmsford Street Newtown.
They give the following reason -
- “Tree is causing damage to private property, obscuring safe footpath access & continuously damaging infrastructure.”
They say they will replace with a Snow in Summer (Melaleuca linarifolia) during 2013 planting season.
I appreciate that Council used sticky tape instead of nails to fix the notification of removal sign to this tree.
Interestingly, this tree is not included in the proposed for removal list in the recent street tree audit.
The bottom bricks of the fence have shifted a little. Other than this, we could not see any other visible damage – though there may be.
It is clearly the wrong tree in the wrong place. There are other Melaleucas in the area so be prepared for them to be removed as well. Newtown is well known for its quirkiness & the people who live here appear to like different & unusual things. I lived in Balmain for more than a decade & saw street trees that obstructed the footpath. No one cared. They just walked around the tree.
I can think of many reasons why this healthy street tree should stay. Unfortunately this tree is inconveniencing people & therefore it will go. If the local community want to try to save this tree, then they will.
Submissions can be sent to Marrickville Council at - email@example.com