Attachments 11.4 and 11.5 - City of Busselton

ATTACHMENT A - MACROPHYTE PROPOSAL 

ITEM 11.4 COUNCIL 12/10/2011 

Lower Vasse River Macrophyte Project: Effectiveness of submerged macrophytes in 

reducing phytoplankton growth 

Introduction 

The Shire of Busselton is considering the use of restored submerged macrophytes to address water quality 

problems in the Lower Vasse River. This method has the potential to achieve water quality improvement, as 

well as enhancing ecological function, however it is a new technique which is best undertaken as a restoration 

and research project. 

Robyn Paice, who has previously done an honours research project on establishing macrophytes in the Lower 

Vasse River (Paice, 2009), has been offered a scholarship through Murdoch University to undertake a PhD that 

would investigate the potential for macrophytes to reduce phytoplankton growth and examine their influence 

on nutrient dynamics and ecology. Benefits of this approach are considerably lower project costs (detailed 

below), and excellent information outcomes. 

This report provides a draft outline for a combined research and restoration project in the Lower Vasse River 

that would result in both direct action in the Lower Vasse River and important research outcomes. It is a basis 

for discussion and project development. 

Background 

Submerged macrophytes have an important role in maintaining water clarity in wetland systems, and at low 

levels of nutrient enrichment, their presence can prevent a shift to a turbid, phytoplankton‐dominated state 

(Scheffer, 2004). There has been much research regarding the mechanisms by which macrophyte maintain a 

clear‐water state, which include: 

• enhanced top‐down control of phytoplankton by grazing zooplankton; 

• sediment trapping and reduced resuspension; 

• alterations to nutrient cycling and availability, including competition with phytoplankton; 

• shading; and 

• possible effects of allelopathy. 

(Søndergaard and Moss, 1998; Stephen et al., 1998; Jeppesen et al., 1999). 

Despite their important role, there has been little research into the benefits of macrophyte restoration. 

Restoration of macrophytes is difficult in nutrient‐enriched systems due to light limitations caused by dense 

growth of phytoplankton and epiphytes. 

Previous research in the Lower Vasse River has demonstrated that the submerged macrophyte Vallisneria 

australis can be grown successfully in conditions of high turbidity and phytoplankton (Novak and Chambers 

2005; Paice, 2009). V. australis grown in a meadow situation was found to substantially increase aquatic 

invertebrate abundance and diversity, and sustain a more consistent zooplankton population (Paice, 2009). 

In terms of water quality, the meadow trials in 2007‐08 were too small to determine any measurable 

improvement. However the meadows did appear to trap particulate materials, indicating increased 

sedimentation and reduced resuspension which could potentially contribute to improved water quality (Paice, 

2009). A larger macrophyte meadow was established in 2009 upstream of the Busselton Bypass, and water 

quality monitoring has indicated lower phosphorus concentrations and lower turbidity in the meadow 

compared to adjacent open waters (Murdoch University, unpublished data).



This project investigates whether a macrophyte that tolerates high nutrient and low light conditions be used to 

reinstate a macrophyte dominant regime. It will examine whether such established macrophyte beds coexist 

with algal blooms or whether, by the mechanisms outlined above, the macrophyte reduces phytoplankton 

growth and/or nutrient status of the water. 

Experimental Design 

While the potential of submerged macrophytes to improve water quality appears good, there is no guarantee 

that phytoplankton growth will be reduced. Research is needed to assess this outcome and also to improve 

understanding of nutrient dynamics and trophic interactions within the restored macrophyte beds. 

Experimental design needs to allow for detailed monitoring and analysis to meet these research objectives. 

The project will involve establishment of replicate submerged macrophyte meadows within protective cages to 

prevent disturbance by birds (and possibly by large goldfish). The design of the cages is negotiable, providing 

that they allow sufficient protection and ongoing access for monitoring. The design and costs described here 

are based on the existing meadow upstream of the Busselton Bypass. This uses 50mm weld mesh and star 

pickets to create a fence around the meadow, with bird netting placed over the top. 

Macrophyte transplants are attached to 100mm weld mesh which is lowered to the sediment surface. This 

gives the plants a substrate for growth, as the sediments are very flocculent and cannot be planted into. The 

mesh is help in place by star pickets, which also hold the bird netting up to prevent it from sagging into the 

water. 

The submerged macrophyte Vallisneria australis would be used for the project, as this has been found to 

tolerate the turbid, nutrient‐enriched conditions in the Lower Vasse River. It is native to Western Australia, 

although there is some debate as to its natural extent. The transplants used have been grown from plants 

sourced in the Margaret River. 

Figure 1 depicts the construction of the macrophyte meadows, and Figure 2 shows the meadow established 

using this method in 2009. To allow statistical analysis of data, five replicate meadows would be required. The 

existing meadow upstream of the bypass can be incorporated into the project, so an additional four meadows 

would need to be constructed. 

In determining the size, design and location of macrophyte meadows, consideration needs to be given to: 

• the size required to effectively measure any benefits; 

• the public profile of the project; 

• the visual amenity of meadows and protective cages; and 

• the cost of establishing the meadows and protective cages. 

For any visual and measurable results it is recommended that meadows of at least 6m by 6m are used for the 

project, and it is possible to create larger meadows if desired.



bird netting over enclosure 

outside fence of 

50mm weld mesh 

supported by 

180mm star pickets 

100mm weld mesh grid 

2.0x1.2m with transplants laid 

on top of sediments, held in 

pace with a 2.4m star picket, 

which also holds up bird netting 

Figure 1. Diagram of macrophyte meadow establishment within protective enclosure. 

Figure 2. Photo of macrophyte meadow enclosure in the Lower Vasse River upstream of Busselton Bypass, established in 

October 2009 (photo taken May 2011). 

Monitoring requirements 

It is proposed that monitoring be undertaken at least monthly, in each of five meadow and at five control sites 

in adjacent open waters, from November to April for three years and include the following: 

• Collection of samples for nutrient analysis; 

• In situ measurement of physicochemical parameters; 

• Collection of invertebrate sweep samples for identification and counting; and 

• Collection of plant material for analysis of epiphyte load and plant growth.



The costs in Table 1 are based on this regime. Additional funding would allow more extensive investigation 

such as analysis of additional parameters, phytoplankton identification and density analysis, and sediment 

investigations. It would also allow for development of laboratory trials to investigate specific chemical and 

biological interactions. 

Project Costs 

The main project costs are materials for construction of protective cages, sample analysis costs, and labour 

costs associated with establishing the cages and meadows, undertaking monitoring and completing data 

analysis and reporting. The cost of the project and contributions from various organisations will vary 

depending on how it proceeds, however joint funding is likely to be sought from the Shire of Busselton, 

Murdoch University and GeoCatch. 

While the project is still in the development stage, indicative costs are outlined in Table 1 below. It is evident 

from this table that there is potential for considerable cost savings if the project were undertaken for PhD 

research purposes. It should be noted that the monitoring requirements included here are based on meeting 

research outcomes. 

Table 1. Indicative costs for macrophyte restoration research project. 

Item description Cost per unit Number Total cost Cost as PhD project 

Cage construction 

6 x 6m $800 4 $3600 $3600 

10 x 10m $1400 4 $5600 $5600 

Plants $1000 $1000 

Labour $100/hr (2 people) 12hrs $1200 ‐ 

Monitoring* 

Sampling labour $100/hr (2 people) 7hrs/mth x $4200 per year ‐ 

6mths 

Water quality analyses $130/sample 60 samples $7800 per year $4680 

(40% discount) 

Invertebrate and plant 

analyses 

$240/sample (3hrs 

@$80/hr) 

60 samples $14400 per year ‐ 

Data analysis and reporting $80/hr Production of 

published 

annual report, 

approx 80 hours 

$6400 Thesis produced with 

interim annual 

reporting at no cost. 

*Monitoring intensity and suit of parameters may differ if project is not used for PhD research. Amounts are annual costs 

with monitoring expected to continue for 3 years. 

Summary 

The opportunity exists to develop a combined restoration and research project for the establishment of 

submerged macrophytes in the Lower Vasse River to address problems of excessive phytoplankton growth. 

The project would increase understanding of the mechanisms by which macrophytes influence nutrient 

dynamics, trophic structure and ecosystem function. This information will assist in management of nutrient 

enriched waterways, and may provide an important tool for improving water quality.



References 

Jeppesen, E., Jensen, J. P., Søndergaard, M. Lauridsen, T. (1999). Trophic dynamics in turbid and 

clearwater lakes with special emphasis on the role of zooplankton for water clarity. Hydrobiologia 

408/409: 217‐231 

Novak, P. and Chambers, J. (2005) Rehabilitation of submerged macrophytes into the Canning River 

and Lower Vasse River, Western Australia: Determining thresholds of phosphorus concentration, 

epiphyte load and phytoplankton as barriers to macrophyte restoration. Environmental Science, 

Murdoch University: Perth. 

Paice, R. L. (2009) Restoration of Submerged Macrophytes in the Lower Vasse River: Feasibility and 

Potential Benefits. Honours thesis, Environmental Science, Murdoch University. 

Scheffer, M. (2004) Ecology of Shallow Lakes. Kluwer Academic Publishers: The Netherlands. 

Søndergaard, M. and Moss, B. (1998). Impact of Submerged macrophytes on Phytoplankton in 

Shallow Freshwater Lakes. Pages 115‐132 in E. Jeppesen, M. Søndergaard, and K. Christofferson, eds. 

The Structuring Role of Submerged Macrophytes in Lakes. Springer‐Verlang: New York. 

Stephen, D., Moss, B. and Phillips, G. (1998). The relative importance of top‐down and bottom‐up 

control of phytoplankton in a shallow macrophyte‐dominated lake. Freshwater Biology 39: 699‐713.

ATTACHMENT B - RIVERBANK REINSTATEMENT DESIGN 


N 

PEEL TERRACE 

GRASS 

COARSE SAND 

PLANTING 

SEE DETAIL A 

PLANTING 

VASSE 

PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE 

TO BE UPGRADED 2007 

RIVER 

CAUSEWAY ROAD 

10 5 0 10 20 30 m 

SCALE 1: 500 

PLAN VIEW 

1 

0m 

AHD 

-1 

EXISTING EMBANKMENT 

SAWDUST/ LIMESTONE 

( EQUAL PORTIONS) 

PAPERBARKS 

SEDGES 

SAND INFILL 

LIMESTONE RUBBLE 

SLOPE 1:3 


HWM 0.8 

AWM 0.3 

LWM -0.3 

GL 

GRASS TO AVERAGE WATER MARK 

HWM 0.8 

AWM 0.3 

LIMESTONE WEED BARRIER/ PATH LIMESTONE WEED BARRIER/ PATH 

COARSE SAND BEACH 

BELOW AVERAGE 

WATER LINE 


PLANTING / FABRIC 

(A.W.M) 

(L.W.M) 

PLANTING / FABRIC 

-2 

0m 3 6 9 12 

DIST 

PROPOSED NORTH BANK CROSS SECTION 

DETAIL A 

ISSUE DATE GRID REVISION DRN REC APPD 

SURVEY 

BOOKS 

DATUM 

DES REF 

DES CHD 

DRN 

CBC 04/07 

NORTH POINT 

RECOMMENDED 

REC 

APPROVED 

APP 

SHIRE OF BUSSELTON 

PH: 97810444 


PROPOSED EMBANKMENT REPAIR & UPGRADE 

VASSE RIVER - NORTH EMBANKMENT 

SHEET 1 OF 1 

FILE PROJECT PLAN 

ENV1 

VRIVER 03-01 

CAD 

ISSUE 

A 

ORIGINAL 

SHEET 

SIZE 

MF 

F:\TECH SERVICES\ PLAN INDEX\ DRAINAGE\ VRIVER 03-01

ATTACHMENT C - TREATMENT OPTIONS CONSIDERED IN THE COUNCILLOR WORKSHOP OF MAY 2011 


1 

TREATMENT OPTIONS CONSIDERED IN THE COUNCILLOR WORKSHOP OF 

MAY 2011. 

This section provides brief discussion on the treatment options that were 

discussed during the workshop and why they were or were not considered 

for further investigation. 

Phoslock 

Phoslock is a modified clay, designed to reduce the release of phosphorus 

from sediments in waterways. It acts to permanently bind filterable reactive 

phosphorus (FRP), which is the type of phosphorous available to algae. By 

limiting the amount of phosphorus it is possible to prevent algal blooms from 

occurring or, at least, prevent them from progressing to the more harmful 

blue-green algal bloom condition. 

Phoslock is applied to the water by mixing into a slurry and spraying over 

the whole surface so that it covers all the sediments of the water body. As 

the Phoslock settles it removes Phosphorous from the water column. It then 

settles on the riverbed and acts as a reactive layer, intercepting any FRP 

that may be released by the sediment. 

The main benefit of Phoslock application is the permanent removal of 

phosphorus that had accumulated in sediments. By so doing algal growth is 

limited for some time, in the order of weeks to months. 

However, it is less effective in reaction to a bloom event since much of the 

Phosphorus is bound up in algae and not available to the clay Phoslock 

treatment is relatively effective during summer unless summer rain occurs 

which delivers more P to the LVR from septage and surface runoff. It would 

be possible to undertake topical dosing of Phoslock after rain given the 

improvements in Phoslock packaging and delivery systems.. Applications 

of Phoslock are relatively expensive: up to $200,000 per application 

depending on area treated and number of treatments. 

Because there are inflows of nutrient to the river from surface run-off and 

groundwater, stopping the nutrient from the sediments will not prevent algal 

blooms from occurring and therefore the application of Phoslock would need 

to be ongoing. Operationally on full dosing of between 40 and 60 tonnes 

would be applied in the first year with smaller dosings of 10 to 20 tonnes in 

subsequent years. 

Until control of Phosphorus sources such as septage, agricultural runoff and 

industrial and residential runoff all treatments of the LVR to manage algal 

blooms will be ongoing including Phoslock however in the case of 

Phoslock the costs are minimised by the treatment sequence described 

above. 

On that basis Phoslock was a lower priority option for treatment. 

Algal flocking materials



2 

Another approach completely is to physically sink the algae to the bottom of 

the river through the use of flocculating clays and other materials. In fact 

one such trial of a prospective material has already been trialled on the LVR. 

These methods rely on the added material to bind together the algal cells so 

that they become heavier and sink. Much work has been conducted 

overseas mainly on dinoflagellate phytoplankton and relatively little on blue 

green algae which are the main LVR Phytoplankton type. 

Research in China has shown that Loess clays can remove algae and that 

clays mixed with Chitonase are especially effective. 

Chitonase is a natural product made from ground up mollusc shells. All of 

these products only remove algae from the surface to the bottom. However 

when the algal cells breakdown the nutrient is released and again becomes 

available for algal growth. This treatment therefore also needs to be used in 

conjunction with another product, such as Phoslock, that binds the 

phosphorous so it is not available. 

Chitonase is currently quite expensive. The price has been driven up by it’s 

medicinal uses. 

Algal removal for the LVR 

Another approach is to physically remove the algae from the river which is 

difficult given the buoyant nature of the blue greens involved. During the 

Jan 2000 algal bloom in the Swan suction trucks were effectively used to 

remove algae, which was then transported to a Water corporation Waste 

water treatment facility. The technique works because the buoyant algae 

floats to the surface in the vacuum truck and the algae clear water can be 

decanted from the bottom which reduces the number of truck journeys 

required. 

The disadvantage is that once the algae is removed more will grow due to 

the abundant supply of phosphorus and so treatments of Phoslock would 

also be required. The advantage of physical removal is that both nutrients 

and organic sludge are removed from the system. This option has not been 

costed and would depend on disposal at Water Corporation site and 

availability of vacuum trucks. 

Nutrisorb 

Nutrisorb is a by-product of the mineral sands industry produced by Iluka. It 

has very good physical filtration properties and therefore is thought to be a 

good treatment to use within the catchment close to the source of the 

pollutants. For example, it could be used as a soil amendment around point 

sources such as dairy effluent ponds and paddocks where the effluent is 

disposed of, or diffuse sources such as paddocks as a top dressing which 

prevents nutrients from getting into creek lines.



3 

Use of nutrisorb to filter nutrients from the lower Vasse River in situ would 

require costly engineering processes to recirculate the water through pumps, 

filters and pipes and replace the filter medium on a regular basis as it 

became saturated. As this is not the intended application for this material it 

is not a good option for treatment of the Lower Vasse River. 

Bio-filtration 

Bio-filtration is the same process that is used for water Quality improvement 

of stormwater. The suggestion is that perhaps some of the bio-filtration 

basins that have been constructed for treatment of stormwater before it 

gets into the river in winter could be used for recirculation of the river water 

during summer. 

Bio-filtration uses soils and plants to take up the nutrients. Water entering 

the system is allowed to pass through the soil and plant roots giving them 

the opportunity to take up the nutrients. The soil medium takes most of the 

Phosphorous while the plants take out most of the Nitrogen. Excess water 

that is not transpired by the plants passes out the bottom of the system and 

back into the river. Periodically the plants need to be harvested and the soil 

medium replaced to remove the nutrients from the system. 

The constructed wetland at the end of Bunbury Street in the LIA has only 

recently been installed and will be monitored for its effectiveness to remove 

nutrient from winter run-off. The potential to treat water from the river 

during summer should be investigated. 

Macrophytes 

Submerged macrophytes have an important role in maintaining water clarity 

in wetland systems, and at low levels of nutrient enrichment, their presence 

can prevent a shift to a turbid, phytoplankton-dominated state (Scheffer, 

2004). There has been much research regarding the mechanisms by which 

macrophyte maintain a clear-water state, which include: 

• enhanced top-down control of phytoplankton by grazing 

zooplankton; 

• sediment trapping and reduced resuspension; 

• alterations to nutrient cycling and availability, including 

competition with phytoplankton; 

• shading; and 

• possible effects of allelopathy. 

(Søndergaard and Moss, 1998; Stephen et al., 1998; Jeppesen et al., 

1999). 

Despite their important role, there has been little research into the benefits 

of macrophyte restoration. Restoration of macrophytes is difficult in 

nutrient-enriched systems due to light limitations caused by dense growth of 

phytoplankton and epiphytes. 

Previous research in the Lower Vasse River has demonstrated that the 

submerged macrophyte Vallisneria australis can be grown successfully in



4 

conditions of high turbidity and phytoplankton (Novak and Chambers 2005; 

Paice, 2009). V. australis grown in a meadow situation was found to 

substantially increase aquatic invertebrate abundance and diversity, and 

sustain a more consistent zooplankton population (Paice, 2009). 

In terms of water quality, the meadow trials in 2007-08 were too small to 

determine any measurable improvement. However the meadows did appear 

to trap particulate materials, indicating increased sedimentation and reduced 

re-suspension which could potentially contribute to improved water quality 

(Paice, 2009). A larger macrophyte meadow was established in 2009 

upstream of the Busselton Bypass, and water quality monitoring has 

indicated lower phosphorus concentrations and lower turbidity in the 

meadow compared to adjacent open waters (Murdoch University, 

unpublished data). 

A new project is proposed to investigate whether macrophytes that tolerate 

high nutrient and low light conditions can be used to reinstate a macrophyte 

dominant regime. It will examine whether such established macrophyte beds 

coexist with algal blooms or whether, by the mechanisms outlined above, 

the macrophyte reduces phytoplankton growth and/or nutrient status of the 

water. 

Macrophytes have the potential to improve water quality, as well as 

enhance ecological function, however it is a new technique which is best 

undertaken as a restoration and research project. The attached report 

(Attachment A) provides a draft outline for a combined research and 

restoration project in the Lower Vasse River that would result in both direct 

action in the Lower Vasse River and important research outcomes. It is a 

basis for discussion and project development. This macrophyte project is 

recommended for support by Council. 

Enzymes 

Enzymes are chemicals that occur in nature and include complex strands of 

protein that accelerate certain reactions. Enzymes will target different 

substrates in the water and bond with them, subsequently reducing them on 

a molecular level. Through this reaction they form harmless compounds that 

will have no further negative effect on the water. While enzymes are 

chemicals, they are comprised of commonly occurring amino acids and can 

be produced by certain bacteria. As they are chemical in nature, enzymes 

will not reproduce after being introduced to the water. So they are a single 

use product. The enzyme concentration in the water also stimulates any 

bacteria present to speed the biological degradation. 

One product, Soil-Zyme that has been used in large water bodies, in 

conjunction with AirDuck aerators to improve mixing, has been promoted to 

the Shire for use in the Vasse River. It is supposed to produce an 80% or 

more reduction of algae and algae blooms, eliminating Blue-green algae 

within 3-4 Days of application. A number of lakes are supposed to have 

been shown to have no further outbreaks after using the product.



5 

While this may be the case, its application to a large linear water body, such 

as the Lower Vasse River has not been proven. The risk associated with 

adding chemicals to a natural water body, as against an artificial lake, is a 

concern and has not quantified. There is no documentation on how it may 

affect the many parameters of water quality and therefore this treatment 

option is one that, needed the proof of concept to be shown before it can 

be considered for use. 

If a supplier was prepared to fund some tests to get the data that shows 

how it affects water quality it may be an option that could be considered. 

Water Conditioner 

The Care-Free Water Conditioner is an in-line catalytic water treatment 

system. It operates by a combination of the following: 

1. Turbulence of the water through a specially designed catalytic chamber. 

2. By the creation of a small electrical field around the chamber casing. 

This combination causes a separation of the mineral particles in the water, 

which changes their behaviour. Particles, which were previously attracted to 

each other now repel and separate into smaller individual particles. This 

allows the "separated" mineral particles and salts to flow through the 

system with minimal interference. 

Corrosive gases are released during conditioning and move through the 

water as harmless bubbles. They are expelled into the atmosphere when 

water leaves the tap. 

Use of the conditioner in a pool filter application was shown to reduce 

algae. The suggestion was to recirculate the river water through the 

conditioner to reduce the algae. However, in a pool application other 

chemicals are used to kill the algae. The water conditioner most likely makes 

the chemicals more available thereby killing the algae more effectively. This 

is another option that has no proof of concept. 

Ultra sound 

Devices are available for tank and pond applications whereby ultrasonic 

waves destroy the algae from within. The ultrasounds are inaudible to 

humans and pose no threat to people, animals or fish. They destroy nearly 

all forms of algae, with minimal impact on the aquatic environment. The 

product range is optimised depending on size and usage, including for 

ornamental ponds, swimming pools, water storage tanks, lakes, cooling 

tower, irrigation and wastewater installations. 

Larger applications off the device are not proven. It is thought that algal 

cells, once killed, will make nutrient available for recycling. This option is 

unlikely to be effective in large areas or blooms where the sphere of 

influence is relatively localised. This is another option that has no proof of 

concept in this application.



6 

River Bank Re-instatement 

This option, as detailed on the plan in attachment B, proposes reshaping and 

revegetating the last remaining section of riverbank on the northern side of 

the river along Peel Terrace. 

The Council of the day held off doing this section as there was some 

objection to the replanting that was being done along the banks because of 

the perceived loss of views of the water. While some sections have been 

densely planted (these areas provide good habitat for waterbirds and aquatic 

fauna) there are others that were planted with rushes and sedges and these 

do not block the views of the water. There is now less objection (anecdotal) 

to the idea of planting the remaining section of riverbank. The Geographe 

catchment council has discussed the proposal to complete this final section 

and were generally supportive of the design proposed. 

The design arose from the issue of undercutting of the bank at the eastern 

end near the railway bridge. It was suspected that exposure of ASS caused 

slumping of the soil structure and subsequent erosion. 

The solution proposed is to pack the undercut section with a blend of 

organic matter and limestone (to neutralise any subsequent effects of 

acidification), and place fill along the edge of the bank to get a more stable 

batter of soil to plant into and create beach access points. The design 

addresses the undercutting problem, provides a natural edge to the river, 

and provides vistas of the water body. 

This project will not solve the WQ issues of the river but completes the 

objective to get a natural edge to the river and will make this section of the 

river much more presentable. The project needs to be properly costed and 

funding sought to assist the Shire to carry out this project. Aboriginal 

consultation has been done but approval (bed and Banks) will be required 

from the Department of Water. 

Sewerage in-fill 

This is not a treatment option so much as a prevention strategy which helps 

to reduce the amount of nutrients getting into the water body. This 

recommendation was made strongly at the beginning of the workshop by 

the Department of Water staff present. The point was made that there is 

enough nutrient coming from any one of the current sources of nutrient 

(surface run-off, groundwater and sediments) to produce algal blooms in the 

river and that the longer term solution is to cut off the nutrient inputs from 

all sources. 

Nutrient levels in groundwater around the Lower Vasse River are largely 

attributable to the use of septic systems and leach drains in the light 

industrial area where the groundwater levels are very high in winter. The 

systems are often submerged in groundwater in winter whereas they should 

be 1.2m above the watertable to work properly. The preferred solution



7 

would be to get the older parts of the light industrial area on mains 

sewerage system and decommission all the septic systems. 

The Shire has a role in lobbying State Government for funding to undertake 

large infrastructure projects in high priority areas such as this. While this will 

not produce an immediate improvement in water quality of the Lower Vasse 

River this option should be pursued as a matter of urgency as it is only the 

petitions of local government that will help to influence investment of the 

State Government in regional areas. 

The areas to be included in the 2011-2013 Infill Sewerage Program have 

just been announced. Busselton did get some funding to complete the 

Abbey area, which was also needed, however the Light Industrial Area 

missed out. The Shire needs to be on the lookout for the next funding 

opportunity under this program. Attachment C is a plan of the Busselton 

Infill sewerage program which outlines the status of mains Sewerage in 

various areas from Wonnerup town site to Abbey.



8 

Weighing up the options 

Option 

WQ improvement 

Yes/No Unproven 

Visual only 

Cost 

High/ 

Medium/ 

Low 

Phoslock Yes $200,000 

every 3-5 

years 

Chitonase – CSIRO 

researching this product 

Unknown in large 

situations 

Potentially high 

cost 

Priority 

High/ 

Medium/ 

Low 

Low 

Low 

Notes / action 

Short term treatment. If there is an influx of nutrient, such 

as during a summer storm event, the Phoslock would have 

to be reapplied. 

Yet to be proven in large applications. Assess this product 

when it has been further developed. 

NUA, as a filter medium. Unproven Medium Low Yet to be proven in large applications. Assess this product 

when it has been further developed. 

Bio-filtration Yes Low Low Investigate possibility to use stormwater bio-filtration system 

at Bunbury Street during the summer season. 

Macrophytes Yes Low High Pursue creation of more meadows for monitoring and 

farming. 

Enzymes Unproven Low Low Unproven in large application in natural area. Supplier funded 

testing under controlled conditions could be allowed. 

Water conditioner Unproven Low Low Unproven in large application in natural area. Supplier funded 

testing could be allowed. 

River Bank Re-instatement Limited Medium Medium The improvement would mostly be aesthetic but would 

complete the works that have been done along other banks 

of the river 

Ultrasound Unproven Low Low Unproven in large application in natural area. Algal cells once 

killed available for nutrient recycling. Unlikely to be effective 

in a large bloom. 

Sewerage In-fill Yes High High Lobby State Government to fund in-fill sewerage. 

Nutrient Loss reduction in 

Catchment 

Yes High – Low Low Continue to support.

PROVISIONAL: SUBJECT TO CHANGE 

ATTACHMENT D - INFILL SEWERAGE PROGRAM 

ITEM 11.4 COUNCIL 12/10/2011

PROVISIONAL: SUBJECT TO CHANGE 

ATTACHMENT D - INFILL SEWERAGE PROGRAM 

ITEM 11.4 COUNCIL 12/10/2011

ATTACHMENT A – DRAFT LEPS ITEM 11.5 COUNCIL 12/10/2011 

Local Environmental Planning Strategy 

FINAL DRAFT 

Report 3 – Objectives, Strategies & Actions 

prepared for the 

Shire of Busselton 

Prepared by: 

Land Insights 

1/1 Alvan Street 

Mt Lawley 

PO Box 289 

Mt Lawley WA 6929 

Phone: (08) 9271 8506 

Fax: (08) 6161 2597 

Document details: 

File: 836 

Revision 1_FINAL DRAFT 

Date: November 2010 

Author: MT/SP 

Verified: SP 

Approved: MT 

Important Note: 

"The information contained in this report has been prepared with care by the 

author(s), or it has been supplied to the author(s) by apparently reliable 

sources. In either case, the author(s) have no reason to doubt its 

completeness or accuracy. However, neither the author(s) company nor its 

employees guarantee the information, nor does it or is it intended to form 

part of any contract. Accordingly, all interested parties should make their 

own inquiries to verify the information, as well as any additional or 

supporting information supplied, and it is the responsibility of interested 

parties to satisfy themselves in all respects. 

This report is for the use only of the party to whom it is addressed. 

Land Insights disclaims responsibility to any third party acting upon 

or using the whole or part of its contents." 

