A Perth council has backflipped on its decision to strip protection from a century-old Moreton Bay fig tree after the decision sparked uproar across the community.
Two weeks after Fremantle council voted to remove the 130-year-old fig — which sits on private land — from its significant tree list, prompting a huge community outcry, councillors on Wednesday night backed a motion from Adin Lang to reverse the decision.
About 150 residents gathered on High Street in Fremantle last week to protest the removal of the tree from the register and a petition had racked up more than 11,000 signatures by Wednesday morning.
Get in front of tomorrow's news for FREE
Journalism for the curious Australian across politics, business, culture and opinion.
READ NOWSpeaking at the council meeting, Cr Lang said during the two weeks between meetings he had received drawings from architects that showed how the property could be redeveloped without removing the tree.
“Up to 30 apartments could be built, 34 car bays installed, while maintaining the fig and maintaining the heritage building,” he said.
“There is an opportunity to save the tree and the house.”
The decision reverses an initially supported request from the Cattalini family, which owns the property, to remove the tree from the list.
The request said the size of the tree was “deterring potential buyers” and creating “financial hardship” in the family’s bid to sell the land.
Cr Lang also said the council had received legal advice that confirmed the Moreton Bay fig had not been placed on the tree register illegally in 2019 — a point the landowners dispute.
Six members of the Cattalini family attended Wednesday’s meeting to protest the reversal.
Tony Cattalini said “due process” had been followed in the original decision on February 14, while Danielle Cattalini hit back at claims the decision was being brought forward again because some elected members had missed the previous vote.
“Was there a quorum at the February meeting?” she asked.
“The City of Fremantle is signalling to all property owners that you can follow process and procedure and yet have no rights.”
Not all councillors agreed with the reversal. Crs Geoff Graham, Fedele Camarda, Ingrid van Dorssen and Jenny Archibald voted against it.
Cr Geoff Graham said there was very little empathy for the landowners.
“The only crime was they purchased this property 60 years ago,” he said.
Mayor Hannah Fitzhardinge said she understood the family’s frustration and the council’s decision either way would make “someone unhappy”.
“Social media creates the opportunity for issues to accelerate rapidly and broadly and this one certainly did,” she said.
“To me, that juxtaposes with the relatively private but persistent efforts of the Cattalini family to get clarity on the future of the site and this tree.”
As part of the reversal, councillors voted to help the owners maintain the tree and review the significant tree register.
That review will include listing trees of cultural heritage significance and the introduction of incentives to support the maintenance of trees on the register.
The future of the tree can now be considered only as part of a formal development application to the city.