Coast Ward Ratepayers Association

01/06/2026

🌿 Is your verge just grass and concrete? It could be so much more.

Join us on Saturday 6 June, 10:00–11:00am and discover how planting low-growing native plants on your verge can help cool your neighbourhood, attract wildlife, and turn a forgotten strip of land into something truly beautiful. 🐝🌸

As our urban tree canopy shrinks and hard surfaces heat up our streets, small changes like this make a real difference — and we'll show you exactly how to get started.

👉 https://loom.ly/Fmn_zhQ

28/04/2026

⭐️Proposed Childcare Centre at 3 Oban Road, City Beach⭐️

‼️Have your say by 4 May 2026, 5pm‼️

From the Town of Cambridge website -

The proposal seeks approval for a Child Care Premises on a residential property that directly abuts neighbouring residential lots.

The site is located within a low-density residential area (R12.5) where child care premises are not a permitted use by right and require discretionary approval.

The proposal has the following variations to the Local Planning Framework:

‼️The proposed number of children (72) exceeds the maximum of 40 children permitted for childcare premises on residentially zoned land.
‼️The building height of 8.1m exceeds the maximum permitted height of 7.0m.
‼️The side boundary setbacks of 1.5m are significantly less than the 7.0–8.0m required, given the proximity to adjoining residential properties.
‼️The front setback of 6.5m is less than the 7.5m required.
‼️The proposed hours of operation (6:30am–6:30pm) exceed the permitted hours of 7:00am–6:00pm.
‼️The site is accessed via a one-way service/access road rather than a Local Distributor Road as required for child care premises in residential areas.
‼️No landscaping strip is provided along the street boundaries as required.

A submission on the application needs to outline whether you object to or support it (when considering the design principles), or you wish to provide general comments on the application.

Submissions can be provided:

📫 By email at [email protected]; or
✉️ By mail at Town of Cambridge, 1 Bold Park Drive, Floreat WA 6014.

Submissions are to be provided by 5:00pm on 4 May 2026.

If you have any queries in relation this matter, please contact the Town on (08) 9347 6000.

Development Design:https://www.cambridge.wa.gov.au/files/assets/public/v/1/documents-and-files/development-amp-sustainability/planning/current-advertised-applications/2026-march/3-oban-road-city-beach-plans.pdf

🔗https://www.cambridge.wa.gov.au/Plan-Build/Planning/Advertised-Planning-Applications/3-Oban-Road-City-Beach

📺Questions at Ordinary Council Meeting, 28 April 2026 (watch from 7 mins): https://youtube.com/live/-Cw-JytpWW0?feature=share

09/04/2026

Read Town of Cambridge response to the recent POST Newspapers article, clarifying rates calculation.

🔗https://www.cambridge.wa.gov.au/About/News/Latest-News/2026/Town-of-Cambridge-clarifies-POST-article-on-rates-at-Ocean-Grand

07/02/2026

Lack of traffic wardens is not only dangerous for school children, it affects everyone on the roads.

Currently there are three school crossings within the Town of Cambridge without wardens -

- Holy Spirit Primary School
- Kapinara Primary School
- West Leederville Primary School

Driving down Hale Road, it’s scary seeing kids dart across a dual carriageway to Hale School, another school without a traffic warden.

Please support this initiative to make school crossings safer. Details below.

Opposition leader Basil Zempilas says changes need to be made to WA’s traffic warden system amid concerns over a growing shortage leaving dozens of dangerous school crossings unattended.

29/01/2026

‼️SUBMISSIONS CLOSE TOMORROW‼️

Last chance to make your submission! 🚨

Submissions on the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 2 (LPS2) close 4pm this Friday, 30 January 2026.

LPS2 will guide how land is planned and developed across the Town of Cambridge into the future, so now’s the time to check what’s proposed and share your feedback.

View the draft and make a submission online before the deadline.

🔗More info & make a submission: cambridge.wa.gov.au/LPS2

27/01/2026

‼️This is your last chance to make a submission. Areas effecting Floreat are below‼️

While the Town of Cambridge has provided further detail, what they HAVE NOT told you is what this means in reality (as even they don't know what the end state will be). Remember this in the context of the Floreat Activity Centre where the intended height was 8 storeys, and the result was ~20 storeys. Silence on this will be taken as acceptance.

