DA Tree Removal Assessment Guide – Stonnington

Tree removal associated with development in Stonnington is not automatically approved.

Council assesses whether trees can reasonably be retained within the overall development design under Clause 52.37, together with overlays such as SLO, VPO, ESO, DDO and Heritage controls across South Yarra, Prahran, Windsor, Malvern, Malvern East, Glen Iris, Armadale, Toorak and Kooyong.

Most development applications require a Level 5 arborist report assessing:

• Tree retention feasibility
• TPZ and SRZ impacts under AS 4970
• Development constraints and design response
• Reasonable alternatives to avoid removal

Our local Level 5 arborists prepare council-compliant reports supporting planning permit applications and clearly explaining whether tree removal is justified within the proposed development.

What Council Assesses During Tree Removal Applications

Tree removal linked to development is assessed within the broader planning context, not as a standalone request.

Council commonly considers:

• Contribution to neighbourhood character and canopy cover
• Tree health, structure and long-term viability
• Development layout and site limitations
• Feasible opportunities to retain the tree
• Compliance with AS 4970, including TPZ and SRZ requirements

Tree Retention Is Prioritised First

Before removal is considered, council generally expects applicants to demonstrate that reasonable retention options have been explored.

This may include:

• Adjusting building footprints or setbacks
• Relocating driveways or services
• Reducing TPZ or SRZ encroachment
• Using root-sensitive construction methods
• Providing arborist evidence supporting removal where retention is not practical

When Tree Removal May Be Supported

Removal may be considered where:

• The tree is structurally compromised or in significant decline
• Development conflict cannot reasonably be avoided
• Design alternatives have been properly explored
• Retention would impose unreasonable development constraints

Approval still depends on arborist evidence, planning context and canopy outcomes.

Example – How TPZ Encroachment Is Assessed

Example Scenario

A proposed dwelling encroaches approximately 15% into the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of a retained canopy tree.

Assessment Considerations

• Encroachment exceeds the commonly referenced 10% TPZ threshold
• Arborist investigation identifies structural roots within the affected area
• Alternative design responses are reviewed
• Root-sensitive footing systems and construction methods are considered

Typical Council Position

Where impacts can be reduced or appropriately managed, council generally expects tree retention.

Where encroachment significantly affects structural roots or long-term viability, removal may become supportable.

Important Takeaway

TPZ encroachment alone does not automatically justify removal.

The decision depends on:

• Extent of impact
• Root significance
• Design response
• Arborist evidence
• Retention feasibility

When Tree Removal Is Unlikely to Be Supported

Removal is less likely where:

• Trees are healthy and structurally sound
• Development design has not responded to tree constraints
• TPZ or SRZ impacts could be reduced through redesign
• The tree provides strong canopy or neighbourhood character value
• Arborist justification is limited or unsupported

Why the Arborist Report Is Critical

The arborist report is the primary document supporting any development-related tree removal request.

It should:

• Assess tree condition and structural integrity
• Calculate TPZ and SRZ under AS 4970
• Evaluate development impacts
• Assess retention feasibility
• Clearly justify proposed removal where necessary

Without detailed arborist documentation, tree removal approval is often difficult to support.

If Tree Removal Is Approved

Approval is usually conditional and may require:

• Replacement canopy planting
• Retention of other viable trees on site
• Landscape outcomes maintaining canopy contribution
• Suitable deep soil for long-term canopy growth

Council generally assesses long-term canopy outcomes rather than short-term replacement alone.

Replacement Canopy & Deep Soil Requirements

Replacement planting should:

• Suit the available site conditions
• Achieve long-term canopy growth
• Be supported by functional deep soil areas
• Respond to development constraints and available space

Council assesses whether replacement outcomes are realistic and sustainable over time.

What Triggers This Assessment Process?

Tree removal assessment commonly applies where:

• A planning permit is required
• A canopy tree meets Clause 52.37 thresholds
• Development impacts a TPZ or SRZ
• Planning overlays apply, including SLO, VPO, ESO, DDO or Heritage Overlay