Community Information – 89 Beach Road, South Bunbury

It is not and never has been. The lot is a separate, vacant residential lot surrounded by existing homes. The City’s formal submission to the WA Planning Commission during the 2015 rezoning confirmed the site has no specific name or identity, no supporting recreational infrastructure, and no clear function as public open space. The Certificate of Title does not indicate it is reserved for recreation.

The City’s archival records confirm the 1970 transfer was a land transaction that included a payment to the then-owners. It was not a gift or donation. Landgate has confirmed there are no conditions, covenants or restrictions on the title requiring the land to be retained as open space or used for any specific purpose.

Council considered all community submissions, held a public meeting (19 attendees), received 29 written submissions, publicly advertised the scheme amendment for 42 days, referred it to the EPA, DPaW and the WAPC, heard from three residents who spoke against the proposal at the Council meeting, and voted to approve the rezoning (Council Decision 411/15, 10 November 2015). The WA Planning Commission subsequently approved the rezoning. The community had their say. The democratic process ran its course.The City is under sustained and legitimate pressure – from our community, from the State Government, and from housing and homelessness services – to do more.
This is us doing more.

The City’s current vegetation assessment identifies 28 trees – not 35 – comprising a mix of South West native species, other WA natives, interstate Australian species and exotic species. The larger, more established specimens are exotic and interstate species, not local natives. No significant trees requiring retention for development purposes have been identified. Residential development also does not necessarily mean removal of all vegetation – many homes in the surrounding streets have mature trees on their properties.

The City’s published baseline canopy cover is 13.7% across the full City boundary, based on comprehensive 2020 vegetation mapping. Updated 2025 aerial mapping indicates canopy cover has increased since that baseline. The 10% figure being cited publicly does not reflect the City’s published data

The City’s motivation is addressing the housing crisis – not revenue generation. Noting, the City has never claimed that two homes will solve the housing crisis. Of course they won’t. But this lot is one action among many – alongside progressing several other strategic City-owned sites, advocating directly to the State Government, engaging with community housing providers, and participating in State-led Housing First working groups. Further, City-owned land is a community asset and any proceeds are ratepayer funds reinvested into the community.

The 2015 rezoning process included a public meeting, 29 written submissions, 42 days of public advertising, signage on the land, newspaper advertising across five editions, website publication, direct letters to adjoining landowners, and referral to multiple State agencies. The City has acknowledged that community information should have been in place before the current for sale signage appeared and is addressing this now. The formal disposal process also requires public advertising under the Local Government Act.

The rezoning and intended disposal of this lot has been a matter of public record since 2015. It was debated at a public Council meeting, publicly advertised for 42 days, and letters were sent to all submitters advising them of Council’s decision. The sale is the next step in a process that has been on the public record for almost a decade.

No. This lot is entirely separate from Big Swamp Nature Reserve and always has been. It is a vacant residential lot situated within an established residential area. The Nature Reserve is adjacent but has a distinct boundary. The lot has no official name or recognised identity as parkland, no supporting recreational infrastructure, and is not classified as public open space. The City’s formal submission to the WA Planning Commission during the 2015 rezoning confirmed this.

The lot was originally zoned Parks and Recreation not for any environmental or recreational purpose, but because it was considered too small for residential development under the planning standards of the time. When those standards changed and the lot was assessed as suitable for development, Council initiated a rezoning process. That process was completed in 2015/16 and the lot has been zoned Residential ever since.

No. The City’s archival records confirm that the transfer of this lot in 1970 was part of a land transaction that included a payment to the then-owners, John and Mary Wood. It was not a gift or donation. The City has also confirmed directly with Landgate that there are no conditions, covenants or restrictions on the Certificate of Title requiring the land to be retained as open space, used for recreational purposes, or preserved in any particular way.

Since the rezoning was finalised in 2016 – almost a decade.

The City of Bunbury.

Bunbury, like communities across WA, is experiencing an unprecedented housing crisis. Families are struggling to find homes. The City is under sustained pressure from the community and State Government to make more land available for housing. Making underutilised City-owned residential land available for housing is a responsible and necessary step. This lot is one of several City-owned sites being progressed as part of the City’s broader housing response.

Under the lot’s R15 residential zoning, it could accommodate two residential lots of approximately 728m² each. To put that in context, that is actually a lower density than many surrounding properties, which are zoned R20, R30 and R40. This is not a large-scale or high-density development – it’s two house blocks.

