Category Archives: Meetings

2017 WLRA Annual General Meeting

The West Leederville Residents Association AGM was held on 20 July 2017

7:32 pm at 104 Woolwich St, West Leederville

  1. Welcome from the Chair.
    1. Anne Lake commenced the meeting by welcoming everyone, and introducing the existing committee: Anne Lake, Sue Taylor and Henry and Noell Stawarz.
    2. The West Leederville Community Garden is now incorporated separately from the WLRA to simplify the Treasurer’s role, and the procurement of Grants.
  2. Attendance: Sue Taylor, Sabrina Klinger, Andrew Thomson, Corinne MacRae, Jane Powell, Anne Lake, Tracey King, Peg Davies, George Davies, Liz Ferguson, Carole Duffill
  3. Apologies: Cr. Carr, Greg and Louise Toy and Brian Galton-Fenzi, Steven and Gillian Ingram, Melita Brown
  4. Minutes of Previous meeting were accepted – Moved: HS, Seconded: NS.
  5. New Business
    1. Local Planning Strategy. Many meetings have been held and attended, organised by the Town of Cambridge and by the local residents. The preferred scenario that was put to TOC last month was favourably reviewed by residents of West Leederville, although there was some resistance from the Coast Ward. Because of some delays, the LPS will be advertised in (about) February.
      1. (SK) Questions were raised about the infill targets, which are thought to be out of date by many residents. In particular, is it appropriate to be considering methods to meet these targets until they have been confirmed? Should we not also be considering the increased densities in our neighbouring suburbs (Subiaco Oval redevelopment may reach the regional targets without the need for further changes in Cambridge). (CM) In 2014, the TOC target was 5500, then in 2015 it was increased to 6900 in the Perth-Peel document. There are still questions about where these figures come from, and what the rationale is. The earlier target was arrived at after consultation with TOC and seemed reasonable. (SK) When the LPS options were developed, were they just a statistical analysis, or was there some critical thinking involved? What quality checks were performed? (TK) The Perth-Peel document did specify that development needs to be focussed around activity centres (shopping, transport etc), and these directions have been dictated to TOC. (AL) During the consultation period, the consultants were asked to explain how they developed the templates, how do they qualify the validity for each household’s response? (CM) The views of the West Leederville community were heard at the council workshop before it was presented at Council. (AL) George and Anne attended the JDAP meeting, and were amazed at the number of empty units in the development – they have not achieved 50% pre-sales. (GD) The JDAP voted against extending the time, Georgiou appealed. There is a further meeting on 28th July to decide whether there will be a formal hearing. Perhaps the financial standing of the developers should be considered in planning applications? But planning decisions are not economic or financial. As a community, however, the problem is bigger than planning: a half-finished project is still a burden borne by the community and the tax-payer. (HS) The LPS has become entangled in numbers, rather than setting a framework for growth in TOC. We need to base our scheme on robust planning, not numbers. (CM) The important thing is quality, rather than quantity: we need more of the missing middle-level accommodation (townhouses, villas). (AP) We need to focus on community building and housing options to augment that. We might benefit from more retail in our area. We need to refocus the debate to be on healthy communities, and on the diversity of accommodation required by people in different stages of life. (CM) Housing is only one component, but we need to also consider commercial and employment opportunities. (SK) We are a family suburb – young families, older people, young couples.
    2. Consideration of amalgamation with Wembley-West Leederville Ratepayers Association. WWLRA have approached us to be taken over by WLRA, as they have been unable to get anyone interested in engaging with the current issues. This needs to be more generally discussed than the current group, and so was raised for discussion rather than decision. There are some significant differences in our groups: we are deliberately for residents (rather than ratepayers), which is quite different. Corinne commented that WWLRA has contributed many good things to the community (including sausage sizzles and cleaning up Lake Monger).
  6. Reminder that we need people on the Committee who are not one-issue members. There are always many issues that come up – road safety, traffic concerns, building issues, park development, removal of mailboxes, the building up of community spirit. Although we all have pet issues, we need to be prepared to continue to engage after our single issue is resolved.
  7. Reports
    1. President – LPS and Community Garden. The Community Garden has been particularly successful in obtaining grants – new gates were installed and we are grateful to the Town of Cambridge for their help with several issues (not least dealing with the GST). We also have new signs. Bunnings have donated reusable bags, a new Members’ Manual, and a Children’s Activity Pack. Anne demonstrated the contents of the Children’s Pack. The Children’s Gardening Book has been developed, and is in high demand from other community gardens. The Open Day will be held in Spring. (PD) The WLRA started very actively because we were angry about traffic, but we got sick of being angry and started the community garden to grow community with a great deal of support from the TOC. (SK) Why not create an atmosphere for Diner En Blanc. Local Rogaining? New Years Music-fest (but not in the middle of summer?) (CM) Rotary might be happy to fund some of these things.
    2. Secretary and Treasurer Report
    3. Peg thanked Anne and Sue, and also Henry for all their work.
  8. Election of Office Bearers – Anne proposed that this be dealt with “out-of-session” as the meeting did not reach Quorum.
    1. Chair
    2. Secretary
    3. Treasurer (in name and paperwork only)
    4. General Committee Members (at least 5)
  9. New Business Arising
  10. Close Meeting