Note with respect to attached Figures 

Figure numbers for plans attached should be read as follows: 

Fig 11.1 to 11.14 as Fig 8.1 to 8.14 

Fig 12.1 to 12.19 as Fig 9.1 to 9.19

LAND inSights 


Table of Contents 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 1 

DEFINITIONS & ABBREVIATIONS .........................................................................................16 

1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................19 

1.1 Background................................................................................................................19 

1.2 Study Area.................................................................................................................20 

1.3 Scope of this report....................................................................................................20 

1.4 Objectives, strategies and actions .............................................................................21 

1.5 Monitoring and review................................................................................................21 

2 VISION ......................................................................................................................22 

2.1 Development of the vision..........................................................................................22 

2.2 Vision statement ........................................................................................................23 

2.3 Achieving the vision ...................................................................................................23 

3 BIODIVERSITY .........................................................................................................24 

3.1 Background................................................................................................................24 

3.2 Issues and implications..............................................................................................27 

3.3 Objectives..................................................................................................................28 

4 WATER, WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES.......................................................30 

4.1 Background................................................................................................................30 

4.2 Values, issues and implications.................................................................................33 

4.3 Objectives..................................................................................................................36 

4.4 Actions.......................................................................................................................37 

5 LANDSCAPE AND LAND QUALITIES.....................................................................38 

5.1 Background................................................................................................................38 


5.3 Objectives..................................................................................................................41 

5.4 Actions.......................................................................................................................42 

6 COASTAL MANAGEMENT AND FORESHORES....................................................43 

6.1 Background................................................................................................................43 


6.3 Objectives..................................................................................................................46 

6.4 Actions.......................................................................................................................46 

7 BASIC RAW MATERIALS ........................................................................................47 

7.1 Background................................................................................................................47 


7.3 Objectives..................................................................................................................48 

7.4 Actions.......................................................................................................................49 

8 MAJOR SETTLEMENTS...........................................................................................50 

8.1 Background................................................................................................................50 

VER 1 – FINAL DRAFT 

Shire of Busselton Local Environmental Planning Strategy 

Report 3 – Objectives, Strategies and Actions 

November 2010

LAND inSights 


8.2 Level of constraint......................................................................................................50 

8.3 Busselton...................................................................................................................51 

8.4 Vasse.........................................................................................................................56 

8.5 Dunsborough .............................................................................................................57 

8.6 Commonage ..............................................................................................................61 

8.7 Objectives..................................................................................................................64 

8.8 Actions.......................................................................................................................65 

9 MINOR SETTLEMENTS............................................................................................66 

9.1 Background................................................................................................................66 

9.2 Jarrahwood................................................................................................................66 

9.3 Yallingup....................................................................................................................67 

9.4 Eagle Bay ..................................................................................................................68 

12.5 Carbunup River..........................................................................................................69 

9.5 Metricup.....................................................................................................................71 

9.6 Objectives..................................................................................................................72 

9.7 Actions.......................................................................................................................72 

10 BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................73 

List of figures 

Figure 1.1 – Study Area 

Figure 5.1 – Visually Attractive Areas 

Figure 8.1 – Major Settlement Precincts 

Figure 8.2 – Aerial Photography – Busselton 

Figure 8.3 – Key Environmental Features – Busselton 

Figure 8.4 – Constraints Analysis – Busselton 

Figure 8.5 – Actions – Busselton 

Figure 8.6 – Aerial Photography – Dunsborough 

Figure 8.7 – Slope Analysis – Dunsborough 

Figure 8.8 – Key Environmental Features – Dunsborough 

Figure 8.9 – Constraints Analysis – Dunsborough 

Figure 8.10 – Actions – Dunsborough 

Figure 8.11 – Aerial Photography – Commonage 

Figure 8.12 – Slope Analysis – Commonage 

Figure 8.13 – Key Environmental Features – Commonage 

Figure 8.14 – Constraints Analysis – Commonage 

Figure 9.1 – Key Environmental Features – Shire 

Figure 9.2 – Constraints Analysis – Shire 

Figure 9.3 – Key Environmental Features – Jarrahwood 

Figure 9.4 – Constraints Analysis – Jarrahwood 

Figure 9.5 – Aerial Photography - Vasse 

Figure 9.6 – Key Environmental Features – Vasse 

Figure 9.7 – Constraints Analysis – Vasse 

Figure 9.8 – Aerial Photography - Yallingup 

Figure 9.9 – Key Environmental Features – Yallingup 

Figure 9.10 – Constraints Analysis – Yallingup 




November 2010

LAND inSights 


Figure 9.11 – Aerial Photography – Eagle Bay 

Figure 9.12 – Key Environmental Features – Eagle Bay 

Figure 9.13 – Constraints Analysis – Eagle Bay 

Figure 9.14 – Aerial Photography – Carbunup River 

Figure 9.15 – Key Environmental Features – Carbunup River 

Figure 9.16 – Constraints Analysis – Carbunup River 

Figure 9.17 – Aerial Photography – Metricup 

Figure 9.18 – Key Environmental Features – Metricup 

Figure 9.19 – Constraints Analysis – Metricup 




November 2010

LAND inSights 


Executive summary 

Introduction 

The Shire of Busselton is currently reviewing its planning framework with a view to preparing a 

Local Planning Strategy and subsequent Local Planning Scheme to guide development in the 

Shire in the future. While the statutory timeframe of the scheme will be five years, the Local 

Planning Strategy itself will provide a longer-term framework of up to 30 years. It will set in 

place long term principles to achieve the Shire’s vision for development over that time. 

The Local Environmental Planning Strategy (LEPS) is one of six ‘sector-based strategies’ that 

will feed into the Shire’s Local Planning Strategy. The LEPS will help guide development and 

environmental protection for the next 30 years. It will also provide significant input and context 

for the future development of the Shire’s Local Planning Strategy and new Local Planning 

Scheme. 

Shire of Busselton proposed Planning Framework Hierarchy 

Report scope 

This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Local Environmental Planning 

Strategy. It should be read in conjunction with the background information provided in previous 

reports, notably: 

• Report 1 – Environmental Profile (published document) 

• Report 2 – Spatial Planning Units (internal unpublished document). 

The information in the above reports, along with the significant consultation that has occurred 

over the past 18 months, has provided the context to the objectives, strategies and actions 

presented in this document. This report has been prepared to provide the Shire 




November 2010 

Page 1

LAND inSights 


Executive Summary 

with guidance on key environmental matters relating to development and land use planning. 

More specific consideration has also been provided for areas where development pressures 

are expected to be greatest – Busselton/Vasse and Dunsborough/Commonage. 

Within each section of the report consideration has been given to what the desired 

environmental outcomes are and how these can be achieved through the land use planning 

system. 

Vision 

The overall vision for the Local Environmental Planning Strategy is: 

The Shire of Busselton will accommodate its current and future populations in 

environmentally sustainable communities characterised by settlements that recognise 

and embrace the physical and environmental features of the Shire. 

Areas of environmental and cultural significance will be identified and protected by the 

Shire’s planning framework, which will result in land use and development being 

environmentally sensitive. 

Environmental issues 

The LEPS focuses on the key environmental issues relating to development and land use 

planning and outlines the objectives, strategies and actions for each. The environmental 

issues discussed in this report are: 

• Biodiversity 

• Water, wetlands and watercourses 

• Landscape and land qualities 

• Coastal management and foreshores 

• Basic Raw Materials 

A summary of each of the environmental issues, including objectives, strategies and actions, 

are presented below. Actions have been assigned a priority as follows: 

• I: Immediate term – within the next financial year 

• M: Medium term – within the next five years 

• L: Long term – 5+ years 

• O: Ongoing – as required. 




November 2010 

Page 2

LAND inSights 



Biodiversity 

Background 

The Shire of Busselton is located within the south-west of Western Australia, which is identified 

as being an international ‘Biodiversity Hotspot’ (Conservation International, 2007). The 

biodiversity within the Shire is an important asset, and therefore, it is essential that all future 

planning decisions take into account the issue of biodiversity protection. 

Issues 

Some of the major issues caused from development and detrimental land uses can include the 

following: 

• Loss and modification of habitats and poorly represented vegetation and plant 

communities 

Clearing of vegetation to facilitate development results in the loss of habitats and plant 

communities. Development within close proximity of natural features can also produce 

‘edge effects’ which causes detrimental impacts on these areas even if the original 

development did not involve clearing. 

• Maintaining/enhancing the biodiversity hotspot 

The detrimental impacts that humans have on the environment has an effect on the 

biodiversity values of the area and threatens the area’s status as a biodiversity hotspot. 

• Introduction and spread of weeds, feral animals and pathogens 

The spread of weeds, feral animals and pathogens have significant impacts on the 

natural environment and biodiversity values. 

• Fragmentation of bushland areas and disruption of ecological linkages 

Clearing of vegetation for development can result in fragmentation of larger areas of 

vegetation into smaller areas which has an impact on habitat values and the movement 

of native fauna. Fragmentation can also have a negative impact on ecological linkages 

across the landscape. 

• Clearing of vegetation for fire management purposes 

Bushfire management is a serious and important issue from a safety perspective. 

However, it also involves clearing of vegetation to meet the requirements of bushfire 

safety. This sometimes results in a conflict between bushfire risk reduction and 

conservation of vegetation complexes. 

Objectives 

The planning framework of the Shire shall: 

1. Maintain and enhance the quality and quantity of remnant vegetation throughout 

the Shire. 




November 2010 

Page 3

LAND inSights 



2. Ensure that protection and enhancement of biodiversity assets in the Shire is 

considered early in the planning process. 

3. Protect and enhance the biodiversity ‘hotspot’ status of the Shire. 

Actions 

No. Action Priority 

BD1 Protect and enhance biodiversity values as part of town planning scheme O 

amendment, development guide plan, subdivision and development application 

processes by: 

• continuing to apply State planning and environmental policies as appropriate, and 

reviewing and updating the local planning scheme, local planning policy and other 

local planning instruments as appropriate in response to changes in State level 

policies; 

• requiring applicants to assess biodiversity values and potential development 

impacts (including impacts arising from development of services and 

infrastructure) as part of town planning scheme amendment, development guide 

plan, subdivision and development application processes; 

• identifying mechanisms and incentives to protect areas of high biodiversity value 

(including via the development guide plan process and the continuation and 

periodic review of the Shire’s Biodiversity Incentives Strategy); 

• identifying means of protecting and enhancing habitat for threatened fauna and 

flora (including habitat in urban areas); 

• requiring the offsetting of biodiversity impacts by the planting and protection of 

local endemic species in local public reserves or other suitable locations; and 

• requiring the planting of locally native species in any landscape, amenity or 

environmental revegetation programs, other than in densely developed and high 

density traffic areas. 

BD2 Undertake broad-scale dieback risk assessment mapping for the Shire, and set out M 

in the local planning framework when and where site-specific dieback risk 

assessments and/or management strategies are required as part of town planning 

scheme amendment, development guide plan, subdivision and development 

application processes. 

BD3 Enhance, protect and manage roadside vegetation by: 

O 

• ensuring that, other than in densely developed and high pedestrian traffic areas, 

locally native species are planted on verges and median strips in all new 

development areas; 

• encouraging and, where practicable, requiring the preservation of remnant 

vegetation in road design and in existing road reserves; and 

• identifying road reserves that have value as ecological linkages, and retain and 

enhance these corridors. 

BD4 Work with relevant State agencies to incorporate the outcomes of the South West M 

Biodiversity Project on regional ecological linkages into the local planning 

framework. 

BD5 Minimise development being located so that it will result in the need for clearing or 

thinning of vegetation to establish bush fire hazard and building protection zones. 

O 




November 2010 

Page 4

LAND inSights 



Water, Wetlands and Watercourses 

Background 

Wetlands are biologically productive systems that support a diverse array of plants and 

animals. Most wetlands present in the Shire are situated along Geographe Bay. The Vasse- 

Wonnerup System is located to the east of the Busselton townsite and is listed as a Ramsar 

wetland. The Busselton region also contains a series of watercourses and coastal wetlands 

that are hydraulically linked to Geographe Bay. 

Groundwater is an important water source in the Shire for a variety of purposes including 

agriculture, horticulture, industry, mining, public water supplies and for environmental 

requirements. 

Issues 

Environmental impacts on wetlands and watercourses from human activity can be summarised 

as follows: 

• Erosion and siltation of the river and wetland banks 

This generally occurs as a result of vegetation clearing and uncontrolled stock 

accessalong watercourses and wetlands and can have detrimental impacts on water 

quality. 

• Removal of native fringing vegetation and habitat for native fauna 

Degradation and destruction of wetland habitats has severe impacts on the biodiversity 

value of the region and causes irrepairable damage. Vegetation buffers are essential 

to help protect wetlands from potential negative impacts and help to protect wetland 

ecological processes and functions, from impacting on nearby development 

• Low biodiversity of remaining fringing vegetation 

Clearing of vegetation and other general impacts can lower the biodiversity of the plant 

species present, which in turn can lower the habitat value of the area. 

• Weed infestation 

Wetland and watercourse ecosystems are extremely vulnerable to weed invasion, 

particularly if they have been impacted through vegetation clearing. Weeds can 

outcompete native plants and can further contribute to the decline in biodiversity and 

habitat value. 

• Poor water quality 

Human activity in catchment areas can have significant impacts on water quality. For 

example, water runoff from farming areas can cause high nutrient levels, as does 

urban development. Clearing of vegetation around watercourses and wetlands can 

cause siltation and erosion and reduce the nutrient uptake of those systems. 

• Altered water regimes 

This is generally caused when water is artificially drained or pumped into wetlands and 

watercourses (such as the creation of dams and stormwater systems). Removal of 

water can affect the natural balance of the system and can affect vegetation 




November 2010 

Page 5

LAND inSights 



composition and habitat areas for fauna species. Increases in water flow along 

watercourses can increase erosion and siltation which can lead to changes in habitat 

areas. 

Objectives 


1. Protect the integrity of wetlands of international, national and state significance. 

2. Encourage protection and enhancement of all wetlands and watercourses in the 

Shire. 

3. Ensure the importance of wetlands and watercourses is acknowledged in the 

strategic and statutory planning processes. 

4. Assist in the provision and implementation of solutions to catchment management 

issues. 

5. Protect groundwater quality. 

6. Protect Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems. 

7. Assist in the management of sustainable use of groundwater for all uses. 

8. Control land use to prevent groundwater contamination or degradation. 

9. Minimise groundwater-influenced land degradation such as salinity and 

waterlogging. 

Actions 


W1 Ensure a planned approach to the management of water, wetlands and O/M 

watercourses by: 

• considering the recommendations of the Water Quality Improvement Plan for the 

Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary and Geographe Bay, and the Sabina, Ludlow, Abba, 

Carbunup, Vasse and Yallingup Brook River Action Plans in the making of 

planning decisions; 

• requiring the submission of local water management plans, urban water 

management strategies and other water planning documents, as appropriate, and 

as required by relevant State Government policy, development guide plans and 

other relevant planning instruments, as part of town planning scheme 


processes; and 

• preparing and implementing district water management strategies for Busselton 

and Dunsborough. 

W2 Protect and enhance wetlands and watercourses by: 

M 

• requiring biophysical assessments and management plans, as appropriate, for 

development that may impact upon wetlands and/or watercourses, to establish 

appropriate development setbacks, protect and enhance riparian vegetation, and 

prevent water quality impacts; and 

• Considering water flow issues as well as other relevant matters in the assessment 

of proposals for dams outside proclaimed surface water catchments. 




November 2010 

Page 6

LAND inSights 



W3 

Manage water quality by: 

• working with appropriate State agencies to ensure that approval for on-site 

effluent disposal is assessed against both health and environmental objectives, 

including, if and where necessary, the introduction of town planning scheme 

provisions, especially in the industrial area and low-density or unsewered 

residential areas in proximity to Conservation Category Wetlands; 

• considering introduction of a ‘Water Quality Improvement Special Control Area’ in 

the town planning scheme for the catchments that drain into the Vasse-Wonnerup 

Estuary (which are identified in the Department of Water’s Water Quality 

Improvement Plan for the Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary and Geographe Bay as being 

‘recovery’ catchments) where it is vital that there is a net reduction in nutrient 

export); 

• requiring planning approval for any development within that Special Control Area 

that may increase the risk of nutrient export and infiltration, including intensive 

agriculture, but which currently does not require a license pursuant to the 

Environmental Protection Act 1986, and set out further guidance in local planning 

policy regarding the information required to assess such applications and the 

objectives to be met; and 

• ensuring that new and infill urban development achieves the best practicable 

water quality outcomes, including via the development and review over time of 

local planning policies and more detailed strategies to achieve a reduction in 

nutrient export from existing urban areas. 

M 




November 2010 

Page 7

LAND inSights 



Landscape and Land Qualities 

Background 

Three distinct landforms are immediately noticeable in the Shire, comprising the broad and lowlying 

coastal plain, bounded by the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge along the west coast, and the 

Whicher Range Scarp to the south-east. The landscape of the Shire assists in identifying a 

‘sense of place’. 

The land qualities and degradation risks are inherent characteristics generally associated with 

the different soil-landscape units and soils types in a specific area. The land qualities and 

degradation risks also affect the land capability or suitability for certain land uses. 

Issues 

Key threats to the identified values associated with landscape are identified below: 

• Highly visible development 

Development of areas that are highly visible and have natural landscape character will 

result in the erosion of the aesthetic and cultural values associated with the Shire’s 

landscape, which is an important component of the identity and attraction of the Shire. 

• Improved access 

Unmanagerd overs has the potential to result in land degradation problems including 

erosion, damage to vegetation and degrading soil structure. 

• Impacts on character 

Changes to important landscapes, such as the wetland chain near Busselton, as well 

as the topography and remnant vegetation surrounding Dunsborough, may alter the 

character of the townsites, even if development in these areas is not necessarily highly 

visible. 

• Impacts on biodiversity 

Many of the significant landscapes within the Shire overlap with important 

environmental features. 

• Protection of views 

Views of significant landscapes are highly valued and there is a natural tendency for 

development to be sited in such a manner as to maximise views. Public views and 

landscapes should wherever possible be protected so that development does not 

diminish or unnecessarily restrict the views that would otherwise be available. 

• Maintenance of existing urban areas 

While not necessarily an environmental issue, some consideration should be given to 

the landscapes within the existing urban centres of the Shire. 




November 2010 

Page 8

LAND inSights 



Key threats to the land qualities and land degradation risks in the Shire include the following 

activities: 

• Development impacts 

Inappropriately located development has the potential to change land qualities. For 

instance, removal of vegetation for development can change the local ground and 

water surface flows, increase risk of water and wind erosion, and exacerbate soil 

salinity. 

• Acid sulphate soils 

Excavation for development can lead to the exposure or development of acid sulphate 

soils. 

Objectives 


1. Protect the current level of landscape integrity on the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge. 

2. Protect, and where possible improve through the development process, the 

current level of landscape integrity around Busselton and Dunsborough. 

3. Ensure that landscape is a legitimate issue to be considered during the 

subdivision and development process. 

4. Encourage landscape improvements. 

5. Prevent the worsening of land qualities in the Shire, particularly on the coastal 

plain. 

6. Ensure development proposals recognise and manage land qualities during the 

development process. 

7. Recognise that some land degradation issues can be dealt with through 

engineering solutions and land management practices. 

Actions 


LS1 Review the ‘Landscape Value Area’ provisions in the Scheme, focusing on identifying I 

and managing the areas of the Shire with the greatest landscape value. 

LS2 Maintain the physical and visual separateness of urban settlements, especially O 

Busselton and Dunsborough. 

LS3 Review and supplement visual landscape local planning policies to ensure that the 

local planning framework: 

M 

• identifies areas of visual landscape significance; 

• identifies and protect the landscape values of key entry points to Busselton and 

Dunsborough as depicted on Figure 5.1; 

• considers/supplements existing TPS provisions for landscape protection in and 

around Busselton and Dunsborough; 

• reflects and updates the Caves Road Visual Management Policy; 

• is consistent with State Planning Policy 6.1: Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge Policy; 




November 2010 

Page 9

LAND inSights 



LS4 

• gives due consideration to Visual Landscape Planning in Western Australia; and 

• sets out appropriate requirements for viewshed analysis as part of town planning 



Manage acid sulphate soils by: 

• identifying an ‘Acid Sulphate Soil Special Control Area’ for the areas where 

best available mapping indicates that acid sulphate soils are high and moderate 

risk; 

• ensuring that ‘permitted development’ (i.e. development that may occur without 

the need for planning approval) provisions are modified in areas susceptible to 

acid sulphate soils (the Special Control Area) to ensure that planning approval is 

required for development with significant potential to disturb acid sulphate soils; 

• requiring any development application in the Special Control Area to be supported 

by a ‘self-assessment’ of acid sulphate soil risk; and 

• providing additional regulatory oversight and adopting a conservative approach to 

development where acid sulphate soils are present in proximity to wetlands, 

especially Ramsar and Conservation Category wetlands. 

O/M 




November 2010 

Page 10

LAND inSights 



Coastal Management and Foreshores 

Background 

The Shire of Busselton has two distinctly different coastal regions, separated by Point Daking, 

Dunsborough. To the west, the shore is mostly west-facing, rocky and high relief. Eastward, the 

shore is approximately north-facing, sandy and low-relief. 

Issues 

The issues and implications associated with the coastal environment are as follows: 

• Removal of coastal vegetation, modification of landscapes, dune erosion, and 

degradation of coastal habitats 

Coastal development typically involves removal of coastal vegetation which can lead to 

dune erosion, landscape changes and loss of habitat. 

• Climate change projections 

The most well documented coastal impact of projected climate change is erosion 

exacerbated through sea level rise. Development setbacks are implemented in an 

attempt to reduce the risk of erosion and inundation on the development. 

• Coastal erosion, storm surge and inundation 

In Busselton, the coastal areas are low lying, with only small inland dunes. Several 

structures have been developed to manage erosion and sediment movement. 

Potential impacts associated with climate change may lead to further, event-driven 

erosion. A general rise in sea levels would also result in coastal management 

implications. 

• Coastal protection works 

There are several existing coastal protection structures along the coast of Geographe 

Bay which result in modification to coastal processes. Placement of infrastructure that 

changes natural coastal processes can often have dramatic effects on the stability of a 

coastline. 

• Management of the coast 

Coastal areas are attractive for development due to the lifestyle opportunities 

associated with being close to the beach. Development pressure on the coast has led 

to a range of associated issues such as uncontrolled access, impacts on the 

biodiversity values of coastal areas and on landscape quality, increased pressure from 

tourism, increased pressure for further development along the coast, inadequate 

understanding about the long term impacts that coastal development has on coastal 

ecology, lack of funds to adequately manage coastal areas and incremental removal of 

coastal vegetation. 

• Fragmentation of ownership 




November 2010 

Page 11

LAND inSights 



Coastal management can be difficult where a management response is required over a 

large area and management is fragmented (meaning access to sites and willingness to 

participate in management programs can be varied). 

Objectives 


1. Maintain, enhance and restore the quality of coastal environments. 

2. Ensure development is appropriately protected from coastal processes. 

3. Maximise the cost-effectiveness of coastal protection structures. 

4. Provide a mechanism for facilitating environmental management of the coast. 

5. Promote further research and investigation on coastal environments, focussing on 

the impact of human development and use on natural processes and the impact 

that coastal processes can have on development. 

6. Promote awareness and education of coastal protection and management. 

Actions 


CM1 Continue to develop and review over time strategies for coastal adaptation and O/M 

management in response to coastal erosion and inundation risk, including the 

potential impacts of climate change, especially climate-change induced sea level rise, 

through the identification of viable coastal defence and/or managed retreat strategies 

for all of the Shire’s coast, including the consideration of identifying, securing and 

expanding coastal foreshore reserves. 

CM2 Protect the coastal environment and other foreshores by: 

M/O 

• managing public access to sensitive areas by focussing public use at established 

locations; 

• ensuring development does not provide unmanaged access to the beach, dunes 

or other foreshores; and 

• seeking to secure the transfer of land to provide for appropriate coastal and other 

foreshore reserves as part of town planning scheme amendment, development 

guide plan, subdivision, development application processes or other 

opportunities. 




November 2010 

Page 12

LAND inSights 



Basic Raw Materials 

Background 

Basic Raw Materials (BRM’s) are an important resource for the Shire and as such it is essential 

that, where possible, this land is protected from development which would prevent extraction in 

the future. Unfortunately, the presence of some BRMs also coincides with the location of 

significant environmental features which can constrain the development of extractive industries. 

The BRM’s found in the Shire include gravel, limestone and limesand, while major minerals 

include coal, the Shallow Bunbury Basalt and Titanium-Zircon. The Shire’s Extractive Industry 

Policy identifies priority areas for gravel and sand and establishes policy measures as 

appropriate based on a range of land use, environmental, amenity and other factors. 

Issues 

Some of the issues resulting from the presence of mining and BRMs is as follows: 

• Mining legislation overriding planning legislation 

The Mining Act 1978 overrides the Planning and Development Act 2005 and therefore 

any schemes, strategies or policies made under the latter Act are not enforceable for 

certain activities provided for under mining legislation. However ‘due regard’ needs to 

be paid to the planning framework. This largely relates to exploration and extraction of 

mineral resources only. Basic Raw Materials (sand, gravel, limestone and limesand) 

are not considered minerals for the purpose of the mining legislation and their 

extraction is governed by the Shire’s planning framework. 

• Remnant vegetation 

Some BRM areas are located in and around remnant vegetation and other important 

environmental assets. 

• Management of BRM operations 

Issues that need to be considered include spread of dieback and other disease, noise 

and road access issues and minimum separation distances from sensitive land uses. 

• Incompatible land uses 

Although not necessarily an environmental issue, consideration should be given to 

protecting accessible sources of BRM within the Shire from incompatible land uses 

(such as rural residential) to ensure that access to the BRM site can occur over time. 

Objectives 


1. Recognise the importance of the environmentally sustainable exploitation of BRM. 

2. Protect high value conservation areas as priority over BRM (e.g. ESAs, DRF, 

TEC’s, habitat for threatened fauna etc.). 




November 2010 

Page 13

LAND inSights 



3. Ensure activities associated with exploitation of BRM do not impact unduly on 

surrounding landholders. 

4. Promote and accommodate the needs of sustainable mining enterprises, although 

not at the expense of the environmental objectives. 

Actions 


M1 Further consider the need to develop an extractive industry local law to supplement M 

town planning controls over extractive industry. 

M2 Review the ‘Rural Areas Land Use and Development Policy’ to ensure that the local M 

planning policy framework makes reference to areas of environmental significance 

identified in this Strategy. 

M3 In partnership with the State Government and other local authorities, promote the 

preparation of a regional Basic Raw Materials Strategy. 

M 

Settlements 

Background 

Consideration has been given to the environmental constraints to the future growth and 

development of the Shire’s settlements. The settlements considered include the major 

settlements of Busselton and Dunsborough (including Vasse and Commonage), and the minor 

settlements of Eagle Bay, Yallingup, Carbunup River, Metricup and Jarrahwood. The 

implications for protection of the environment and some guidance for future management have 

been outlined. 

Actions for Major Settlements 

The major settlements in the Shire are Busselton, Dunsborough, Vasse and Commonage. 

The following actions are recommended for major settlements the land in proximity to these 

settlements. 

Actions 


MAJ1 Discourage expansion of the urban footprint, especially but not only in the area 

between the coast and the wetland chain, to improve environmental outcomes, by: 

O 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, seeking to identify 

opportunities for the redevelopment and consolidation of existing urban areas to 

reduce the pressure for expansion of the urban footprint; 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, not supporting the 

rezoning of land that would result in an expansion of the urban footprint into areas 

identified as having medium or high environmental constraints (as depicted on 

Figures 8.4, 8.9 and 8.14) unless there is a clear strategic case for doing so, and 

following the consideration and assessment of alternatives and the environmental 

impacts of urban development; 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, considering 

alternative zonings for areas of land currently zoned for urban or rural 

development, but which contain Conservation Category Wetlands (as depicted on 

Figure 8.5) and/or other significant environmental constraints; that would make 

approval of the development unlikely; 




November 2010 

Page 14

LAND inSights 



MAJ2 

MAJ3 

MAJ4 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, and/or 

subsequently, identifying means, in consultation with affected landowners, of 

providing for the long-term protection, enhancement and management of the 

wetland chain (and adjoining areas of remnant vegetation and significant 

environmental constraints) between Busselton and Dunsborough (and outside the 

area subject of the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy); and. 

In Busselton and Dunsborough, consider introducing development incentives and/or 

transferrable development rights to facilitate the protection and enhancement of urban 

biodiversity and character. 

Provide buffers around key infrastructure by: 

• liaising with the Water Corporation to identify and protect appropriate 

development buffers around the Busselton and Dunsborough Wastewater 

Treatment Plants; 

• reviewing the identified buffer around the Busselton Regional Airport and seeking 

to ensure the identification of an appropriate buffer; and 

• considering the creation of differentiated industrial zones to ensure that industrial 

development that may be incompatible with residential development is not 

proposed in areas in proximity to existing or proposed residential development. 

Include areas of remnant vegetation in public ownership and currently in Recreation 

reserves pursuant to the town planning scheme in a new Conservation reserve. 

M 

M 

O 

Actions for Minor Settlements 

The minor settlements are Eagle Bay, Yallingup, Carbunup River, Metricup and Jarrahwood. 

Actions 


MIN1 Do not support further expansion of Yallingup and Eagle Bay outside existing O 

structure plans. 

MIN2 In considering proposals for the expansion of Carbunup River, Metricup and O 

Jarrahwood, do not support the rezoning of land that would result in an expansion of 

development into areas identified as having medium or high environmental constraints 

unless there is a clear strategic case for doing so, and following consideration of the 

environmental impacts of urban development. 

MIN3 In Yallingup, Eagle Bay, Carbunup River and Metricup, promote the enhancement 

and protection of all remnant vegetation, and consider introduction of clearing controls 

in the town planning scheme to support that objective. 

M 




November 2010 

Page 15

LAND inSights 



Definitions & abbreviations 

Definitions 

Amenity – those factors which combine to form the present character and likely future character 

of an area. 

Biodiversity – the variety of life: the different plants, animals and microorganisms and the 

ecosystems of which they are a part. 

Buffer – the area (or ‘physical buffer’) required to maintain wetland function, usually defined by 

biophysical criteria. 

Catchment – the area of land from which water drains to form creeks, rivers, lakes, wetlands, 

reservoirs and aquifers. 

Coastal foreshore reserve – the area of land on the coast set aside in public ownership to allow 

for coastal processes and provide protection of ecological values, landscape, visual landscape, 

indigenous and cultural heritage, and public access, recreation and safety. 

Conservation – the protection, management, sustainable use and enhancement of the natural 

environment. 

Development – any change to land use, including housing, any demolition, erection, 

construction, alteration of or addition to any building or structure on the land and any 

excavation or other works. 

Dieback – the common name given to the pathogen Phytophthora cinnamomi which is a soil 

borne water mould that invades and destroys the root systems of many native flora species in 

Western Australia. 

Environmentally sustainable development – development that improves the total quality of life, 

both now and in the future, in a way that maintains the ecological processes on which life 

depends. 

Ecological linkage – a series of (both contiguous and non-contiguous) natural areas that, within 

a landscape context, connect larger natural areas by forming stepping stones of habitat that 

allow the movement of organisms and genetic material between these larger natural areas. 

Ecology – study of the relationships of animals and plants, particularly of animal and plant 

communities, to their surroundings, living and non-living. 

Ecosystem – a term used to describe a specific environment to include all the biological, 

chemical and physical resources and the inter-relationships and dependencies that occur 

between those resources. 




November 2010 

Page 16

LAND inSights 



Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems – ecosystems which rely on the water present in the 

ground for their survival. 

Land capability – the ability of the land to accept a type and intensity of use permanently, or for 

specified periods under specific management, without permanent damage. Based on an 

assessment of available biophysical land resources information. 

Landscape values – natural and/or cultural landscape features that are highly valued, as 

defined by documented research. 

Land suitability – the potential use of the land based upon a multi-disciplinary evaluation of 

physical, technical, social and economic factors. 

