You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Canary Island Palm trees’ tag.

Last July 2011 Clr Phillips put up a Notice of Motion –That Council develop a policy of requiring &/or facilitating the relocation of Canary Island palms where a development requires their removal.”  This was on the Council Meeting agenda last month.  Apologies for the length of this post.

Most of the staff advice is as follows, with my response written in bold. –

  • This will create an obligation on Council to locate & maintain the identified trees in Council streets & parks. (What is the problem with this? Council maintains thousands of public trees).
  • It is estimated the cost of removal & replanting will be covered by the Developer. As a general principle the merits of a development proposal should be considered on the basis of the tree in its original location, not on the developer’s ability to relocate it to a new site. (This surprised me.  I would have thought that if a DA wanted a Canary Island Palm removed, then Council could give approval on the basis that Council is given the tree & Council relocates it to a position of their choice).
  • The species is not self cleaning & mechanical removal of dead fronds is required as part of their maintenance. The trees were popular for civic, institutional & large formal garden plantings from about the 1850s to the 1950s. (Cabbage Tree Palms are not self-cleaning either, yet Council still chooses & plants these in parks & as street trees).
  • Marrickville has several significant plantings, including St Brigids Church & the old hospital site on Marrickville Road; Graham Avenue & Hastings Street behind the old hospital site; Carrington Road South Marrickville, & Brooklyn Street, Tempe. The Graham Avenue palms are listed in Council’s heritage register as an example of 1930s Depression relief work. (All these trees should be listed on the Heritage Register. These trees are well regarded by local residents I have spoken to who find them beautiful, impressive & a positive addition to parks & the streetscape).
  • All of these locations are identified in Council’s Australian White Ibis Management Plan 2007 because of the predilection of these birds to inhabit

    Beautiful landscaping at the intersection opposite Arlington Recreation Reserve in Dulwich Hill includes a Canary Island palm in the traffic island

    & nest in Canary Island Date Palms. Although native & endangered, the Australian White Ibis does not enjoy popular status when living in close quarters with humans, often being described as noisy & smelly. Management of palm habitat to reduce its attractiveness to the Ibis includes pruning into a ‘wineglass’ or ‘pineapple’ shape by removing horizontal fronds to reduce the space suitable for nesting. (Removing their beauty). However, constant pruning can damage palms.  Pruning palm fronds can lead to poor trunk formation & can threaten the health of the palm when applied over several seasons. Pruning also increases the risk of disease spreading between palms. At the time when Council’s Australian White Ibis Management Plan 2007 was being prepared it was noted that the Carrington Road palms had been regularly pruned by Council over the previous 3 to 4 years & their health was being compromised by the constant pruning. (Many in the community were wondering what was wrong with the Carrington Road trees.  Only last month a business owner spoke to me about 1 of these trees concerned that it was dying.  In 2009, 3 replacement Canary Island Palms died during the drought. They were removed & not replaced much to the disappointment of both the businesses & locals). Council’s tree management officer recommended that pruning should be limited to only removing dead fronds & flower stalks to prevent killing the palms. Phoenix palm tree maintenance is at the higher cost end of tree species maintained by Council due to the need to mechanically remove fronds on a regular basis, the elevated platform required for the work, arboricultural hygiene requirements & the difficulty of disposing of the fibrous & spiky fronds, which generally cannot be recycled & must be disposed of to landfill. (That Council would need to prune a few fronds is a small cost considering the overall benefits of this species of tree.  Council would not need to prune more than once year & even that may be an over-estimate.  Landfill from fronds is far better than most of what reaches landfill).

