14/08/2026
There are currently earthworks proceeding at 53 Harper Street, Woodbridge. According to the developers they intend to clear all vegetation on the block including several large mature trees. One is a Eucalyptus species and there are a couple of Cape Lilac Trees. As most of us are aware Cape Lilacs are used as vital foraging habitat by threatened species of Black Cockatoo in the middle of summer.
If City of Swan Council had endorsed the Draft Tree Protection and Management Local Planning Policy (POL-LP-1.18) at its meeting on 12 November 2025 then the trees at 53 Harper Street would have qualified as "protected trees". The owner would have been required to submit a Development Application if they wanted to cut them down.
Once a Development Application is required then the requirements of Section 10.2 of the City of Swan Local Planning Scheme 17 apply: "The local government in considering an application for planning approval is to have due regard to such of the following matters as are in the opinion of the local government relevant to the use or development the subject of the application".
Those considerations include s10.2(m) "the likely effect of the proposal on the natural environment and any means that are proposed to protect or to mitigate impacts on the natural environment" and c10.2(o) "the preservation of the amenity of the locality".
The City deferred the Draft Policy for consideration at a future meeting, but many other local Governments in Perth have already adopted similar policies.
As we saw in Guildford recently, the owner of a property on Helena Street lodged a development application to cut down an old growth Flooded Gum known as the Auction Tree. That application has since been withdrawn, presumably due to public opposition.
There is a growing expectation in the community that Development Applications should be submitted before cutting down large mature trees on private property in suburban areas.
When property owners are considering cutting gown mature established trees they should ask themselves if they are going to do the right thing by the local community - or will they just take the money and run, not caring about the damage they leave behind.
There have been several cases in the State Administrative Tribunal that support this, such as ZORZI and TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE [2025] WASAT 77 and two months ago NEE and TOWN OF BASSENDEAN [2026] WASAT 66 (June 2026).
Here is part of the decision from NEE and TOWN OF BASSENDEAN:
As the Tribunal found in Zorzi and Town of Cambridge [2025] WASAT 77 (Zorzi), at [232], applying the orthodox principles of planning law and taking into account the planning context of the site, the 'works' to remove, in that case, a Tuart tree, constituted 'development' for which approval was required under Town of Cambridge Local Planning Scheme No 1.
Considering the facts of the present case, the tree, while of a different species, it is of a significant scale and set in a suburban context, and the same definitions of 'development' and 'works' apply.
As in Zorzi, the works to remove the tree will result in a permanent alteration to the subject site to such an extent that it will have consequential town planning impacts on the relevant locality, including but not limited to visual amenity and, its removal, considering this context, cannot, in my view, be regarded as de minimis." [46-48]
