A strong community campaign has failed to save a 60-year-old Norfolk Island Pine at Killarney Vale even though it’s on Central Coast Council’s Significant Tree Register.
The Local Planning Panel has given deferred approval to remove the tree on the footpath, along with development consent to knock-down the existing house and build a new two-storey house at 11 Trelawney St, including a new driveway.
However, this consent is not valid until legal easement arrangements are registered with NSW Land Registry Service, proving vehicle access to the neighbour at Number 13.
At present the properties at 11 and 13 Trelawney St share a driveway but the Panel said there was unresolved vehicular access and the development proposal at Number 11 would effectively preclude access to Number 13.
Since the development application was lodged with Council in October 2021 there has been about 160 objecting submissions, petitions and a community campaign to save the Norfolk Pine.
It’s one of only 11 Norfolk Pines on the Coast that have made it onto the significant trees list and is a local landmark about 20m high and 3.2m wide, visible across much of Tuggerah Lake and a beacon for boaties.
Objectors say that to cut it down just to accommodate a second or additional driveway would be environmental vandalism of gross proportions.
They say the owner should look at alternative designs to accommodate the tree as many houses have been built years ago with big Norfolk Pines within 6m and they were still surviving very well.
Local birds such as Tawny Frogmouths and Brush Tail Possums are known to inhabit the tree.
In March the Local Planning Panel deferred decision on the development application until Council supplied more information about the longevity of the tree as well as arrangements about the shared driveway servicing the two properties.
Among a long list of things, the Panel also wanted to know what work had been undertaken with the owner’s builder to finalise a design that allowed the tree to be retained, unless an independent aborist assessment showed the tree’s retention was not viable under any circumstances.
When the matter came back to its September 2 meeting, the Panel’s report said that in making its decision it weighed up the retention of an otherwise healthy tree which might have several decades of life remaining and the damage the tree had caused and would likely continue to cause public and private property.
The Panel said it “thoroughly reviewed all information, interrogated Council staff, the independent arborist and the applicant’s representative to clarify additional details provided”.
“Advice from Council staff and the independent arborist is that any changes, even minor changes, to the ground conditions in the vicinity of the tree will likely result in shortening the life of the tree to about one to five years,” the Panel report said.
“In making this decision, the Panel had regard to the public submissions and the comments made by speakers at our March meeting.
“On balance, the tree will continue to cause public and private property damage and there are no reasonable alternatives both in terms of building design and materials,” the report said.
The owner has 24 months to produce evidence of the conditions of deferred consent otherwise it will lapse.
Sue Murray