  • One of the recommended strategies of the Australian White Ibis Management Plan 2007 is to limit new ibis nesting habitat in Marrickville through revision of tree management related policies  (Marrickville Council chooses to get rid of trees on the basis of the need to prune & because of wildlife.  If there are no trees for the Ibis, perhaps they will start using the roofs of houses.  Places where these birds could be out of the way & not an annoyance for people like the Cooks River have more grasses than trees).
  • The yellow fruit of the palm, although not attractive to humans are popular with birds & bats & the seeds are highly viable. Self-seeded specimens propagate widely throughout the Marrickville LGA & metropolitan Sydney & it has become a weed species in East Gippsland, the Riverina & Auckland New Zealand. (I’d be interested if you have you ever seen one growing spontaneously in gardens, parks across Marrickville LGA.  I’ve seen 3. All are growing the fork of Fig trees & are small enough for me to remove.  I’d hardly consider them an invasive tree in this LGA.  Wolli Creek would be the only area I would worry about.   Marrickville LGA is not East Gippsland, the Riverina & Auckland New Zealand. Eucalypts are a weed in South Africa & the US, yet we still plant these species of tree in Australia. Causarinas which multiply by sending out endless suckers do not seem to be a problem to Council).
  • Canary Island Date Palms are susceptible to Fusarium wilt. The disease is active in Sydney & has resulted in the death & removal of a fine stand of the palms in Centennial Park. (Is the potential for disease a reason why these trees should not be saved? I don’t think so, nor do the people who pay many thousands of dollars purchasing mature Canary Island Palms to landscape their properties).
  • Consultation undertaken during the preparation of the Marrickville Urban Forest Strategy reflects a growing community interest in trees & in the use of locally provenanced tree species. The observation is made that although these grand, architecturally formed palms were frequently planted & often produced highly attractive landscapes, their day as landscape feature elements has passed & Council should be increasing its plantings of locally endemic species to address biodiversity & amenity issues. (I participated in this community consultation & did not see the issue of Canary Island Palms brought up as a topic by Council.  This blog has always advocated for native food-producing trees to be planted around the LGA.  However, I have also advocated for keeping & caring for non-native trees that provide food for both people & urban wildlife, especially when those trees provide beauty.  It is in autumn that one notices just how many ornamental fruit trees that provide no value to wildlife there are in our parks & streets across the LGA).
  • Any proposal to remove a tree as part of a DA is assessed on its merits.

    Canary Island palms in Marrickville Park

    Where Council agrees that a tree cannot be kept, if practical & appropriate conditions can be imposed to require certain species to be relocated within the development site – this is the preferred option in the case where retention of the tree is warranted & the species is suitable to transplant successfully. Transplanting of trees to Council owned sites within the LGA as a condition of consent is problematic unless there is an adopted policy & process to facilitate this option in an efficient & timely way.  (Once again, I fail to understand why Council sees the transplanting of a tree onto Council property as a cost that should be born by the developer.  Council should be requesting the tree as a gift to the community rather than it be chopped down & added to landfill.  I doubt that there would be many developers who would care that Council takes away a tree that they want to get rid of.  In fact, the transplanting of a tree removes the considerable cost of removing the tree for the developer).

I was not present for the debate. The vote was – For: Clrs Olive, Peters, Phillips, Kontellis & Byrne.  Against: Clrs Iskandar, Tsardoulias, Wright, O’Sullivan, Thanos, Hanna & Macri.  Not passed.

I will continue to advocate for transplanting these majestic trees.  I do so because it seems crazy to throw away a tree that likely has another 80-100-years of life left, that is relatively easy to transplant, provides food & habitat for urban wildlife, is a link to our history & significantly improves streetscapes.  The relative ugliness of our streetscapes in particular is a desperate need in many areas across Marrickville LGA.  Even Council has referred to these trees as creating “highly attractive landscapes.”

I feel disappointed with Marrickville Council.  Surrounding Councils do transplant these trees into traffic islands, as feature trees in appropriate locations & their community benefits.  I have talked to all sorts of people who frequently mention these trees in a positive light, particularly when they have been the beneficiaries of one planted in their locality.  As Ibis are a concern, there are plenty of sites where these trees could be planted where they would not be affecting residential homes.  I sincerely doubt whether half a dozen Canary Island palms a year would come up for removal & perhaps 1 or 2 of these would not be found suitable to transplant due to issues of access, but Council could at least try.  End of rant.

Here is a 1-minute video showing Ibis in a row of Canary Island palms opposite Lewisham Railway Station –

This Canary Island palm beautifies & makes an impressive feature a traffic island in the Stanmore shopping strip

I found a 2009 TAFE paper that says, Marrickville LGA is densely populated with 4,325 people per square kilometre & has the least amount of green space of any LGA in Australia.”  This is an astounding statistic & with something like another 4,300 people going to live here as part of the last state government’s housing strategy, our green space will become even more important than it is now.

Some of our larger parks are classified ‘active parks,’ that is, parks that are primarily used for organized sporting activities. As such, some residents feel they cannot use the parks for much of the time.  Therefore, ‘passive,’ parks with playgrounds, picnic or grassed areas become very important to the non-sporting association community.

