TPO permits — Ku-ring-gai vs Willoughby, compared.

The two North Shore councils with the tightest tree-preservation regimes also differ on almost every point of detail. If you're planning a removal in Gordon, Wahroonga, Pymble, Lindfield, Killara, Turramurra, or St Ives — you're under Ku-ring-gai. Chatswood, Willoughby, Artarmon, Naremburn, Castlecrag, and Castle Cove fall under Willoughby City Council.

Here's how each handles the paperwork.

Threshold comparison

Ku-ring-gai Council TPO protects any tree:

• Over 5 metres tall, or
• With a trunk diameter over 30cm measured at 1.4m above ground, or
• On the Blue Gum High Forest ecological community list, or
• Within a heritage conservation area.

Willoughby City Council TPO protects any tree:

• Over 4 metres tall, or
• With a trunk diameter over 15cm measured at 1.4m above ground, or
• Any protected species listed in Schedule 1 of the Willoughby LEP.

Willoughby's 4m / 15cm threshold catches more trees than Ku-ring-gai's 5m / 30cm. For small-to-medium garden trees, Willoughby is stricter. For mature heritage specimens, Ku-ring-gai's species-specific rules bite harder.

Application process

Ku-ring-gai requires:

• Completed TPO application form (online via NSW Planning Portal).
• Arborist report from a qualified (AQF Level 5) arborist for any protected species.
• Photographs of the tree in context.
• Proof of ownership or consent from the property owner.

Typical turnaround: 15-20 business days. Extensions are common for heritage overlay sites.

Willoughby requires:

• TPO application form (online).
• Arborist report for removals in heritage conservation areas or DA-linked work; not always required for straightforward non-protected removals.
• Photographs and sketch plan of the site.

Typical turnaround: 10-14 business days. Faster than Ku-ring-gai for standard applications.

Species protections

Ku-ring-gai runs an extensive list of species-specific protections, with the Blue Gum High Forest ecological community being the big one — it applies to swathes of Wahroonga, Turramurra, and St Ives. Any tree within a mapped BGHF area triggers the full application process regardless of size.

Willoughby's Schedule 1 list is shorter but includes Sydney blue gum, spotted gum, and angophora costata — which cover most of the significant canopy trees across the LGA.

Penalties

Both councils can refer significant breaches to the NSW Land and Environment Court. Maximum penalties under the EPA Act are $110,000 for corporations and $22,000 for individuals. Ku-ring-gai has a higher prosecution rate for unauthorised removals than any other Sydney council.

Our role on both

We don't lodge TPO applications on your behalf, but every removal quote will set you up for the council pathway:

1. Desktop pre-check against the TPO register and heritage overlays.
2. On-site AQF-qualified assessment with photographic evidence.
3. Clear brief of what the application needs to cover and what the council portal expects.
4. Referral to a consulting arborist when a formal written arborist report is required.
5. Scheduled removal once you have council notification in hand.

For emergency hazards, both councils accept retrospective notification (usually within 14 days) when the evidence pack confirms imminent risk. Our crew photographs and documents everything on arrival so you have the full pack ready to lodge.

Which council is harder?

Depends on the tree. For modern blocks with garden-sized trees (under 5m) Willoughby's lower threshold means more paperwork for the property owner. For large heritage specimens, Ku-ring-gai's species protections and longer turnaround add weeks to the project. Either way, the application is workable with a strong arborist report on file.