Ramsar – The Convention on Wetlands (commonly known as the Ramsar Convention) is an 

intergovernmental treaty adopted at the Iranian city of Ramsar the purpose of which is to 

promote the conservation and wise use of wetlands, particularly those that possess high 

ecological values. 

Remnant vegetation – stands of remaining native vegetation indigenous to a locality. 

Reserves – may be either land classified in local planning schemes for public purposes or 

areas of Crown land reserved for public purposes as determined by the Land Act 1933 and the 

Land Administration Act 1997. 

Riparian zone – the area along or surrounding a water body where the vegetation and natural 

ecosystems benefit from and are influenced by the passage and storage of water. 

Rural-residential – land use for residential purposes in a rural setting which provides for 

alternative residential lifestyle and which seeks to preserve the amenity of such areas and to 

control land use impacts. 

Setback – the area outside a sensitive area (such as a wetland) and the ‘buffer’ that is required 

to adequately protect the area from potential impacts of adjacent land uses in order to maintain 

the function of the sensitive area and its buffer. It is largely determined by the type of land use 

and management measures proposed. 

Sustainability – meeting the needs of current and future generations through and integration of 

environmental protection, social advancement and economic prosperity. 

Threatened Ecological Community – communities which consist of native vegetation which are 

poorly represented and in endanger of extinction. 

Visual landscape – the appearance of landscape elements such as landform, vegetation, 

waterbodies and human land use that makes an area identifiable and unique. 




November 2010 

Page 17

LAND inSights 



Visually sensitive/exposed areas – areas that are visible from communities, public use areas, 

and travel corridors (such as roads and waterways) and any other viewpoint. 

Wetlands – areas of marsh, fen, peat land or water; whether natural or artificial, permanent or 

temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish, or salt including areas of marine 

water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres. 

Abbreviations 

ATU............................................ Aerobic Treatment Unit 

BIS............................................. Biodiversity Incentives Strategy 

BRM........................................... Basic Raw Materials 

DAFWA...................................... Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia 

DEC........................................... Department of Environment and Conservation 

DEWHA..................................... Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 

DGP........................................... Development Guide Plan 

DIA............................................. Department of Indigenous Affairs 

DMP.......................................... Department of Mines and Petroleum 

DOP........................................... Department of Planning 

DOW.......................................... Department of Water 

DRF............................................ Declared Rare Flora 

EPA............................................ Environmental Protection Authority 

EPP............................................ Environmental Protection Policy 

ESA............................................ Environmentally Sensitive Area 

GeoCatch................................... Geographe Catchment Council 

GDE........................................... Groundwater Dependant Ecosystem 

LEPS.......................................... Local Environmental Planning Strategy 

LPP............................................ Local Planning Policy 

LPS............................................ Local Planning Strategy 

SCA............................................ Special Control Area 

SGP........................................... Subdivision Guide Plan 

SPP............................................ State Planning Policy 

SWBP........................................ South West Biodiversity Project 

TEC............................................ Threatened Ecological Community 

TPS............................................ Town Planning Scheme 

WAPC........................................ Western Australian Planning Commission 




November 2010 

Page 18

LAND inSights 



1 Introduction 

1.1 Background 

The Shire of Busselton is currently reviewing its planning framework with a view to preparing a 

Local Planning Strategy and subsequent Local Planning Scheme to guide development in the 

Shire in the future. While the statutory timeframe of the scheme will be five years, the Local 

Planning Strategy itself will provide a longer-term framework of up to 30 years. It will set in 

place long term principles to achieve the Shire’s vision for development over that time. 

The Local Environmental Planning Strategy (LEPS) is one of six ‘sub-strategies’ that will feed 

into the Shire’s Local Planning Strategy. The LEPS will help guide development and 

environmental protection for the next 30 years. It will also provide significant input and context 

for the future development of the Shire’s Local Planning Strategy and new Local Planning 

Scheme. 

Shire of Busselton proposed Planning Framework Hierarchy 

The Shire of Busselton is located within a ‘Biodiversity Hotspot’ and consists of many 

significant environmental features. Present and past land uses have often had an adverse 

impact on the environment within the Shire. With high anticipated population growth rates and 

subsequent land development pressures, the environment will continue to be placed under 

pressure and degraded from human impact. It is anticipated that the LEPS will provide 

guidelines for future land use, development and environmental protection within the Shire. It is 

hoped that this will result in sustainable development and protection of the environment for 

many years into the future. 

The intent of the LEPS is to provide succinct actions that can be implemented via the Shire’s 

planning framework. It is important to note that it is not an Environmental Management Plan, 

but rather a guide for incorporating environmental issues into the Local Planning Strategy and 

Local Planning Scheme. 




November 2010 

Page 19

LAND inSights 



1.2 Study Area 

The Study Area comprises the entire Shire of Busselton municipal area. It is bound to the north 

by the Shire of Capel, to the east by the Shire of Donnybrook-Balingup and to the south by the 

Shire of Augusta-Margaret River and the Shire of Nannup. The extent of the Shire’s 

boundaries is shown in Figure 1.1. 

The Shire covers an area of 145 500 hectares on the west coast of Western Australia, 

approximately 220 kilometres south of Perth. It has a population of approximately 32,000 

people 1 . The towns of Busselton and Dunsborough are the principal settlements and together 

with Yallingup, as well as Cape Naturaliste and the west coast are popular tourist destinations 

for recreational activities such as swimming, boating and fishing in association with the Shire’s 

wine and food industry. The central area of the Shire is primarily used for agricultural 

purposes, and is largely cleared of vegetation. The western coastal areas, the west coast and 

a large area of land at the eastern end of the Shire are largely reserved for conservation and/or 

recreation purposes. 

1.3 Scope of this report 

This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Local Environmental Planning 

Strategy. It builds on the background information provided in previous reports, notably: 

• Report 1 – Environmental Profile 

• Report 2 – Spatial Planning Units (unpublished internal background document). 

Background information pertaining to the environmental features of the Shire is contained 

within these two reports. This information, along with the significant consultation that has 

occurred, has provided the context to the strategies and actions presented in this document. 

Numerous planning and environmental policies and reports exist which are applicable to the 

Shire and help guide development and land use. These have been looked at in detail in Report 

1. Updated policies and information should be considered in conjunction with the outcomes of 

this report when necessary. 

The format of this document has been derived to provide the Shire with guidance on key 

environmental matters relating to development and land use planning. More specific 

consideration has also been provided for areas where development pressures are expected to 

be greatest – Busselton, Vasse, Dunsborough and Commonage. 

Within each section of the report consideration has been given to what the desired 

environmental outcomes are and how these can be achieved through the land use planning 

system. The intention is that the objectives and actions for specific environmental issues in the 

Shire be considered in conjunction with, or complement, the actions which are specific to the 

settlements and towns in the Shire as well as recommended changes and the TPS zones and 

reserves. 

1 ERP, 2010 Australian Bureau of Statistics 




November 2010 

Page 20

LAND inSights 



1.4 Objectives, strategies and actions 

Detailed objectives and actions have been developed for each key environmental issue in the 

Shire, as well as for the major and minor settlements. Attached to each action is a priority. 

Priorities 

Priorities have been classified as follows: 

• I: Immediate term – within the next financial year 

• M: Medium term – within the next five years 

• L: Long term – 5+ years 

• O: Ongoing – as required. 

1.5 Monitoring and review 

The Local Environmental Planning Strategy has been prepared following consultation with the 

community and the Shire of Busselton. As such, it has been prepared on the basis of 

consultation as well as scientific review and takes into account the views and desires of those 

consulted, as appropriate. 

Implementation of the LEPS will occur over time. Some actions can be implemented in the 

short term, however there are some that will be implemented in the future. As such, there is 

always the possibility that attitudes, external policies and the nature of development may 

change over time. It is therefore recommended that this plan be reviewed in a period of five 

years or in conjuction with a review of the local planning strategy to determine its ongoing 

relevance and to accord to the long term planning timeframes considered by Council. Any 

review should include an audit of implemented actions and an analysis of the reasons as to 

why any actions remain unimplemented (if that is the case). 

It is possible that activities, development or uses that have not been specifically addressed in 

this report may be promoted at some time in the future. Should this arise, it is recommended 

the Council be guided by the general vision and objectives contained within this document. A 

thorough assessment of the proposed activity, development or use will need to be undertaken 

following a process similar to that used to prepare this strategy. This is presented graphically 

below. 

Determine 

requirements, set 

parameters and review 

background 

information 

Seek stakeholder and 

community input 

Assess against the 

principles and 

guidelines identified 

in Local Planning 

Strategy 

Make decision to 

support activity, 

development or use. 




November 2010 

Page 21

LAND inSights 



2 Vision 

2.1 Development of the vision 

The vision provides the overall foundation for subsequent strategies and actions recommended 

by the LEPS. 

The vision has been developed following consultation with the community during the course of 

preparing the LEPS. Community consultation occurred early in the process during an open 

community meeting. 

A separate Community and Industry Reference Group was also established. This group 

provided input into the project at key intervals as the LEPS was being prepared, and provided 

comment and guidance as to the key environmental features of the Shire, and the values 

attached to them. 

It became clear that there were certain ‘themes’ emerging in relation to the most important 

environmental features of the Shire – those things that the LEPS should strive to protect, and 

enhance if possible. It also became apparent that there were certain issues that the LEPS has 

the opportunity to address. 

Overall, the following were environmental features that were of value and of concern to the 

local community: 

Key Values: 

• The remaining natural environmental and conservation values of the Shire 

• Low levels of development in specific areas 

• Current lifestyle attributes. 

Key Concerns: 

• Loss of biodiversity and bushland 

• Degradation of the environment and conservation value of the Shire 

• Unsustainable development and the impact it has on the environment 

• Impact of increased development on water resources. 

Key vision statements also began to materialise: 

• Ecologically sensitive development 

• Retention of all remnant bushland 

• Protection of coastline (no further development in these areas) 

• Increase in the amount of reserved land (government secures more land that has high 

environmental values) 

• Promotion of ecotourism 




November 2010 

Page 22

LAND inSights 



These issues capture the aspirations of the community and form the basis for preparing a 

vision for protecting and enhancing the Shire’s environment as the Shire grows over the next 

30 years. 

2.2 Vision statement 

The overall vision for the Local Environmental Planning Strategy is: 

The Shire of Busselton will accommodate its current and future populations in 

environmentally sustainable communities characterised by settlements that recognise 

and embrace the physical and environmental features of the Shire. 

Areas of environmental and cultural significance will be identified and protected by the 

Shire’s planning framework, which will result in land use and development being 

environmentally sensitive. 

2.3 Achieving the vision 

The Local Environmental Planning Strategy provides the basis for environmentally sensitive 

and sustainable development in the Shire over the next 30 years. Objectives, strategies and 

actions are identified for a range of key physical and environmental features of the Shire. 

Within the context of the Shire’s future planning framework, consideration is also given to 

principles of sustainability, in particular sustainable settlements, sustainable transport and 

sustainable urban design. 

Focus is given to the key anticipated growth areas of Busselton, Vasse and 

Dunsborough/Commonage. A broader consideration is provided for the entire Shire, including 

all minor settlements. 




November 2010 

Page 23

LAND inSights 



3 Biodiversity 


Introduction 

Biodiversity is defined by the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts as the 

variety of life: the different plants, animals and microorganisms and the ecosystems of which 

they are a part (DEWHA, 2009). The Shire of Busselton is located within the South-west of 

Western Australia, which is identified as being an international ‘Biodiversity Hotspot’. This 

means that the region has met two strict criteria: it contains at least 1, 500 species of vascular 

plants as endemics, and it has lost at least 70% of its original habitat (Conservation 

International, 2007). 

As the level of biodiversity is an important asset to the Shire, it is important that all future 

planning decisions take into account the issue of biodiversity protection. 

Remnant Vegetation 

Approximately 48% of the Shire comprises remnant vegetation (Shire of Busselton, 2004). A 

majority of this remnant vegetation is contained within National Park or State Forest. The 

central area of the Shire is mostly cleared of native vegetation and which occurred in the past 

for agricultural pursuits. To accommodate Urban Development clearing has also occurred in 

placesalong the northern coastline between the eastern Shire boundary and Dunsborough. 

Much of the remnant vegetation exists in the eastern section of the Shire (which covers 

approximately one third of the Shire) and along the western coastal areas. 

Vegetation Complexes 

The vegetation complexes vary across the Shire to correspond with the various landforms that 

exist. In general, most of the complexes exist in ‘bands’ which run parallel with either the 

western or northern coastlines. The vegetation complexes that exist along the northern coastal 

area include Quindalup (which occurs closest to the coast) and Ludlow (exists further inland to 

the south of the Quindalup complex). Much of the central agricultural region consists of 

vegetation belonging to the Abba vegetation complex. The Yelverton and Treeton vegetation 

complexes occur at the southern end of the Shire. 

Different vegetation complexes also run parallel to the western coast. Some patches of 

Kilcarnup vegetation complex occur along the rocky coastline and the Gracetown vegetation 

complex occupies the remainder of this rocky coastline. Beyond this exists a relatively larger 

strip of vegetation belonging to the Cowaramup complex. 

The vegetation complexes found in the eastern section of the Shire include Rosa, Telera, 

Kingia, Bidella, Jalbaragup, Preston and Coate. 

Vegetation complexes and vegetation classes which have less than 30% of the pre-European 

extent remaining are commonly referred to as ‘poorly represented’ (EPA, 2000). Vegetation 

complexes with less than 400 ha remaining in the state are also considered to be poorly 

represented. Most poorly represented vegetation complexes are found along the northern 




November 2010 

Page 24

LAND inSights 



coastal areas of the Shire, as well as the central region. This can largely be attributed to the 

extent of clearing carried out for agriculture and urban development in these areas. The poorly 

represented vegetation complexes and classes in the Shire are as follows: 

• Abba 

• Blackwood (96 ha remaining) 

• Cartis (73 ha remaining) 

• Darradup 

• Jarrahdale 

• Ludlow 

• Southern River. 

• Cowaramup (Cw2) 

• Kilcarnup (KB) 

• Yelverton (Yf) 

• Yelverton (Yw). 

Ecological Linkages 

Ecological linkages form an essential component of a healthy ecosystem and contribute to the 

biological diversity of the area. They consist of areas of native vegetation, which link larger or 

more significant areas of vegetation to one another. Ecological linkages are utilised by native 

fauna when they travel from one area of vegetation to another. Regional Ecological Linkages 

in the Shire have been identified by the South West Biodiversity Project (SWBP) and have 

been published in Environmental Protection Bulletin No. 8 (EPA, 2009). This bulletin also 

states that future planning and development proposals should consider and support the 

retention and enhancement of regional ecological linkages. 

Fauna 

Many vulnerable and threatened fauna species are found in the Shire including birds, 

mammals, reptiles and aquatic species. Of these, three species of mammals are classified as 

being vulnerable or at high risk of extinction. These are the Western Ringtail Possum, the 

Chuditch and the Quokka. The coastal vegetation in urban areas from Dunsborough to 

Busselton along Geographe Bay are particularly important habitat for the Western Ringtail 

Possum. 

The Shire also contains important habitat areas (for foraging, breeding and roosting) for three 

species of threatened black cockatoos; Carnaby’s Black Cockatoo, Baudin’s Black Cockatoo 

and the Forest Red-Tailed Black Cockatoo. Given that mapping of habitat areas for the abovementioned 

cockatoos is not currently available, the below definitions should be taken into 

account to ensure that the impacts on these values are considered as part of any future 

development proposals - 

Foraging habitat - Includes the presence of any combination of the following species: 

Marri (Corymbia calophylla), Mountain Mari (C. haematoxylon), Jarrah (Eucalyptus 

marginata), Black Butt (E. patens), Flooded Gums (E. rudis), Tuarts (E. 

gomphocephala), Banksias spp. (including B. attenuate, B. grandis, B mezesii, B. 




November 2010 

Page 25

LAND inSights 



littoralis and species formerly known as Dryandra spp.), Hakea spp., and Agonis spp. 

Also includes pine plantations and cape lilac. 

Breeding habitat - Potential nest trees are any Marri (C. calophylla), Jarrah (E. 

marginata), Black Butt (E. patens), Flooded Gums (E. rudis), Tuart (E. gomphocephala) 

or Wandoo (E. wandoo) (either alive or dead stags) with a Diameter Breast Height of 

more than 500 mm. 

Roosting habitat - Generally prefer large stands of tall trees close to permanent water, 

with dense canopy. Tree species used for roosting include Marri (C. calophylla), Jarrah 

(E. marginata), Tuart (E. gomphocephala), Wandoo (E. wandoo), introduced eucalypts 

and introduced pines. 

The distribution of threatened fauna is fairly even throughout the western section of the Shire 

and the northern coastal area. In general, threatened fauna are typically located where 

remnant vegetation is present (and therefore habitat is still available). However, it should be 

noted that although a large area of vegetation exists in the eastern section of the Shire, a very 

small number of threatened fauna are found in this area. 

Other biodiversity assets 

Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC’s) are communities which consist of native 

vegetation which are poorly represented and in danger of extinction. Ten threatened ecological 

communities are known to be present in the Shire. The DEC database also indicates that 22 

taxa of Declared Rare Flora and 69 taxa of Priority Flora are present in the Shire. 160 taxa are 

at the end of their range on the Busselton Plain, with 60 of these being at the northern end of 

their range and 35 at the southern end (DEC, 2009). 

Dieback 

‘Dieback’ is the common name given to the pathogen Phytophthora cinnamomi. It is a soil 

borne water mould which invades and destroys the root systems of many native species in 

Western Australia. The ease with which the pathogen can spread has greatly contributed to its 

extensive occurrence and consequent destruction of large areas of native vegetation in 

Western Australia. Therefore, it is important that areas of vegetation that are susceptible to 

dieback are closely monitored for signs of infection, the soils are tested and that if dieback is 

found, measures are put into place to prevent its further spread. A report prepared by the 

Dieback Working Group in 2000 called Managing Phythophthora Dieback, Guidelines for Local 

Government contains advice on how dieback can be managed. 

Fire risk 

Fire is a natural occurrence in the Australian environment, with some vegetation communities 

and species relying on the occurrence of fires for continued growth and regeneration. 

However, it is important that fire prevention and management is promoted in order to reduce 

the impact of fires on human safety and on the natural environment (WAPC, 2001). 

Fire management can have negative effects on vegetation composition and fauna if undertaken 

inappropriately intervals/times. Major issues associated with fires that can have a negative 




November 2010 

Page 26

LAND inSights 



effect on natural vegetation include the frequency of fires, the intensity of fires, the time of the 

year in which they occur and the distribution of the fire. 

Fire risk throughout the Shire is largely associated with remnant vegetation – with these areas 

being classified as having high or extreme risk, and other cleared areas generally having low 

risk. The potential impact of a wild fire is however related to the proximity of assests in areas of 

high and above fire risk. 

3.2 Issues and implications 

The most significant impact of development on biodiversity is the modification of habitats. 

Some ways in which humans modify habitats is through vegetation clearing, modifying river 

flows, filling and draining of wetlands, introduction of feral animals, weeds and diseases and 

from various land uses. 

Some of the major issues caused from development and detrimental landuse include the 

following: 

• Loss of poorly represented communities 

• Maintaining/enhancing biodiversity hotspot 

• Protecting ecological linkages 

• Introduction and spread of weeds, feral animals, pathogens 

• Increased ‘edge effects’, particularly when large areas of remnant vegetation are 

subdivided into rural residential properties 

• Fragmentation of bushland areas and disruption of ecological linkages 

• Conflicting needs of bushfire risk reduction and conservation of vegetation complexes 

• Clearing of vegetation for fire management purposes 

• Recognising the needs of agriculture/mining/tourism. 

The issues and implications associated with biodiversity are as follows: 

• Remnant vegetation 

As was stated earlier, vegetation complexes are considered to be poorly represented if 

less than 30% of the Pre-European extent remains. A number of poorly represented 

vegetation complexes exist in the Shire, with some that have less than 10% of the Pre- 

European extent remaining. In general, the reasons why these complexes are poorly 

represented is because they have been cleared for agricultural and urban land uses, 

and thus most of these complexes are on the flat coastal plain portion of the Shire. 

Further clearing of these complexes for these land uses will only exacerbate the 

problem. Therefore, it is important that future development areas do not result in the 

reduction in the area of these vegetation complexes and that more effort should be 

spent to conserve more areas (such as through the Biodiversity Incentives Strategy 

(Beckwith Environmental Planning, 2009)) and to achieve a net increase in the area of 

these complexes and good quality vegetation. 

It is also important that future development and land use does not negatively affect the 

identified Regional Ecological Linkages (LNRSPP) in the Shire. 




November 2010 

Page 27

LAND inSights 



Development in areas of High or Extreme fire risk is generally not supported under 

State policy. Fire management in Western Australia generally requires the reduction of 

fuel loads and to reduce the risk of fire to facilitate development, the removal of 

vegetation is promoted (WAPC, 2001). While from a fire management perspective this 

may be acceptable, clearing of vegetation for fire management will have detrimental 

impacts on biodiversity as described above. It is therefore recommended the 

management of fire risk in the Shire is not solely dependent on the removal of remnant 

vegetation but for new development is also linked to the location of that development. 

This may effectively mean that some areas will not be able to be developed further or 

areas historically identified for development may not be able to proceed. As discussed 

later in this document, in certain areas such as Commonage, alternative and innovative 

mechanisms for development could also be considered so as to allow some form of 

development but not at the expense of protecting the important remnant vegetation. 

• Threatened species 

The south-west of WA has been identified as a biodiversity hotspot because of the 

variety of endemic plant and animals found in the area. It is important that future 

planning decisions do not have a detrimental impact on the biodiversity status of the 

Shire. Therefore, future development should avoid areas which contain threatened 

species such as DRF, priority flora and threatened fauna. It is also important that if 

future development is proposed for an area of remnant vegetation that appropriate 

surveys are conducted in order to determine whether significant flora, vegetation and 

fauna are present. 

• Dieback 

The known and potential dieback areas are also associated with areas of native 

vegetation. Although some forms of land use are permitted in these areas, it does 

pose a major constraint to development and can result in strict management guidelines 

being enforced. If development is proposed in an area that contains or is close to 

remnant vegetation, it is recommended that it is tested for dieback regardless of 

whether it has been identified as a dieback area or not. 

3.3 Objectives 


1. Maintain and enhance the quality and quantity of remnant vegetation throughout 

the Shire. 

2. Ensure that protection and enhancement of biodiversity assets in the Shire is 

considered early in the planning process. 

3. Protect and enhance the biodiversity ‘hotspot’ status of the Shire. 


BD1 Protect and enhance biodiversity values as part of town planning scheme O 





November 2010 

Page 28

LAND inSights 



BD2 

BD3 

BD4 

BD5 

processes by: 

• continuing to apply State planning and environmental policies as appropriate, and 

reviewing and updating the local planning scheme, local planning policy and other 

local planning instruments as appropriate in response to changes in State level 

policies; 

• requiring applicants to assess biodiversity values and potential development 

impacts (including impacts arising from development of services and 

infrastructure) as part of town planning scheme amendment, development guide 

plan, subdivision and development application processes; 

• identifying mechanisms and incentives to protect areas of high biodiversity value 

(including via the development guide plan process and the continuation and 

periodic review of the Shire’s Biodiversity Incentives Strategy); 

• identifying means of protecting and enhancing habitat for threatened fauna and 

flora (including habitat in urban areas); 

• requiring the offsetting of biodiversity impacts by the planting and protection of 

local endemic species in local public reserves or other suitable locations; and 

• requiring the planting of locally native species in any landscape, amenity or 

environmental revegetation programs, other than in densely developed and high 

density traffic areas. 

Undertake broad-scale dieback risk assessment mapping for the Shire, and set out 

in the local planning framework when and where site-specific dieback risk 

assessments and/or management strategies are required as part of town planning 



Enhance, protect and manage roadside vegetation by: 

• ensuring that, other than in densely developed and high pedestrian traffic areas, 

locally native species are planted on verges and median strips in all new 

development areas; 

• encouraging and, where practicable, requiring the preservation of remnant 

vegetation in road design and in existing road reserves; and 

• identifying road reserves that have value as ecological linkages, and retain and 

enhance these corridors. 

Work with relevant State agencies to incorporate the outcomes of the South West 

Biodiversity Project on regional ecological linkages into the local planning 

framework. 

Minimise development being located so that it will result in the need for clearing or 

thinning of vegetation to establish bush fire hazard and building protection zones. 

M 

O 

M 

O 




November 2010 

Page 29

LAND inSights 



4 Water, Wetlands and Watercourses 


Wetlands 

Wetlands are biologically productive systems that support a diverse array of plants and 

animals. They have also been identified as one of the key life support systems along with 

agricultural land and forests (Ramsar Convention Secretariat, 2007). It is estimated that a 

significant proportion of wetlands along the Swan Coastal Plain have been destroyed since 

European settlement. Some of the major impacts on wetlands as a result of human activity 

including vegetation clearing (on foreshore areas and within the catchment), pollution, water 

consumption, modification of water flow and encroaching development. 

Most wetlands present in the Shire are situated along Geographe Bay, although it should be 

noted that current wetland mapping does not extend across the entire Shire. The Busselton 

region also contains a series of watercourses and coastal wetlands that are hydraulically linked 

to Geographe Bay. Major features include the following: 

• Carbunup River 

• Mary Brook 

• Lennox River 

• Buayanup Drain 

• Vasse Diversion Drain 

• Vasse River 

• Sabina River 

• Abba River 

• Ludlow River 

• Toby Inlet 

• Broadwater Area 

• New River Area 

• Vasse & Wonnerup 

Estuaries 

• The Deadwater 

The Vasse-Wonnerup System is located to the east of the Busselton townsite and is listed as a 

Ramsar wetland. Historically, the waterbodies were estuarine basins which have been 

functioning as low-salinity lagoons since floodgates were installed (WAPC, 2005). The 

floodgates are used to help control the water levels in the Vasse and Wonnerup waterbodies. 

When the water levels rise above that of sea level, the floodgates open to release some water 

into the sea. In general, the water is fresh during winter and more saline during summer. 

During the summer months, the system also has high nutrient levels which results in algal 

blooms. This has public health implications and is damaging to the ecology of the system. 

The system boasts the largest regular breeding colony of Black Swans in the south-west. In 

fact, the ecology of the system satisfies two Ramsar criteria in relation to waterbirds: 

• it regularly supports 20,000 waterfowl (more than 20 000 waterbirds have regularly 

been counted, including occasions when this number has exceeded 33 000) and 

• it regularly supports 1% of the individuals in a population of one species or subspecies 

of waterbird (at least 1% of the Australian population of Black-winged Stilt Himantopus 

himantopus and at least 1% of the world population of Red-necked Avocet 

Recurvirostra novaehollandiae use the Vasse-Wonnerup System in most years. 




November 2010 

Page 30

LAND inSights 



(Department of Conservation and Land Management, 1990) 

Significant wetlands located to the west of the Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary consist of the New 

River and the Broadwater. These wetlands are low-lying and prone to flooding during the 

winter months. 

Wetlands in Western Australia are categorised based on their environmental qualities and use 

as Conservation, Resource Enhancement or Multiple Use. The evaluation categories are 

described in Table 6.1 

Table 6.1 – Wetland Evaluation Categories 

Category General Description Management Objectives 

C – Conservation 

(incorporates EPA 

Bulletin 686 categories 

H and C) 

R - Resource 

enhancement 

(incorporates EPA 

Bulletin 686 categories 

O and R) 

Wetlands support a 

high level of ecological 

attributes and functions. 

Wetlands which may 

have been partially 

modified but still 

support substantial 

ecological attributes 

and functions. 

Highest priority wetlands. Objective is preservation of wetland 

attributes and functions through various mechanisms 

including: 

- reservation in national parks, Crown reserves and State 

owned land, 

- protection under Environmental Protection Policies, and 

- wetland covenanting by landowners. 

These are the most valuable wetlands and the Commission 

will oppose any activity that may lead to further loss or 

degradation. No development. 

Priority wetlands. Ultimate objective is for management, 

restoration protection towards improving their conservation 

value. These wetlands have the potential to be restored to 

conservation category. This can be achieved by restoring 

wetland structure, function and biodiversity. Protection is 

recommended through a number of mechanisms. 

M - Multiple use 

(aligned with EPA 

Bulletin 686 category 

M) 

Wetlands with few 

important ecological 

attributes and functions 

remaining. 

(Water and Rivers Commission, 2001) 

Use, development and management should be considered in 

the context of ecologically sustainable development and best 

management practice catchment planning through land care. 

Should be considered in strategic planning (e.g. drainage, 

town/land use planning). 

Watercourses 

There are several major rivers, numerous minor-perennial watercourses, and several inlets 

within the Shire. The most significant inlet is Toby Inlet, which is located approximately 4 

kilometres from Dunsborough along the edge of Geographe Bay. The inlet itself is a narrow, 

linear estuarine lagoon running roughly parallel to the coast with two connections to the ocean 

at its western end. It is characterised by tidal movements during the summer months and an 

outflow of fresh water in the winter. 




November 2010 

Page 31

LAND inSights 



A number of action plans have been prepared by the Geographe Catchment Council 

(Geocatch) in response to general concerns about the health and quality of the rivers in the 

Geographe Catchment. Action plans have been prepared for the Sabina, Abba, Ludlow, 

Carbunup and Vasse Rivers, and the Yallingup Brook. The aim of the action plans is to provide 

guidelines for the management of these watercourses. 

Groundwater 

Groundwater is an important water source in the Shire for a variety of purposes including 

agriculture industry, mining, public water supplies and for environmental requirements. The 

three main aquifers underlying the Shire, in order of depth from the surface, are the superficial 

aquifer, Leederville Aquifer and Yarragadee Aquifer. Groundwater is extracted from all three 

aquifers for consumption purposes. 

The superficial aquifer is unconfined and generally occurs with a thickness of less than 10 

metres, although it can be up to 20 metres thick in some areas. The water table occurs at 

depths up to about 3 metres and is mainly recharged by direct infiltration of rainfall, 

supplemented in some areas with limited upward leakage from the underlying Leederville 

aquifer under the Swan Coastal Plain. Groundwater discharges into streams, drains, wetlands, 

downwards into underlying formations as well as directly into the ocean. Groundwater flow in 

the superficial aquifer on the Swan Coastal Plain is northward towards Geographe Bay. 