Residents need both ‘active’ & ‘passive’ parks.  Some like those along the Cooks River blend active & passive beautifully because of the size of the parks & access to the river.  A number of our passive parks are beautiful & visiting them is worth a trip out.  I will post about these over time.

A beautiful mature Fig tree complete with a great set of aerial roots in Weekley Park. Council has planted another Fig tree recently.

A couple of weeks ago we visited Weekley Park.  Almost everything about this grand old historical park is beautiful in my opinion.  Located between Percival, Albany & Clarendon Roads Stanmore, Weekley Park is full of large, tall trees & is laid out in grid pattern with every path meeting in the centre where there is a circle of very tall Canary Island palm trees.  20-years ago there used to be prolific flowering red, pink & white roses in the raised central garden, but instead there is now a few Nandinas with empty garden beds.  Some of the roses in other garden beds that connect with the central paths are still here so hopefully they will continue to be retained.

The Nandina look very ordinary & a bit scraggly in the centre feature garden that is supposed to bring the components of the park together.  Perhaps one day when Council has the funds they might bring back the roses or plant something a bit more dramatic & beautiful that suits the park, though this is a matter of personal taste. Other people might like Nandina. They certainly sell at nurseries.

Weekley Park is very popular green space as evident by the many people sitting in the shade on benches, on the grass or watching their kids play in the playground.  Lots of people, including adolescents, were in groups or alone reading.  It was nice to see.

The park is also full of bird song & this coupled with the visual aspect of the many tall trees makes it quite a relaxing place.  The playground equipment is new & there are toilets & drinking bubblers.  You can take your kids for a while & have no need to rush home because someone needs to go to the loo.

There are 2 large trees towards the centre that look to me to be in trouble, maybe even dead.  It’s hard for me to tell because it is still winter.  They have large areas of decay, holes & dead areas in the branches.  Actually, these holes would make fine homes for urban wildlife, but I doubt that the trees will be allowed to stay.  I hope when they do come down that they are replaced with equally large growing trees so the feel of the park can be retained.  The rest of the trees are in great health & there is a nice variety that all seems to come together well & give a stately look to the park.

Art installation 'Tree People' by Graham Chalcroft

There is a great piece of public art called ‘Tree People’ that was created by artist Graham Chalcroft & installed in June 2009 as part of Marrickville Council’s public art strategy.  I like it a lot. It’s whimsical & also functional as it includes double-sided benches.  Year 5 students from St Michael’s Catholic Primary School collaborated with the artist by drawing the animals that are ‘the guardians of the park.’  Council contracted public art is popping up around the LGA in public spaces, which is very nice.

One of the old Fig trees has the best aerial roots forming that I have seen in the LGA.  It’s great that they have been left to grow & have not been chopped off. One day they will do what they are supposed to do & offer structural support to the branches when they grow larger.

If you like parks, then I think you will like Weekley Park.  It is worth paying a visit & spending some time.  Dogs need to be on a leash & there are free poo bags supplied & a bin on site.  There are a few chess tables with bench seats, loads of park benches all facing good views of the park.

Council has recently planted quite a few new street trees on the verge that will also add beauty to the area.  The intersection is a Box or Murraya hedge (I didn’t go close enough to see) & this too looks grand & lovely.  Green intersections make any street look great in my opinion.  All these things work unconsciously in the mind saying this is a nice area.  One block away is the intersection almost everyone knows about.  It is the hundreds of agapanthus & white roses at the roundabout at Salisbury Road & Northumberland Avenue.  This was radical for the area in the mid 1980s & I remember a friend taking me from Balmain just to see it.  It’s still there, though not in as good condition, but still giving a strong message that Stanmore is a nice area.

I imagine some would wonder why I go on about such basic things like intersections.  I do so because the majority in Marrickville LGA are concrete or concrete patterned bricks.  Any green landscaping that softens the hard infrastructure is a plus in my opinion.  I strongly believe that landscaping makes an area nicer as do a sufficient number of good-looking street trees.  Some suburbs in Marrickville LGA have this as a norm while others look bare & somewhat harsh in comparison.  This has an impact on how our society feels about an area or even a whole suburb.