No, and the City has never claimed they will. But the housing crisis will not be solved by any single action – it requires sustained effort across multiple fronts. This lot is one step among many the City is taking, alongside progressing several other strategic City-owned sites, advocating directly to the State Government, engaging with community housing providers, and participating in State-led Housing First working groups. Every home matters when families in our community cannot find one.

No. The sale is being progressed, but it must come back to Council for formal consideration and will be subject to public advertising under the Local Government Act. Council will make the final decision through a transparent, legislated process. The community will have the opportunity to have their say as part of that process.

City-owned land is a community asset and any proceeds from its sale are ratepayer funds reinvested into the community.

No. The City’s motivation is addressing the housing crisis. This sale is part of a broader, systematic review of City-owned landholdings that has been underway for several years. Any proceeds are ratepayer funds that get reinvested into the community – not money that goes into someone’s pocket.

The City has undertaken a current vegetation assessment of the site. The lot contains 28 trees – not 35 as has been claimed – comprising a mix of South West native species, other WA natives, interstate Australian species and exotic species. The larger, more established specimens are exotic and interstate species, not local natives. No significant trees requiring retention for development purposes have been identified.

The City takes its canopy and greening commitments seriously. The City’s published baseline canopy cover is 13.7% across the full City boundary, based on comprehensive 2020 vegetation mapping – not the 10% figure that has been circulating publicly. Updated 2025 aerial mapping indicates that canopy cover has increased since that baseline, reflecting the City’s ongoing investment in urban greening.

This lot is zoned Residential, not Public Open Space, and has been for almost a decade. The City’s canopy targets are pursued across the whole city through a range of strategies and sites – they are not dependent on the retention of any single residential lot.

Not necessarily. Any future development would be subject to standard planning and development approvals. It would be open to future owners to retain trees on their property where they choose to do so. Many homeowners in the surrounding streets have mature trees on their residential lots – residential living and tree canopy are not mutually exclusive.

The environmental value of this lot was assessed during the 2015 rezoning process, including referral to the then Department of Parks and Wildlife. That assessment found that wildlife in the area is very unlikely to be solely reliant on this site given its small scale and proximity to the extensive Big Swamp Nature Reserve which provides significant habitat.

Environmental advice will be provided to Council as part of its consideration of this matter.

The adjacent Big Swamp Nature Reserve – which provides the significant wildlife habitat in this area – is entirely separate, fully protected and completely unaffected by this sale.

The City’s formal assessment, provided to the WA Planning Commission during the 2015 rezoning, found that this lot has no identified ecological function as a wildlife corridor. The Big Swamp Nature Reserve itself provides the significant habitat and corridor function in this area. The lot is surrounded by established residential development and its development for two residential lots does not introduce a new land use to the Reserve’s interface – it continues an existing one.

No. The City’s published baseline canopy cover is 13.7% across the full City boundary, based on comprehensive 2020 vegetation mapping. Updated 2025 aerial mapping indicates canopy cover has increased since that baseline. The 10% figure being cited publicly does not reflect the City’s published data.

No. A community campaign opposed the rezoning in 2015, and those concerns were heard and considered through a thorough process. However, Council considered all submissions, heard from three residents who spoke against the proposal at the Council meeting, and voted to approve the rezoning to Residential (Council Decision 411/15, 10 November 2015). The rezoning was subsequently approved by the WA Planning Commission.

The community had their say. The democratic process ran its course. The decision was made.

The 2015 process included:

• Letters and a letterbox drop to all immediate landowners and residents
• A public meeting on 9 April 2015 (19 attendees), facilitated by the CEO
• A written submission period (29 submissions received)
• 42 days of public advertising of the scheme amendment
• Signage on the land from 12 August to 23 September 2015
• Publication in the newspaper across five editions
• Publication on the City’s website
• Referral to the EPA, Department of Parks and Wildlife, WA Planning Commission and multiple service agencies
• Three residents addressed Council speaking against the proposal at the November 2015 Council meeting

All submissions were provided to Council and considered as part of the decision. Letters were sent to all submitters advising them of the Council resolution.

The disposal of this land must come back to Council for formal consideration and will be subject to public advertising under the Local Government Act. Details of the public advertising period, including how to make a submission, will be published on this page and communicated to surrounding residents when available.

You can also contact the City’s Economic Development Team on 9792 7000 or info@bunbury.wa.gov.au

If the sale attracts interest (offer/s made), the matter will come before Council. The formal disposal process including public advertising has not yet commenced. Details will be published here when available.

Not through this process. That would be a separate matter for Council to consider.