⭐️⭐️PLEASE HAVE YOUR SAY BY THIS FRIDAY, 4PM⭐️⭐️: 🔗Make a submission: cambridge.wa.gov.au/LPS2

Points to use are:

📍NEWMAN COLLEGE SITE - JUNIOR SCHOOL CAMPUS📍
Spot Rezoning by Minister

The former Newman College site at 49 PEEBLES ROAD, FLOREAT, is NOT identified for increased density in the endorsed Local Planning Strategy.

This spot rezoning undermines strategic planning and produces an outcome that is NOT consistent with the principles of orderly and proper planning.

Upcoding from R12.5 to R100 is strongly opposed, as it sets a precedent for ad-hoc rezoning and undermines strategic planning. While R100 is intended for four storeys, recent approvals in the Town have resulted in developments significantly exceeding intended heights. This may result in the height being much higher than 4 storeys.

The site is close to the Floreat Activity Centre, which already provides for over 1,000 new dwellings. Further upcoding would add to density, traffic and infrastructure pressures in the area.

The Council opposed advertising for a Scheme Amendment for this site at its meeting in May 2023, reinforcing that upcoding is not supported.

The community expects the site to remain at R12.5, in line with the Strategy and to protect local character.

📍EAST FLOREAT IMPACTS📍
Cambridge Street Urban Corridor West and East – Widening Urban Corridor and Upcoding by Minister, including Newry Street and Salvado Road.

The Draft LPS2 proposes higher density along Cambridge Street from Floreat to West Leederville, with R-AC1 zoning at the eastern end allowing up to 9 storeys. However, developer costs rise sharply beyond 8 storeys, leading developers to seek even greater heights, sometimes offering minor community benefits in return, which increases the risk of approvals for buildings of 15 storeys or more.

To address this, it is recommended to apply R-AC3 zoning instead of R-AC1, which would limit development to 6 storeys and better align with the Local Planning Strategy’s original vision of 5 storeys.

Proposals to upcode areas along NEWRY STREET and SALVADO ROAD are not supported by the Local Planning Strategy and must be rejected to maintain strategic planning integrity. This is in context of the added pressure of the nearby Floreat Activity Centre (which includes the Floreat Forum site) and the recent approval for over 1,000 dwellings, noting that the WAPC added a further 8 storeys across the shopping centre footprint which would result in a significant increase in dwelling numbers. No studies have been conducted on the impact this would have on traffic and related infrastructure in the area. This further upcoding through the streets of East Floreat would add further pressure.

📍CONCLUSION📍
Under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, any Local Planning Scheme, including LPS2, must be informed by the endorsed Local Planning Strategy. The Strategy sets the long-term vision for land use, housing, infrastructure and environmental protection, while the Scheme translates this vision into legal zoning and development standards. ANY deviation from the Local Planning Strategy and undermines both legislative requirements and the trust built through community consultation.

LPS: site intended height limits: �https://www.cambridge.wa.gov.au/files/assets/public/v/1/documents-and-files/development-amp-sustainability/planning/planning-projects/lps/appendix-to-local-planning-strategy-housing-yield-analysis-sm.pdf

27/01/2026

‼️This is your last chance to make a submission. Areas effecting City Beach are below‼️

While the Town of Cambridge has provided further detail, what they HAVE NOT told you is what this means in reality (as even they don't know what the end state will be). Remember this in the context of Ocean Village where the intended height was 6 storeys, and the result was 23 storeys. Silence on this will be taken as acceptance.

⭐️⭐️PLEASE HAVE YOUR SAY BY THIS FRIDAY, 4PM⭐️⭐️: 🔗Make a submission: cambridge.wa.gov.au/LPS2

Points to use are:

📍EMPIRE VILLAGE📍
Minister's Upcoding of Building Height to 7 (or more) storeys

The Local Planning Strategy specifies a maximum building height of 4 storeys (Council recommendation of R100) for Empire Village, accommodating between 100 and 150 dwellings. This was determined through careful analysis and community input to ensure development is in keeping with the character and expectations of the area.

The Draft LPS2 proposes R-AC2 zoning for Empire Village, which allows for an indicative building height of 7 storeys. This change EXCEEDS community expectations and the limits set out in the endorsed Strategy, particularly as the end result may significantly exceed this height, as evidenced with other recent approvals in the Town (Ocean Village, Floreat Activity Centre - both 20+ storeys). Such an increase in height and density is NOT supported by the community and must be rejected to maintain consistency with the Strategy and uphold the integrity of the planning process.

📍POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITES📍
Several Town-owned sites, including the OLD QUARRY SITE in City Beach, Surplus Wembley GOLF COURSE Land, TEMPLETONIA CRESCENT Civic Centre in City Beach and the Council Administration Centre in Floreat, were identified in the Local Planning Strategy as contributing 700-1,000 dwellings to meet State Government targets.

These sites are not adequately addressed in LPS2, raising concerns about the ABSENCE OF CURRENT CONTROLS over zoning and expected building heights. Without clear controls, there is a risk of inappropriate development that could exceed community expectations and State targets.

It should be noted that any development in areas of virgin bushland within the golf course should be opposed, as this would have significant environmental impacts and is not supported by the community.

Incorporating these sites into LPS2 with explicit height and density limits would provide greater certainty and protection for the community.

📍CONCLUSION📍
Under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, any Local Planning Scheme, including LPS2, must be informed by the endorsed Local Planning Strategy. The Strategy sets the long-term vision for land use, housing, infrastructure and environmental protection, while the Scheme translates this vision into legal zoning and development standards. ANY deviation from the Local Planning Strategy and undermines both legislative requirements and the trust built through community consultation.

LPS: site intended height limits: �https://www.cambridge.wa.gov.au/files/assets/public/v/1/documents-and-files/development-amp-sustainability/planning/planning-projects/lps/appendix-to-local-planning-strategy-housing-yield-analysis-sm.pdf

23/01/2026

‼️Developer Contact with Staff Policy MISREPRESENTED AND REVOKED by Council at the December meeting‼️

This policy has been persistently misrepresented, particularly by the Mayor and administration. Based on the discussion at the Council meeting, it is questionable whether some Councillors have even read the two-page document (see policy below).

The claim that Policy 33 blocks all contact between staff and developers is simply NOT true.

It is disappointing that the majority of Councillors voted to revoke this policy, including one who had publicly pledged support prior to the election. This is despite the CWRA deputation at the Council meeting explaining its purpose and dispelling the false claim that the policy blocks all contact.

This item was added to the agenda at the last minute. Was this timing intentional to limit the community’s opportunity to voice concerns about the proposed revocation? Staff have the authority to exercise statutory delegations, decisions that could favour developers. It is worth noting that most new board members seek additional information and ask questions before making significant decisions. Shouldn’t the Council exercise the same level of diligence on such an important matter?

Who truly benefits from reducing transparency?

As the Town of Cambridge holds tens of millions of dollars of its own property, and serves as the local government authority for planning, the community deserves full transparency regarding potential developments. The recent example (see below) of contact about property in PERRY LAKES underscores why this policy should have been retained.

Here’s what the policy actually does:

🟢 Policy 33 targets “prescribed contact", being any contact about developments worth over $2 million or proposals that don’t align with the Local Planning Strategy (excluding minor applications).

🟢 For these proposals, staff must record every interaction, including in-person, phone calls, email, etc. (who, when, how, what property, and what was discussed) and declare it in a public register, ensuring transparency and public accountability.

🟢 Where a proposal isn’t consistent with the Local Planning Strategy, an additional control applies that requires staff to only provide general planning info recorded in writing.

🟢 Crucially, any pre-lodgement briefings of council in relation to proposed developments that are inconsistent with the Local Planning Strategy are to occur in a public forum so that the community are aware.

🟢 All discussions with the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage about these proposals must be minuted and reported to Council.

These measures were introduced to ensure the Town’s administration were documenting meetings with developers regarding significant proposals that could impact community amenity.

Policy 33 DOESN'T BAN ALL CONTACT, it puts smart controls in place for major projects to protect community TRUST, ensure TRANSPARENCY, and keep everyone ACCOUNTABLE.

Town of Cambridge
POST Newspapers

22/01/2026

‼️DON'T LET MORE HIGH-RISE HAPPEN IN THE TOWN - HAVE YOUR SAY‼️
DEADLINE - 4pm on Friday 30 January 2026.

The Town is seeking feedback on the Draft Local Planning Scheme 2 which has made changes to the density zoning for some sites. These changes may not only impact you, but have implications and may set an unfavourable precedent for the Town.

Submission points are outlined below for your consideration. You may choose to address some or all of these points in your submission.

Simply copy and paste and use the link to complete your submission. When preparing your response, make it clear which sections of the draft LPS2 you do NOT support.

📄MAKE A SUBMISSION: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CYFF5J5

📌SUBMISSION POINTS:
I wish to provide feedback on the Draft Local Planning Scheme No 2 (LPS2).

LPS2 Must Align with the Endorsed Local Planning Strategy – the draft LPS2 does NOT align and CAN'T be supported.

The Town of Cambridge’s Local Planning Strategy, endorsed by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) in April 2021, was developed through extensive community consultation, background analysis and formal public engagement. This process established a clear mandate and a binding agreement between the Town the community, and the WAPC.

Under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, any Local Planning Scheme, including LPS2, must be informed by the endorsed Local Planning Strategy. The Strategy sets the long-term vision for land use, housing, infrastructure and environmental protection, while the Scheme translates this vision into legal zoning and development standards. Any deviation from this process undermines both legislative requirements and the trust built through community consultation.

The community’s expectation is that the Council will communicate to the Minister that LPS2 must strictly align with the endorsed Strategy and reflect the community’s vision. Any amendments that do not align with the Strategy would breach legislative requirements and erode community confidence in the planning system.

EMPIRE VILLAGE (Gayton Road)
Minister's Upcoding of Building Height to 7 (or more) storeys

The Local Planning Strategy specifies a maximum building height of 4 storeys (Council recommendation of R100) for Empire Village, accommodating between 100 and 150 dwellings. This was determined through careful analysis and community input to ensure development is in keeping with the character and expectations of the area.

The Draft LPS2 proposes R-AC2 zoning for Empire Village, which allows for an indicative building height of 7 storeys. This change exceeds community expectations and the limits set out in the endorsed Strategy, particularly as the end result may significantly exceed this height, as evidenced with other recent approvals in the Town (Ocean Village, Floreat Activity Centre - both 20+ storeys). Such an increase in height and density is not supported by the community and must be rejected to maintain consistency with the Strategy and uphold the integrity of the planning process.

CAMBRIDGE STREET Urban Corridor West and East
Widening Urban Corridor and Upcoding by Minister, including Newry Street and Salvado Road.

The Draft LPS2 proposes higher density along Cambridge Street from Floreat to West Leederville, with R-AC1 zoning at the eastern end allowing up to 9 storeys. However, developer costs rise sharply beyond 8 storeys, leading developers to seek even greater heights, sometimes offering minor community benefits in return, which increases the risk of approvals for buildings of 15 storeys or more.

To address this, it is recommended to apply R-AC3 zoning instead of R-AC1, which would limit development to 6 storeys and better align with the Local Planning Strategy’s original vision of 5 storeys.

Proposals to upcode areas along Newry Street and Salvado Road are not supported by the Local Planning Strategy and must be rejected to maintain strategic planning integrity.
Further upcoding would add to density, traffic and infrastructure pressures in the area.

NEWMAN COLLEGE SITE
Spot rezoning by Minister

The former Newman College site at 49 Peebles Road, Floreat, is not identified for increased density in the endorsed Local Planning Strategy.

This spot rezoning undermines strategic planning and produces an outcome that is not consistent with the principles of orderly and proper planning.

Upcoding from R12.5 to R100 is strongly opposed, as it sets a precedent for ad-hoc rezoning and undermines strategic planning. While R100 is intended for four storeys, recent approvals in the Town have resulted in developments significantly exceeding intended heights. This may result in the height being much higher than 4 storeys.

The site is close to the Floreat Activity Centre, which already provides for over 1,000 new dwellings. Further upcoding would add to density, traffic and infrastructure pressures in the area.

The Council opposed advertising for a Scheme Amendment for this site at its meeting in May 2023, reinforcing that upcoding is not supported.

The community expects the site to remain at R12.5, in line with the Strategy and to protect local character.

POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITES
Several Town-owned sites, including the Old Quarry Site in City Beach, Surplus Wembley Golf Course Land, Templetonia Crescent, Civic Centre in City Beach and the Council Administration Centre in Floreat, were identified in the Local Planning Strategy as contributing 700-1,000 dwellings to meet State Government targets.

These sites are not adequately addressed in LPS2, raising concerns about the absence of current controls over zoning and expected building heights. Without clear controls, there is a risk of inappropriate development that could exceed community expectations and State targets.

It should be noted that any development in areas of virgin bushland within the golf course should be opposed, as this would have significant environmental impacts and is not supported by the community.

Incorporating these sites into LPS2 with explicit height and density limits would provide greater certainty and protection for the community.

COMMUNITY CONFIDENCE AND COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITY
Recent instances where State Government and agency decisions have overridden Council resolutions and established planning frameworks within the Town of Cambridge have significantly eroded community confidence in the planning system.

The Council has a fundamental responsibility to uphold the Local Planning Strategy and ensure that LPS2 aligns with it, particularly regarding density and height limits. This is essential to restore and maintain community trust in the planning process.

Any proposed amendments by the Minister that do not align with the Strategy must be rejected. The Council must act as the elected representative of ratepayers and defend the community’s vision and expectations as established through the endorsed Strategy.

CONCLUSION
There must be strict alignment of LPS2 with the endorsed Local Planning Strategy - this draft LPS2 has failed to align with the Strategy. After years of community consultation, the Local Planning Strategy was only recently endorsed by the WAPC in 2021. The Strategy gives a clear community mandate to meet State infill density targets, and any deviation undermines strategic and orderly planning.

Any upcoding or zoning changes not supported by the Strategy must be rejected. This is not limited to the sites mentioned in this submission, but to all within the Town of Cambridge contained in the draft LPS2. Noting that Town has retrospectively rezoned some sites to reflect where government agency decisions have disregarded legislation, Council decisions and community input (eg. Ocean Village site, Floreat Activity Centre).

There must be the inclusion of clear controls for all potential future development sites, with explicit height and density limits.

Council must support the community they represent and reject Ministerial amendments that breach the Strategy and community expectations.

Planning must be transparent and strategic-led, respecting community consultation and legislative requirements.

🔗More information - https://www.cambridge.wa.gov.au/Plan-Build/Planning/Current-Planning-Development-Projects/Local-Planning-Scheme-No.-2

🔗Drop-in session presentation -https://www.cambridge.wa.gov.au/files/assets/public/v/1/documents-and-files/development-amp-sustainability/planning/planning-projects/lps2/information-presentation.pdf

Town of Cambridge

20/01/2026

Last session on tonight to ask questions on planning that may effect you.

Questions need to be asked why the draft LPS2 does not align with the endorsed Local Planning Strategy when legislation states the Strategy must inform the Scheme.

Instances in LPS2 include:
🔺 Empire Village – Minister's upcoding of Building Height to 7 storeys, may result in more.
🔺 Cambridge Street Urban Corridor West and East – Widening urban corridor and upcoding by Minister, including Newry Street and Salvado Road.
🔺 Newman College Site – Spot rezoning by Minister to height of 4 storeys, may result in more.
🔺 Several Town-owned sites identified in the LPS and not addressed, leaving them without development controls, including the Old Quarry Site in City Beach, Surplus Wembley Golf Course Land, Templetonia Crescent, Civic Centre in City Beach and the Council Administration Centre in Floreat

Any proposed amendments by the Minister that do not align with the Strategy must be rejected. The Council must act as the elected representative of ratepayers and defend the community’s vision and expectations as established through the endorsed Strategy.