Fed-up Stonnington Council plans bond to save trees
By Madeleine Heffernan
13 March 2018
Owners or developers may be asked to pay cash as security for failing to protect trees across Stonnington.
A Melbourne council is so frustrated by developers and property owners felling or damaging trees without permission that it plans to introduce tree bonds next year.
The council says high levels of redevelopment in Stonnington have led to a loss of established tree canopy across the well-to-do suburbs in its area.
“There are just too many significant, mature trees in the inner city that are being lost, so we want to provide more of a guarantee that they will be protected and preserved where agreed upon,” Stonnington mayor Steve Stefanopoulos said.
Sometimes residents found a tree a nuisance and felled it overnight without a permit, Cr Stefanopoulos said. Sometimes trees were damaged during development work, despite permits requiring them to be preserved. And sometimes a developer “moonscaped” a site – removing every stick of vegetation to make it easier to develop – and accepted the fine as a price of doing business.
In response, Stonnington City Council – which covers Toorak, Kooyong, South Yarra, Windsor, Prahran, Armadale, Malvern, Malvern East and Glen Iris – has proposed that before a development plan is approved, the owner or developer be required to pay money as security for failing to protect trees or ensure satisfactory landscaping works.
The money, likely to be thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, would be returned only if the party kept its promise to protect existing trees and establish and maintain new planting. For trees, the authority the money was paid to would inspect the site one year after completion; for landscapes, six weeks.
Cr Stefanopoulos said tree and landscape bonds would make owners and developers think twice.
“When it’s a $10 million project, [under current laws] they’re going to get fined a couple of hundred dollars because they’ve cut down a tree. Which developer is going to argue? “But if we’re talking about $10,000 to $20,000, they’ll think, ‘Hang on a minute, that hurts a bit more.’
Stonnington is not the first council to complain that tree numbers are dwindling amid the city’s housing boom.
Nillumbik shire councillor Peter Clarke last year described illegal tree removal as community and environmental vandalism, while Whitehorse City Council found private arborists were sometimes hired to recommend a tree be removed, even if it was healthy.
Michelle Croughan, manager of planning and building at the Municipal Association of Victoria, which represents local councils, said councils that had sought to protect trees without a bond had struggled.
“The bond seems to be the only mechanism that makes both owners and contractors take the protection of trees seriously,” she said.
Stonnington City Council is seeking public comment now and will vote on the idea later this year, with a possible 2019 introduction.
It is proposed that the council will send letters to all owners of land for which has a permit has been issued over the past four years. This letter would “inform them that council has adopted a zero-tolerance approach in respect to the failure to adhere with vegetation requirements of permits”.
It is also proposed that planning permit cover letters be changed to state, “in the event of a breach of any of the requirements of the permit or endorsed material, the landowner, developer and any other relevant persons (such as a subconsultants) will be liable to prosecution.
“In most cases, such a breach will result in the issue of a Planning Infringement Notice to all parties (where applicable bank guarantees will be drawn). ”
The Property Council was contacted for comment.
March 14, 2018 at 11:32 AM
Don’t think I’ve ever seen any property getting bulldozed for development where a single blade of grass has been left. Trees are collateral damage in Glen Eira.
March 14, 2018 at 12:15 PM
Most of our councillors present and past would be out there helping developers in chopping down trees. I heard ex councillor Pilling referred to a chainsaw Pilling.
March 14, 2018 at 10:43 PM
If he had not been elected, Frogmore would still be standing.
March 15, 2018 at 7:13 AM
God yes, that was a tree massacre on a epic scale and many years on the site remains an empty wind swept dust bowl.
March 15, 2018 at 12:52 PM
That is a disgrace.
March 14, 2018 at 4:47 PM
I doubt that even a $20,000 bond or fine would stop a development that runs to the millions and it would probably be tax deductible. Still, it’s better than nothing and much much better than the non existent tree protection that Glen Eira has.
March 15, 2018 at 12:25 PM
Isn’t it interesting that in our closest municipality Councillors are troubled by moon scaping when it is the norm in Glen Eira. Can anyone nominate a property where a developer preserved any vegetation?
Our children will rightly be ashamed of the generation that oversaw the destruction of our urban forest. Too few of our trees are more than 40 years old.
And yes you can have high density development that does not remove all trees, and preserves amenity for its citizens.
March 15, 2018 at 1:09 PM
Its increasing looking like you cannot have trees other that nominal ornamentals and medium density development. The excavation of the underground car parks that are becoming the standard here in Glen Eira rule out keeping any significant trees. It also to easy to a arborist that is in pay of the developer to condemn all the trees on the site. Tree decline should be seen as a marker of overdevelopment, especially as here in Glen Eira as we do not have the open space to make up this tree loss.
March 15, 2018 at 1:16 PM
Worth remembering that the current Urban Design Guidelines advocate very strongly for underground car parks. No mention of course of how close these concrete bunkers will be to fencelines.
March 15, 2018 at 1:44 PM
Moonscaping and general tree protection has been discussed for years and years in Glen Eira and never got off the ground thanks to Magee, Okotel, Lipshutz and Esakoff plus Lobo in recent times. Even Hyams was in favour of “consultation” but came down on the side of a “minimal” tree register according to some old posts up here. Maybe times have changed and if Magee and Esakoff still stick to their old views they can be outvoted this time round.