Information on the duties of the Committee:


  • It is the duty of the chairperson to consult with the secretary regarding the business to be conducted at each committee meeting and general meeting.
  • The chairperson has the powers and duties relating to convening and presiding at committee meetings and presiding at general meetings provided for in these rules.


  • Dealing with the Association’s correspondence;
  • Consulting with the chairperson regarding the business to be conducted at each committee meeting and general meeting;
  • Preparing the notices required for meetings and for the business to be conducted at meetings;
  • Unless another member is authorised by the committee to do so, maintaining on behalf of the Association the register of members, and recording in the register any changes in the membership, as required under section 53(1) of the Act;
  • Maintaining on behalf of the Association an up-to-date copy of these rules, as required under section 35(1) of the Act;
  • Unless another member is authorised by the committee to do so, maintaining on behalf of the Association a record of committee members and other persons authorised to act on behalf of the Association, as required under section 58(2) of the Act;
  • Ensuring the safe custody of the books of the Association, other than the financial records, financial statements and financial reports, as applicable to the Association;
  • Maintaining full and accurate minutes of committee meetings and general meetings;
  • Carrying out any other duty given to the secretary under these rules or by the committee.

Guidance note – Record of Office Holders – detailed information about what must be included in the record of office holders is included under rule 68.


  • Ensuring that any amounts payable to the Association are collected and issuing receipts for those amounts in the Association’s name;
  • Ensuring that any amounts paid to the Association are credited to the appropriate account of the Association, as directed by the committee;
  • Ensuring that any payments to be made by the Association that have been authorised by the committee or at a general meeting are made on time;
  • Ensuring that the Association complies with the relevant requirements of Part 5 of the Act;
  • Ensuring the safe custody of the Association’s financial records, financial statements and financial reports, as applicable to the Association;
  • If the Association is a tier 1 association, coordinating the preparation of the Association’s financial statements before their submission to the Association’s annual general meeting;
  • If the Association is a tier 2 association or tier 3 association, coordinating the preparation of the Association’s financial report before its submission to the Association’s annual general meeting;
  • Providing any assistance required by an auditor or reviewer conducting an audit or review of the Association’s financial statements or financial report under Part 5 Division 5 of the Act;
  • Carrying out any other duty given to the treasurer under these rules or by the committee.

Meeting of West Leederville Residents at Leederville Town Hall

West Leederville Resident’s Association Inc

On Sunday, 02 April, 2017 at 2.30 – 4.30 pm

To discuss Town of Cambridge:

      Local Planning Strategy and Strategic Community Plan, and

–      Proposals for Further increasing Density in Residential West Leederville

Continue reading Meeting of West Leederville Residents at Leederville Town Hall

High rise to replace our leafy streets?

