In the leafy streets of Clovelly, a suburb in Sydney’s east, a community is rallying to save a piece of their local heritage—an 80-year-old weeping fig tree. The towering tree, which has become a beloved fixture on Quail Street, is now facing the axe after one resident complained about property damage.
This decision by the Randwick City Council has sparked a fierce debate about the value of urban trees and the balance between development and environmental preservation.
The weeping fig in question is not just any tree; it’s a living landmark that has provided shade, beauty, and a habitat for wildlife for decades. Residents have expressed their dismay, fearing that the loss of this tree will not only diminish the aesthetic appeal of their neighbourhood but also lead to increased noise, heat, and a decline in local biodiversity.
Petrana Lorenz, a Quail Street resident, encapsulates the sentiment of many when she spoke of the tree’s importance to her family’s life.
‘The trees were one of the biggest draws for living on the street. We’re in a second floor unit and our kids have grown up staring out the window and looking at the parrots and the possums. You cut down that tree and the sound of road traffic and heat increases rapidly. We lose our whole outlook,’ she told Yahoo News.
The council’s decision to remove the tree was made after a complaint about roots damaging a homeowner’s lawn, car space, and fence. Despite previous efforts to prune the tree and manage the issue, the council concluded that further trimming would compromise the tree’s structural integrity.
On 25 February, the council voted for its removal, citing liability concerns and the potential cost of insurance claims.
However, the community argues that the decision was hasty and that alternative solutions should be considered. Maria Bradley, another local resident, warns of the precedent this could set: ‘It’s a slippery slope. We can’t keep losing these really big trees that structurally are not a risk.’
The council, while aiming to increase canopy cover by 40 per cent by 2040, maintains that tree removal is ‘a last resort.’ They have also pledged to plant a ‘mature’ lilly pilly as a replacement, but residents are sceptical that it will provide the same benefits as the venerable fig.
Rob Aird, a local homeowner, is considering legal action to delay the tree’s removal. He suggests that the council could cover the cost of the property damage without involving insurance, thereby preserving the tree and avoiding greater expense and loss to the community.
The situation in Clovelly is emblematic of a broader issue facing urban areas across Australia. As cities grow and develop, the pressure on green spaces and mature trees increases.
Campaigners like Maria Hogg from Saving Sydney’s Trees are fighting to protect these natural assets, which are often undervalued in the face of short-term economic considerations.
The story of Quail Street’s weeping fig is a microcosm of the challenges faced in creating sustainable cities that value the environment as much as they do development. It raises important questions about how urban greenery is managed and prioritised.
We at YourLifeChoices encourage our readers to share their thoughts and experiences with local environmental issues. Should the concerns of a single property owner outweigh the collective benefit of a community’s green space? Have you faced similar challenges in your neighbourhood? Join the conversation in the comments below.
Also read: What’s making you angry? App shows what we complain about most to local councils
