Rarely a Dull Moment - More Trees Stuff

Welcome back to our regular feature, Rarely a Dull Moment where we report on the highlights of City of Fremantle Council and occasionally Committee meetings and other activities. We would have titled the feature Never a Dull Moment, but didn’t want to overpromise!

In 2026, we are very pleased to welcome Jenny Archibald to the RADM desk. Jenny will be well known to many Freo folk as a former Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Councillor of the City of Fremantle. Jenny brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to her new role as our RADM reporter and we are sure many Shipees will look forward to her regular RADM reports.

In this RADM Jenny Archibald reports on the Planning Services Committee Meeting of 1 July 2026.

Welcome readers to our RADM report for the Planning Services Committee 1 July 2026 – the first for this new committee.

First to our valued public question time……and more questions on trees. Two local residents were seeking to retain their impressive trees on the Register of Significant Trees and Vegetation Areas – a topic for further discussion below.

THE HEADLINE STORY – TREES POLICIES

With no Petitions, Presentations nor Elected Member Communication, the the Headline Story was – Trees and more trees. Item PSC2607-6 ADOPTION OF AMENDED LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES 2.23: REGISTER OF SIGNIFICANT TREES AND VEGETATION AREAS AND 2.26: TREE RETENTION.

This led to an interesting discussion focusing on what is protected under which policy and to what extent, and whether it might be better to look at a blanket policy over the whole of the city for the Policy 2.26 Tree Retention Policy. Currently some higher density areas and the City Centre area are not covered by this policy. In discussion of questions around the two policies, it was clarified by staff that all trees are assessed under the same criteria and are protected to the same extent whether registered as a significant tree on the Register or deemed a regulated tree under the Tree Retention Policy. Following a question put during public question time, it also appears that if a significant or regulated tree is damaged by someone other than the owner of the tree, the responsibility may still lay with the owner unless the offending party can be proven.

More interesting facts from the Officers’ report – there has been a decline in canopy in the city over the period 2015-2026, with the greatest loss on private land (-15.7%) against an increase of canopy on public land of 7.8%. Cr Williamson Wong noted concern that “saving trees may limit infill”, a goal of many to increase density and therefore efficiency within the city.

There was a good deal of discussion on many aspects of these policies. But all up, parts 1,3,4 and 5 of the motion covering the receipt of submissions, amendment of the Local Planning Policy 2.23 – Register of Significant Trees and Vegetation Areas, removal of trees not considered of cultural significance from the Register,and declining to register resident nominated trees as Significant Trees for the same reason. Part 2 (Local Planning Policy 2.26 – Tree Retention) was deferred to the next appropriate Planning Committee meeting for further review, including review of which species may be considered not appropriate under the policy. Getting this policy right is no easy task.

AND EVERYTHING ELSE

On the remaining policy discussions, it was excellent to see the return of this topic – Item PSC2607-5 INITIATION OF LOCAL PLANNING POLICY 5.4: CONVENIENCE STORES FOR ADVERTISING. The report notes that the City has “received confirmation that the Minister approved Scheme Amendment 89: Convenience Stores for advertising with the expectation that advertising will begin within 28 days unless another timeframe is agreed to by the Commission”. The Officers report comments that the “proliferation of Convenience Stores threatens the viability of the commerciality of the City Centre by squeezing out other land uses and limiting the diversity of shopping, dining, and entertainment options that draw in visitors”. So, watch the My Say page on the council website and have a read!

There were two applications for unhosted short stay rental accommodation. You may recall this topic was discussed at a recent Council meeting and will no doubt become a topic of further consideration with the goal to keep a favourable balance of visitors and longer-term residents within the inner city area. But for this meeting, one was approved (PSC2607-4 ORD STREET, NO. 314/8 (LOT 56), FREMANTLE – CHANGE OF USE TO UNHOSTED SHORT-TERM RENTAL ACCOMMODATION) and the other refused (PSC2607-3 EAST STREET, NO. 39/31, FREMANTLE – CHANGE OF USE TO UNHOSTED SHORT TERM RENTAL ACCOMMODATION).

Two residential development applications were approved (PSC2607-1 DEFERRED ITEM: FIELD STREET, NO.2 (LOT 55), BEACONSFIELD – DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE HOUSE AND CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE STOREY SINGLE HOUSE and PSC2607-2 WESTMEATH, NO. 7 (LOT 23), NORTH FREMANTLE – TWO STOREY SINGLE HOUSE WITH ANCILLARY DWELLING).

And finally, a planning information report for July 2026. All up, six of the items were resolved by the Committee and three will be discussed further at a future Council meeting. The new committee is off and running!

Signed off at 19.36pm. Goodnight Freo.

*By Jenny Archibald