The Leederville Aquifer consists of interbedded sand and shale. Its thickness in the Bunbury 

Trough averages between 150 and 200 metres. The Yarragadee aquifer is a major confined 

aquifer which occurs throughout most of the southern Perth Basin. 

In the confined aquifers, such as Leederville and Yarragadee, groundwater is generally fresh, 

with minor areas of brackish water (usually near the coast). Salinity is generally lowest in the 

recharge areas, increasing along the groundwater flow path towards the coast. Water table 

(generally superficial aquifer) groundwater can become saline through secondary salinity 

processes such as recirculation of irrigation water. 

Historically, water quality measurement in the Department of Water’s regional monitoring bore 

network has occurred infrequently, so regional trends in water quality, including salinity, are 

difficult to ascertain. A regional water quality measurement program is currently being 

developed. 

The Shire is located within the Busselton-Capel Groundwater Area, and the Busselton-Capel 

sub-area. The Busselton-Capel Groundwater Area was proclaimed in 1984. The area is 

divided into nine sub-areas, based on groundwater flow systems, to manage the quantity of 

groundwater resources. The groundwater catchment has been “proclaimed” under the Rights 

in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 and a license is therefore required to extract water from the 

superficial aquifer. Extracting groundwater from the deeper artesian aquifers requires a license 

throughout the State. 

There are some exemptions to licensing. Domestic groundwater usage is permitted and is 

therefore exempt from licensing. Other groundwater uses exempt from licensing include: 




November 2010 

Page 32

LAND inSights 



• fire fighting purposes 

• water for cattle and other stock (other than those being raised under intensive 

conditions) 

• water for an area of lawn or garden that does not exceed 0.2 hectares in size 

• other ordinary domestic uses. 

Groundwater-Dependant Ecosystems 

Groundwater-dependant ecosystems (GDEs) are ecosystems that rely on groundwater for their 

survival. Some GDEs depend on the water supplied from superficial aquifers which means that 

their health can also be affected by local changes in the water regime (such as drainage, 

increased abstraction and reduced rainfall). Alternatively, some GDEs rely on the supply of 

water from deep aquifers such as the Leederville and Yarragadee aquifers which are not 

significantly affected by short-term local changes in water regimes. 

4.2 Values, issues and implications 

Wetlands and Watercourses 

It is evident that past human activities have had a negative impact on the health of many 

wetlands in the Shire and that the current pattern of development places additional pressures 

on these environments. The presence of a number of other environmental constraints around 

wetlands (such as the presence of threatened fauna and remnant vegetation) increases the 

constraints to development in their vicinity. 

Environmental impacts largely associated with the wetlands and watercourses from human 

activity can be summarised as follows: 

• Erosion and siltation of the river and wetland banks 

• Lack of native fringing vegetation and habitat for native fauna 

• Low biodiversity of remaining fringing vegetation 

• Weed infestation 

• Poor water quality (which affects receiving waters such as the Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary) 

The issues and implications associated with wetlands and watercourses in the Shire are as 

follows: 

• A significant proportion of the coastal plain consists of wetlands and watercourses 

• The ‘edge effects’ that intensive development and land use has on wetlands and 

watercourses (particularly those with high conservation value) 

• Confusion over regulation of environmental water flows 

• The construction of dams on watercourses 

• Re-alignment of watercourses 

• Altered water regimes caused by drainage and filling 

• Nutrient enrichment and eutrophication of wetlands and watercourses from agriculture as 

well as stormwater runoff and septic tanks from urban and other developed areas 

• Contamination of wetlands with other pollutants such as heavy metals and chemicals 




November 2010 

Page 33

LAND inSights 



• Nuisance insects that breed in wetlands and watercourses and sometimes impact on 

developed/populated areas 

• Vegetation removal, degradation and weed infestation around wetlands and 

watercourses 

• Salinisation of wetlands caused by vegetation removal 

• Filling of wetlands and watercourses 

• Conflicting needs of the community in relation to wetlands and watercourses – eg 

recreation verses. conservation. 

Key threats to the health and condition of wetlands and watercourses in the Shire are further 

explained below: 

• Lack of appropriate buffers 

Buffers are designed to protect wetlands from potential negative impacts and help to 

protect wetland ecological processes and functions. Buffers also act to protect the 

community from potential impacts such as nuisance midge problems. They should 

ideally consist of native fringing vegetation in order to help achieve these functions. 

The presence of wetlands and their respective buffers pose a major constraint to 

proposed development. EPA Guidance Statement Number 33 states that Wetlands 

that are to be protected require a minimum 50 metre buffer distance (EPA, 2008). 

Other issues relate to the current wetland mapping and information. The extent of data 

on wetlands in the Shire is limited and further studies are required to determine the 

location of wetlands throughout the remainder of the Shire. Once this mapping is 

completed it will assist in the management of the wetland and with the assessment of 

development applications. Where wetlands have not been mapped a qualified 

professional should be assigned to determine the extent of wetland based on the 

hydric soils, hydrology and wetland vegetation. 

Being a Ramsar site, the Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary is listed as a matter of national 

environmental significance in the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and 

Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and the government is bound by an international 

agreement to ensure the wetland is protected and its environmental qualities 

maintained or enhanced. Therefore any development proposed within the catchment 

of this waterbody will be referred to the Commonwealth, rigorously assessed and 

management actions enforced. 

• Poor water quality 

The issue of nutrient leaching and the effect of water quality is one of the major 

environmental concerns in the Shire. Recent studies have been aimed at identifying 

which land uses contribute most to nutrient levels in waterbodies and therefore have 

the most impact. At present, it is certain that human activities resulting from more 

intensive land uses (such as agriculture, urban development etc.) have the greatest 

impact on water quality. This impact is more severe the closer the development is to 

waterbodies. 




November 2010 

Page 34

LAND inSights 



Therefore, it is important that any proposed developments or land use changes are 

assessed based on the amount of nutrient runoff that could occur and their potential 

impact on water quality. The results of this assessment could pose a constraint to 

development if the impact is such that it will prevent water quality targets being met. 

Contamination of wetlands with other pollutants such as heavy metals and chemicals is 

also a significant issue as it can poison native flora and fauna which in turn affects the 

natural ecological processes of the system. 

• Altered water regimes 

Altered water regimes of wetlands and watercourses are generally caused when water 

is artificially drained or pumped into these systems. This generally occurs when dams 

are created or when the natural drainage pattern of the area is modified to suit the 

needs of developed areas. Removal of water can affect the natural balance of the 

system and can affect vegetation composition and habitat areas for fauna species. 

Increases in water flow along watercourses can increase erosion and siltation which 

can lead to changes in habitat areas. Decreases in water flow can affect the natural 

migration of certain fauna species. Degradation in water quality such as higher salinity 

levels or nutrient levels can also occur from changes in the water regime. 

Groundwater 

Groundwater underlies the entire area of the Shire and is a vital environmental asset. It is 

important that the impact of development proposals and land use changes is considered to 

help ensure that groundwater quality will not be affected. Overall however, the presence of 

groundwater should not pose a significant constraint to development, providing appropriate 

management of wastewater discharge and runoff occurs. 

The issues and implications associated with groundwater in the Shire are as follows: 

• Impacts of development on groundwater quality 

If not appropriately planned and managed development can have a detrimental impact 

on groundwater quality, with increased contaminants and nutrients entering 

groundwater. In addition, potential changes in groundwater levels as a result of 

development can mobilise other contaminants (natural or artificial) in the soil. 

• Groundwater over-use 

Over-use of groundwater can lead to groundwater depletion, which has flow-on effects 

on biodiversity. There is a general trend across the south-west of the State that has 

seen groundwater levels slowly fall, and a resultant change in vegetation structure – 

particularly with species dependent on higher groundwater levels. Overuse of the 

superficial groundwater in coastal areas has resulted in saltwater intrusion and loss of 

the water resource. 

• Rising groundwater levels 

In contrast to the point made above, removal of vegetation in certain areas can result 

in rising groundwater levels. This can have an associated impact on salinity, 




November 2010 

Page 35

LAND inSights 



waterlogging and biodiversity. Certain areas may be subjected to greater inundation 

rates which has the potential to alter vegetation structure. 

• Reduced rainfall 

The recent trend in the reduction in annual rainfall results in lower groundwater 

replenishment rates. There is little that can be done to address this directly but it does 

have implications for management of other water resources. 

• Groundwater contamination 

Some land uses can lead to contamination or pollution of groundwater (through soil 

leaching and stormwater runoff into water features). As stated earlier in this document, 

areas with high groundwater levels that are susceptible to waterlogging are particularly 

at risk. Any development, particularly on sandy soils, has the potential to lead to 

groundwater contamination if not appropriately managed. 

• Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems 

Changes in groundwater levels and/or quality can impact the ecosystems dependent 

on that groundwater – in particular vegetation structure (and therefore habitat). There 

are also a range of social values associated with GDE’s that will also invariably be 

affected by decline in ecosystem quality. The study of GDE’s is not an exact science 

and there is some question as to the resilience of these ecosystems to change. 



1. Protect the integrity of wetlands of international, national and state significance. 

2. Encourage protection and enhancement of all wetlands and watercourses in the 

Shire, regardless of their current condition. 

3. Ensure the importance of wetlands and watercourses are acknowledged in the 

strategic and statutory planning processes. 

4. Assist in the provision and implementation of solutions to catchment management 

issues. 

5. Protect groundwater quality. 

6. Protect Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (including social and environmental 

values). 

7. Assist in the management of sustainable use of groundwater for all uses. 

8. Control land use to prevent groundwater contamination or degradation. 

9. Minimise groundwater-influenced land degradation such as salinity and 

waterlogging. 




November 2010 

Page 36

LAND inSights 



4.4 Actions 

The actions recommended for the Shire’s planning framework are identified in the following 

table. 

1 


W1 Ensure a planned approach to the management of water, wetlands and O/M 

watercourses by: 

• considering the recommendations of the Water Quality Improvement Plan for the 

Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary and Geographe Bay, and the Sabina, Ludlow, Abba, 

Carbunup, Vasse and Yallingup Brook River Action Plans in the making of 

planning decisions; 

• requiring the submission of local water management plans, urban water 

management strategies and other water planning documents, as appropriate, and 

as required by relevant State Government policy, development guide plans and 

other relevant planning instruments, as part of town planning scheme 


processes; and 

• preparing and implementing district water management strategies for Busselton 

and Dunsborough. 

W2 Protect and enhance wetlands and watercourses by: 

M 

• requiring biophysical assessments and management plans, as appropriate, for 

development that may impact upon wetlands and/or watercourses, to establish 

appropriate development setbacks, protect and enhance riparian vegetation, and 

prevent water quality impacts; and 

• Considering water flow issues as well as other relevant matters in the assessment 

of proposals for dams outside proclaimed surface water catchments. 

W3 Manage water quality by: 

M 

• working with appropriate State agencies to ensure that approval for on-site 

effluent disposal is assessed against both health and environmental objectives, 

including, if and where necessary, the introduction of town planning scheme 

provisions, especially in industrial area and low-density or unsewered residential 

area in proximity to Conservation Category Wetland; 

• considering introduction of a ‘Water Quality Improvement Special Control Area’ in 

the town planning scheme for the catchments that drain into the Vasse-Wonnerup 

Estuary (which are identified in the Department of Water’s Water Quality 

Improvement Plan for the Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary and Geographe Bay as being 

‘recovery’ catchments) where it is vital that there is a net reduction in nutrient 

export); 

• requiring planning approval for any development within that Special Control Area 

that may increase the risk of nutrient export and infiltration, including intensive 

agriculture, but which currently does not require a license pursuant to the 

Environmental Protection Act 1986, and set out further guidance in local planning 

policy regarding the information required to assess such applications and the 

objectives to be met; and 

• ensuring that new and infill urban development achieves the best practicable 

water quality outcomes, including via the development and review over time of 

local planning policies and more detailed strategies to achieve a reduction in 

nutrient export from existing urban areas. 




November 2010 

Page 37

LAND inSights 



5 Landscape and Land Qualities 


Three distinct landforms are immediately noticeable in the Shire, comprising the broad and lowlying 

coastal plain, bounded by the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge along the west coast, and the 

Whicher Range Scarp to the south-east. 

The Shire has a unique landform, with certain areas such as the Leeuwin-Naturalise Ridge 

identified for protection within a State Planning Policy. The landform provides opportunities for 

tourism, agricultural purposes as well as being a desirable setting for (mainly rural-based) 

settlement purposes. The landscape of the Shire assists in identifying a ‘sense of place’. 

The Department of Agriculture and Food (DAFWA) has identified various land degradation risks 

associated with the soil-landscape units across the Shire. The different soil qualities that affect 

the level of land degradation include salinity, wind erosion, water erosion, waterlogging, flood 

risk, microbial purification and phosphorus export. 

The capability of land to support various land uses is strongly influenced by the land qualities 

and degradation risks. An assessment of land capability considers the specific requirements of 

the land use (e.g. unrestricted rooting depth or soil water availability) plus the risks of 

degradation associated with the land use. Land capability is more commonly used in relation to 

agricultural land uses, but can also be used to help determine the suitability of the land for 

more intensive forms of development. 


Landscape 

The distinctiveness of the Shire’s landscape is recognised as being significant – both at a local 

level and a regional level. It has intrinsic value, as well as supporting various ecological values 

associated with each of the landform units that comprise the broader landscape. The 

landscapes within the Shire have different capacities to accept change – and this has been 

recognised in certain areas. Many of the existing settlements within the Shire have distinctive, 

and highly attractive, entrances. There are also important views and vistas along travel 

corridors and other areas of the Shire. Some of these are shown on Figure 5.1, however, it is 

also recommended that further investigation of areas of landscape significance be undertaken. 

The importance of landscape planning has been identified in the WAPC document Visual 

Landscape Planning in Western Australia (WAPC, 2007). The guidelines within this document 

have been reviewed and applied as appropriate. Further information relating to landscape in 

the Shire is included in the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy (Shire of Busselton, 

2005), which includes strategies and actions relating to the maintenance and improvement of 

the amenity values of the Busselton wetlands and the LNSRPP. 




November 2010 

Page 38

LAND inSights 



The value associated with the landscape, and in particular the Leeuwin-Naturaliste ridge, is 

best described by State Planning Policy 6.1 Leeuwin-Naturalise Ridge (WAPC, 1998) – which 

states: 

The Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge policy area is well known for its rich mosaic of agricultural 

land uses and remnant vegetation, spectacular coastline, marine-based recreation 

opportunities, the dominant and dividing “ridge”, National Park, magnificent stands of 

karri, limestone features, and coastal and inland settlements. Its unique character and 

identity are based on its location, the high concentration of significant natural and cultural 

features, and outstanding opportunities for people wishing to experience the special 

lifestyle and recreation opportunities of the area. 

People are attracted to the policy area for a variety of reasons and similarly they respond 

to the natural and cultural features in a variety of ways, which is reflected in the activities 

they undertake, and the different types and patterns of existing development. This 

interplay between existing natural and cultural characteristics, and the perceptions, 

experience and enjoyment people derive from them creates the landscape of the 

Leeuwin-Naturaliste region. This landscape has been described as embodying local 

character, features, identity, beauty, ambience, heritage, amenity and attractiveness. It is 

extremely important for maintaining the quality of life, sense of place, history, 

understanding of natural and cultural processes, and the work and recreation of those 

who live in and visit the region. 

The LEPS seeks to maintain the integrity of the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge, not only for the 

cultural, recreation and aesthetic values identified above, but also to protect the biodiversity 

values and ecosystems supported by the landscape in this area – which is unique in both the 

remainder of the Shire and the broader region. 

Away from the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge the landscape is characterised by the broad, flat 

Swan Coastal Plain that rises sharply at the Whicher Scarp. The wetland chains around 

Busselton, along with the remnant vegetation in these areas, provide another significant 

landscape within the Shire. The wetland chains also have significant ecological value and the 

environmental features of these areas will mean that they generally remain undeveloped. 

Dunsborough is nestled at the base of the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge, which forms a visual 

backdrop to the town. Development on the ridge or upper slopes will in most areas be highly 

visible and as such inappropriate. 

Road reserves also provide a function as vegetation corridors, particularly in the heavily 

cleared areas on the coastal plain. The remnant vegetation on these roads provides a visual 

reference when travelling through the Shire and can form part of the visual foreground in the 

landscape. It is therefore important that they be recognised and protected in proposals for 

subdivision and development. 

Key ‘visually attractive areas’ within the Shire are shown on Figure 5.1. These generally 

encompass areas that surround townsites, on the approaches to townsites or along travel 

routes. 




November 2010 

Page 39

LAND inSights 



Key threats to the identified values associated with landscape and topography are identified 

below: 

• Highly visible development 

Development of areas that are highly visible and / or have high visual quality will result 

in the continual erosion of the aesthetic and cultural values associated with a particular 

landscape. This will be experienced greater where there are dramatic changes in 

topography and where there are significant landscape features. Within the Shire, 

these are along the entire length of the Leeuwin-Naturalise ridge (including the 

Commonage rural living area) and to a lesser extent on the Whicher Scarp. 

• Improved access 

New development, regardless of where it is created, generally requires improved 

access. Both vehicle and pedestrian traffic has the potential to result in land 

degradation problems including erosion, damage to vegetation and degrading soil 

structure. Once degradation has commenced it becomes much more difficult to control 

and manage. 

• Impacts on character 

The wetland chain near Busselton, as well as the topography and remnant vegetation 

surrounding Dunsborough, is a key element in defining the ‘character’ of these 

locations. Changes to these important landscapes may alter the character of the 

townsites, even if development in these areas may not necessarily be highly visible (as 

compared to development that may occur in certain parts of the Leeuwin-Naturalise 

Ridge). 

• Impacts on biodiversity 

Many of the significant landscapes within the Shire are contiguous with important 

environmental features, including for instance the vegetation and ecological linkages of 

the Leeuwin-Naturaliste ridge, and the wetland chains and associated poorly 

represented vegetation and habitat around Busselton. Changes to the landscape in 

these areas have the potential to adversely affect important biodiversity values. 

• Protection of views 

Views of significant landscapes are valued highly and there is a natural tendency for 

development to be sited to maximise views. Public views and high quality landscapes 

should wherever possible be protected so that development does not diminish or 

unnecessarily restrict the views that would otherwise be available. Consideration 

should therefore be given to development that is sensitive to the landform on which it is 

located, and which does not seek to dominate that landscape or restrict views from 

surrounding areas. 

• Urban Character 

Aesthetic values associated with the streetscape of the town centres and entrance 

routes to the towns are significant in defining and maintaining a sense of place. The 

proliferation of commercial uses if it was to occur along major urban entry points has 




November 2010 

Page 40

LAND inSights 



the potential to dilute the town character and thus should be avoided if possible. This 

is particularly relevant to the Busselton townsite, where the main entry road (Causeway 

Road) is still relatively free from the linear commercial strips that are apparent on the 

outskirts of many other significant rural towns. 

• Development impacts 

Development has the potential to change land qualities. For instance, removal of 

vegetation for development, or earthworks associated with drainage infrastructure, can 

change the local ground and surface water flows, increase risk of water and wind 

erosion, and exacerbate soil salinity. 

• Waterlogging 

Significant areas of the coastal plain within the Shire are susceptible to waterlogging. 

Further removal of vegetation can increase susceptibility, change groundwater regimes 

and have impacts on remnant vegetation. The issue of waterlogging is usually 

overcome by importing fill to a site. While this can be an acceptable solution, it also 

has the potential to further change natural water flows, groundwater levels, result in the 

loss of vegetation and have landscape impacts. 

• Nutrients and soil conditioning 

Many soils in the Shire have low capabilities with respect to retention of nutrients and 

microbial purification. These issues are important where development is proposed that 

does not include appropriate infrastructure that is usually found in urban areas – such 

as rural living and agricultural developments. Consideration needs to be given to the 

use of appropriate wastewater treatment systems, and the impacts of nutrient 

application associated with other forms of rural activity. 

• Acid sulphate soils 

Excavation for development can lead to the exposure or development of acid sulphate 

soils. This is obviously a greater issue in areas where there is higher risk of acid 

sulphate soils being present, and in some instances the risk can be managed. As a 

general position, development should avoid areas where there is high risk of acid 

sulphate soils being present or developing, and detailed investigations should occur in 

other areas where there is a possibility of occurrence. Self-assessment of acid 

sulphate soils (using a form similar to that published by the WAPC) should be required 

to accompany any application for development. The WAPC Acid Sulphate Soils 

Guidelines should form the basis for any consideration and management of 

development with the potential to intercept or affect acid sulphate soils. 



1. Protect the current level of landscape integrity on the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge. 

2. Protect, and where possible improve through the development process, the 

current level of landscape integrity around Busselton and Dunsborough. 




November 2010 

Page 41

LAND inSights 



3. Ensure that landscape is a legitimate issue to be considered during the 

subdivision and development process. 

4. Encourage landscape improvements. 

5. Prevent the worsening of land qualities in the Shire, particularly on the coastal 

plain. 

6. Ensure development proposals recognise and manage land qualities during the 

development process. 

7. Recognise that some land degradation issues can be dealt with through 

engineering solutions and land management practices. 

5.4 Actions 


table. 

2 


LS1 Review the ‘Landscape Value Area’ provisions in the Scheme, focusing on identifying I 

and managing the areas of the Shire with the greatest landscape value. 

LS2 Maintain the physical and visual separateness of urban settlements, especially O 

Busselton and Dunsborough. 

LS3 Review and supplement visual landscape local planning policies to ensure that the 

local planning framework: 

M 

• identifies areas of visual landscape significance; 

• identifies and protect the landscape values of key entry points to Busselton and 

Dunsborough as depicted on Figure 5.1; 

• considers/supplements existing TPS provisions for landscape protection in and 

around Busselton and Dunsborough; 

• reflects and updates the Caves Road Visual Management Policy; 

• is consistent with State Planning Policy 6.1: Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge Policy; 

LS4 

• gives due consideration to Visual Landscape Planning in Western Australia; and 

• sets out appropriate requirements for viewshed analysis as part of town planning 



Manage acid sulphate soils by: 

• identifying an ‘Acid Sulphate Soil Special Control Area’ for the areas where 

best available mapping indicates that acid sulphate soils are high and moderate 

risk; 

• ensuring that ‘permitted development’ (i.e. development that may occur without 

the need for planning approval) provisions are modified in areas susceptible to 

acid sulphate soils (the Special Control Area) to ensure that planning approval is 

required for development with significant potential to disturb acid sulphate soils; 

• requiring any development application in the Special Control Area to be supported 

by a ‘self-assessment’ of acid sulphate soil risk; and 

• providing additional regulatory oversight and adopting a conservative approach to 

development where acid sulphate soils are present in proximity to wetlands, 

especially Ramsar and Conservation Category wetlands. 

O/M 




November 2010 

Page 42

LAND inSights 



6 Coastal Management and Foreshores 


The Shire of Busselton has two distinctly different coastal regions, separated by Point Daking, 

Dunsborough. To the west, the shore is mostly west-facing, rocky and high relief. Eastward, the 

shore is north-facing, sandy and low-relief. The west coast is exposed to prevailing wave 

conditions and the eastern region experiences significant sheltering from Cape Naturaliste and 

the relatively shallow waters of Geographe Bay. 

The overall wave climate is seasonal, with energetic conditions associated with mid-latitude low 

pressure systems located in the southern Indian and Southern Oceans. These events are more 

intense, sustained and frequent over winter months, producing generally higher wave 

conditions. Summer conditions produce lower energy offshore wave conditions. 

The Busselton region experiences amongst the lowest daily tide ranges in the world for a 

marine coast. Although it has a maximum tide range of 1.2m, the average daily range is only 

0.5m, and nearly 0.3m of the tide range is determined by seasonal sea level fluctuations. 

Busselton is predominantly diurnal, experiencing a single tidal cycle on most days. The tidal 

cycle is bi-annual, with solstitial tidal peaks occurring in June and December. The seasonal 

mean sea level cycle peaks in May-June and is lowest in October-November, which 

approximately corresponds with winter westerly wind events and summer easterly winds 

respectively. 


Coastal implications of development include the removal of vegetation, modification of the 

landscape, destruction of ecological linkages for fauna movement, removal or degradation of 

fauna habitat and modification to drainage systems. 

The most well documented coastal impact of projected climate change is erosion exacerbated 

through sea level rise. This has a potential significant impact on development and land use 

located close to the coast. Development setbacks are implemented in an attempt to reduce the 

risk of flooding and inundation on the development. Current views on climate change indicate 

that there is going to be a need for adaptation, given that it is now considered too late to 

prevent any climatic changes occurring. 

The issues and implications associated with the coastal environment are as follows: 

• Coastal erosion, storm surge and inundation 

Coastal erosion and accretion are part of a normal coastal cycle. In Busselton, the 

eastern coastal areas are low lying, with only small inland dunes. Several structures 

have been developed to manage erosion and sediment movement. Likely impacts 

associated with climate change may lead to further long term and event-driven erosion. 

A general rise in sea levels is also likely to result in increased coastal management 

implications. 




November 2010 

Page 43

LAND inSights 



It should be noted that a more detailed study of the impact of coastal erosion, 

inundation and storm surge is currently underway. The outcomes of this study will 

provide the baseline for the actions recommended in the local planning strategy to 

addressthis issue. 

• Coastal protection works 

The Busselton coastline is likely to be subject to increased risk of erosion and 

inundation over time. As stated above, the implications of this are to be assessed in a 

future study. 

At present, there are several existing coastal protection structures along the coast of 

Geographe Bay, including seawall, groynes and infrastructure such as boat ramps 

which can result in modification to coastal processes. 

All of these assets are currently managed by the Shire. Decisions will need to be 

made by the Council as to whether long-term ongoing maintenance of these structures 

is sustainable in terms of their: 

o ongoing ability to protect public and private land 

o ability to protect environmental and landscape values associated with the 

Shire’s coastal areas 

o ongoing economic cost 

The cost of establishing, upgrading or maintaining these structures is expensive, 

particularly in a typical environment of increasing pressure on budgets. Consideration 

therefore needs to be given to the most effective and efficient manner in which to protect 

the Shire’s coast. Options to be considered may include focussing development in one 

or more ‘strategic’ areas where coastal infrastructure can be concentrated; or allowing 

private investment into protection structures. Other scenarios could include maintaining 

existing structures at current standards and planning for potential greater impacts 

associated with event-driven erosion and inundation; or removing existing infrastructure 

altogether in certain locations with a view to concentrating on specific nodes as identified 

above. 

While ultimately the approach adopted in the Shire of Busselton will be driven by the 

Council this needs to be based on the outcomes of the coastal erosion and inundation 

study and an assessment of cost implications. It is likely that there will be a need to 

continue maintenance of existing structures. Where development decisions have been 

based on the existence of these structures but new structures should be considered in 

terms of the long term maintenance cost and the potential need to improve these to 

address rising sea levels. 

Furthermore, the Shire is anticipating a significant increase in population over the next 

30 years and this will likely lead to the need for key coastal protection nodes where 

significant coastal protection infrastructure can be concentrated (unless there is a 

decision to situate / relocate future development further inland). 




November 2010 

Page 44

LAND inSights 



If the approach taken is to maintain infrastructure and focus future development in 

existing coastal nodes, the issues then become: 

1. How will coastal protection works be prioritised? 

2. Who will implement them? 

3. How will they be funded? 

These questions and their implications are still being worked through by the State 

Government and many local governments around Australia. It is, however, suggested 

that the following actions be considered: 

o Identify, in conjunction with sound settlement planning principles, the most 

important components of development nodes along the coast. 

o Undertake engineering feasibility and cost analysis to provide maximum 

protection to these areas using worst-case scenario climate change. 

o Investigate options for funding and maintaining protection works, including 

ongoing liaison with State and Commonwealth governments; considering 

developer contributions or levies, or allowing fully privately-funded works. 

o Implementing ‘managed retreat’ solution in areas where it is not appropriate or 

viable to protect the coast. 

Placement of infrastructure that changes natural coastal processes can often have 

dramatic effects on the stability of a coastline. It should therefore be noted that any 

coastal protection works, particularly where private development is located, need to be 

designed and implemented at a strategic level to minimise the risk of small-scale works 

creating a new problem on adjoining land. 

• Management of the coast 

Coastal areas are attractive for development due to the lifestyle opportunities 

associated with being close to the beach. It is clear that the development patterns in 

the Shire have followed a general Australian trend of locating development near the 

coast. 

Invariably, development pressure on the coast has led to a range of associated issues 

as follows: 

o Maintenance and control of public access 

o Development is usually focussed around coastal areas which has subsequent 

impacts on the biodiversity values of coastal areas and on landscape quality 

o Tourism is also concentrated in coastal areas and population and land use 

pressures increase substantially during holiday periods 

o Increased pressure for further development along the coast 

o Inadequate knowledge and understanding about the long term impacts that 

coastal development has on coastal ecology 

o Lack of funds which are required to adequately manage coastal areas 

While the planning system cannot address all of these issues, it can provide input and 

guidance on many. 




November 2010 

Page 45

LAND inSights 



• Fragmentation of ownership 

Coastal areas are highly valued and while the beaches themselves are largely in public 

ownership, many of the areas immediately behind the beach/dunes are in private 

ownership or a mix of crown reserves. The majority of these areas are affected by 

coastal processes. Coastal management can be difficult where a management 

response is required over a large area and ownership is fragmented (meaning access 

to sites and willingness to participate in management programs can be varied). 



1. To maintain, enhance and restore the quality of coastal environments. 

2. Ensure development is appropriately protected from coastal processes. 

3. Maximise the cost-effectiveness of coastal protection structures. 

4. Provide a mechanism for facilitating environmental management of the coast. 

5. Promote further research and investigation on coastal environments, focussing on 

the impact of human development and use on natural processes and the impact 

that coastal processes can have on development. 

6. Promote awareness and education of coastal protection and management. 

6.4 Actions 


table. 

3 


CM1 Continue to develop and review over time strategies for coastal adaptation and O/M 

management in response to coastal erosion and inundation risk, including the 

potential impacts of climate change, especially climate-change induced sea level rise, 

through the identification of viable coastal defence and/or managed retreat strategies 

for all of the Shire’s coast, including the consideration of identifying, securing and 

expanding coastal foreshore reserves. 

CM2 Protect the coastal environment and other foreshores by: 

M/O 

• managing public access to sensitive areas by focussing public use at established 

locations; 

• ensuring development does not provide unmanaged access to the beach, dunes 

or other foreshores; and 

• seeking to secure the transfer of land to provide for appropriate coastal and other 

foreshore reserves as part of town planning scheme amendment, development 

guide plan, subdivision, development application processes or other 

oppurtunities. 