I have made a short YouTube video of Weekley Park here –


& the Salisbury Road  intersection here –

The centre of Weekley Park has a circle of mature Canary Island palm trees. There are also a couple of Canary Island palms at the perimeter. Instant charm. In the foreground are two rose gardens, dormant because of winter.

Canary Island palm in Pigott Street Dulwich Hill that could be saved by relocating it across the white fence into Hoskins Park

The number of trees that can be viewed on the skyline from far too many parts of Marrickville LGA can be counted on two hands.  Suburbs like Dulwich Hill, Lewisham & Petersham have more trees visible on the skyline, but development is hot in these suburbs so the canopy may not last.

I accept that the loss of our big trees has to happen if units & other higher density housing are to be built.  Occasionally, tall-growing replacement trees are included as part of new development, but in reality, the trend is to develop as much of the land as possible & landscape with small shrubs.  Street trees & parks are expected to provide the outlook of taller trees.

In this month’s Development Assessment Committee Meeting, approval was given to chop down 11 mature trees at Fanny Durack Aquatic Centre, while 7 trees in Tempe, including a mature Canary Island Palm, will be considered for removal after a site inspection.  This is a total of 18 large trees up for removal just for this month.

This Canary Island Palm is up for removal in Tempe

Last month, at least 36 trees, most of them massive trees, were up for removal in Petersham Park. Thankfully, this didn’t get approval.  Coming up soon is the Brooks Lodge Dulwich Hill DA seeking approval to remove 11 trees, including a mature Canary Island Palm.

What I have noticed is Marrickville Council’s acceptance of the loss of mature palms that can quite easily be transplanted in another location.  In my opinion, these trees are worth the trouble of saving as they will pay the cost back many times over the years.  Why does Marrickville Council allow our old Palm trees to be thrown away?

Canary Island Palms are incredibly hardy, durable & water-wise trees.  A Canary Island Palm that is around 18-20 metres will be between 80 & 100-years-old.  It is not unusual for these trees to live for 160-years or more.  They also provide food & habitat for a wide range of urban wildlife.

These trees are worth big money.  I rang just one company for a quote.  They charge by the metre for Canary Island palms & each metre of trunk costs $1,500 plus GST.


  • a 10 metre tree will cost $15,000 plus GST – a total of $16,500.
  • a 20 metre tree will cost $30,000 plus GST – a total of $33,000.

These prices are just to purchase the tree & do not cover delivery or installation.

You are looking at least $90,000 plus worth of palms in Dolls Point (before delivery & installation) in today's rates. This is money well spent as it improves the whole area & provides food & habitat for urban wildlife

Suffice to say that the presence of mature Canary Island Palms increases property value substantially.  People want ‘statement trees’ because they are seen to add class, they finish off the property, they don’t want to wait half a lifetime for a tree to mature & because these are the trees you have when you don’t want to obstruct the view.  Canary Island Palms are even sold on Second Life, which tells me that people have a love of these trees.

The mature Canary Island Palm at Pigott Street Dulwich Hill that is up for removal is located around 3 metres from a boundary fence to Hoskins Park.  The tree could easily be dug out with a grader, carried next door & planted in Hoskins Park, thereby retaining at least some of the history of Pigott Street.   If not in the park, then there are countless round-a-bouts & corners in Marrickville LGA where a tree like this would significantly improve the streetscape.  I recognize that trees are the casualties of development, but I do not accept that Marrickville Council cannot at the very least, retain trees that can be relocated.  It is unbelievable & sad that the most likely action will be to give approval to chop it down probably because Council will say the process of relocating it would be too difficult.

You are looking at in excess of $200,000 worth of trees here in San Souci (before delivery & installation) in today's rates. I'm glad they spent this money because the community & the wildlife get to benefit from these trees as well. It was money well spent.

In February 2010 I posted about community action to save Hoskins Park in Dulwich Hill from a 3-storey development of 11 town houses next door that would remove 15 trees & which would ‘loom over’ Hoskins Park. Two development applications were submitted & both were refused.  Council cited non-compliance with local planning controls & the huge community opposition to the development as reasons for refusal.  The Marrickville Heritage Society also put in a submission against the development, particularly the intent to demolish two 1920s houses.

It was regarded as an overdevelopment back then & now another DA has been submitted, this time almost twice the size at 20 units. Currently the site is zoned 2A – low residential density, prohibiting multi-level & mulit-unit residential development in the Hoskins Park area. Half of the 20 units will be affordable housing (20% off market rent for 10 years). Perhaps they are hoping that the affordable housing component will ensure that the zoning requirements are ignored & the DA gets approved?

