Fremantle residents have had their say on the two dozen trees earmarked for removal to make way for a playing field expansion in Beaconsfield – and they didn’t hold back.
About 300 residents crammed into the Fremantle Town Hall for a special electors’ meeting on Tuesday night with two opposing goals in mind: halt all tree removals across the port city, or rip the trees out to make another oval as originally planned.
Locals were outraged when they learned last month that 26 trees were earmarked to get the chop at Hilton Park, one of Fremantle’s largest recreation and sporting open spaces.
The popular playing fields are in the midst of a major redevelopment, and the trees, some of which included Norfolk Pines, would have to be removed to make way for a junior football oval.
‘Not an either-or choice’
A petition signed by almost 600 electors triggered the special council meeting, where they called on the council to pause the removal of the trees, and also consider their tree retention policy as a whole.
The proposed motion by resident Mark Woodcock asked the council to “immediately halt all clearing and mature tree removals across the City of Fremantle, specifically including the destruction of mature trees at Hilton Reserve”.
It also requests a mandate that “any future infrastructure, sports, or masterplan developments must be redesigned to prioritise 100 per cent retention of mature urban canopy.”
Hilton Park is approximately 19 hectares and is framed by Carrington Street, Lefroy Road, Shepherd Street and Jeffery Street.
Despite plans for the park’s redevelopment being cleared by council in 2024, residents claimed the extent of the tree removal was not quantified until signs went up in the northern portion of the playing fields.
Footy club warns of project delay
The masterplan for the park sets out a staged approach for the works over 10 years and includes a new community hub, shared soccer facilities, southern cricket and community building, a basketball court, skate park, additional recreation spaces and more trees and shade.
To create a new junior oval, the council endorsed the removal of the 26 trees and claimed to have undertaken community consultation where “seventy per cent of respondents supported the concept”.
The plan would also see 61 new native trees – more than double the number of trees removed – planted in the park.
Work was due to begin in August to remove asbestos from the site of what was once a BMX track in the park, followed by the removal of the trees, but both were paused until after the electors’ meeting.
The town hall was split, with tree canopy advocates and parents of children who play for the Fremantle City Dockers Junior Football Club – one of the groups who would best benefit from the new oval.
At least 35 people spoke at the meeting, with many playing tit-for-tat on how many generations they’ve lived in the area for (the highest was 135 years).
Three additional motions were submitted to the meeting in relation to the tree removal at Hilton Park.
Woodcock said he made his original motion “just to call attention to what was going on”.
“[I wanted] to send a very clear message to council that I feel the vast majority of Fremantle wants to protect the tree canopy,” he said.
“It’s not either or a choice between trees and sports. We don’t have to choose one or the other. We should have both.
“Voting tonight does not cancel the sports upgrade. It simply pauses the destructive works that council will take to the tree canopy, and this will allow a review or alternative layouts and engage in a genuine co-design with the community.”
On the opposing side, Fremantle City JFC president Connor Magee said if the motion was successful, it could jeopardise the junior AFL oval that is “so desperately needed” by the club.
“It also jeopardises the improvements to the cricket facilities, pump tracks, park accessibility, walking trails, and much more,” he said. “It has been part of our plan for a number of years. We cannot afford to go back to the drawing board now.”
‘No one in here knows what’s going on’
When it came time for the vote on Woodcock’s motion, electors only narrowly voted in favour of it.
But before they could get to the other motions, half of the room quickly emptied, with the majority of supporters of the master plan leaving.
What ensued was bureaucratic chaos as the electors shouted that they weren’t aware the following motions would be considered as amendments to Woodcock’s initial motion, instead voting under the assumption they would be individual motions.
“No one in here knows what is going on,” one elector shouted.
“I do not believe this was clear. I think this is really unfair, and I’m very frustrated and disappointed,” another elector said, to a room of applause.
After a tense few minutes of back and forth, the city’s chief executive, Glen Dougall, gave the approval for each amendment to be considered as new motions.
“It’s a special meeting that’s been asked for a specific purpose. So it’s not like an annual general meeting, so you have to stay on topic,” Dougall said.
“At Fremantle, we allow it to bend a little, but we need to keep it at least proximate to the intent of the meeting. The reason 583 people signed that petition was to talk about tree canopy and that’s what we’re trying to stick to.”
Dougall said they decided to allow each motion to be voted on individually because “there’s a lot of people who just wanted to vote on it”.
“At the end of the day, we’re here to listen to what people have to say. So, they put the motion up, and they voted on it and the council will talk about it next week.
Andrew Burton was one of the three electors who put up an additional motion and was under the impression it would be voted on in that manner.
“It’s a very poor process. It doesn’t help the community. It doesn’t help your transparency and democracy, and it doesn’t help show that you’re making evidence-based decisions that give the best solution,” he said of the mismanagement of the meeting.
“I hope that we can proceed in a non-polarised way so that we can really just drive for a good solution for everybody. Because at the moment, I don’t see anybody winning.”
With half the room gone, each item was voted for and passed and will be discussed by council members at next week’s ordinary council meeting.
From our partners
Read the full article here
