This petition is to object to:

1. The removal of two historic palm trees (approximately 100 years old) at 66 The Grove Lower Mitcham.  and

2. The proposed NDIS registered supported living facility at this location.

The two mature Canary Island palms are a valued local landmark. They provide established habitat for kookaburras and cockatoos, significant canopy and shade, and make an important contribution to the character of our streetscape. Their removal would be an irreversible environmental and visual loss.

The proposed development would fundamentally and permanently change the function and intended of use of the property, introducing multiple residents, on-site staff, increased traffic, parking demands, deliveries, and operational noise within a quiet residential area. There will be a reduced sense of privacy and neighbourhood security with many strangers in the area.

We respectfully request that the removal of the historic trees be reconsidered. And that the broader neighbourhood impacts of this NDIS registered supported living facility be fully and independently assessed.

Sign the petition to stand against the removal of these historic palm trees and urge the council to refuse the proposed development.

BACKGROUD:

Unfortunately, two of our beloved landmarks, namely the two historic Canary Island palm trees located at 66 The Grove Lower Mitcham are under threat. Proposed plans to remove these trees to make way for a supported living facility at this location have sparked serious concerns among residents and nature enthusiasts alike.

These trees are estimated to be approximately 100 years old and form a significant and established component of the local streetscape. Their scale, maturity, and visual prominence contribute meaningfully to the character of the area and to the broader urban tree canopy within Lower Mitcham. 

Importantly, the trees provide habitat and refuge for native fauna.  Kookaburras and Cockatoos have been observed utilising these palms for perching, shelter, and nesting. In an increasingly urbanised environment, mature trees play a critical role in sustaining birdlife and supporting biodiversity. The loss of these established trees would remove a functioning habitat that cannot be replicated by replacement plantings for many decades.

Planning Consent was granted late last year by Mitcham Council for the conversion of the property into NDIS registered supported accommodation for up to six residents, with full-time staff on site. The proposal includes partial demolition, substantial additions and alterations to the existing building, and removal of the two regulated palm trees. The extension will cover most of the rear of the block, significantly impacting neighbouring properties by reducing tree and sky views and altering the established residential character of the area.

Furthermore, the establishment of a supported living facility in this specific area raises several questions about urban planning and the preservation of green spaces in Mitcham. While we acknowledge the importance of providing care and support to individuals who need it, we must carefully consider the location and resultant impact on local ecosystems and residents' quality of life.

What is most concerning is not simply the development itself, but the process that allowed it to proceed with minimal transparency and no meaningful input from surrounding residents. Unbeknown to many of us, the whole suburb of Lower Mitcham (and surrounding suburbs) is subject to a planning overlay that permits significant retirement facilities and supported accommodation sites as a directive of the State Government. There is no stipulation regarding the type of resident who may live in such facilities, and the local council has no real discretion in the approval process. 

We are deeply concerned as we chose this area to live due to its quiet, stable and residential nature. The reality of a supported accommodation facility is that staff, visitors, and residents will change regularly. There will be a continual flow of people who are unknown to us living and working immediately adjacent to our homes and our children. Regardless of the intentions of the operator, this creates understandable discomfort and uncertainty for families who value safety, familiarity, and stability in their immediate surroundings. These concerns should not be dismissed, and they deserve to be part of the planning conversation.