In the latest DA they want to do the following –

  • Demolish parts of the historic Brooks Lodge. This building is being considered for heritage listing.
  • Demolish 34 & 36 Piggot Street, two Federation houses that appear to be in excellent condition.  36 Piggott Street in particular has its original features, tessellated tiles, chimney & stained glass windows.
  • 3-storey units will overlook Hoskins Park. As the land is on the hill directly above Hoskins Park, which slopes down towards the Greenway, the units will indeed ‘loom over’ the park.
  • They also want to remove a mature Melaleuca street tree on Denison Road & an Evergreen Ash (Fraxinus griffithii) street tree on Piggot street. New trees will be planted here when the development is completed.
  • They want to remove 4 trees from the front formal garden of Brooks Lodge & replace with a formal garden of their own design.  3 of the trees are of significant size & at least one is visible on the skyline from Hoskins Park & surrounding streets.  A Frangipani will be relocated somewhere else.
  • 4 small to small-sized trees inside the property will be removed.
  • 1 mature Canary Island Palm will be removed. At the very least this tree should be transplanted somewhere into the streetscape of Marrickville LGA or a few metres across the fence & replanted in Hoskins Park. These trees cost thousands of dollars to source & are great sources of food & habitat for many species of birds as well as flying-foxes. They also handle transplanting well.
  • All up this DA seeks to remove 11 trees.

Healthy Canary Island Palm - instead of chopping it down, why not relocate it across this fence into Hoskins Park or at the Cooks River or into a traffic island or somewhere else in Marrickville LGA?

I personally think there is much to be concerned about with this DA apart from the unnecessary loss of trees.  To remove 4 healthy mature trees in a formal garden of an historic house to create another formal design is totally unnecessary in my opinion.  The loss of these trees will have a major impact on the skyline & the leafy feel of this area.  It will be also removing food sources & habitat for urban wildlife. Throwing away the Canary Island Palm is dreadful.

Local community group ‘Save Hoskins Park’ believes that the development, should it be approved, will have a significant detrimental impact on both Hoskins Park & the character & amenity of surrounding streets. They need others in Marrickville LGA to help them preserve the amenity, privacy, unique character & view corridors of Hoskins Park by sending Marrickville Council a submission opposing this development.  You can contact ‘Save Hoskins Park’ if you would like a draft submission to make it easier at –

The DA (DA201100201) can be viewed here –

The deadline for submissions is 12 noon 19th May 2011.  Submissions can be emailed to –

I made a short video of the trees that will be lost & the houses that will be demolished if this DA is approved –

& a short video of Hoskins Park –

Showing the front garden of Brooks Lodge - every bit of green including the street tree is going to be chopped down or removed to create a new formal garden. It is already a beautiful formal garden.

The evening opened up with an Extraordinary Council Meeting about our Sister City relationship with the island of Madeira, which was recently struck by flood & landslides killing 42 & injuring 250 people.

Discussion covered recognising the devastating effects of this & other recent natural disasters, Council’s poor financial position, the lack of financial capability to reciprocate to an equal level when representatives from Sister Cities visit Marrickville, the large numbers of Sister Cities we have & whether this should be reduced (imagine, “sorry sister, it’s goodbye”) & developing a policy regarding financial assistance to Sister Cities when Council is having problems financially supporting its own services.

The motion was carried to donate $5,000 from the Sister Cities budget to help with rebuilding the affected area. Mayor Iskandar had the deciding vote.

Then came the Development Assessment Meeting.  One wouldn’t think that DAs are interesting unless they directly concern you, but actually they are.

There were DAs for single block developments, shops & large residential housing.  The gallery was full & some residents waited for 2 hours to speak.  The following is my impressions & thoughts:

People from both sides feel quite passionate & emotional about DAs.  Some were frustrated by the time required for the DA process.

Local residents were concerned about developments they felt would significantly change the streetscape in terms of set-back & visual impact. Height, noise, parking, privacy & loss of light were other issues causing concern.

I have seen these issues raised many times both inside & outside Council meetings.  People who become involved by attending Council meetings, signing petitions or lobbying against certain DAs hold the streetscape of the Inner West in high regard & they want to retain it.  It appears that some people new to the area & developers want to build more modern buildings & this causes a conflict with the other residents.