November 2010 

Page 46

LAND inSights 



7 Basic Raw Materials 


The Department of Mines and Petroleum has identified the areas of the Shire which contain 

Basic Raw Materials (BRM) and mineral resources. The BRM found in the Shire include 

gravel, limestone and limesand, while major minerals include coal and the Shallow Bunbury 

Basalt. 

Significant coal deposits exist in a broad north/south belt between the Busselton and 

Dunsborough faults in widths ranging from 300-700 metres. While of a high quality, to date 

access to these deposits has been constrained due to environmental and land use factors as 

they are in proximity to areas of remnant vegetation, popular tourism areas and residential and 

rural residential areas. 

Significant gas deposits have also recently been discovered in the Whicher Range (State 

Forest) in the southern portion of the Shire. Substantial investigation is still required to 

determine the extent and viability of extracting the gas though it potentially could provide a 

major economic benefit to the area in the longer term. 

The rural areas of the Shire also contain extensive sand and gravel deposits, which are critical 

to the ongoing development of the Shire from a land development, building and road 

construction perspective. 

Sand and limestone potential largely correlates to the Swan Coastal Plain and Leeuwin- 

Naturaliste Coast areas with some additional, although more patchy, potential within the 

interface between the Swan Coastal Plain and the plateau systems. Limesand potential is 

limited to the near shore coastal areas on the west coast. 


Basic Raw Materials are an important resource for the Shire and as such it is essential that, 

where possible, this land is protected from development which would prevent extraction in the 

future. Unfortunately, the presence of some BRMs also coincides with the location of 

significant environmental features which constrain the development of extractive land uses. 

The Shire’s Extractive Industry Policy identifies priority areas for gravel and sand and 

establishes policy measures as appropriate based on a range of land use, environmental, 

amenity and other factors. For this reason many of the gravel deposits in the west of the Shire 

are not likely to be accessible due to environmental and planning constraints. However, it 

should be noted that the vast majority of existing and undeveloped pits within the Shire are for 

gravel resources located within the Blackwood Plateau system. 

Sand deposits are generally less constrained with many being in the central and eastern rural 

parts of the Shire. 

Some of the issues resulting from the presence of mining and BRMs are as follows: 




November 2010 

Page 47

LAND inSights 



• Mining legislation over-riding planning legislation 

The Mining Act 1978 overrides the Planning and Development Act 2005 and therefore 

any schemes, strategies or policies made under the latter Act are not enforceable. 

However ‘due regard’ needs to be paid to the planning framework. This largely relates 

to exploration and extraction of mineral resources only. It is important to note that 

Basic Raw Materials (sand, gravel, limestone and limesand) are not considered 

minerals for the purpose of the mining legislation. Their extraction is governed by the 

Shire’s planning framework. 

• Some BRM areas are located in and around remnant vegetation and other 

important environmental assets 

Report 1 of the LEPS identified several locations throughout the Shire where BRM 

occurrences were located in areas containing remnant vegetation – some of it poorly 

represented vegetation. Given the importance of remnant vegetation in the Shire, 

priority should be given to protection of these areas as opposed to clearing for BRM 

extraction. 

• Management of BRM operations 

The operation of BRM within the Shire will be subject to a planning approval under the 

local planning scheme. Many other local governments also issue a licence separately 

to the local planning scheme. The dual approach provides an opportunity for the initial 

land use planning issues to be considered, and the licence provides the ability of the 

Shire to manage the day-to-day operation of the site. Issues that would need to be 

considered include spread of dieback and other disease, through inappropriate 

hygiene procedures (spread via machinery etc), noise and road access issues and 

minimum separate distances from sensitive land uses. 

• Incompatible land use 

Although not necessarily an environmental issue, consideration should be given to 

protecting accessible sources of BRM within the Shire from incompatible land uses 

(such as rural residential) to ensure that access to the BRM can occur over time. This 

will ensure that currently accessible sites are not sterilised and that increased pressure 

for access to BRM will not be placed on those sites containing important environmental 

features. 



1. Recognise the importance of the environmentally sustainable exploitation of BRM. 

2. Protect higher value conservation areas as priority over BRM (e.g. ESAs, DRF, 

TEC’s, habitat for threatened fauna etc). 

3. Ensure activities associated with exploitation of BRM do not impact on 

surrounding landholders. 




November 2010 

Page 48

LAND inSights 



4. Promote and accommodate the needs of sustainable mining enterprises, although 

not at the expense of the environmental objectives. 

7.4 Actions 


table. 


M1 Further consider the need to develop an extractive industry local law to supplement M 

town planning controls over extractive industry. 

M2 Review the ‘Rural Areas Land Use and Development Policy’ to ensure that the local M 

planning policy framework makes reference to areas of environmental significance 

identified in this Strategy. 

M3 In partnership with the State Government and other local authorities, promote the 

preparation of a regional Basic Raw Materials Strategy. 

M 




November 2010 

Page 49

LAND inSights 



8 Major settlements 


This chapter of the document presents key features, constraints analysis and actions for areas 

of the Shire where more site-specific consideration of issues is required. Constraint plans have 

been provided for the key settlements of Busselton, Vasse and Dunsborough, as well as the 

Commonage precinct. The extent of each settlement area considered is shown on Figure 8.1. 

Constraints mapping for other areas in the Shire is provided in the following chapter. 

8.2 Level of constraint 

The purpose of determining a ‘level of constraint’ is to guide management decisions and land 

use allocation by identifying areas where future development may be more suitable It is 

anticipated that the constraint assessment should consider and differentiate between the areas 

suitable for different land uses such as urban development, agriculture and conservation. 

The first step in undertaking a constraints assessment involves identifying the key 

environmental features of the area being considered. This work has to a large degree been 

completed in Reports 1 and 2 of the LEPS, and the key features associated with future 

development of urban, rural-residential, commercial or industrial areas form the basis of the 

constraints assessment. 

Due to the potential large-scale impacts of urban development it is important to determine 

which areas are more capable of supporting this particular land use. As the physical and 

biological features of the environment vary, it is important to ascertain which areas are more 

suitable to urban development while proposals are still in their planning stages. 

As a consequence of the constraints assessment areas more appropriate for other land uses 

such as conservation, agriculture or resource utilisation can also be identified and allocated in 

the planning process. 

Constraint levels 

The key environmental features of the Shire have been addressed in detail by Report 1 – 

Environmental Profile, along with key environmental issues that relate to planning and 

development. These key features or issues are the aspects of the Shire’s environment that the 

LEPS is seeking to protect or address via the Shire’s land use planning framework and are 

identified as: 

• Poorly represented communities (including communities with 400ha or less remaining) 

• Other remnant vegetation 

• Threatened Ecological Communities, Priority Ecological Communities and their buffers 

• Areas of high potential for Acid Sulphate Soils 

• Ramsar, Conservation and Resource Enhancement category wetlands 

• Major waterways and their riparian zones 

• Areas subject to high and extreme fire risk 

• Areas prospective for Basic Raw Materials (sand, gravel, limestone, limesand) 

• Areas prospective for other minerals subject to the Mining Act 1978 




November 2010 

Page 50

LAND inSights 



• Priority Agricultural Areas (soil-landscape units having over 60% of soils Class 1 or Class 

2 for a variety of agricultural uses) 

• Areas subject to waterlogging (soil-landscape units having over 60% of soils with high or 

very high susceptibility to waterlogging). 

In order to consider the impact of future land use and development it is necessary to consider 

the spatial extent of each of these key features, along with a relative level of constraint 

associated with each so that their relative importance can be considered. The value scale 

applied consists of a value of High, Medium, Low or No Significant Environmental Constraints. 

A description of each is as follows: 

• High: significant constraints that cannot be easily addressed. Development in these 

areas should generally be avoided where possible as they generally contain areas of 

highly significant environmental importance. 

• Medium: significant constraints that may, with appropriate planning and environmental 

mitigation, be addressed. Development in these areas should only proceed if suitable 

environmental assessment has occurred and it has been determined by the Shire and 

other agencies that there will be no significant environmental degradation. 

• Low: constraints to the development of land are apparent in these areas, but these 

constraints can usually be overcome with appropriate planning. 

• No known significant environmental constraints: these areas are not affected by 

environmental constraints, using known data in relation to the key environmental 

features listed above. 

It should be noted that: 

1. The level of constraint listed is based on currently known and available information. 

Environmental conditions continually change and the importance and distribution of 

environmental features can change over time. 

2. The levels of constraint identified on the maps in this document consider only the key 

environmental features identified. It is important to note that there has been no 

consideration given to other important aspects of settlement planning (such as 

proximity to key settlements, provision of infrastructure etc.). As a result, the level of 

constraint maps contained within this document should form one of the key inputs of 

the future Local Planning Strategy, where more detailed settlement analysis can occur. 

8.3 Busselton 

Current land use and description 

The coastal areas of Busselton are the main residential areas of the Shire. The majority of this 

area is zoned Residential under the TPS with much of the land fully developed. In some areas 

higher density codings have been applied, particularly closer to the town centre. Once fully 




November 2010 

Page 51

LAND inSights 



developed at the higher densities many of the older, 1000m 2 + properties will be redeveloped 

into 300-400m 2 lots. 

Further inland the wetland chain initially prevented the expansion of urban land to the south, 

however urban development has occurred south of the wetland chain as the east-west 

expansion became constrained. 

The Shire’s main industrial area is also located adjacent to the Busselton Bypass. The majority 

of this area is relatively old and the Shire has identified several micro-scale environmental 

issues associated with some of the existing land use practices, mainly relating to drainage and 

water quality. 

The remainder of lots in the southern portion of the Busselton area are zoned Rural, Rural 

Residential or Conservation. The wetland areas are primarily reserved for Recreation. 

The Structure Plan areas for Vasse, Ambergate North and Airport North/Yalyalup are also 

located on the outskirts of Busselton. All of these areas have already been identified by 

Council as areas suitable for future development. Development has commenced in some 

areas while the remainder are progressing through planning and environmental approvals at 

the present time. 

Busselton’s topography is very flat and low-lying, being generally less than five metres above 

sea level. The area is characterised by the central wetland chain that runs east-west and 

extends to the Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary and beyond. This chain contains important 

environmental features and has been largely classified as being a Conservation Category 

Wetland. The New Water and Broadwater wetlands are included in this wetland ‘chain’. 

The Quindalup vegetation complex is the major complex in the Busselton area. This complex 

is poorly represented across the entire Swan Coastal Plain. There are approximately 440 

hectares of Quindalup vegetation remaining in the broader Busselton area, with 68% of that 

vegetation within an appropriate zoning in the existing TPS. The remnant vegetation within 

Busselton is focussed on two east-west linkages – one through the central wetland area and 

the other along the coast. While there are some north-south linkages, these are generally 

fragmented. In addition, small areas of local bushland reserve have been retained in many 

urban subdivision areas. 

All of the remaining vegetation areas are likely to retain environmental and habitat values in 

addition to the intrinsic value of the poorly represented vegetation itself. In particular, the 

Quindalup vegetation is a key habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum. The Shire of Busselton 

is currently preparing a policy to identify mechanisms to protect the Western Ringtail Possum 

habitat. 

Climate change, and in particular rising sea levels, may increase storm and inundation risk, and 

may have a significant impact on Busselton. Given the low-lying land, the inland wetlands and 

the limitations on the drainage system, any adverse changes in climate and sea level will result 

in additional areas of Busselton becoming more susceptible to impact. 




November 2010 

Page 52

LAND inSights 



Key features summary 

The following key features were identified and addressed in detail in Report 1. They are 

summarised below, and form the basis for Figure 8.3. 


The majority of remnant vegetation in the Busselton area is poorly represented (that is, less 

than 30% of it remains). 

Table 13.1 – Remnant vegetation within Busselton 

Complex 

Total 

Some protection 

Ha % Ha % 

Abba 11.997 0.39 0.000 0.00 

Abba Complex 

Bidella 

Blackwood 

Cartis 

Cartis Complex 

Coate 

Cowaramup 

Darradup 

Gracetown 

Jalbaragup 

Jarrahwood Complex 

Kilcarnup 

Kingia 

Ludlow 226.927 15.43 37.252 16.42 

Metricup 

Preston 

Preston Complex 

Quindalup 440.212 22.44 299.511 68.04 

Rosa 

Southern River Complex 

Telerah 

Treeton 

Whicher Scarp 

Willyabrup 

Yelverton 

Totals 679.136 336.763 49.59 

Notes: 

1. Total ha reflects the hectares of each complex within the area 

2. Total % reflects the % of the complex that occurs within the area compared to the total amount in 

the Shire 




November 2010 

Page 53

LAND inSights 



3. Some protection refers to vegetation that is reserved for Recreation under the TPS, or zoned 

Bushland Protection or Conservation 

4. Complexes in red are poorly represented and have significant environmental value. 

Threatened Fauna 

Rare fauna are indicated at scattered locations throughout the Shire and the entire Busselton 

urban area is identified as containing important habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum and 

black cockatoos. It is important to note that many locations also coincide with the poorly 

represented vegetation complexes. This further accentuates the importance of retaining and 

protecting this vegetation as habitat for rare fauna. It is highly possible that the reason that 

those particular fauna species are rare is because of the significant loss of these vegetation 

complexes/habitats. 

Threatened Ecological Communities 

There are no TECs within the Busselton area. 

Waterbodies and watercourses 

The Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary (also a Ramsar site) is located in close proximity to current 

Busselton town site and to the north of planned growth areas. This wetland, the surrounding 

land as well as other land along the coastal area is also identified as Environmentally Sensitive 

Areas (ESAs). It is widely acknowledged that urban and agricultural development has a 

negative impact on the health of the wetlands. Recent water quality studies completed by the 

Department of Water also confirm the impact that increased nutrient runoff has on these 

wetlands (White, 2008). Further development within the Vasse Wonnerup catchment area will 

likely have a negative impact on the wetland, including the area identified in the strategy. Other 

waterbodies are also located in this area, which are likely to be impacted in a similar way. 

The Vasse-Wonnerup wetland system extends further to the west to encompass the New River 

and Broadwater wetlands. The New River wetland exists directly to the west of the Vasse- 

Wonnerup Estuary system in a parallel alignment to the coast. It is low-lying and is prone to 

flooding during the winter months. The Vasse River Diversion Drain intersects the river 

approximately half-way across its length, causing the eastern section of the river to flow into the 

Lower Vasse River. The Broadwater wetland is located further west of the New River and 

mainly consists of a floodplain and shallow lagoon. It is located on a conservation reserve and 

private property and is generally surrounded by less intensive land uses such as agriculture, 

some adjoining land is currently zoned for urban purposes. Although the water quality is very 

poor, the wetland is an important waterbird habitat and contains the rare aquatic herb Villarsia 

submerse. 

1 in 100 year flood boundary 

The Department of Water has identified the 1:100 year flood boundary. This is the area that 

would be affected by a major flooding event that has an average annual recurrence potential of 

1%. Modelling has been completed in and around the coastal wetlands and lagoons adjacent 

to Geographe Bay. DAFWA has also indicated that high flood risk areas are also prevalent 

adjacent to watercourses within the Abba soil-landscape system, as well as some upland areas 

of the Cowaramup Uplands soil-landscape system. 




November 2010 

Page 54

LAND inSights 



Flood levels and extents will be reviewed in light of new topographical data and to take into 

account climate change. This information will need to be included on updated plans once the 

revised data is available. 

Acid Sulphate Soils 

The highest risk is around the wetland chain which extends parallel to the coast from the 

eastern boundary of the Shire through to the Dunsborough town site. Most of the remainder of 

the Busselton area is identified as having a moderate to low acid sulphate soil risk. 

Fire Hazard 

The areas with high or extreme fire hazard risk largely coincide with areas of remnant 

vegetation, including some areas that are currently close to existing residential development. 

Therefore, appropriate precautions and fire management should occur during any future 

development to help avoid any detrimental impacts caused by fire. 

Fire hazard can generally be reduced by clearing vegetation. Given, however, that the majority 

of the remnant vegetation in and around Busselton is already poorly represented, the focus 

should be on location of development to achieve preservation of the vegetation rather than on 

it’s clearing for fire management/development purposes. 

Priority agricultural areas 

Priority agricultural areas have been determined by identifying soil-landscape units within which 

over 60% are classified as being within Class 1 (very high) and 2 (high) capability for a range of 

agricultural land uses. 

Within and around Busselton there are only limited areas identified. They are all located inland 

of the wetland chain. Where possible it is important to protect priority agricultural areas 

and ensure that agricultural activities on these areas are not restricted by allowing incompatible 

(eg urban, rural residential) uses on land adjoining. 

BRM and Mineral Resources 

A large proportion of the Shire, including the area around Busselton, is prospective either for a 

range of minerals or Basic Raw Materials. Planning implications include: 

• Mining legislation over-riding planning legislation (including the Local Planning Strategy 

and Local Planning Scheme). This does not apply to BRMs, which requires Shire 

approval. 

• The extent of prospectively does not necessarily mean that these areas are suited to 

exploitation of the resource – in developed areas around Busselton it is unlikely that 

Basic Raw Material extraction would be permitted. 

Waterlogging 

Inland areas, away from immediate coastal strip, are prone to waterlogging. Development in 

these areas is likely to require fill. There are two implications in relation to this as follows: 




November 2010 

Page 55

LAND inSights 



1. Importing fill needs to be considered in the context of local water management – and 

specifically potential impacts on groundwater levels, changes in hydrology and surface 

flow, and impact on remnant vegetation (relating to both changes in water levels and 

ground level). 

2. There is a finite volume of fill available and it is likely to be sourced from a significant 

distance away. 

The level of constraint associated with each of the abovementioned features/issues is 

presented on Figure 8.4. 

8.4 Vasse 


The Vasse settlement is located to the south-west of the Busselton townsite. It is currently 

zoned Vasse Development with small areas also zoned Residential, Public Purpose, Industrial 

and Business. The surrounding land is largely zoned Agriculture. 

There are European Heritage Sites located within the settlement, including the Old Vasse 

School and the Westbrook Homestead. The route of the Augusta-Busselton railway line also 

runs through the town. One Aboriginal Heritage Site is located at the intersection of the Bussell 

Highway and the Busselton Bypass. 


Remnant vegetation 

A majority of the Vasse settlement and surrounds is cleared of native vegetation. The patches 

remaining have been identified as the Abba and Ludlow vegetation complexes. Both of these 

complexes are also identified as being poorly represented, which makes them worthy of 

conservation and protection. 


Threatened fauna have been recorded by the DEC near the Vasse townsite area (classified as 

Priority 4). The area is known to contain important habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum 

and black cockatoos. 


No TECs have been identified in the Vasse settlement area. 


An ESA is identified within the settlement which extends along the southern edge of the area 

zoned Vasse Development. One small Conservation Category Wetland is identified in the 

south-west of the settlement area and a larger Resource Enhancement Wetland is located 

within the southern section of the ESA. 





November 2010 

Page 56

LAND inSights 



The 1 in 100 year flood boundary is largely associated with the location of wetlands and 

watercourses. The watercourses to the east of the Vasse townsite have a 1 in 100 year flood 

boundary which extend into the settlement area to a small extent. However, a majority of the 

Vasse townsite is not affected by the flood boundary. 


Acid sulphate soil mapping for the area shows that the Vasse settlement largely has a 

moderate to low risk of acid sulphate soils occurring within 3 metres of the soil surface and the 

surrounds have a high to moderate risk. 

Fire Hazard 

Areas of extreme fire hazard risk are identified in areas consisting of remnant vegetation such 

as the areas to the north and east of the existing development within the townsite. The others 

areas are identified as having a lower fire hazard risk. 

Priority Agricultural Areas 

The Vasse settlement and surrounding area is located within a Priority Agricultural Area. 


The Vasse settlement and surrounding area is identified as having potential for coal resources. 

Waterlogging 

The Vasse settlement area has been generally identified as having a low waterlogging risk, 

although some of the surrounding area (such as the land to the east) associated with wetlands 

are identified as having a high waterlogging risk. 

8.5 Dunsborough 


Urban development in Dunsborough follows a similar pattern to Busselton, with the majority of 

the land adjacent to the coast zoned Residential. Further urban expansion areas have been 

developed inland, including Dunsborough Lakes. The Dunsborough Town Centre is zoned 

Business and remains the focal point of the town, however an area of Industrial zoned land has 

been identified at the southern extremity of the planned Dunsborough area. Development has 

been guided by the Dunsborough Structure Plan. 

The coastal areas of Dunsborough contain significant linear remnants of the Quindalup 

vegetation complex, much of it associated with the Toby Inlet. The other significant vegetation 

complex in the Dunsborough area is the Abba complex, which is located in a large contiguous 

block either side of the Cape Naturaliste Road. The western portion of this vegetation block is 

reserved Recreation, however the eastern side is zoned Rural Residential. 

Overall there are approximately 58 hectares of Abba and 93 hectares of Quindalup complex 

vegetation in and around Dunsborough, with 28% and 73% respectively afforded some 

protection due to existing zoning. 




November 2010 

Page 57

LAND inSights 



There is one TEC (Eucalyptus calophylla – Eucalyptus marginata woodlands on sandy clay 

soils of the southern Swan Coastal Plain) within the Dunsborough, located in a small reserve 

amongst an established residential area. The buffer for this TEC also extends into the 

surrounding areas. Another TEC is located further north along the coast. 

Toby Inlet is located approximately 4 kilometres from Dunsborough. The inlet itself is a narrow, 

linear estuarine lagoon running roughly parallel to the coast with two connections to the ocean 

at its western end. It is characterised by tidal movements during the summer months and an 

outflow of fresh water in the winter. 

Similarly to the Busselton area, climate change, and in particular rising sea levels, increasing 

storm and inundation risk, may have a significant impact on the Dunsborough area. The areas 

around Toby Inlet will be particularly susceptible to impact. 

Other environmental features of the location include the following: 

• Elevation and topography is generally flat, other than in the northern part of 

Dunsborough. 

• Consists of a relatively low level of remnant vegetation cover – most of the vegetation 

complexes present in this area are also identified as being ‘poorly represented’ 

• Includes the vegetation complexes ‘Quindalup’ and ‘Ludlow’ 

• Includes the soil-landscape systems ‘Quindalup’, ‘Vasse’ and ‘Spearwood’ and a small 

portion of ‘Abba’ further inland at Busselton and ‘Abba’ at Dunsborough 

• A large portion of land is identified as an Environmentally Sensitive Area which generally 

correspond to the areas of remnant vegetation and/or wetland areas 

• The area is not indicated as having a high capability for agricultural land uses. 





The remnant vegetation associated with the coastal plain is generally poorly represented and 

should have priority for protection. There remain significant areas of other remnant vegetation 

associated with the slopes and ridgeline. This vegetation forms a backdrop to the 

Dunsborough townsite. 

Table 13.2 – Remnant vegetation within Dunsborough 

Complex 

Total 


Ha % Ha % 

Abba 57.819 1.89 16.461 28.47 

Abba Complex 

Bidella 

Blackwood 

Cartis 





November 2010 

Page 58

LAND inSights 



Complex 

Total 


Coate 

Ha % Ha % 

Cowaramup 3.246 0.06 0.483 14.87 

Darradup 

Gracetown 

Jalbaragup 


Kilcarnup 

Kingia 

Ludlow 33.553 2.28 21.946 65.41 

Metricup 0.780 0.07 0.011 1.40 

Preston 


Quindalup 93.324 4.76 68.302 73.19 

Rosa 


Telerah 

Treeton 

Whicher Scarp 

Willyabrup 57.302 2.21 22.625 39.48 

Yelverton 8.929 0.18 0.004 0.04 

Totals 254.953 129.831 50.92 

Notes: 



the Shire 




The zoned Industrial area (yet to be developed) on Commonage Road contains some remnant 

vegetation that is classified as being poorly represented. The Development Guide Plan for this 

site requires the retention of the vegetation. Subject to the vegetation in this area being 

protected from development and appropriately managed, together with a review of water 

management of the site, there are no issues with the development of the remainder of the site 

for light industrial purposes. 


Rare fauna are indicated at scattered locations throughout the Shire and the entire 

Dunsborough urban area is identified as containing important habitat for the Western Ringtail 

Possum and black cockatoos. It is important to note that many locations also coincide with the 

poorly represented vegetation complexes. This further accentuates the importance of retaining 

and protecting this vegetation as habitat for rare fauna. It is highly possible that the reason that 




November 2010 

Page 59

LAND inSights 



those particular fauna species are rare is because of the significant loss of these vegetation 

complexes/habitats. 


There are two TEC’s within the Dunsborough area – one located adjacent to the coast and the 

other in a reserve near the golf course. The buffers of both TEC’s extend over developed 

urban areas. 


Toby Inlet and surrounding areas are classified as Conservation Category wetlands. The inlet 

is a narrow, linear estuarine lagoon running roughly parallel to the coast with two connections 

to the ocean at its western end. It is characterised by tidal movements during the summer 

months and an outflow of fresh water in the winter. There are no other significant waterways or 

watercourses within or immediately adjacent to the Dunsborough townsite. 


The 1 in 100 floodway data does not extend to Dunsborough. 


The highest risk is associated with Toby Inlet and other near coastal areas of the coastal plain. 

The presence of acid sulphate soils has been independently and previously confirmed within 

Toby Inlet. 

Fire Hazard 

There is a significant amount of remnant vegetation within and around Dunsborough, most 

notably on the slopes associated with the ridge. All of these areas represent a high or extreme 

fire hazard. 


of the remnant vegetation in and around Dunsborough is already poorly represented, the focus 

should be on the preservation of the vegetation rather than on its clearing for fire 

management/development purposes. 





Within and around Dunsborough there are only limited areas identified, with some identified in 

areas already subject to plans for future urban development (within DGPs or Structure Plan 

areas). 


Apart from coastal areas there are only relatively small areas subject to areas of BRM potential. 

It is not considered these would represent a significant constraint to future development. 

Planning implications include: 




November 2010 

Page 60

LAND inSights 



• Mining legislation overriding planning legislation (including the Local Planning Strategy 

and Local Planning Scheme). This does not apply to Basic Raw Materials, which 

requires Shire approval. 

• The extent of prospectively does not necessarily mean that these areas are suited to 

exploitation of the resource – in developed areas around Busselton it is unlikely that 

Basic Raw Material extraction would be permitted. 

Waterlogging 

The majority of the coastal plain south and south-east of Dunsborough (including part of 

Dunsborough Lakes) is susceptible to waterlogging. A significant difference in Dunsborough 

however is that areas prone to waterlogging are also to a large part susceptible to acid 

sulphate soils. 

Level of constraint associated with each of the above-mentioned features/issues is presented 

on Figure 11.9. 

8.6 Commonage 


The Commonage area is largely zoned Rural Residential however also contains small areas 

which are reserved for Recreation. The land use is predominantly rural residential, although a 

few larger lots still exist throughout the area which are used for agricultural land uses 

(viticulture, grazing and agroforestry). A relatively high amount of remnant vegetation still 

exists throughout the area, although it is slightly fragmented due to past clearing and existing 

development. 

Lot sizes within the precinct range in area from 118 hectares to 5,000m 2 . The average lot size 

of subdivided rural living lots is 3.6 hectares. Some agricultural pursuits on a smaller scale are 

still prevalent in the area. 

All of the Commonage area (except for two small areas) has been identified as Rural 

Residential under the LNRSPP. The remaining areas are either existing conservation reserves 

or National Park. 

There are numerous tourist operations within the area, ranging from small-scale 

accommodation through to a significant number of ‘creative industries’. 

There are several European heritage sites within the area, including Keenans Track which 

dissects the Commonage area, Millbrook Precinct and the site of the 'Meleri' Winery in the 

southern portion of the site. Big Rock Nature Reserve in the northern portion of the site is also 

registered. Several Aboriginal Heritage Sites and their buffers extend into the northern end of 

the area. 

There are a number of inactive extractive industry sites within the area, mainly gravel or sand. 

There are four extractive industry sites recorded as being active – these being for sand and/or 

gravel. 




November 2010 

Page 61

LAND inSights 



The Commonage area consists of a relatively large amount of remnant vegetation, although it 

is fragmented in some locations. This could be attributed to the rural residential land uses 

which are dominant in this area and that landowners generally prefer native vegetation on their 

properties. Of the vegetation complexes present, only the ‘Abba’ complex is poorly 

represented, however this complex is only present in a few areas. There are no TECs 

identified. 

The remnant vegetation in and around Commonage provides habitat for native fauna. The 

DEC has indicated that threatened fauna have been identified within this area.. 

Other environmental features of the location include the following: 

• Topography is varied, elevation is high and generally slopes in a westerly direction 

towards the coast 

• Surface water systems are limited except minor perennial streams which flow to the west 

coast or Geographe Bay 

• Includes the vegetation complexes ‘Cowaramup’ and ‘Metricup’ 

• Includes the soil-landscape systems ‘Cowaramup Uplands’ and ‘Wilyabrup Valleys’. 





There are significant stands of remnant vegetation in the Commonage area, however only 

relatively small areas contain poorly represented vegetation. 

Table 13.3 – Remnant vegetation within Commonage 

Complex 

Total 


Ha % Ha % 

Abba 41.875 1.37 2.220 5.30 

Abba Complex 

Bidella 

Blackwood 

Cartis 


Coate 

Cowaramup 842.054 14.51 204.087 24.24 

Darradup 

Gracetown 0.811 0.02 0.219 26.96 

Jalbaragup 


Kilcarnup 

Kingia 




November 2010 

Page 62

LAND inSights 



Complex 

Total 


Ha % Ha % 

Ludlow 4.806 0.33 0.270 5.61 

Metricup 589.679 51.48 61.060 10.35 

Preston 


Quindalup 

Rosa 


Telerah 

Treeton 

Whicher Scarp 

Willyabrup 189.535 7.30 0.669 0.35 

Yelverton 271.238 5.32 20.805 7.67 

Totals 1939.998 289.331 14.91 

Notes: 



the Shire 





Rare fauna are indicated at scattered locations throughout the Shire and the entire 

Commonage urban area is identified as containing important habitat for the Western Ringtail 

Possum and black cockatoos. 

The DEC has indicated that threatened fauna have been identified within this area which is 

classified as Endangered, Vulnerable, Priority 1 and Priority 4. 


There are no known TEC’s within the Commonage area. 


There are no wetlands or significant watercourses in the Commonage area. 


The 1 in 100 year flood boundary does not extend to the Commonage area. 


There are no areas of high or moderate risk within the Commonage area. 

Fire Hazard 




November 2010 

Page 63

LAND inSights 



There is a significant amount of remnant vegetation throughout Commonage, most notably on 

the slopes associated with the ridge. All of these areas represent a high or extreme fire 

hazard. 


of the remnant vegetation in and around Commonage is already poorly represented, the focus 

should be on the preservation of the vegetation rather than on its clearing for fire 

management/development purposes. 





The majority of the cleared areas in the Commonage area meet the requirements for priority 

agricultural land, and there are several small-scale agricultural operations in this area. 

Changing settlement patterns in the area will need to be cognisant of existing agricultural uses, 

with a preference given to maintaining these usually small-scale industries. 


A significant amount of land within Commonage is prospective for a variety of BRM. Each 

application would need to be considered on its merits in terms of both environmental and 

amenity issues. 

Waterlogging 

There are limited areas of land susceptible to localised waterlogging in the Commonage area. 

Level of constraint associated with each of the above-mentioned features/issues is presented 

on Figure 8.14. 



1. Protect all remaining areas of poorly represented vegetation and provide 

opportunities for revegetation where possible. 

2. Protect property and life by restricting development within the 1:100 year 

floodway. 

3. Ensure that coastal management, climatic change and inundation/flooding is 

taken into account as part of the development approvals process. 

4. Ensure that that development continues to be subjected to thorough Structure 

Planning and Development Guide Plan processes that incorporate relevant 

environmental assessment and management. 

5. Protect major watercourses and riparian zones. 

6. Maintain the integrity of wetland systems. 




November 2010 

Page 64

LAND inSights 



7. Ensure that essential infrastructure is protected from incompatible land use. 

8. Protect important landscapes within and around the town centre and adjoining 

residential areas. 

9. Protect and encourage agricultural industries, particularly intensive agricultural 

enterprises to maximise use of good quality agricultural land. 

10. Protect the lifestyle opportunities provided for within the Vasse and Commonage 

areas. 

8.8 Actions 


MAJ1 Discourage expansion of the urban footprint, especially but not only in the area O 

between the coast and the wetland chain, to improve environmental outcomes, by: 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, seeking to 

identify opportunities for the redevelopment and consolidation of existing urban 

areas to reduce the pressure for expansion of the urban footprint; 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, not supporting 

the rezoning of land that would result in an expansion of the urban footprint into 

areas identified as having medium or high environmental constraints (as 

depicted on Figures 8.4, 8.9 and 8.14) unless there is a clear strategic case for 

doing so, and following the consideration and assessment of alternatives and 

the environmental impacts of urban development; 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, considering 

alternative zonings for areas of land currently zoned for urban or rural 

residential development, but which contain Conservation Category Wetlands 

(as depicted on Figure 8.5) and/or other significant environmental constraints 

that would make approval of the development unlikely; 

• in the development of the Local Settlement Planning Strategy, and/or 

subsequently, identifying means, in consultation with affected landowners, of 

providing for the long-term protection, enhancement and management of the 

wetland chain (and adjoining areas of remnant vegetation and significant 

environmental constraints) between Busselton and Dunsborough (and outside 

the area subject of the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy); and. 

MAJ2 In Busselton and Dunsborough, consider introducing development incentives M 

and/or transferrable development rights to facilitate the protection and enhancement 

of urban biodiversity and character. 

MAJ3 Provide buffers around key infrastructure by: 

M 

• liaising with the Water Corporation to identify and protect appropriate 

development buffers around the Busselton and Dunsborough Wastewater 

Treatment Plants; 

• reviewing the identified buffer around the Busselton Regional Airport and 

seeking to ensure the identification of an appropriate buffer; and 

• considering the creation of differentiated industrial zones to ensure that 

industrial development that may be incompatible with residential development 

is not proposed in areas in proximity to existing or proposed residential 

development. 

MAJ4 Include areas of remnant vegetation in public ownership and currently in Recreation 

reserves pursuant to the town planning scheme in a new Conservation reserve. 

O 




November 2010 

Page 65

LAND inSights 



9 Minor settlements 


This chapter of the document presents the key features and constraints analysis for all minor 

settlements in the Shire. These are as follows: 

• Jarrahwood 

• Yallingup 

• Eagle Bay 

• Carbunup River 

• Metricup 

Figures 9.1 and 9.2 show the key environmental features and constraints of the entire Shire, 

while Figures 9.3 to 9.19 show key environmental features and the constraints plans for each of 

the abovementioned settlements. 

9.2 Jarrahwood 


The Jarrahwood settlement is currently zoned Agriculture and surrounded by land reserved as 

Recreation. Current environmental data indicates that Jarrahwood and surrounds consist of 

few significant environmental features apart from the high level of remnant vegetation cover. 



The Jalbaragup vegetation complex exists throughout the settlement and surrounds. 


Threatened fauna have been recorded by the DEC within or near the Jarrahwood townsite 

(classified as Vulnerable and Priority 3). 


No TECs have been identified within or near the Jarrahwood townsite. 


No waterbodies or watercourses are identified within or near the Jarrahwood townsite. 


The Jarrahwood townsite is located on high elevation on the Whicher Scarp. As such, the 1 in 

100 year flood level does not affect this settlement. 


No acid sulphate soil information is currently available for this area. 




November 2010 

Page 66

LAND inSights 



Fire Hazard 

The areas surrounding the Jarrahwood townsite are identified as having an extreme fire hazard 

risk. This is most likely due to the presence of remnant vegetation and the slope of the land. 

Cleared areas such as within the townsite itself has a lower fire hazard risk. 


The townsite and the surrounds are located within a Priority Agricultural Area. 


No BRM or mineral resources are identified within or directly surrounding the townsite, however 

some BRM potential (gravel) is identified further from the townsite. 

Waterlogging 

The townsite has a very low waterlogging risk. 

9.3 Yallingup 


The Yallingup settlement is located on the western coastal side of the Leeuwin-Naturaliste 

Ridge. The settlement is largely zoned Residential and consist of a few smaller areas zoned 

for Public Purposes and Special Purposes (the caravan park). An area slightly to the south is 

also zoned for Special Purposes (a hotel and camping area). Most of the surrounding area is 

reserved as Recreation which consists of an expansive area of remnant vegetation. 

A majority of the settlement and surrounds are also located within Aboriginal Heritage Sites. A 

number exist throughout the area, with one in particular which extends half way across the 

Yallingup townsite from the south (the Yallingup Brook Aboriginal Heritage Site). 



The vegetation complex within and directly surrounding the Yallingup townsite is identified as 

the Gracetown vegetation complex. The vegetation along the coast to the south is identified as 

Willyabrup vegetation complex and to the north is Kilcarnup vegetation complex, which are 

identified as poorly represented. 


No threatened fauna have been identified within the Yallingup townsite, although a few have 

been recorded by the DEC to the south of the town (classified as Vulnerable, Priority 4 and 

Endangered). The area is known to contain important habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum 

and black cockatoos. 


No TECs have been identified within or surrounding the Yallingup townsite. 





November 2010 

Page 67

LAND inSights 



No waterbodies or watercourses are identified within or surrounding the Yallingup townsite. 


The 1 in 100 year flood boundary does not affect the Yallingup townsite. 


Acid sulphate soil mapping for the area shows that the Yallingup settlement has no known risk 

of acid sulphate soils occurring within 3 metres of the soil surface. 

Fire Hazard 

The area directly surrounding the Yallingup townsite is covered in remnant vegetation and has 

a steep slope, therefore making this area an extreme fire hazard risk. 


The Yallingup townsite and surrounds are not located within a Priority Agricultural Area. 


The coastal areas to the west of the townsite are identified as having limesand potential and 

the townsite and surrounding area is identified as having sand potential. 

Waterlogging 

The townsite and surrounds have a low waterlogging risk. 

9.4 Eagle Bay 


The Eagle Bay settlement is located at the northern end of the Leeuwin-Naturaliste to the north 

of the Dunsborough townsite and to the south of Bunker Bay. It is developed for residential, 

rural residential, tourism and recreational purposes. 

The areas directly to the north and south-east of the settlement are identified as European 

Heritage Sites 



The settlement consists of patches of remnant vegetation which becomes less fragmented 

along the coastal areas. The vegetation complexes are identified as Willyabrup and 

Cowaramup which are not identified as being poorly represented. 


No threatened fauna have been identified within the Eagle Bay settlement area. However, the 

area is known to contain important habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum and black 

cockatoos. 





November 2010 

Page 68

LAND inSights 



A number of TECs are located along the coast to the south of the Eagle Bay settlement. The 

TEC buffers (and associated ESAs) extend close to the boundary of the Eagle Bay settlement. 


No waterbodies or watercourses are identified within the Eagle Bay settlement area. 


The 1 in 100 year flood data does not extend to the Eagle Bay settlement area. 


Acid sulphate soil mapping for the area shows that the Eagle Bay settlement predominately has 

no known risk of acid sulphate soils occurring within 3 metres of the soil surface expect for the 

northern end of the settlement and further inland which has a moderate to low risk. 

Fire Hazard 

Areas of extreme fire hazard risk are identified within and surrounding the Eagle Bay 

settlement. These areas are largely associated with areas containing remnant vegetation. 


A majority of the Eagle Bay settlement area and surrounding land is identified as a Priority 

Agricultural Area. 


Some BRM potential has been identified within the Eagle Bay settlement such as gravel in the 

southern half, limesand along the coast and sand in the northern section. 

Waterlogging 

The Eagle Bay settlement has a low waterlogging risk. 

12.5 Carbunup River 


The Carbunup River settlement is a very small townsite located to the south-west of the 

Busselton townsite along the Bussell Highway. Approximately 14 lots within the settlement are 

zoned Residential and the surrounding land is predominantly zoned Agriculture. An area 

reserved for Recreation is located to the south-west of the townsite. 

A majority of the land zoned for agriculture is cleared of vegetation. The areas of remnant 

vegetation are predominantly located within the recreation reserve and along the Carbunup 

River. The major environmental features associated with this settlement are located within 

these areas of remnant vegetation. 






November 2010 

Page 69

LAND inSights 



The remnant vegetation associated with this settlement is the Abba vegetation complex, which 

is identified as poorly represented. 


No threatened fauna have been identified within and surrounding the Carbunup River townsite. 

However, the area is known to contain important habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum and 

black cockatoos. 


Three Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) are located within the recreation reserve to 

the west and south of the townsite. The TEC buffers extend over the existing townsite and 

surrounding agricultural land. 


The Carbunup River extends along the eastern side of the townsite and flows north towards 

Geographe Bay. The river is identified as a Conservation Category Wetland and an ESA. 


The eastern portion of the Carbunup River townsite is located within the 1 in 100 year flood 

boundary for the Carbunup River. 


Acid sulphate soil mapping for the area shows that the Carbunup River townsite has a 

moderate to low risk of acid sulphate soils occurring within 3 metres of the soil surface. 

Fire Hazard 

The remnant vegetation located along the Carbunup River and the remnant vegetation to the 

west and south of the townsite are identified as having an extreme fire hazard risk. The 

townsite is not identified as having a high risk. 


The Carbunup River townsite and surrounding area is located within a Priority Agricultural 

Area. 


The Carbunup River townsite and surrounding area is located an area identified as having coal 

potential. 

Waterlogging 

The Carbunup River townsite and surrounding area is not identified as having a waterlogging 

risk. 




November 2010 

Page 70

LAND inSights 



9.5 Metricup 


The Metricup settlement is located along the Bussell Highway at the southern end of the Shire. 

It is not currently developed as a townsite or any substantial settlement. A majority of the area 

is zoned Agriculture with a small area reserved for Recreation along the highway. 

A small European Heritage site is located within the settlement (within the area reserved as 

Recreation adjoining the highway). 



The Metricup townsite and surrounds are largely cleared of vegetation which is a result of the 

historical agricultural land uses in the area. The vegetation complexes within the settlement 

and beyond are predominantly Yelverton and Treeton. 


No threatened fauna have been identified within and surrounding the Metricup townsite. 


No TECs have been identified within or surrounding the Metricup townsite. 


No waterbodies or watercourses have been identified within or surrounding the Metricup 

townsite. 


The 1 in 100 year flood boundary does not affect the Metricup townsite. 


No acid sulphate soil information is currently available for this area. 

Fire Hazard 

The Metricup townsite and surrounding area has been identified as having an extreme fire risk 

(i.e. the area associated with remnant vegetation). 


The Metricup townsite is not located within a Priority Agricultural Area, although surrounding 

land to the south and east is located within this area. 


Some gravel potential has been identified within the Metricup townsite and extending to the 

south. 




November 2010 

Page 71

LAND inSights 



Waterlogging 

The Metricup townsite has been identified as having a low waterlogging risk. 



1. Protect all areas of remnant vegetation, particularly areas of poorly represented 

vegetation and TECs and provide opportunities for revegetation where possible. 

2. Ensure that any proposed development in the area is subjected to thorough 

Structure Planning and Development Guide Plan processes that incorporate 

relevant environmental assessment and management. 

3. Protect important landscapes within and around the townsite. 

4. Protect the lifestyle opportunities provided for within minor settlements. 

5. Protect the environmental values of the Carbunup River through the 

implementation of an appropriate vegetated buffer. 

9.7 Actions 


MIN1 Do not support further expansion of Yallingup and Eagle Bay outside existing O 

structure plans. 

MIN2 In considering proposals for the expansion of Carbunup River, Metricup and O 

Jarrahwood, do not support the rezoning of land that would result in an 

expansion of development into areas identified as having medium or high 

environmental constraints (as depicted on Figures 9.4, 9.7, 9.10, 19,13, 9,16 and 

12.19) unless there is a clear strategic case for doing so, and following the 

consideration and assessment of alternatives and the environmental impacts of 

urban development. 

MIN3 In Yallingup, Eagle Bay, Carbunup River and Metricup, promote the 

enhancement and protection of all remnant vegetation, and consider introduction 

of clearing controls in the town planning scheme to support that objective. 

M 




November 2010 

Page 72

LAND inSights 


10 Bibliography 

Beckwith Environmental Planning, (2009), Revised Biodiversity Incentives Strategy for Private 

Land in the Busselton Shire (draft), Shire of Busselton, WA. 

Conservation International, (2007), 

http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/hotspots/hotspotsscience/Pages/hotspots_defined.aspx 

Department of Conservation and Land Management, (1990), Information Sheet on Ramsar 

Wetlands (RIS), from website: 

http://www.naturebase.net/pdf/national_parks/wetlands/fact_sheets/vasse_wonnerup1.doc 

Department of Environment and Conservation, (2009), The Flora and Vegetation of the 

Busselton Plain (Swan Coastal Plain), Department of Environment and Conservation, WA. 

Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2007), Draft Policy Guideline for the 

EPBC listed Western Ringtail Possum, Department of Environment and Heritage, Canberra, 

ACT. 

Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009), 

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/ 

Dieback Working Group, (2000), Managing Phytophthora Dieback, Guidelines for Local 

Government, Dieback Working Group. WA. 

Environmental Protection Authority, (2000), Position Statement No. 2. Environmental Protection 

of Native Vegetation in Western Australia. Environmental Protection Authority, WA. 

Environmental Protection Authority, (2004), Position Statement No. 4. Environmental Protection 

of Wetlands. Environmental Protection Authority, WA. 

Environmental Protection Authority, (2008), Guidance Statement 33. Environmental Guidance 

for Planning and Development. Environmental Protection Authority, WA. 

Environmental Protection Authority, (2009), Environmental Protection Bulletin No. 8 South 

West Regional Ecological Linkages. Environmental Protection Authority, WA. 

Ramsar Convention Secretariat, 2007, National Wetland Policies: Developing and 

Implementing National Wetland Policies. Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 3rd 

edition, vol. 2. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland. 

Shire of Busselton, (1999a), Caves Road Visual Management Policy, Shire of Busselton, WA. 

Shire of Busselton, (1999b), Extractive Industry Policy, Shire of Busselton, WA. 

Shire of Busselton, (2004), Shire of Busselton Environment Strategy, Shire of Busselton WA. 

DRAFT VER 0b 



August 2010 

Page 73

LAND inSights 


Shire of Busselton, (2007a), Shire of Busselton Local Tourism Planning Strategy. Issues and 

Opportunities Paper, Shire of Busselton, Busselton, WA 

Western Australian Planning Commission, (1998), State Planning Policy No. 6.1. Leeuwin- 

Naturaliste Ridge Policy, Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth. 

Western Australian Planning Commission, (1999), Shire of Busselton District Town Planning 

Scheme No. 20. Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth. 

Western Australian Planning Commission and FESA, (2001), Planning for Bush Fire Protection, 

Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth. 

Western Australian Planning Commission, (2002), State Planning Policy No. 2.5. Agricultural 

and Rural Land Use Planning, Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth. 

Western Australian Planning Commission, (2005), Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy, 

Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth. 

Western Australian Planning Commission, (2007), Visual Landscape Planning in Western 

Australia. A Manual for Evaluation, Assessment, Siting and Design, Western Australian 

Planning Commission, Perth. 

Western Australian Planning Commission, (2008), South-West Framework, Western Australian 

Planning Commission, Perth. 

White, Kirrily, (2008), A Plan to Improve Water Quality in the Vasse Wonnerup Wetlands and 

Geographe Bay (Draft), Department of Water, WA. 

DRAFT VER 0b 



August 2010 

Page 74

CA V ES R D 

BU SE LH WY 

CA V ES R D 

AL BE R T ST 

QU EN S T 

CA U SE WA Y RD 

VA SE H WY 

BU SE LH WY 

SU E S RD 

BU SE LH WY 

VA SE H WY 


Perth 

SHIRE OF DARDANUP 

Shire of Busselton 

SHIRE OF CAPEL 

CA P E NA T UR A LI ST E R D 

BUSSELL HWY 

BUSSELL HWY 

SHIRE OF 

DONNYBROOK- 

BALINGUP 

BU SSELTON BYPA SS 


VASSE HWY 

HWY 

BUSSELL 

SHIRE OF NANNUP 

UNIT 1/1 ALVAN STREET, MT LAWLEY, WA, 6050 

POSTAL ADDRESS: PO BOX 289, MT LAWLEY, WA, 6929 

PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 

EMAIL: admin@landinsights.com.au 

1:300,000 

0 1 2 4 6 8 10 

Kilometres 

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA-MARGARET RIVER 

± 

LOCAL 


ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING STRATEGY 

REPORT 3 

Base data supplied by the Shire of Busselton & Landgate (SLIP) 

Plan date: 3 Sept 2009 

File: 836 


STUDY AREA 

FIGURE 1.1

CA V E S R D 

BU S E L H WY 

CA V E S R D 

AL B E R T ST 

QU E N S T 

CA U S E WA Y R D 

VA S E H WY 

BU S E L H WY 

SU E S R D 

BU S E L H WY 

VA S E H WY 


Legend 

Settlements 

Shire of Busselton Boundary 

Highway 

Main Road 

Cape Naturaliste Road - Vegetation; 

undulating topography 

Eagle Bay 

Local Road 

Visually Attractive Road 

Dunsborough Visual backdrop 

Cadastre 

CA P E N A T U RA L IS T E R D 

Tuart Forest remnant; wetlands 

Visual backdrop to 

Dunsborough - 

Vegetation; sparse 

development 

Yallingup 

Commonage 

Dunsborough 

Yallingup & Caves Road - Unique 

development pattern following 

topography; dense vegetation 

Caves Road - Entrance 

to Dunsborough townsite 

Ford Road - Open farmland; lack of 

commercial strip/residential land; 

views to wetlands; vegetation 

Vasse 

BUSSELL HWY 

Busselton 

BUSSELTON BYPA SS 

Queen Street - 

Town centre; 

vista to foreshore 

BUSSELL HWY 

Bussell Highway - Open farmland; 

weltands; forest 

Carbunup River 

Caves Road - Farmland; 

vineyards; vegetation 

VASSE HWY 

HWY 

Bussell Highway - Open farmland; 

rolling hills; vegetation 

BUSSELL 

Entrance to Jarrahwood - 

Forest area 

Metricup 

Jarrahwood 


Plan date: 16 Oct 2009 

File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:250,000 

0 1 2 4 6 8 10 

Kilometres 


LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING STRATEGY 

REPORT 3 


VISUALLY ATTRACTIVE AREAS 

FIGURE 3.1

CA V E S R D 

CA V E S R D 

AL B E R T S T 

Q U E N S T 

CA U S E WA Y RD 

VA S E H W Y 

BU S E L H WY 

SU E S R D 

BU S E L H WY 

VA S E H W Y 


Legend 


!( Settlements 

Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Bussleton 

Dunsborough 

Commonage 

!( 

Eagle Bay 

CA P E N A TU R A L IS T E R D 

DUNSBOROUGH 

Yallingup 

!( 

!( 

BUSSELTON 

!( 

BUSSELL HWY 

Commonage 

Vasse 

!( 

BUSSELTON BYPASS 


!( 

VASSE HWY 

BU S E L H WY 

BUSSELL HWY 

!( 

Metricup 

!( Jarrahwood 

Base data supplied by the Shire of Busselton 

Plan date: 19 Aug 2009 

File: 836 


MAJOR SETTLEMENT PRECINCTS 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:200,000 

0 2.5 5 7.5 10 

Kilometres 

± 


REPORT 3 

FIGURE 11.1


Map Location 

Legend 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

BUSSELTON 

QUEEN ST 

AL BE RT ST 

CAUSEWAY RD 

BUSSEL L HWY 

VASSE HWY 



Plan date: 4 August 2010 

File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:40,000 

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 

Kilometres 

± 



REPORT 3 

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY 

BUSSELTON 

FIGURE 11.2


Legend 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Land Use Strategy Precinct 

Structure Plans 

Development Guide Plan 

Long Term Urban Development 

Mid Term Development 

Short - Mid Term Development 

Short Term Development 

! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 

1 in 100 Year Flood Boundary 

Extreme Fire Hazard 

High Fire Hazard 

Environmentally Sensitive Areas 

Conservation Category Wetland 50m buffer 

Conservation Category Wetland 

Major Waterway (20m buffer) 

Waterlogging (>60% High & Very High) 

Poorly Represented Vegetation

Legend 

FORTH ST 

" Settlement 


Structure Plan Area 

JOHN ST 

LOCKE ST 

Industrial Zoning 

Waste Water Treatment Plant 






Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

PEARCE RD 

GEOGRAPHE BAY RD 

CAVES RD 

AVERIL ST 

DAWSON AV 

JO 

NES WY 

CAMBRIDGE BVD 

COOKWORTHY R D 

HARNETT ST 

BEACH FIELDS DR 

RAY AV 

KOOLJAK RD 

HARVEST RD 

HIGGINS DR 

CLEMATIS WY 

Level of Constraint 

HOLGATE RD 

NORMAN RD 

TEC Buffers 



Poorly Represented Vegetation 60% Category 1 & 2) 

BRM & Mineral Resources 


No Significant Environmental Constraints 

Note: mapping does not include coastal setback lines or areas possibly subject to inundation 

as a result of climate change. This mapping will become available over time and should be 

incorporated into this constraints plan as appropriate. 

High 

Medium 

Low 

BURT ST 

BELL DR 

ALAN ST 

CROSS RD 

CURRAWONG DR 

WILLIAM DR 

DARTER ST 

GEOGRAP HE BAY RD 

BROADWAT ER BVD 

JEAN ST 

FALCON DR 

LOCKHART ST 

DOLPHIN RD 

CORAL CR 

GREYTEA 

L PL 

HOVEA CR 

DEREK ST 

BREEDEN ST 



HALE ST 

JOHNSTON AV 

HADFIELD AV 

GLENLEIGH RD 

BLUE CR 

LILLY CR 

BIGNE 

BOWER RD 

W YLIE CR 

LL DR 

FAIRWAY DR 

CRAIG ST 

HAMILT ON WY 

ELLEN L 

TIP DRAY TCE 

FALKINGHAM RD 

PETTIT CR 

ALPHA RD 

MILL RD 

GLEN EAGLES GR 

KA 

MELALEUCA DR 

L GARIT C H AV 

CARTER ST 

MARGARET ST 

QUEEN ELIZABETH AV 

DORSET ST 

REYNOLDS ST 

RECREATION L 

KING ST 

SIMON ST 

SOUTH ST 

KELLY DR 

CLYDEBANK A V 


THOMAS ST 

SEYMOUR ST 

P R 

READING ST 

I NCE REG 

COLLEGE AV 

HIGH ST 

CHANCERY WY 

PEAKER CT 

ENT DR 

MYLES ST 

GALE ST 

CARDINAL CR 

DUCHESS ST 

" Busselton 

ALBERT ST 

WEST ST 

EDWARDS ST 

ADELAIDE ST 

COOK ST 

MARINE TCE 

FAIRBAIRN RD 

CAUSEWAY RD 

SOUT H ERN DR 

BARLEE ST 

FAIRLAWN RD 

FREDERICK ST 

ALBERT ST 

NEVILLE ST 

TRUMPER DR 

WRIGHT ST 

STRELL Y ST 

ISAACS ST 

Map Location 

KENT ST 

CAREY ST 

PEEL TCE 

DUKE ST 

HARRIS RD 

MOLLOY ST 

COU N 

FORD RD 

KOORDEN PL 

HAY SHED RD 

TR Y R D 

WEBB ST 

HESTER ST 

FRIESIAN GR 

ANGUS CL 

MOY 


WILLMOTT ST 

LAYMAN RD 

L AN WY 

AVOCET BVD 

BUSSELL HWY 

LINDSAY DR 

LINDSAY DR 

KLAEHN CR 

ARMITAGE DR 

BLUM BVD 

GRANT ST 

GUERIN ST 

DAVID DR 

HARWOOD RD 

NAVIGATION WY 

ESTUARY WAT ERS DR 

JOSEPH DR 

HAWKER APP 

RIEDLE CL 

KITE CT 

FREYCINET DR 

BURGEE COVE 

SPINNAKER BVD 

K 

LAN 

PORT L 

EEL RTT 

YA R D BVD 

OSPREY D R 

LYDDY RD 

ESTUARY VIEW DR 

CABLE SANDS RD 

LAYMAN RD 

BARRA C KS DR 

INLET D R 

WEBSTER RD 

TUART DR 

BALLARAT RD 

WARATAH CT 

LANCASTER DR 

D OWELL RD 

BUSSELL HWY 

"Vasse 

PRIES RD 

GLENVIEW DR 

DOWELL RD 

BRIDGEVIEW ENT 

OAKS DR 

BELLTONIA WY 

RED GUM WY 

PAPERBARK WY 

QUENDA CL 

PEPPERMINT WY 


KOOKABURRA WY 

J A RR 

AH ELB 

SHOVELBOARD WY 

CHAPMAN HILL RD 

BANGALO CL 

FLORENCE RD 

RENDEZVOUS RD 

AIRPORT DR 

VASSE HWY 

BOALLIA RD 

ST ANDREWS L 

KALOORUP RD 

QUEEN ELIZABETH AV 

LINDBER G R D 

GORDON RD 

GILES RD 

WONNERUP EAST RD 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


FRANKLIN RD 

1:40,000 

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 

AMBERGATE RD 

AMBERGATE RD 

IRONS RD 


ENVIRONMENT PLANNING STRATEGY 

REPORT 3 

ACTON PARK RD 



File: 858 

CONTRAINTS ANALYSIS 

BUSSELTON 

FIGURE 11.4

SUES RD 

VASSE 


Legend 


Proposed Urban Boundary 

Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 







Cadastre 

Waste Water Treatment Buffer (1km) 

Unreserved Poorly Represented Native Vegetation 


Map Location 

Provide development incentives (such as 

density relaxation, multiple dwelling potential) 

on land indentified as retaining important 

remnant vegetation 

BUSSELTON 

Urban Area Limit 

De-zone areas of urban land where affected 

by Conservation Category Wetlands 

ALBERT ST 

QUEEN ST 

CAUSEWAY RD 

BUSSE LL HWY 

VAS SE HWY 

Identify means, in conjunction with affected landowners, of 

providing for the long term protection, enhancement 

and management of the wetland chain and adjoining 

areas of remnant vegetation. The focus of this recommendation is 

in areas not affected by the Busselton Wetlands Management Plan. 


Include wetland and remnant 

vegetation chain currently for 

Recreation in a new reserve 

for Conservation. 

Include wetland and remnant 

vegetation chain currently reserved for 

Recreation in a new reserve 

for Conservation. 

Reserve or liase with landowners 

to progress a conservation rezoning 

over areas currently zoned Agriculture. 

Independent studies are being 

undertaken to determine the future 

uses and associated buffers 

around the airport and new 

industrial area. 

Liase with Water Corporation to establish 

an appropriate development buffer 

around the WWTP 


Plan date: 15 September 2010 

File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:50,000 

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 

Kilometres 

± 



REPORT 3 

ACTIONS 

BUSSELTON 

FIGURE 11.5


Map Location 

Legend 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

DUNSBOROUGH 


Plan date: 4 Aug 2010 

File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:25,000 

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 

Kilometres 

± 



REPORT 3 


DUNSBOROUGH 

FIGURE 11.6


WARDANDI DR 

WILL AN UP RISE 

Map Location 

ENDICOTT LOOP 

SLOAN DR 

ENDORA CL 

MARTINA DR 

CAPE NATURALISTE RD 

GIBSON D R 

GUY CR 

A MIRO ST 

BRAND CL 

CHAPMAN ST 

N ORFOLK ST 

DUFFY PL 

SEAGRASS COVE 

CURTIS ST 

BIRD CR 

HILLS RD 

HANSEN ST 

PROTEA PL 

TODDY PL 

TURNER ST 

BEACH RD 

BAY VIEW CR 

SMITH ST 

GREEN ST 

FINLAYSON ST 

GIBNEY ST 

NEWBERRY RD 

NORTH ST 

VINCENT ST 

Legend 

" Settlement 



Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 


! 


Map Location 

! 

Legend 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

! 



! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 



DUNSBOROUGH 








MEELUP BEACH RD 

CASTLE R O C K RD 


Map Location 

D AND ATUP PL 

WARDANDI DR 

WILLAN UP RISE 

ENDICOTT LOOP 

Legend 

" Settlement 

CAPE NATURALISTE RD 

ENDORA CL 

MARTINA DR 

SLOAN DR 

BIRD CR 

TODDY PL 

TURNER S 

BAY VIEW CR 

GREEN ST 




WESTERN CAPE DR 

CAVES RD 

VIDLER RD 

HUNTINGTON CT 

S HEARERS CL 

QUEDJINUP DR 

LITTLE J OHN R D 

BRUCE RD 

BRONZEWING RD 

BIG ROCK PL 

DALMORE CL 

GIBSON DR 

GUY CR 

AM 

IRO ST 

JONES RD 

CAP R 

IGAR D 

CHAPMAN ST 

NORFOLK ST 

WINDLE PL 

I CT 

CURTIS ST 

CLINKER DR 

RIDGEWAY DR 

HILLS RD 

HANSEN ST 

PROTEA PL 

MAR T 

GALLEY RMB L 

CARINYA RISE 

W 

T 

BEACH RD 

IND 

GIBNEY ST 

MARRI DR 

H AKEA WY 

ACACIA CL 

INGAL E DR 

MOONDAH CL 

LEMERE D R 

FINLAYSON ST 

NEWBERRY RD 

ASHBROOK GRN 

NORTH ST 

VINCENT ST 

GIFFORD RD 

NATURALISTE TCE 

CLARK ST 

PRO W SE WY 

DU NN B AY RD 

DUNSBORO UGH LAKES DR 

AMBERLEY LOOP 

BURT CT 

" Dunsborough 

R ES O RT D R 

C H 

INDOOROOPILLY CR 

MICHAELS PWY 

PRESTWICK RD 

E 

STER WY 

GULL CT 

CLUBHOUSE DR 

PEPPERMINT DR 

PERON AV 

DIVOT L 

ROYAL OAKS CR 

PIMELEA PDE 

PAR L 

FAURE L 

WANUI ST 

GRIFFIN DR 

MARSHALL ST 

COMMONAGE RD 

SEATTLE CT 

ELMORE RD 

TOBY CT 

WILSON AV 

MCDERMOTT ST 

STONE ST 

CAVES RD 

WHATMAN ST 

LAGOONA PL 

C A M PIO N W Y 


High 

Medium 

Low 

Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

Priority Agricultural Areas (>60% Category 1 & 2) 

TEC Buffers 







Note: mapping does not include coastal setback lines or areas possibly subject to inundation 

as a result of climate change. This mapping will become available over time and should be 

incorporated into this constraints plan as appropriate. 

PARKFIELD CL 

KOOPIN PL 

CAVES RD 


BINA PL 

YUNGARRA DR 

HEMSLEY RD 

LA GOON DR 

THE COVE 

SHEO AK D R 

SO N NING LOOP 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


MCLACHLAN RD 

KURRUM PL 

BUCKINGHAM GR 

VERAISON PL 

ATHERDEN CT 

VIN 

VINEYARD PL 

BAUME L 

T NERS DR 

1:30,000 

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 

Kilometres 

BIDDLE RD 

GRANGE WY 

± 

LOCAL 

GENOLI RD 

MEWETT RD 

QUINDALUP SIDING RD 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


DUNSBOROUGH 

FIGURE 11.9 

"


Legend 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 


Cadastre 

Unreserved Poorly Represented Native Vegetation 

Conservation 

Map Location 

DUNSBOROUGH 

Provide development incentives (such as 

density relaxation, multiple dwelling potential) 

on land indentified as retaining important 

remnant vegetation 

Identify means, in conjunction with affected landowners, of 

providing for the long term protection, enhancement 

and management of the wetland chain and adjoining 

areas of remnant vegetation. 



File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:30,000 

0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 

Kilometres 

± 



REPORT 3 

ACTIONS - 

DUNSBOROUGH 

FIGURE 11.10


Map Location 

Legend 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 



File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:35,000 

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 

Kilometres 

± 



REPORT 3 


COMMONAGE 

FIGURE 11.11

Legend 

" Settlement 


DUCK WORTH PL 

D RUMM O ND GLEN 


VIDLER RD 

BIG ROCK PL 

JONES RD 

WINDLE PL 

CLUBHOUSE DR 

DIVOT L 

CAVES RD 

PAR L 

MARSHALL ST 

Map Location 

ELMORE RD 

WILSON AV 




Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

CAVES RD 

QUEDJINUP DR 

BRONZEWING RD 

DALMORE CL 

CA P 

R 

IGAR 

D 

RIDGEWAY DR 

I CT 

KOOPIN PL 

ASHBROOK GRN 

R ES O RT DR 


ST MICHAELS PWY 

FAURE L 

GRIFFIN DR 

TOBY CT 

PARKFIELD CL 

Cadastre 



Legend 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 



! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 










Legend 

" Settlement 




Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 


DUCK WORTH PL 

D RUMM O ND GLEN 


CAVES RD 

VIDLER RD 

QUEDJINUP DR 

BRONZEWING RD 

BIG ROCK PL 

DALMORE CL 

JONES RD 

CA P 

WINDLE PL 

R 

IGAR 

D 

RIDGEWAY DR 

I CT 

ASHBROOK GRN 

R ES O RT DR 


ST MICHAELS PWY 

CLUBHOUSE DR 

DIVOT L 

CAVES RD 

PAR L 

FAURE L 

GRIFFIN DR 

MARSHALL ST 

Map Location 

ELMORE RD 

TOBY CT 

WILSON AV 


PARKFIELD CL 

TEC Buffers 

SHEARERS CL 

KOOPIN PL 


High 

Medium 

Low 







Note: mapping does not include coastal setback lines 

or areas possibly subject to inundation as a result of 

climate change. This mapping will become available 

over time and should be incorporated into this 

constraints plan as appropriate. 

CANAL ROCKS RD 

" Smiths Beach 

SMITHS BEACH RD 

DUDDY RD 

WHITTLE RD 

" Yallingup 

YALL 

D A WSON DR 

WARDANUP CR 

VALLEY RD 

IN GUP B E ACH RD 

COLEY RD 

Y ALLINGU P CAVES RD 

KANGAROO PDE 

GUNYULGUP VALLEY DR 

DUGDALE RD 

H O WSON RISE 

MILLBROOK RD 

WILDBROOK PL 

KOORABIN DR 

HEMSLEY RD 

KURRUM PL 

NUK KLGUP LOOP 

BLUE ORCHID CT 

KARDA PL 

HAYLEY CL 

DRESS CIR 

THE COVE 

COWSLIP PL 

WINDMILLS CL 

LAGOON DR 

MACNAIR PL 

SHA 

LLOW 

MILLER RD 

S U MMER BR 

NUKKLGUP LOOP 

S LOOP 

WINTER RTT 

PORTER CT 

SHEO 

SONNING LOOP 

MISTOVER PL 

ANNIE LYSLE PL 

AK DR 

MCLACHLAN RD 

" Commonage 

WOOD CT 

MORIARTY PL 

MARRINUP DR 

MACK PL 

OLD MILL GR 

WISTERIA DR 

BINA PL 

BRUSHWO OD BR O OK DR 

BUCKINGHAM GR 

CURLEW RISE 

VERAISON PL 

ATHERDEN CT 

BAUME L 

YUNGARRA DR 

VINEYARD PL 

CHARNU PL 

BROYAGE RTT 

VINT N 

SEA HILL CR 

OC E AN V 

SU M MERVILLE CR 

ROWAN PL 

ERS DR 

IEW DR 

TRANQUIL L 

B URWOOD L 

BIDDLE RD 

GRANGE WY 

GREEN PARK RD 

O'BYRNE RD 

PANORAMA RISE 

WYLARAH WY 

HAYES RD 

CREEKVIEW RD 

JUNEE PL 

G LOVE R RD 

OTTER CL 

GENOLI RD 

COWRANG L 

MEWETT RD 

VASSE-YALLINGUP SIDING RD 

OWEN RD 

CAPE CLAIRAULT RD 

INJIDUP SPRING RD 

BRAZIER COVE 

SAIN SB 

URY LO O P 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


HOUSE GLEN 

MARRON RISE 

WYADUP RD 

1:35,000 

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 

T H 

E D ELL RTT 

ZAMIA GR 

BUTTERLY RD 

W 

BA 

YFIEL D CT 

ILDWOOD RD 

THORNTON RD 

COMMONAGE RD 

BLACK B UT T CL 

LOMBO VIEW 

RAPID 

WO ODBRID GE VALE 

A RISE 



REPORT 3 

BERRYMAN RD 

WILDW O OD RD 



File: 858 


COMMONAGE 

FIGURE 11.14

CA V E S R D 

CA V E S R D 


Q U E N S T 


VA S E H W Y 

BU S E L H WY 

SU E S R D 

BU S E L H WY 

VA S E H W Y 


Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 



! TEC Points 

!! 

" 

Yallingup 

" 

Smiths Beach 

" 

Bunker Bay 


Eagle Bay 

" 

! ! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

" 

" Commonage 

Dunsborough 

! 

Vasse 

" 

" 



BUSSELL HWY 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

TEC Buffers 










CA V E S R D 

CA V E S R D 


Q U E N S T 


VA S E H W Y 

BU S E L H WY 

SU E S R D 

BU S E L H WY 

VA S E H W Y 


Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

TEC Buffers 


" 

Bunker Bay 

Eagle Bay 

" 



High 

Medium 



Low 




Yallingup 

" 

" 

Dunsborough 

" 


BUSSELL HWY 

Smiths Beach 

" 

" 

Commonage 

Vasse 

" 


" 


VASSE HWY 

BUSSELL HWY 

BU S E L H WY 

" 

Metricup 

" 

Jarrahwood 



File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:200,000 

0 2.5 5 7.5 10 

Kilometres 

± 



REPORT 3 

CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS 


FIGURE 12.2


Map Location 

Legend 

" Settlement 

ASHCROFT RD 

NUMBER NINE RD 

NUMBER EIGHT RD 

MILL RD 

JARRAHWOOD RD 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 


"Jarrahwood 

VASSE HWY 

JARRAH LOG RD 

OLD VASSE HWY 

ASHCROFT RD 



MIDDLE RD 




OLD SCHOOL RD 





Map Location 

JARRAH LOG RD 

NUMBER NINE RD 

VASSE HWY 

OLD VASSE HWY 

MIDDLE RD 

"Jarrahwood 

OLD SCHOOL RD 

MILL RD 

ASHCROFT RD 

JARRAHWOOD RD 


Low Medium High 

Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

TEC Buffers 







ASHCROFT RD 



File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:15,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 

CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS 

JARRAHWOOD 

FIGURE 12.4


Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

OXFORD CL 

MURDOCH WY 

BEACHFIELDS DR 

STANFORD DR 

COOKWORTHY RD 

FORBES WY 

KOOLJAK RD 

Map Location 

PRIES RD 

GLENVIEW DR 


BUSSELL HWY 

NEWTOWN CL 

DOWELL RD 

"Vasse 

ELIJAH CIR 

SAPIUM L 

PLOUGH CR 

DOWELL RD 

CARRIAGE TCE 

MILLIGAN WY 

PARKSVIEW BVD 

HERITAGE DR 

HEBE L 

OAKS DR 

LAKEVIEW BVD 

ABELIA L 

CAROB WY 

WAGTAIL L 

COTTAGE DR 

CAPROCK CR 


KALOORUP RD 

FLORENCE RD 

RENDEZVOUS RD 

BOALLIA RD 



File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:15,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 


VASSE 

FIGURE 12.5


Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 



! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 











CAVES RD 

JOHN ST 

LOCKE ST 

CUTHBERT ST 

ROBERTS RD 

AVERIL ST 

DAWSON AV 

OXFORD CL 

MURDOCH WY 

JONES WY 

MACINTYRE ST 

CAMBRIDGE BVD 

YALE CL 

LINCOLN ST 


STANFORD DR 

BARKLE CL 

EDITH COWAN CT 

CALLITRIS CR 

HARNETT ST 

FORBES WY 

CAPTAIN GILL BR 

LITTLE COLIN ST 

HIBBERTIA GRN 

WAGON ENT 

RAY AV 

BRYANT CL 

KOOLJAK RD 

GOODY PL 

MARSUPIAL BEND 

HIGGINS DR 

HARVEST RD 


SHERWOOD CR 

CLEMATIS WY 

RUDIS WY 

TRAVELLERS WELL ST 

NORMAN RD 

ROSE ST 

BURT ST 

BELL DR 

MILKMAN AV 

ENTERPRISE WY 

Legend 

" Settlement 

CROSS RD 

ALAN ST 

Map Location 

FINCH ST 

MUSK CL 

OWL CL 

CURRAWONG DR 


Highway 

Main Road 

BROADWATER BVD 

DARTER ST 

WILLIAM DR 

KARRI CT 

TERN L 

PARROT WY 

BROADWATER BVD 

CURRAWONG DR 

Local Road 

COOKWORTHY RD 

Cadastre 

TEC Buffers 


PRIES RD 

GLENVIEW DR 









BUSSELL HWY 

NEWTOWN CL 

KALOORUP RD 

DOWELL RD 

"Vasse 

ELIJAH CIR 

SAPIUM L 

PLOUGH CR 

DOWELL RD 

CARRIAGE TCE 

MILLIGAN WY 

PARKSVIEW BVD 

HERITAGE DR 

HEBE L 

OAKS DR 

LAKEVIEW BVD 

ABELIA L 

CAROB WY 

WAGTAIL L 

COTTAGE DR 

CAPROCK CR 


BANGALO CL 

BELLTONIA WY 

FLORENCE RD 

RENDEZVOUS RD 

BOALLIA RD 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:15,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 


Plan date: 19 June 2009 

File: 858 


VASSE 

FIGURE 12.7


Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Map Location 

VALLEY RD 

DAWSON DR 

"Yallingup 

ELSEGOOD AV 

HAMMOND RD 

WARDANUP CR 

YALLINGUP CAVES RD 

YALLINGUP BEACH RD 

CAVES RD 



File: 836 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY - 

YALLINGUP 

FIGURE 12.8


Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 



! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 











Note: mapping does not include coastal setback lines or areas 

possibly subject to inundation as a result of climate change. 

This mapping will become available over time and should 

be incorporated into this constraints plan as appropriate. 

Map Location 

Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

TEC Buffers 

VALLEY RD 

DAWSON DR 

"Yallingup 

ELSEGOOD AV 

HAMMOND RD 

WARDANUP CR 

HEMSLEY RD 









YALLINGUP CAVES RD 

CAVES RD 

LAGOON DR 

THE COVE 

YALLINGUP BEACH RD 

DUGDALE RD 

BLUE ORCHID CT 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


YALLINGUP 

FIGURE 12.10


Map Location 

Legend 

KESTREL ST 

GAIA CL 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

FERN RD 

EAGLE CR 

CALADENIA CL 

"Eagle Bay 

ELLA GLADSTONE DR 

MERCATOR WY 

LANCELOT VIEW 

GYPSY ST 

OTRANTO CL 

WEDGETAIL VIEW 

DEPUCH CL 

SEAVIEW RISE 

SUNRISE CL 

EAGLE BAY-MEELUP RD 

EAGLE BAY RD 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


EAGLE BAY 

FIGURE 12.11


Map Location 

Legend 

" Settlement 

GAIA CL 


Highway 

Main Road 

KESTREL ST 

Local Road 



FERN RD 

EAGLE CR 

! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 


CALADENIA CL 






"Eagle Bay 






Map Location 

Legend 

" Settlement 

GAIA CL 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

KESTREL ST 

Cadastre 

TEC Buffers 

FERN RD 


EAGLE CR 

CALADENIA CL 

"Eagle Bay 









LANCELOT VIEW 

GYPSY ST 

MERCATOR WY 

Note: mapping does not include coastal setback lines or areas 

possibly subject to inundation as a result of climate change. 

This mapping will become available over time and should 

be incorporated into this constraints plan as appropriate. 

OTRANTO CL 

WEDGETAIL VIEW 

DEPUCH CL 

SEAVIEW RISE 

SUNRISE CL 

EAGLE BAY-MEELUP RD 

EAGLE BAY RD 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


EAGLE BAY 

FIGURE 12.13


MARYBROOK RD 

Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Map Location 

CHAIN AV 

LENNOX RD 

WILDWOOD RD 

O'DONNELL ST 

"Carbunup River 

VICKERY ST 

BUSSELL HWY 

NORTH JINDONG RD 

ALFRED RD 

MINCHIN RD 

DOUGLAS RD 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


CARBUNUP RIVER 

FIGURE 12.14


Map Location 

MARYBROOK RD 

Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

CHAIN AV 

Local Road 



! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 


LENNOX RD 

! 

WILDWOOD RD 

O'DONNELL ST 


VICKERY ST 










Map Location 

MARYBROOK RD 

Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

CHAIN AV 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

TEC Buffers 


LENNOX RD 

WILDWOOD RD 

O'DONNELL ST 


VICKERY ST 








BUSSELL HWY 

NORTH JINDONG RD 

ALFRED RD 

MINCHIN RD 

DOUGLAS RD 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


CARBUNUP RIVER 

FIGURE 12.16


Map Location 

SILVERWOOD RD 

METRICUP-YELVERTON RD 

Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

"Metricup 

METRICUP RD 

WALBURRA SIDING RD 

GALE RD 

BUSSELL HWY 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


RYAN RD 

1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


METRICUP 

FIGURE 12.17


Map Location 

SILVERWOOD RD 


METRICUP RD 

"Metricup 

Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 



! TEC Points 

TEC Buffers 









Deposit - Titanium Zircon 



Map Location 

SILVERWOOD RD 


Legend 

" Settlement 


Highway 

Main Road 

Local Road 

Cadastre 

TEC Buffers 


METRICUP RD 

"Metricup 


Medium High 






WALBURRA SIDING RD 

GALE RD 

BUSSELL HWY 



PHONE: (08) 9271 8506 

FAX: (08) 6161 2597 


RYAN RD 

1:10,000 

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

Kilometres 

± 

LOCAL 



REPORT 3 



File: 858 


METRICUP 

FIGURE 12.19

SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS 

PROPOSAL: Local Environment Planning Strategy 

SUBMISSIONS CLOSE: 2 May 2011 

OFFICER: Louise Koroveshi 

No Submitter Nature of Submission Officer Comment Officer Recommendation 

1. FESA 

Att: Tony Morgan 

PO Box 1288 

The Fire & Emergency Service Authority of WA (FESA) requests the 

following 

condition be applied: 

This occurs now and is at a level of 

detail well below the scope of the 

LEPS. 

That the submission be 

noted 

BUNBURY WA 6231 

• Fire Hydrants to be provided to the FESA Standard as imposed 

by the relevant Water Authority and that Water Authority is to 

be the clearing body upon completion of these works. 

2. Department of Agriculture 

and Food 

PO Box 1231 


The Department of Agriculture and Food (DAFWA) supports the 

proposed planning strategy in principle, but would like to raise the 

following comments: 

1. Priority agricultural areas (p43) - "Where possible it is important 

to protect priority agricultural areas and ensure that agricultural 

activities on these areas are not restricted by allowing 

incompatible (e.g. urban, rural residential) uses on land 

adjoining." 

Noted. 


noted 

DAFWA agrees with this statement as it is important not 

to sterilise agricultural land with inappropriate adjoining 

developments. 

2. Priority agricultural areas (p55) - "The majority of the cleared 

areas in the Commonage area meet the requirements for 

priority agricultural land, and there are several small-scale 

agricultural operations in this area. Changing settlement 

patterns in the area will need to be cognisant of existing 

agricultural uses, with a preference given to maintaining these 

usually small-scale industries. " 

It is a good idea to give preference to the small scale 

agricultural operations currently in the area and DAFWA 

suggests that the area could be marketed as a precinct for 

small scale niche agricultural operations. 

3. Department of Mines & 

Petroleum 

The Geological Survey of Western Australia (GSWA) has assessed the 

proposal on behalf of the Department of Mines and Petroleum and is 

Noted, however the draft strategy 

recognises the importance of BRMs 


noted and the strategy





Mineral House 

100 Plain Street 

EAST PERTH WA 6004 

pleased to see that the Shire is addressing Basic Raw Materials (BRM) 

and mineral resource issues. However, we suggest that the Shire 

considers excluding BRM and mineral resources from this particular 

strategy. GSWA agrees that these are "not necessarily an 

environmental issue" as stated in Section 7.2 (bullet point 4) of the 

proposed planning strategy. 

The Shire's decision to include BRM and mineral resources in an 

environmental strategy is problematic especially where there is an 

attempt to weigh up environmental values with BRM and mineral 

resource values. The stated objective 4 under the Basic Raw Materials 

(Section 7.3) to "promote and accommodate the needs of sustainable 

mining enterprises, although not at the expense of the environmental 

objectives" is indicative of this approach. 

Under the Mining Act 1978 the mining approvals process takes 

environmental considerations into account including assessments by the 

Office of the EPA where required. These are therefore normally 

determined on a case by case basis with assessments made by experts 

in the relevant field. The proposed Strategy appears to attempt to preempt 

this process. 

The proposed strategy discusses discouraging expansion of the urban 

footprint, in major and minor settlement areas, identified as having 

medium or high constraints. GSWA considers this important but would 

expect to see more high levels of constraint in the "constraints 

mapping" in those areas where strategic mineral resources and BRM 

occur, consistent with State Planning Policy No.2 Environmental and 

Natural Resources Policy and 2.4 Basic Raw Materials. 

Specifically, we raise the following issues and concerns with this Local 

Environmental Planning Strategy: 

and recognises the need to protect 

these valuable resources from 

incompatible land uses to ensure 

that access to BRM can occur over 

time. Agree that mapping needs to 

be updated to reflect the recent 

work done by GSWA. Constraints 

mapping to be reviewed in the 

context of the updated mapping. 

The assertion that BRM and mineral 

resource issues should not be 

addressed in the LEPS is not 

supported. BRM minerals were part 

of the LEPS scope and, like all of 

the other strategies, will be 

addressed as part of an overall, 

consolidated local planning 

strategy. 

The issues of whether the LEPS 

includes consideration of 

BRM/minerals issues is entirely a 

matter for the Shire. The LEPS also 

does not and cannot pre-empt or 

circumvent Mining Act processes. 

be modified as follows 

(noting that the changes 

proposed are to the 

content of the text and 

mapping and will not 

result in change to the 

objectives 

and 

recommended actions of 

the strategy): 

1. update the mapping 

on BRM and strategic 

mineral resources to 

reflect the recent work 

done by the GSWA. 

2. adjusting the text 

within section 7.1 

Background to separate 

the descriptions of basic 

raw materials and 

strategic mineral 

resources. 

The strategy should also 

be updated to reflect the 

Council’s recently 

adopted policy position 

on coal seam gas 

extraction and coal 

mining. 

• The BRM, as shown on the Figures 8.3, 8.7, 8.11, 8.16, and 

9.1 in this strategy, have been superseded by recent work at 

GSWA, done in conjunction with the Department of Planning. 

We recommend that the Shire consult with the Department of





Planning for further details. 

• The mineral resources mapping does not reflect the most up to 

date publically available mapping for titanium-zircon 

mineralization. Furthermore, large mineralized areas are not 

shown on the maps and it is unclear if these are simply 

obscured by other layers in the mapping or are not present. 

• The maps are complex and difficult to interpret. There is no 

differentiation between mineral resource type (titanium-zircon, 

coal) and BRM type (sand, gravel, limesand, limestone, rock 

aggregate) which is relevant when determining the constraints. 

Furthermore Bunbury Basalt has been mapped as a mineral 

resource instead of a BRM (rock aggregate). 

• There is a priority ranking, in the "constraints mapping" that 

generally does not rank minerals resources and BRM with a 

higher constraint level than environmental issues, except once 

in the Metricup settlement area. Even in this instance there is 

an inconsistency in the constraints analysis mapping. The Shire 

of Busselton Constraints Analysis map (Figure 9.2) shows the 

Metricup settlement area as an area of "No Significant 

Environmental Constraints" while the Metricup Constraints 

Analysis map (Figure 9.16) shows the same Metricup 

settlement area as having a high level of constraint. GSWA 

concurs with the analysis of high constraint and points out that 

the text of the report should also mention the titanium-zircon 

mineralization in the Metricup settlement area as it is a 

significant resource in this area (Section 9.6 Metricup - BRM 

and Mineral Resources). 

• We are concerned that none of the other areas of titaniumzircon 

mineralization are shown on a constraints analysis map, 

even though there are large areas of titanium-zircon 

mineralization elsewhere in the Shire. Furthermore, with regard 

to the constraints mapping, there are other areas in the Shire 

labelled "no significant environmental constraints" that are in





fact areas of titanium-zircon mineralization. 

Due to the above issues, DMP believes that strategic BRM and mineral 

resources are best addressed and protected in the Local Planning 

Scheme and Strategy where appropriate, rather than in this Local 

Environmental Planning Strategy. For inclusion in this document a 

substantial revision would be required to both the maps and the text to 

address the above issues. 

4. Department of Environment 

& Conservation 

PO Box 1693 


3. Biodiversity 

Section 3.1 - Remnant Vegetation 

• It is recommended that the second paragraph be amended to 

'A majority of this remnant vegetation is contained within 

National Park or State Forest, vested in the Conservation 

Commission of Western Australia and managed by the 

Department of Environment and Conservation' . 

Section 3.1 - Vegetation Complexes 

• A list of vegetation complexes below 30% of extent remaining 

or with less than 400ha remaining is included in the Strategy. 

However, some of the vegetation complexes included on this 

list may have less than 30% or 400ha within the Shire, but 

they have more than 30% or 400ha remaining when 

considered across the extent of their distribution (i.e. outside of 

just the Shire). 

Minor text changes to update and 

correct and/or clarify technical 

detail as suggested are supported. 

Needs to be noted, though, new 

environmental information is, and 

will be, forthcoming on an on-going 

basis and decision makers can, and 

do, respond to that new 

information as it emerges. 

The LEPS merely provides a 

snapshot in time in terms of 

relevant information available and 

sets out the broad environmental 

planning directions. It does not and 

cannot reference all environmental 

information. 


noted and text changes 

and mapping updates be 

done to ensure the 

technical 

and 

grammatical accuracy of 

the final document – 

refer to the Officer 

Comment section of the 

agenda item. These 

changes will not alter the 

fundamental thrust, 

objectives 

or 

recommended actions 

contained within the 

advertised strategy. 

For example the Darradup (DP) vegetation complex has 71% of 

original extent and 2893 ha remaining over the distribution of 

the complex, however is listed in the Strategy has being poorly 

represented. Similarly the Blackwood (BK) complex found in the 

Shire actually has over 90% of original extent and over 

20,000ha remaining. These vegetation complexes would 

therefore not be considered to be 'poorly represented' as 

defined by the EPA. This is also reflected in Table 3 of the 

Addendum for the South West Biodiversity Project Area





(Molloy, S., O'Connor, T., Wood, J., and Wallrodt, S, 2007), 

which does not identify the Blackwood (BK) or Darradup (DP) 

vegetation complexes as meeting criterion 1a ii). 

Based on the list of vegetation complexes identified to exist in 

the Shire of Busselton in Table 24 of the Addendum for the 

South West Biodiversity Project Area (Molly, S., O'Connor, T., 

Wood, J., and Wallrodt, S, 2007) and DEC's 2007 report 

produced for the South West Biodiversity Project Addendum, 

Ecological Criteria for use in determining Regionally or Locally 

Significant Natural areas in the South West NRM Region within 

the Swan Coastal Plain, Jarrah Forest and Warren IBRA 

Bioregions, the following vegetation complexes within the Shire 

would be considered to be poorly represented and significant. 

o Abba«30%) 

o Cartis «30% and





o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Cowaramup (Cr) (539ha remaining) 

Metricup (M) (589ha remaining) 

Metricup (Mv) (561ha remaining) 

Treeton(Tw) (35% remaining) 

Wilyabrup (W2) (34% remaining) 

Wilyabrup (Ww2) (519ha remaining) 

It is recommended that the above complexes also be acknowledged in 

the LEPS as being significant considering how close they are to being 

under thresholds and accuracy and currency of data. 

Section 3.1 - Ecological Linkages 

• It is recommended that the correct reference be included for 

the South West Regional Ecological Linkages Project - Molloy, 

S., Wood, J., Wallrodt, S. and Whisson, G. (2009) South West 

Regional Ecological Linkages Technical Report, Western 

Australian Local Government Association and Department of 

Environment and Conservation, Perth. 

Section 3.1- Fauna 

• The Shire of Busselton also contains habitat and known 

occurrences of a threatened species of freshwater crayfish, 

Engawaea reducta. 

Section 3.1 - Other biodiversity assets 

• This section refers to 10 TEC's known to be present in the 

Shire. A check of DEC's datasets actually identifies eight 

different TEC's and 16 different PEC's within the Shire of 

Busselton. 

• The Flora and Vegetation of the Busselton Plain (Swan Coastal 

Plain) report has been referenced incorrectly - (DEC, 2009) 

should be replaced with (Webb, 2009), with the complete 

reference being Webb, A., Keighery, 8., Keighery, G., 

Longman, V., Black, A. and O'Connor, A (2009) The Flora and





Vegetation of the Busselton Plain (Swan Coastal Plain). A 

Report for the Department of Environment and Conservation as 

part of the Swan Bioplan Project. 

Section 3.1 - Fire Risk 

• The WAPC/FESA Planning for Bushfire Protection document 

referenced in this section has been replaced with Edition 2 of 

the document published in May 20 IO. This document is also 

referenced under Section 3.2, Remnant Vegetation. 

Section 3.2 - Remnant Vegetation 

The last sentence under this heading refers to achieving a net increase 

in the area of poorly represented complexes. It is not clear what is 

meant by the reference to achieving a net increase, given that these 

vegetation complexes are already below 30% thresholds. 

Section 3.3 - Actions 

• BD1, dot point 2 should be amended to 'requiring applicants to 

assess biodiversity values and address potential development 

impacts...' 

4. Water, Wetlands and Watercourses 

• Recommend acid sulfate soils be added as a threat under the 

heading of ' Poor water quality' . 

• Five of the objectives relate to protection of groundwater and 

Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems, controlling land use to 

prevent groundwater contamination or degradation. Previous 

draft included 10 actions specifically relating to groundwater. 

However, the revised advertised Strategy does not appear to 

include any actions that are specific in relation to groundwater. 

4 2 nd dot point - the earlier draft of 

the LEPS contained a number of 

actions that essentially are already 

occurring and are at a level of detail 

well below the scope of the 

strategy. The LEPS contains 

appropriate, high-level support for 

those actions.. 

• Action W2, dot point 2 - it is recommended that reference to 

'water flow issues' be amended to 'environmental water 

flows'.





• Action W3, dot point I - it is recommended that 'in proximity to 

Conservation Category Wetland' be amended to 'in proximity 

to wetlands of high conservation significance' . As noted in the 

LEPS, the Geomorphic Wetland mapping is limited to the Swan 

Coastal Plain. Other wetlands of high conservation value would 

exist outside of the mapped area, which would not yet have 

been allocated a wetland management category. A definition of 

wetlands of high conservation significance is provided in the 

EPA's Guidance Statement No. 33, Section B4.2.2. 

5. Landscape and Land Qualities 

• Action LS3 - recommend an additional dot point 'is consistent 

with the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy (2005)' . 

8. Major Settlements 

Section 8.2 Level of Constraint 

• the dot points under 'Constraint levels' should also include: 

o Declared Rare and Priority Flora 

o Regional Ecological Linkages 

• First paragraph on page 39 - reference to 'No Significant 

Environmental Constraints' should be amended to 'No Known 

Significant Environmental Constraints', to be consistent with 

the dot point headings following this paragraph. 

Section 8.3 Busselton 

• Threatened Ecological Communities 

o it is recommended that the title of this section be changed 

to 'Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities', given 

that Priority Ecological Communities are also recognised as 

a constraint under Section 8.2. 

o it is recommended that the following addition be made 

under this section 'A number of Priority Ecological 

Communities are known to occur within the Busselton 

The suggestion that the LEPS





area. Mapping for Priority Ecological Communities is 

currently incomplete and therefore some are not included 

on the current environmental features and constraints 

analysis mapping.' 

• An additional section should be added addressing wildfire 

management, particularly that proposed development in the 

area needs to address management of kangaroos. Expansion of 

development into rural lands is displacing noticeable numbers 

of kangaroos. The lack of suitably placed wildlife corridors in a 

number of subdivision areas has resulted in problems for nearby 

rural/large lot landowners, with displaced kangaroos being 

unavoidably forced onto their properties and/or into areas of 

nearby isolated remnant vegetation. 

Increased number of kangaroos within areas of remnant 

vegetation can result in excessive grazing pressure on native 

vegetation and, consequently, a reduction in nature 

conservation values. Neighbouring rural landholdings are 

adversely affected as pasture productivity is reduced due to the 

presence of very high numbers of kangaroos. 

• The last sentence in this section states 'The level of constraint 

associated with each of the abovementioned features/issues is 

presented on Figure 8.4'. As there are some constraints 

discussed in the text that are not shown on Figure 8.4, such as 

threatened fauna habitat and priority ecological communities, it 

is recommended that this sentence be changed to ' ...The level 

of constraint associated with some of the abovementioned..'. 

Section 8.4 Vasse 






should address the management of 

kangaroos is not supported as it is 

not considered to be a significant 

issue in terms of development 

expanding into rural areas. 

Residential development is 

occurring within the existing 

identified urban areas of Yalyalup, 

Vasse and Dunsborough Lakes and 

to a much lesser extent, limited 

rural residential subdivision of land 

on Rendezvous Road and in The 

Commonage already zoned for that 

purpose. There are no new areas of 

urban or rural residential 

development expansion into rural 

land at a scale that is considered to 

significantly contribute to this 

matter. It is also likely that the 

presence of an increased number of 

kangaroos is reflective of the 

natural increase in the number of 

local populations and their 

preference for cleared agricultural 

land. Notwithstanding, kangaroo 

management and relocation plans 

are required to be implemented as a 

condition of subdivision approval 

within some of the existing 

residential estates. This matter is 

noted but no change to the 

strategy is recommended.





o 

it is recommended that the following addition be made 


Communities are known to occur within the Vasse area. 

Mapping for Priority Ecological Communities is currently 

incomplete and therefore some are not included on the 

current environmental features and constraints analysis 

mapping.' 

Section 8.5 Dunsborough 








Communities are known to occur within the Dunsborough 


currently incomplete and therefore some are not included 

on the current environmental features and constraints 

analysis mapping.' 




discussed in the text that are not shown on Figure 8.9, such as 

threatened fauna habitat and priority ecological communities, it 

is recommended that this sentence be changed to ' ...The level 

of constraint associated with some of the abovementioned..' 

Figure 8.13 Actions Dunsborough 

is the same as the previous 

versions of the LEPS and is meant 

to be included in the document. 

• Figure 8.13 is an Actions Figure for Dunsborough. The Actions 

Figures that were in previous versions of the LEPS appear to 

have been removed from the current draft - it is not clear 

whether Figure 8.13 was also meant to be removed from the 

current version.





Section 8.6 Commonage 






o t is recommended that the following addition be made 


Communities are known to occur within the Commonage 


currently incomplete and therefore are not included on the 


mapping.' 




discussed in the text that are not shown on Figure 8.14, such 

as threatened fauna habitat and priority ecological 

communities, it is recommended that this sentence be changed 

to ' ...The level of constraint associated with some of the 

abovementioned..' . 

Section 8.8 Actions 

• MAJl, dot point 2 - refers to environmental constraints shown 

on Figures 8.4, 8.9 and 8.14. 8.9 and 8.14 are incorrect. 

Figure references and reference to constraint Figure 8.17 is 

missing. 

• MAJl, dot point 3 - reference to Figure 8.5 as showing 

Conservation Category wetlands is incorrect. Additional Figures 

showing Conservation category wetlands are also missing. 

9. Minor Settlements 

• Refers to minor settlements including Vasse, however Vasse 

has been included and discussed under Section 8 Major





Settlements. 

Section 9.3 Yallingup 








Communities are known to occur in the vicinity of the 

Yallingup townsite. Mapping for Priority Ecological 

Communities is currently incomplete and therefore some 

are not included on the current environmental features and 

constraints analysis mapping.' 

Section 9.5 Carbanup River 






o it is recommended that the text under this section be 

amended to 'Three Threatened Ecological Communities 

(TECs) and one Priority Ecological Community (PEe) are 

located within the recreation reserve... The TEC and PEC 

buffers extend..'. Mapping for Priority Ecological 

Communities is currently incomplete and therefore some 

are not included on the current environmental features and 

constraints analysis mapping.' 

Section 9.6 Metricup 



to 'Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities', given





o 



it is recommended that the following addition be made 

under this section 'Priority Ecological Communities are 

known to occur in the vicinity of the Metricup townsite. 

Mapping for Priority Ecological Communities is currently 

incomplete and therefore some are not included on the 


mapping.' 

Maps/Figures 

• Existing conservation reserves (National Parks, Conservation 

Parks and Nature Reserves) and State Forest and Timber 

Reserves vested in the Conservation Commission of WA and 

managed by DEC should also be included on the environmental 

features and constraints mapping. 

• Ramsar wetlands should also be included on the environmental 

features and constraints mapping. These areas may not 

necessarily coincide with the Conservation Category wetland 

mapping. 

• Knowledge of the Busselton area vegetation has significantly 

increased in recent years as a result of the Swan Bioplan 

project, the results of which are documented in the report The 

Flora and Vegetation of the Busselton Plain (Swan Coastal 

Plain) (Webb et al 2009). As outlined above, this work has 

highlighted a number of significant values for the Busselton 

Plain, however this information is not yet available in the form 

of datasets. 

The Busselton Plain report covers a number of reference areas 

for which there is detailed information on biodiversity values 

provided in Webb et al. It is recommended that the location of 

these reference areas, available as a dataset, be included on 

the Environmental Features Maps with a note in the Strategy 

that detailed information on environmental values is available in





the Webb et al. report for each of these sites. 

• Constraints Analysis Maps - the title in the legends 'No 

Significant Environmental Constraints' should be changed to 

'No Known Significant Environmental Constraints'. 

• Constraints Analysis Maps - the current maps show a narrow 

strip along much of the coastline as having 'No Significant 

Environmental Constraints'. Many of these areas are rocky 

cliffs, within National Park, dunal areas subject to erosion and 

would be highly constrained for development. 

5. David Kemp I congratulate the Shire on what I believe is a very good environmental 

strategy. My concern is in the area of intensive livestock industries 

(beef feedlots, dairy feedlots and dairies) and the risk they pose to 

water quality within the catchments of Geographe Bay. The draft 

strategy does mention and recognise water quality as an issue and the 

part agriculture broadly plays. I believe more specific targeted action 

can be taken by the Shire to tackle issues raised. The Shire requires 

planning approval for new development but when an existing 

development expands I understand that approvals are not required e.g. 

a 150 cow herd dairy through renovations to existing infrastructure can 

quickly grow to an 800 – 1000 cow dairy. Approvals should be 

required for building of effluent ponds, feed pads and renovating or 

enlarging dairies/feedlots. There is a need for the Shire to know where 

This issue is addressed at a more 

detailed level through the Vasse 

Wonnerup Water Quality 

Improvement Plan, which has been 

prepared to guide management 

strategies to reduce nutrient loads 

(from identified sources such as 

dairies and feedlots) entering the 

Vasse Wonnerup wetlands and 

Geographe Bay. The plan outlines 

measures for the management of 

diffuse nutrients from agricultural 

practices and other sources from 


noted.





all dairy, dairy feedlots and beef feedlots are located by having a 

location register. Review the recently released draft dairy guidelines and 

develop local laws if necessary. I understand the beef industry has also 

released national guidelines regarding the management of feedlots and it 

may be useful to review these as well. 

Also the issue of cattle movement across public roads during winter 

months leaves substantial amounts of manure day after day on roads 

which washes into roadside drains and causes a traffic hazard when left 

to accumulate. 

the catchments entering the 

wetlands. 

The regulation of feed lots and 

similar is specifically addressed in 

the 2 nd and 3 rd dot points of W3, 

I applaud the document in recognising the Vasse-Wonnerup Water 

Quality Improvement Plan and that this plan will be taken into 

consideration when making planning decisions. 

6. Busselton Chamber of 

Commerce 

While the Chamber accepts that a planning strategy is required to 

provide guidance to the Shire on local environmental protection and 

nature conservation issues, the Chamber nonetheless is concerned that 

the Final Draft contains statements and recommendations which will 

significantly increase the cost of development and/or will add 

significantly to the time required to assess development applications 

without any worthwhile benefits accruing to the environment. 

Accordingly, the following submission is presented in the hope that it 

will elicit changes in the final strategy before it is presented to Council. 

1. Page vi – The list of ‘detrimental land uses’ should be balanced 

by the opportunities that well designed land development can 

provide. This page is unnecessarily negative towards 

development and the following opportunities should be stated: 

a. When land of high conservation value is transferred from 

private to public ownership, management of important 

environmental values can be conducted. 

b. Development proposals allow offsets to be negotiated, 

such as creation of new habitat or revegetation to provide 

wildlife linkage between existing remnant vegetation. 

1 & 2 Noted. The LEPS recognises 

that the Shire is within a 

biodiversity hotspot and says that 

consideration of protection of 

biodiversity values should be part 

of the planning assessment 

process. It is accepted practice that 

planning applications are informed 

by technical assessment, where 

necessary, (e.g. servicing and 

infrastructure, traffic, geotechnical) 

1 & 2 – Include 

additional dot points in 

recommendation BD1 

relating to proposed 

Western Ringtail Possum 

Habitat Protection Area 

and to seek 

environmental benefits 

along with social 

benefits and/or minimise 

social and/or economic 

costs where possible.





2. Page vii – BD1 2 nd dot point – the cost of assessing 

biodiversity values can run into tens of thousands of dollars. 

Where a land development proposal is unlikely to impact on 

existing environmental values, this money is often better spent 

on management of those values, rather than in gathering 

information which may only be of academic value. Accordingly, 

a sensible outcome should be sought with proponents whereby 

cost savings within the approval process can be directed in part 

towards actions that improve environmental values. 

and an application that potentially 

could have an effect on biodiversity 

values should be informed by an 

appropriate assessment. 

Nevertheless, the Shire recognises 

the need to assess environmental 

issues in an efficient manner so 

that they provide maximum 

environmental benefit with 

minimum social and economic cost 

– in fact, ways to combine 

environmental benefit with social 

and/or economical benefit should 

be sought where possible. 

The LEPS itself would assist with 

that, as it should assist in ensuring 

that environmental factors are 

considered at a strategic level, and 

development directed toward less 

environmentally sensitive areas, or 

in directions that they provide 

environmental benefit. More 

strategic and integrated approaches 

are also appropriate and the 

Council’s proposed creation of a 

Western Ringtail Possum Protection 

Area, combined with development 

incentive and offset planting funds 

is an example of the kind of things 

that are possible. 

That proposal, in particular, could 

be noted in the LEPS as could the 

need to seek opportunities to 

deliver environmental benefit in





ways that also deliver social and/or 

economic benefit or that costs are 

minimised where possible. 

3. Page vii – BD1 6 th dot point – while not opposed to the 

concept of planting local native species, such plantings should 

be clearly shown to achieve pre-determined and worthwhile 

goals. A general statement in support of planting only native 

plants cannot be supported in all instances and the Strategy 

should clearly state what goals or objectives planting with local 

native species should achieve. 

4. Page viii – BD3 1 st dot point – where opportunities exist to 

plant local native species in older developed area and where 

this will enhance environmental values as suggested above, 

then the planting of local native species should not be confined 

only to new development areas. 

5. Page xi – Landscape and Land Qualities. The Chamber 

disagrees with the premise on which several issues and actions 

in this section of the Strategy are recommended, namely, that 

development by definition degrades ‘natural landscape 

character’ in highly visible areas. The reality is that logging, 

clearing and other human interactions with the so-called 

‘natural’ landscapes have changed them into modified 

landscapes over the 170 years since European settlement 

began within the Shire. Further, the aesthetic values associated 

with the existing Shire’s landscape values are highly subjective: 

one person’s attractive view is another person’s boring vista. 

Development proposals that impact upon landscape character 

should be assessed on their merits, with public comment 

3. The LEPS is not and cannot be 

the place to address issues like this 

in a detailed manner. Agree with 

comment to some degree, but 

general direction needed to be 

clear. 

4. Agree 

5 & 6. Do not agree that LEPS says 

that development necessarily 

degrades landscape values. But 

landscape issues are considered to 

real and important. The high value 

that the community place on the 

landscape qualities of the Shire, 

particularly the Leeuwin Naturaliste 

Ridge has been identified through 

numerous strategic planning 

documents (notably State Planning 

Policy 6.1 Leeuwin Naturaliste 

Ridge) and has been raised by the 

community during consultation on 

3. No change 

4. Modify strategy to 

reflect this comment. 

5 & 6 Noted.





sought on whether the impacts are unacceptable or not. 

Pages xi and xii – Protection of views. The Chamber believes 

that the entire Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge area, including the 

National Park, is a highly modified landscape and is not a 

‘natural’ landscape area. Further, the high landscape values 

which the community (including the Chamber) give to this area 

exist because of the variability of human and natural features 

mixed together in ways that have been generally unplanned 

and unmanaged over most of the 170 years since European 

settlement. Public views and landscapes should only be 

protected where the public specifically states that protection 

should be offered, not ‘wherever possible’. It is arrogant to 

believe that the landscape currently existing within the Leeuwin 

Naturaliste Ridge cannot be improved upon by further human 

development. If the Shire considers this admittedly strong 

statement to not be true, then the re-establishment of native 

vegetation should also be considered as a development that 

may impact adversely upon highly valued views and hence 

should also be subject to stringent controls. 

Accordingly, the Chamber does not accept Objective 1: 

‘Protect the current level of landscape integrity on the Leeuwin 

Naturaliste Ridge’ if this means that development is to be 

considered as inherently unacceptable unless it is essentially 

not visible from public viewing points including roads. 

6. Page xiii – LS1 – the recommended review of ‘Landscape 

Value Area’ provisions in the Scheme is supported on the basis 

that the review is aimed at achieving a better balance than 

currently exists, so that development and its visual impacts are 

not seen as inherently bad and unacceptable. 

the Shire’s Local Rural, 

Environmental and Cultural 

Strategies, as well as recent review 

of the Shire’s Reflective Building 

Material Policy. 

It would be incorrect to suggest 

that the objectives and 

recommended actions in the LEPS 

seek to stifle development, rather it 

recognises the need for the land 

use planning process to cater for 

and manage growth and 

development within the Shire, 

whilst conserving and enhancing 

the special benefits arising from the 

landscape values and qualities that 

contribute to the visual fabric of 

the Shire. 

The objectives and actions outlined 

in the LEPS in relation to landscape 

and landscape qualities are 

consistent with SPP 6.1 and the 

importance that the community 

places on those values. The 

objective of the LEPS in relation to 

landscape and landscape qualities is 

essentially reflective of the vision 

of SPP 6.1 which is – ‘creative, 

vital and sustainable communities 

living in balance with economic 

development and the unique 

landscape and environmental values 

of the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge 

policy area’. The importance of 

landscape values of the Ridge area





and other areas within the Shire 

away from the Ridge (such as the 

wetland chain, settlements, key 

tourist travel routes and the coast) 

are inherent in other strategy 

documents including the Shire’s 

draft Local Cultural Planning 

Strategy, Local Rural Planning 

Strategy and Busselton Wetlands 

Conservation Strategy. Landscape 

and environmental values of the 

Shire have been raised as matters 

of importance to the community 

through the early formulation of the 

LEPS and other planning documents 

referenced above. 

7. Page xiii – LS3 - last dot point. Viewshed analysis can be a 

complex and costly task and should only be required for large, 

extensive development proposals. 

8. Page xiii – LS4 – no justification is given to justify the 

duplication of state government land development requirements 

as currently apply to managing acid sulphate soils. To date, 

existing state government conditions have resulted in no 

developments causing ASS problems within the Shire and a 

duplication of local and state government actions is not 

7. LS3 recommends that the local 

planning framework sets out 

appropriate requirements for 

viewshed analysis. Such 

requirements could be tailored to 

the scale of the planning 

application and the landscape 

context of the application’s 

proposed location and may only 

need to be informed by a visual 

landscape assessment. 

8. There is no interest to duplicate 

State Government requirements. 

Development other than subdivision 

though, doesn’t require State 

approval so the issue needs to be 

addressed at a local level. 

7. Noted 

8. Noted





warranted. 

9. Page xvii – MAJ1 – 3 rd dot point. The arguments in support of 

this recommended action are not stated. Further, the state 

government’s Swan Coastal Plain Lakes Environmental 

Protection Policy provides strong legislative protection of 

Conservation Category Wetlands. This recommended action 

seems to be suggesting an unnecessary duplication of state 

government controls over such wetlands. In the absence of 

suitable justification being provided for such duplication, the 

Chamber does not agree with this recommendation. 

10. Page 34+ Basic Raw Materials. The Chamber is not satisfied 

with the casual, low key way in which basic raw materials are 

described and assessed in the report. The opening paragraph 

fails to acknowledge that extremely important resources of 

sand, clay and rock occur within the Shire, all of which play 

varying but crucial roles in meeting community needs. 

Further, the statement at the bottom of page 34, that ‘the vast 

majority of existing and undeveloped pits within the Shire are 

for gravel resources within the Blackwood Plateau system’ fails 

to acknowledge that most of these resources are and will 

remain unavailable as they occur in state forest or national 

parks. This appears to seriously and inaccurately downplay the 

importance of basic raw material resources within the western 

part of the Shire which in general should remain available for 

development to meet existing and future needs. 

11. Page 35 – 3 rd dot point – Management of BRM operations. The 

Chamber is unaware of the existing approval process for the 

operation of BRM sites within the Shire. However, it should not 

be too difficult for the Shire to devise a system that requires 

only one comprehensive and integrated license to be issued, 

not the ‘dual approach’ that appears to be recommended in the 

Strategy. 

9. This is not a duplication of the 

State controls. It is a recognition 

that some zoned land may not be 

viably developable for the zoned 

purpose and more appropriate and 

viable alternatives should be 

considered. 

10. Noted and consideration could 

be given to adjusting the text 

within section 7.1 Background to 

separate the descriptions of basic 

raw materials and strategic mineral 

resources. 

11. This statement makes the 

erroneous assumption that two 

appropriately targeted approvals 

processes will be more difficult 

than an overly cumbersome single 

process, and the planning system is 

not well suited to responsive 

regulation at the detailed level. 

9. Noted 

10. Modify strategy to 

reflect this comment. 

11. Noted. 

12. Note that inland





12. Page 50 – 1 in 100 year flood boundary. If ‘The 1 in 100 

floodway data does not extend to Dunsborough’, then the 

Department of Water should have been asked to provide an 

estimate of its extent or the Shire’s professional staff could 

have drawn up an indicative, ‘subject to review by DoW’ 

boundary. Considering the flood disaster suffered in 

Queensland earlier in the year, it is unacceptable to dismiss 

such an important issue so lightly. 

13. Page 50 – Fire Hazard, 2 nd para. The statement that ‘the focus 

should be on the preservation of the vegetation rather than on 

its clearing for fire management/development purposes’ is 

arguing that the Shire should act contrary to existing law and 

hence is encouraging the type of attitude towards fire hazard 

reduction which resulted in the loss of more than 40 homes in 

the Kelmscott Roleystone area this summer. 

14. Page 54 – Fire Hazard, 2 nd para. Same comments as above. 

The Shire MUST place the life and property assets of people 

above that of nature conservation and landscape protection 

when considering fire management issues in existing 

development areas. To suggest otherwise is irresponsible and 

potentially opens the Shire to litigation in the event of a 

damaging bushfire. 

7. Bernie Masters I present these comments as my formal submission to the Shire and I 

advise that I make this submission in the following capacities: 

1. not as a landowner within the Shire, so I have no personal or 

financial interest in the outcomes of the planning review process 

within the Shire 

2. as chair of the Ludlow Tuart Forest National Park Management Plan 

Community Advisory Committee (although this is a personal 

submission and not one made on behalf of the committee) 

3. as the former chair of the Busselton Wetlands Steering Committee 

which produced the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy 

12. This under-estimates the costs, 

complexity and potential liabilities 

associated with flood mapping. 

Nevertheless, inland flooding risks 

in Dunsborough are relatively low. 

13 & 14. However the 

interpretation of these statements 

are incorrect. What is meant is 

that, given the extent of remnant 

vegetation around Dunsborough 

that is poorly represented and a 

high or extreme fire risk, then 

consideration should be given to 

locating new development away 

from such areas. A text change 

could be considered that clarifies 

the intent of this section. 

A comprehensive and technically 

detailed assessment of the draft 

LEPS containing 183 suggested 

text changes (to correct scientific 

content, grammar and errors), 

personal viewpoints and 

commentary. The suggested 

corrections and text changes are 

broadly constructive (in terms of 

scientific accuracy and clarification) 

and can be positively considered. 

flooding risks in 

Dunsborough are low. 

13 & 14 make text 

change to clarify. 


noted and text changes 

and mapping updates be 

done to ensure the 

technical and 

grammatical accuracy of 

the final document – 

refer to the Officer 

Comment section of the 

agenda item. These 

changes will not alter the





4. as a former member of the Geographe Catchment Council for some 

13 years 

5. as an environmental consultant with over 30 years experience within 

the Shire. 

My aims in providing 183 comments on the document are: 

* to ensure wherever possible the scientific accuracy of the statements 

contained in the draft document 

* to have the document compiled so that it can be used as a publiclyavailable 

source of information about environment and planning 

within the Shire, so that members of the public can learn from this 

document about our local environment and its values 

* to have a clear, unambiguous document that is easy to read and 

understand 

* to use good English and grammar throughout. 

Of the 183 comments, I admit that a number are somewhat pedantic: 

to replace 'ecological' with 'environmental', for example. Many also 

seek greater clarity in the meaning of words, terms or sentences. 

However, several challenge the scientific basis on which certain claims 

have been made, such as the seriously inaccurate statement that most 

wetlands on the Swan Coastal Plain have been destroyed, when in fact 

most still exist although in a degraded state. To expand on why the 

scientific accuracy of the document is so important, by way of 

example, if the claim that most wetlands have been destroyed is 

allowed to stand, then development proposed for the former wetlands 

will be assumed to not impact on wetland environmental values and 

hence will be acceptable (all other things being equal). If the wetlands 

still exist, however, albeit in a lesser or greater degraded state, then 

development of the wetlands will be seen as impacting on remaining 

wetland values and people may be hesitant to allow such development, 

especially if drainage modification and revegetation have a reasonable 

likelihood of improving wetland values. 

I also advise that most diagrams within the document are so overloaded 

with information that they are unreadable and hence unusable. 

These changes (whilst too 

numerous to document within the 

schedule of submissions) will not 

affect the intent or direction of the 

objectives and recommended 

actions of the LEPS. The main 

areas raised in the submission 

relate to development in the 

context of landscape and land 

qualities, basic raw materials, 

perceived duplication of existing 

state level policies and actions and 

fire hazard. These concerns are 

reflective of the issues raised in 

submission 3 and the officer 

comment in response to submission 

3 is applicable to the same 

elements in this submission. 

fundamental thrust, 

objectives or 

recommended actions 

contained within the 

advertised strategy.





Many of the figures need to have their contained information placed on 

3 or 4 separate figures with accurate, understandable legends, so that 

the important information contained within the figures can be more 

easily understood. 

I also need to repeat my belief that, over the 3+ years during which the 

LEPS has been produced, community consultation has been less than 

ideal. At a public meeting held at the Geographe Bayview Resort in 

2008 or 2009, only about a dozen members of the public attended and, 

in my view, these people were not representative of the broader 

community whose members have an interest in environmental matters. 

The current draft LEPS is a worthwhile improvement on the previous 

draft which included many on-ground management actions that were 

not relevant to the planning process. Nonetheless, in future, I suggest 

that the Shire prescribe its requirements in terms of advertising and 

direct contact with environmental groups and individuals when 

awarding tenders for similar planning or environmental studies. 

Finally, I submit that the entire document needs to be given over to an 

experienced science writer/editor for full editing and, where necessary, 

rewriting to enhance clarity. 

By the way, if the Busselton Chamber of Commerce provides a 

submission to the Shire on the draft LEPS, parts of it may be similar or 

identical to words that I have used in my submission. The reason for 

this is that I have provided a short document to the Chamber outlining 

what I see as the major problems with the draft LEPS from the point of 

view of unnecessary duplication, unjustified costs or unwarranted time 

constraints to be imposed on development proposals. It is up to the 

Chamber whether it accepts or rejects my comments and therefore 

whether it provides a submission or not. 

8. Julie Rotherbridge The focus of our response is primarily on dieback. We understand that 

this document is about strategy, and so will try and target comments 

accordingly. 

As one of the main objectives of the LEPS is to maintain and enhance 

the quality of remnant vegetation throughout the Shire, we feel that 

Action BD2 of the LEPS responds 

to this submission and broad-scale 

dieback risk assessment mapping 

as a basis for the identification of 

where, within the Shire, sitespecific 

dieback risk assessments 


noted.





more control (auditing) is required with regard to the spreading of 

Dieback (Phytophthora cinnamomi). 

Whilst broad-scale dieback risk assessment is a move forward, if areas 

assessed/mapped are not treated and marked with signage the mapping 

become obsolete within 12 months. It is therefore imperative that a 

signage and treatment program is attached to any mapping initiative. 

One of the easiest ways to spread dieback is through soil movement 

and disturbance and introducing gravel, soils, sand and other materials 

into an un-infested area. There are a number of extractive industry sites 

recorded as being active. Are these currently being used for sand and/or 

gravel by the Shire or contractors working for the Shire? We know that 

in most instances these sites are likely to be infested with the dieback 

pathogen. 

and/or management strategies 

would be required as part of the 

planning approval process. Such 

management strategies would 

provide guidance and outline 

protocols for dieback management, 

such as risk, signage, hygiene 

practices, training and auditing. 

It is therefore important that no BRMs are used from infested sites and 

these sites should be closed down. It is also crucial to ensure the run 

off from these sites are secured. All infested sites should be indicated 

by relevant signage. All BRM sites can be tested by a registered 

authority to ascertain whether it contains the Dieback pathogen - an 

independent professional assessor should extract these samples and 

ensure they are analysed by a registered testing authority. 

Note that part of appeal of Shire is its rural undeveloped nature. The 

more visibly developed it becomes, the less valuable it is. Thus 

development should be undertaken carefully and where possible hidden 

from view. The last thing visitors from Perth and many residents want 

to see is a housing estate or industrial area as they tour the region. 

Specific recommendations to be added to the document: 

1. Signage of dieback status at BRM & extractive industry sites. 

2. Auditing of usage of material from infested BRM & extractive 

industry sites.





3. Establishment of un-infested BRM & extractive industry sites. 

4. All personnel working for the Shire of Busselton should undergo 

Dieback awareness training. It is understood that Depot staff and 

Rangers will undergo training in August 2011 but it is important for 

all Shire employees understand the threat of dieback within the 

community they work. 

5. All contractors engaged by Shire should undergo dieback training 

and implement protocols including clean on entry and clean on exit. 

6. Strategy to make more mention of "tourist drives" or equivalent - 

known roads with landscape value such as Wildwood Road and 

Vasse Yallingup Road. These need to be specifically preserved and 

note that upgrading (by sealing or making wider) or making safer 

(road markings and barriers) can be at odds with their intrinsic 

value. 

9. Dunsborough Coast & Land 

Care Group Inc 

36 Geographe Bay Road 

DUNSBOROUGH WA 6281 

The Strategy does not include treatment of stormwater to reduce 

nutrient input to Geographe Bay. This is a serious omission and is 

detrimental to the health and stability of the seagrass beds. 

The section on waterbodies and water courses mentions Toby Inlet and 

states that there are no other significant waterways or watercourses 

within or immediately adjacent to the Dunsborough townsite. Dugalup 

and Daradatup brooks are at least as significant as Toby Inlet and drain 

untreated stormwater into Geographe Bay. 

The Dunsborough Foreshore redevelopment plans include a waterwise 

garden in Seymour Park. It would be better to include stormwater 

nutrient stripping ponds in the design. 

The issue of stormwater 

management is addressed at a 

more detailed level through the 

Vasse Wonnerup Water Quality 

Improvement Plan, which has been 

prepared to guide management 

strategies to reduce nutrient loads 

(from identified sources and 

catchments) entering the Vasse 

Wonnerup wetlands and Geographe 

Bay. The plan outlines measures for 

the management of diffuse 

nutrients from urban development, 

such as stormwater, through the 

incorporation of water sensitive 

urban design. 


noted. 

This includes the 2 nd and 3 rd dot 

points in recommendation W3, 

which proposes a ‘Water Quality





Improvement Special Control Area’ 

for the identified recovery 

catchment in the Vasse-Wonnerup 

Water Quality Improvement Plan. 

The WAPC Better Urban Water 

Management policy framework also 

provides the higher level guidance 

on requirements for local and urban 

water management plans at various 

levels within the town planning and 

development process.

Attachments 11.4 and 11.5 - City of Busselton

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?