News

What the BRG has been doing

Lot 709 Armadale - MRS Amendment Advertised
14 July 2025

Preliminary information about this proposal was published on this page in June. See further below here

The WA Planning Commission has advertised for public comment a proposal by land developer Mirvac to amend the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) to rezone for urban development the “egg farm” (Lot 709 Armadale Road) at the north end of Liddelow Road, Banjup. If approved, about 700 houses could be built on the land.

You can see the advertisement here: Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1437 (Complex) - Lot 709 Armadale Road, Banjup | Have Your Say, WA! You can download the pertinent documents at that site or here: Armadale 342 lot 709

The land comprises just under 47 hectares and, apart from the residence, the old egg farm, and the associated buildings, has been wetlands, fallow, or used for grazing since the 1950s and earlier. It is currently zoned “Rural – Water Protection” and “P2” under the Jandakot Groundwater Protection Policy, like the rest of residential Banjup.

In accordance with BRG members’ resolution at the AGM of March 2024 (see here Banjup Vision | Banjup Residents), the BRG will likely oppose Mirvac’s proposed rezoning. However, the Committee seeks the views of the Banjup community before proceeding. Please email secretary@banjup.au to let the Committee know your views.

We must make our submission by 12 September 2025

Proposed Tree Protection Policy
3 July 2025

The City of Cockburn is proposing to protect tall trees within its local government area, which includes rural Banjup, Jandakot, and Treeby – see Local Planning Policy 5.26 - Tree Protection | Comment on Cockburn The City invites submissions on its proposal by 1 September.

Committee members of the Banjup Residents Group met with City of Cockburn officers to determine how the proposed policy would affect rural landowners. Our initial assessment is – not much, as follows:

1. Focus on Urban Tall Trees

The focus of the City’s proposed protection policy is on tall trees on older established urban properties, such as Hamilton Hill, that might be subject to sub-division proposals. The City wants to avoid clear felling of large blocks and ensure that development plans can preserve established trees and the canopy and character that they provide. However, the policy would also apply to rural properties.

2. Effect on Rural Landowners

Rural landowners will likely only encounter the Cockburn’s tree protection policy if they apply to erect a new shed, say, and want to cut down tall trees to make way for it. Our understanding is that the City would discuss siting the shed elsewhere rather than fell trees.

Reasonable pruning maintenance of tall trees would not require approval. Useful guidelines for pruning trees to Australian Standards are at The Australian Standards AS4373-2007 'Pruning of amenity trees' and what does it mean? - Rennie Bros Tree Services

However, removal of a tall tree for safety reasons would need to be discussed with the City. Discussions would not be arduous and approval would not be unreasonably withheld.

Removal of dead trees would not require approval (but take a photo as proof beforehand!)

3. Regulated Trees

The proposed policy would allow the City of Cockburn to declare any tree over 8 metres tall as a “Regulated Tree”, whether the landowners, rural or urban, agree or not. Just as a landowner must obtain the City’s approval before erecting a building on his land, so any removal or severe lopping of such a tree would require the approval of the City of Cockburn beforehand.

4. Location of Every Tall Tree

The City knows the whereabouts of every tall tree within the City boundaries from a “layer” within its mapping system – see the maps at Regulated Trees in the City of Cockburn (zoom into your street to reveal the tall trees in bright green).

The maps of Regulated trees will assist the City with its compliance activities, particularly when a new Development Application is submitted and it can be shown that Regulated trees have been removed beforehand.

5. No Effect on Zoning

On first reading of Cockburn’s proposed tree protection policy, it might be thought that it would be helpful in further protecting our rural amenity from avaricious land developers. However, in zoning matters state legislation trumps all local government policies. Rural landowners’ trees are best protected by state planning and environmental legislation – until the Minister determines otherwise.

6. Your Thoughts?

Your Committee trusts that you find this review of Cockburn’s tree protection policy informative.

Please let us know your thoughts on the policy and what should be the intent of the BRG submission to Council. Email us at secretary@banjup.au

Rezoning Lot 709 Armadale Road - the "Egg Farm"
16 June 2025

We understand that the WA Planning Commission has authorised the advertising of a proposal by land developer Mirvac to rezone the 47 hectares of mostly pasture at Lot 709 Armadale Road for urban development. The advertisements will likely be released for public comment in July.

To avoid doubt, this is the subject area to be advertised for an amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme:

A verbal presentation by Mirvac in support of the rezoning was made to the WAPC meeting on 19 February 2025. These are the main points Mirvac made as shown in the agenda paper:

Our [Mirvac’s] presentation to the Commission is in support of the proposed MRS Amendment.
We have been on an extensive journey (engagement, designing, reporting and substantiating our proposal) providing justification for the proposed MRS rezoning including the economic and social rationale and cost benefit analysis, in support of delivering residential dwellings on the subject site.
The Planning Frameworks are a high-level guide formulated over 5 years ago and unable to completely address the current housing crisis. Rational proposals which fall outside the Frameworks can be entertained by Govt.
The site is categorically unique in terms of its size (47ha), is under single landownership, absence to environmental value and importantly is able to leverage off existing & established infrastructure.
Conversely, the adjacent area to the west is impacted by significant environmental (vegetation) and fragmented landholdings constraints.
The proposal is supported by up to date engineering analysis which has confirmed Lot 709 can be fully serviced at no cost to government
The proposal is supported by real market economic analysis undertaken by specialist firms which confirmed residential land take-up rates and population growth in the Cockburn area have far exceeded Perth and Peel @3.5 million forecasts;
The EPA has confirmed the denuded nature of the site and lack of environmental assets
The DWER position of not supporting reclassification of the land from P2 to P3 is the same as that provided for all other recent urbanisation projects delivered/proposed within the Jandakot Mound.
Groundwater currently extracted by the adjacent J70 Water Corporation bore accounts for only 1-2% of the entire extraction from the Jandakot mound.
The Jandakot-Treeby DSP is unlikely to meet original residential yield forecasts due to the extent of environmental assets present.

The Banjup Residents Group has campaigned long and hard to preserve our rural amenity and ambience. Our members have endorsed a Vision for Banjup that preserves our safe, green haven of peace and tranquillity. You can read more here: Banjup Vision | Banjup Residents

700 residential houses on our northern border will significantly impact us. It will inevitably lead to more pressure to develop land north of the water pipeline in Murdoch Way and Gutteridge Road. However, our concerns might not be considered by the State government in its quest for more residential land, even though plenty has been already identified in the Perth and Peel Planning Framework that was updated only a couple of years ago. The Framework was originally called Perth@3.5million and sufficient land was identified to accommodate 3.5 million by 2050. Perth’s current population is 2.3 million, so there should be plenty of undeveloped land left without Banjup.

Separately but in parallel to Mirvac and with their knowledge, several landowners on Murdoch Way and Carlson Place wrote on 25 May to the Minister for Planning, copied to many others including the BRG, asking for their lands to be rezoned for urban development.

Current indications are that developers will pay $1 million per hectare for residents’ private land, regardless of the buildings thereon – they would be bulldozed anyway. Existing landowners could get better prices by selling into the residential housing market. Even if Murdoch Way were rezoned, no-one can force a landowner to sell.

We understand that the City of Cockburn will oppose both proposals for rezoning.

Jandakot / Treeby Structure Plan

16 June 2025

The Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage is advertising of a draft district structure plan for the Jandakot/Treeby urban expansion area. The draft documents are available at https://haveyoursay.dplh.wa.gov.au/jtdsp
Submissions close 15 August.

The structure plan shows that the developers anticipate 4,770 houses being built over the next maybe 40 years, according to the map on page 55.

Jandakot Treeby Structure Plan map v1.jpg

Jandakot Treeby Structure Plan lots v1.jpg

Mobile Phone Blackspot Funding

17 January 2025

Mobile phone reception in Banjup is poor. The telcos seem to have forgotten us. Our only mobile phone tower was built in 2018 to bolster the reception in Atwell, not specifically to service the 420 homes in Banjup.

New funding to improve mobile phone coverage will become available soon under the Commonwealth government’s Mobile Black Spot Program. Banjup could qualify for such funding under the recently announced Round 8 of the Program.

Round 8 offers $55 million in grant funding for disaster prone locations in regional and rural Australia, to bolster community safety and enable better assistance for locals during and after emergencies.

The Mobile Black Spot Program is an ongoing Australian federal government funding program aimed at adding mobile phone reception to areas which do not have it, such as communities, transport routes and tourist destinations.

Since its inception in 2013, over 1,200 mobile base stations have been funded and a total of 1,047 constructed by Telstra, Optus, TPG Telecom (formerly Vodafone), and Field Solutions Group (FSG). Mobile base stations built under the program are funded with contributions from the Commonwealth, the network operators themselves, and in some cases, state and local governments.

Our local MP, Josh Wilson, federal member for Fremantle, has written to the BRG to nominate Banjup for funding to upgrade our mobile phone reception. He says:

“To help build a strong case I would like to invite you to tell your story about this issue, and why improving mobile connectivity is so important to you and the Banjup community.

Please provide this to my office … by 5:00pm AWST on Wednesday 29 January.“

The BRG will facilitate a reply but we need to reflect the needs and views of residents and their stories, as Josh puts it.

By Saturday, 25 January, can you write to the BRG at secretary.banjup@gmail.com to tell us your views and your “stories”?

HOWEVER, the BRG is very aware of the controversy about mobile phone towers that arose in 2016 and 2017 when many residents objected to the siting of a tower in Harper Road. Community support one way or the other needs to be clear before the BRG responds to Josh Wilson.

Note that in January 2018 the State Administrative Tribunal approved the siting of a mobile phone tower at 25 Harper Road. In its decision, the Tribunal said:

“The impact of the facility on the visual amenity of the locality was weighed against the State planning policy objectives of providing telecommunications facilities. The Tribunal concluded that overall the community benefits derived from the proposed facility was balanced with any consequential impact there might be on the visual amenity of the locality and found that planning approval was warranted subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions. Consequently, the application for review was allowed and conditional planning approval granted.”

In a few words, community benefit outweighs loss of visual amenity.

Further, the WA State Planning Policy 5.2 – Telecommunications Infrastructure says at 3.1 Electromagnetic Emissions (EME):

“The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) Radiofrequency (RF) Standard which sets limits for human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields from all sources, including telecommunications infrastructure. ARPANSA is the primary Commonwealth agency responsible for protecting the health and safety of people and the environment from the harmful effects of radiation.

Standards set by ARPANSA incorporate substantial safety margins to address human health and safety matters; therefore it is not within the scope of this Policy to address health and safety matters. Based on ARPANSA’s findings, setback distances for telecommunications infrastructure are not to be set out in local planning schemes or local planning policies to address health or safety standards for human exposure to electromagnetic emissions.”

In a few words more, objections to a mobile phone tower on health grounds will not be entertained by government.

Traffic Management in Banjup

The Banjup Residents Group has been campaigning since 2014 to deter heavy trucks and through traffic from Banjup’s roads. At almost every meeting of BRG members in the Banjup Hall we have discussed traffic and what to do about it.

In 2019, we thought that we were making progress with the Cardno traffic study that recommended several road “treatments” such as “modified T-intersections” and blisters on the through routes of Liddelow and Beenyup. We discussed this at length in the BRG meetings in the years since. However, the City of Cockburn has been reluctant to take those recommendations further.

Since mid 2023 there has been a change in personnel and attitude at the City of Cockburn. They are now more cognisant of the need to preserve Banjup’s rural amenity as mandated by Councillors in the “Banjup Preservation Principles” that include:

The intended function of the roads in Banjup is for traffic within its local area and not for traffic between outside areas and they will be managed as such.

City officers have engaged constructively with the BRG Committee to find ways of reducing through traffic. However, the City is bound by the rules of Main Roads WA that are very prescriptive about traffic management treatments.

Apparently, the recommended modified T-intersections would require extensive street lighting, kerbing, drainage, and modified property driveways along the length of Liddelow Road, at least. City officers have told Councillors that such works could cost $20 million, which would be a “grave financial impost” on the City and is three times the City’s roads budget for 2023-24.

It would be unrealistic of Banjup residents to expect Councillors of the City of Cockburn to approve such a large sum on traffic management in Banjup. Accordingly, the BRG Committee reluctantly agreed that the recommendations of the Cardno report are not appropriate and that alternative traffic management measures must be devised.

Cockburn officers liaised with the Committee to develop alternative treatments to reduce traffic through Banjup. Officers advised that Main Roads WA might favour a proposal that speeds on all Banjup streets be limited to 60 kph, except for Liddelow Road, which would be limited to 70 kph. Such reductions could divert some through traffic to faster roads.

Main Roads WA requires that “threshold statements” would need to be put in place at all Banjup entry points and would signify to roads users that they are entering a different area and should expect different road conditions, including lower speeds. Threshold statements would include not only signage but also changes in road surface and width and the planting of tall trees.

At its September 2013 meeting, the Council of the City of Cockburn unanimously approved the proposal to design measures to make Banjup a “Local Area Speed Zone”. This would see all roads in Banjup limited to 60 kph, except for Liddelow Road which would be 70 kph. Cockburn’s Traffic Manager anticipates that the slower speeds would divert some through traffic onto faster roads elsewhere.

After 10 years of lobbying the City of Cockburn, this is the first practical measure to deter traffic that they have offered and look like implementing. It may not be all we wanted but it is a first step. Besides, freeway speeds are not compatible with the rural idyllic that we are trying to preserve and promote.

The City of Cockburn put the traffic management proposals out for public consultation to all Banjup residents from 28 February to 15 March 2024. At the BRG AGM on 10 March, members voted overwhelmingly to support the proposals. The officers' report to Council will likely be made to its meeting in May 2024.

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act affects all rural properties

UPDATE:

The WA government has promised to repeal the ACH laws but update the previous legislation. How this might affect rural landowners in not known.

The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage legislation comes into effect on 1 July 2023 and applies to all land in WA greater than 1,100 square metres. Consequently, it affects every landowner in rural Banjup, Jandakot, and Treeby – our land areas are typically 20,000 square metres and more.

The Act, the Regulations, and the Guidelines as currently available are all substantially incomplete, so it is difficult to give guidance with any confidence. The Act, the Regulations, and the Guidelines as currently available are all substantially incomplete, so it is difficult to give guidance with any confidence. You can download each of them at https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OQPKvgV6HZineQjBlkTsJ7qZtELYSaSm?usp=drive_link

However, the Act says Aboriginal cultural heritage means

“the tangible and intangible elements that are important to the Aboriginal people of the State, and are recognised through social, spiritual, historical, scientific or aesthetic values, as part of Aboriginal tradition”

The Guidelines imply that, on properties over 1,100 sq metres, if you maintain existing infrastructure in a way that, over the course of 1 calendar year, involves any of the following—

(a) removing more than 4 kg of material;

(b) disturbing more than 10 m2 of ground in total;

(d) excavating to a depth of more than 0.5 m.

then an ACH authorised person must perform a Due Diligence Assessment before any works can proceed.

“Gardening” is an exempt activity but digging a 600 mm deep trench would not be.

The legislation is aimed at mining companies in the wake of the Juukan Gorge fiasco. However, its broad ambit could give activists opportunities to disrupt your rural living. Such a disruption was reported on 15 June at Port Hedland traditional owners accuse council, Water Corp of disturbing heritage site - ABC News .

An e-petition to the Legislative Council is open for signature until 20 June. You can see it at https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/LCePetitions.nsf/petitions/23-0018

Rural landowners might well consider that it is in their best interest to sign the petition.

Note that the Government has substantial majorities in both houses of the WA parliament.

Still No Clarity on Water Mound Review

UPDATE:

The Department of Planning has "clarified" that the Water Mound review was only to "inform the decision on the Jandakot PIA". The areas south of Armadale Road will not be affected by the outcome of the review.

At the BRG AGM on 26 March 2023, 80 members discussed the implications of the State government review of the "whole of the Jandakot water protection area, including the [Jandakot] PIA".

Enquiries by the BRG Committee of the PIA team at the Department of Planning revealed that they could not explain why the whole of the Water Mound was being reviewed – they were only interested in the Jandakot/Treeby PIA.

The Committee had spoken by telephone with Deputy Premier Roger Cook MLA who could shed no further light either.

There is no ambiguity in the announcement. If the review had been to inform only the Jandakot/Treeby PIA, then it would have been phrased as such. Instead, the government was explicit in reviewing land use on the Water Mound from the airport down to Anketell Road.

The wording of the review is clear and no accident. Government somewhere has an intention that is yet to be revealed.

Government Review of All Lands in Banjup, Jandakot, and Treeby

The State government announced on Wednesday, 21 September 2022, the outcome of 4 years’ planning investigations into future uses of 12 areas of land in the Perth metropolitan area – see Media statements - Potential for up to 76,000 new homes with resolution of Planning Investigation Areas .

You can download the 20 page report, “Perth and Peel@3.5million Planning Investigation Areas Update” at Planning investigation areas (www.wa.gov.au) (about half way down the page).

Sadly for residents in rural Jandakot and Treeby, the future zoning of their lands was not resolved; they are still under “Planning Investigation” (see page 16 of the PIA report).

Sadly also for residents in the south west corner of Banjup between Lyon and Kinley, they did not rate a mention in the report.

Alarmingly, for all residents on the water mound, the PIA Update report also states on page 16 when discussing rural Jandakot and Treeby that:

The State Government has committed to undertake an integrated and whole-of-Government strategic review of water and land use values in the Jandakot water protection area as a priority.

The review will inform further consideration by the WAPC and State Government regarding future policy settings within the broader Jandakot water protection area, including the PIA.

A ”whole-of-government” review implies that the Department of Water (DoW) will be just a participant in the review. As when the “Banjup Urban Precinct” (now Calleya) proposal was being evaluated in 2012, the Department of Planning (DoP) will be the lead agency for the upcoming review. In 2012 the DoP wanted the old sand quarries rezoned and the DoW was reduced to requiring that any water run-offs from roads were contained.

“…as a priority” could imply over the next 12 months.

The “broader Jandakot water protection area” implies all land uses in Jandakot, Treeby, Banjup, and south through Wandi and Anketell will also be reviewed (see map at the end of this email).

As we all know, governments do not start an inquiry or review without knowing the answer first. Our rural lands are under threat.

Your Committee welcomes your thoughts on how the Banjup Residents Group should respond in the short and longer terms to the state government’s announcements. Email your thoughts to Secretary.banjup@gmail.com

Apply for Garden Bore Exemption

The WA Government has mandated that from 1 September 2022, garden bores may be used only twice a week, which brings the regulations in line with the 2 day a week restriction on sprinklers using scheme water.

However, the Banjup Residents Group was successful in lobbying for exemptions for bore users not connected to scheme water and living in a bushfire prone area. All residents of rural Banjup, Jandakot, and Treeby meet these criteria. Note, though, that it is not a blanket exemption for our area: each property owner or occupier must apply for their own exemption.

The Department of Water Regulation administers the exemption scheme. You can apply for your own exemption at:

https://begroundwaterwise.wa.gov.au/garden-bore-regulation/apply-for-approval-to-irrigate-on-a-three-day-sprinkler-roster/

It is a straightforward on-line application that the Department will review manually before writing back to you.

Bore Roster Change Opposed

The WA government is proposing to reduce from 3 to 2 the number of times each week that a bore may be used from 1 September 2022. For rural landowners, this threatens the viability of the Asset Protection Zones around our houses and so exposes us to greater risks in the event of bush fire.

The BRG Committee is vigorously opposing the proposal. We have:

Met with Kwinana MLA and Deputy Premier Roger Cook to ask him to speak on our behalf to the Minister for Water, Dave Kelly.
Written to Jandakot MLA Yaz Mubarakai but he is on leave until March.
Spoken with Cockburn councillors to seek their support, which they have given, for an exemption for those not on scheme water.
Spoken with executives at DFES to clarify their position on Asset Protection Zones, which is as published on the DFES web site.

You can see more about our current initiatives here.

Kinley Road change of use rejected

On 9 October 2021, Cockburn Council rejected the application for retrospective approval of the Kinley Road "lodging house" and gave the occupiers 90 days to vacate the premises and return them to then approved use.

Transport depot at Beenyup and Gibbs given 2 years' temporary approval

On 9 December 2021, Cockburn Council gave 2 years' temporary approval for the JAG traffic sign business to continue to operate at 157 Beenyup.

Previously, on 8 July 2021 Council refused the development application. The applicant then took the decision to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT).

It appears that there is a deficiency in Cockburn's town planning scheme that would allow any use of land in the 'Resource Zone'.

SAT directed Cockburn and the applicant to come to a mediated agreement which was put to Council on 9 December and included a 5 year temporary approval. Council accepted the terms of the agreement but gave only a 2 year approval.

Objection to Kinley Road development

22 July 2021 - The BRG submitted to the City of Cockburn an objection to the retrospective development application for a multiple tenancy hostel in Kinley Road.

Objection to 'transport hub' at Beenyup and Gibbs

27 May 2021 - The BRG submitted to the City of Cockburn an objection to the retrospective development application made by the owner of the property at the corner of Beenyup and Tapper for retrospective approval to legitimise his use of the property as a trucking depot that has been operating there for several years.