Given that these developments are being built, I don’t think it will be too many years before the visual outlook of great chunks of Marrickville LGA will be significantly changed.  Unlike Haberfield, which has decreed no modern buildings will be allowed & heritage will be protected at all cost, Marrickville LGA does not seem to have a policy like this.

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that if a DA ticks all the boxes, it is up to the councillors as to whether it gets approved.  Naturally, the Councillors have differing perceptions of taste & beliefs as to what constitutes appropriate outlook, as well as what should be knocked down.  Many cherished buildings considered heritage by the Marrickville Heritage Society & other authorities have been demolished over the years.

Last night one developer said the plans for a large  residential development were “unashamedly contemporary,” yet the area this development is situated is one of the most historical in the LGA in terms of housing, other buildings, parks, trees & other historical infrastructure. I see some box-like buildings plonked next to softer, filigree terraces, but I belong to Marrickville Historical Society, so of course I prefer the older buildings.

Only last week Paul Keating said on Lateline, “Well, I can’t teach you good taste” when speaking about the 60 storey glass hotel in red planned for a finger pier at Barangaroo. Interesting that I liked much of the proposed development, but not this particular building.


I mention the issue of development & taste because our suburbs are changing.  Marrickville LGA is about to embark on major new development & much of it will be high-rise.  A lot will get through because the state government wants us to have housing for something like another 10,000 people & frankly Marrickville Council desperately needs the money which comes from Section 94 contributions (what the developers pay to Council).

The Councillors need our input either directly or via community lobby groups.  Mayor Iskandar said this in both Marrickville Matters & the Inner West Courier recently.  He also said that the changes coming would affect the community for at least the next 25 years.  If we don’t let the Councillors know what we don’t want, then we will have to accept what the developers give us.

Very soon, a DA for a Backpackers in Addison Road Enmore will come before Council.  This is a 130 plus bed establishment with 7 parking spaces, 2 of them designated Disabled Parking.  Is this of consequence?  Judging by the speakers last night & other recent community action regarding the proposed development on the old Marrickville RSL site, parking is a huge issue in people’s minds.  Council is passing DAs where residents question the parking ratio & sincerely believe parking opportunities will be worse with the new development.

It’s changing times.  Denser living will further impact on parking.  Backpackers often have sufficient funds to buy a car & most residences have at least one car & sometimes more than two.  Council & the government are encouraging public transport use, but living close to a railway station really doesn’t have much of an impact on vehicle ownership yet.  Perhaps later it will when petrol becomes costlier.  For now, there is the problem with a transport system that is already deemed inadequate.  It’s all food for thought.

Moving to trees, a DA at 23 West Street was passed last night.  This site will have 8 double storey modern townhouses built on a block where there are two 9 metre Council protected Canary Island Palm trees & a Fiddle Leafed Fig tree on the boundary of the back property.  Council’s own report stated that Canary Island Palm trees only live for 15-40 years so the development would ‘outlive’ them.  In fact, these trees generally live for 150-160 years, which is an enormous difference.

The Councillors agreed these 2 trees will be relocated to the back of the development, stipulating the root protection zone of the Fig tree will also be protected.  This is a good thing, though I’m sorry we will lose the Palms from the streetscape, which has or is about to lose 31 trees on the opposite side of the street.  Change.

It was good to hear that Palms relocated at Enmore Park for the swimming pool development are doing well.

Another DA passed was 63 Grove Street St Peters which will erect 34 double storey dwellings.  2 mature trees will be removed, yet the landscaping is great.  They intend to plant 10 trees capable of growing to 15 metres, 19 trees reaching 5 metres, 9 trees reaching 7 metres, 10 trees reaching 8 metres & 46 trees reaching 5 metres.  94 trees in total.  They also intend to preserve the current street trees.  I wish all developments planted this percentage of tall growing trees.

One final point of interest is that various sites across Marrickville LGA are considered contaminated, so don’t eat the dirt.  There is some serious toxic stuff around from poor industry practices in the past & dumping.  Like toxins that live on to create problems decades later, we need to think if an upcoming development will also be like that & whether we want to be involved in community consultation to shape our community for the better.



© Copyright

Using and copying text and photographs is not permitted without my permission.

Blog Stats

  • 714,777 hits
%d bloggers like this: