A quiet Clovelly street has become the centre of a heated neighbourhood dispute, as residents unite to fight the decision to cut down a towering 24-metre fig tree that has stood for up to 80 years.
The conflict, which escalated in late February 2025, stems from a homeowner’s complaint alleging the tree’s roots damaged a fence, lawn and driveway along Quail Street, just a block from the beach.
In response, Council decided to remove the tree, citing insurance limitations and long-term liability concerns. However, locals say the decision was rushed and lacked proper consultation, sparking community action and potential legal proceedings.
Community Pushback Grows
Residents say the tree offers more than just greenery — it provides vital shade, softens traffic noise, attracts native birds and animals, and enhances the street’s character. They believe removing it would affect their quality of life and set a dangerous precedent for how councils handle urban trees.
Long-time Clovelly resident Petrana Lorenz, who lives opposite the tree, said families on Quail Street have spent decades enjoying the wildlife it attracts, including parrots, possums and herons. She said removing the fig would not only increase heat and noise but also strip the area of its unique charm.
Others in the neighbourhood have echoed similar concerns. Maria Bradley told reporters she worries the decision could pave the way for more tree removals across the suburb. She and others feel large, mature trees are being sacrificed for short-term convenience, despite the environmental and community benefits they bring.
Decision Defended, Residents Question Evidence
Randwick City Council has said it only removes trees as a last resort and has planted more than 2,000 street trees since 2022 to meet its goal of increasing canopy cover by 40 per cent by 2040. It plans to replace the weeping fig with a younger lilly pilly tree that is “better suited” for street planting.
However, residents argue that a newly planted tree will not immediately offer the cooling effects or wildlife habitat that the current one provides. Urban planning expert Professor Sarah Bekessy said claims that replacement trees can offer the same benefits are misleading. She believes regulations should better protect old trees in urban areas, given their unique role in cooling streets and supporting biodiversity.
Some residents question whether the damage to the fence and driveway was even caused by the tree at all. They paid for an independent engineering report which reportedly found no conclusive link between the tree and the structural damage. They are now seeking access to council documents and the insurer’s recommendations, filing freedom of information requests in hopes of reviewing the evidence behind the removal order.
Legal Challenge Looms
With support growing from local MP Allegra Spender, who has written to the mayor requesting a pause on the decision, residents are preparing to challenge the council’s plan in the NSW Land and Environment Court. Homeowner Rob Aird said it would be more sensible for Council to cover the relatively minor repair cost directly instead of cutting down a tree that has become part of the community’s identity.
This isn’t the first time Quail Street has faced a battle over its trees. Two decades ago, residents successfully opposed a plan to remove all five figs that line the footpath. Now, many fear that if one is removed, the others may follow.
The extraordinary general meeting held on 25 March did not change Council’s position, and the removal remains on the table. Residents say they’re not giving up and will continue exploring all available options — including court intervention — to keep the fig tree standing.
Published 1-April-2025