As many people were unaware of the previously scheduled opportunity to speak with the Consultants and to view the plans that detail the effect of the possible changes to the West Leederville – Wembley Local Planning Strategy and Strategic Community Plan, Council has scheduled an addition consultation day this Saturday at the Coles Shopping Centre on Cambridge Street.    The WLRA has arranged a residents meeting on the Sunday at 2.30 pm at the Leederville Town Hall just in front of the bowling Club.  Your local Councillors will be in attendance to answer any general questions you may have.

Why your attendance is important:  The likely changes to our neighbourhood may include 4-10 storey apartment and commercial development in quiet residential streets of West Leederville as far north as Ruislip St

Town of Cambridge has proposed 3 scenarios for planning change. All 3 plans significantly increase density across residential West Leederville.

All this while little/no increased density for City Beach and Floreat.

If you care about West Leederville, PLEASE urgently complete Council survey at  Deadline is 7 April 2017.


ð  Say all 3 scenarios are NOT ACCEPTABLE.

ð  West Leederville has already seen its recent fair share of density increases.

ð  West Leederville school and other amenities cannot accommodate further population increases

You can also voice your concerns by attending the Residents Information session  meeting on the 2nd of April or let us know your thoughts through the WLRA website or contact your local Councillor to ensure your opinions count.


Don’t let our historic suburb become the
high density scapegoat for rest of Cambridge

Local Government Elections

Meet the Candidates Night
Leederville Town Hall, 
84 Cambridge Street,
West Leederville 
on Monday 14 September at 7.00 pm. 
The Speakers will include the Mayoral candidates namely; Mayor Simon Withers, Cr Pauline O’Connor, Mrs Keri Shannon and Mr Gary Mack
All other nominating Wembley Ward candidates have also been invited.  It’s very important that we make sure that all candidates have the best interests of the Wembley and West Leederville areas as a central focus.  Its also a good time to meet your neighbours and listen to the skill base behind each Councillor.
The meeting will close by 9 pm at the latest.

Annual General Meeting

Annual General Meeting of West Leederville Residents Association

27 November 2014 7:30 pm
at 104 Woolwich St, West Leederville


Present: Sue Taylor, Noelle Stawarz, Henry Stawarz, Anne Lake, Peg Davies, Carole Duffill, Melita Brown, Shannon Lovelady, Susan Kennerly , Alan Langer, Louis Carr, Kim McCouncel, Sandy Coats, Ginny Wright, Teresa Kezzi, Sallie Boyd, Michael Green, Kate Sinfield, Diederik Mennen, Sonja Mennen, Felicity Simpson

  1. Welcome from the Chair.
  2. Apologies: Corinne MacRae, Ely De Pellegrin, Kathleen Blakers, Sue Benson, Bruce Stevenson, Simon Withers, Rod Bradley, George Davies, Monique DeVienna
  3. Minutes of previous meeting were published on the website, and no objections were tabled.
  4.  Guest Speaker: Councillor Alan Langer
    1. Alan answered a question about the traffic flow plans for the Georgiou and Psaros sites to encourage us that these considerations are being looked at from an overall view, rather than as a piecemeal approach. Cambridge Street developments have taken much longer than had been anticipated, and Alan apologised on behalf of the Town.
    2. Heritage Preservation in West Leederville
      1. Sallie Boyd has been raising concerns about the fate of 101 Northwood St. The recent request for a Heritage Review has been declined by the Heritage Commission. The developer has since been working with the Town of Cambridge to preserve the existing home and the character of the area. The amended plans for 101 Northwood have been submitted, will be assessed by the planning department, and then will become available to the Councillors after that. Alan commented that all councils were required and funded to do a heritage precinct study in 1997, which ought to be upgraded every 4 – 10 years. However, the State Heritage Committee have not enforced this, and it seems that more buildings seem to be coming off the list than are being put on the list. There are a very small number of houses on the register, and being on the inventory does not prevent development. There have been some successful methods of preserving worthy homes without preventing development in other suburbs, other states and other countries – there is certainly a better way to do it than the State Heritage Act as it currently stands. Alan suggested that a formal review might cost in the order of $50,000. Louis commented that the zoning in West Leederville has become so dense that the character of our streets is vulnerable, and agreed that a Heritage Register is required for West Leederville and Wembley homes. Sallie reported a misplaced community perception that houses like 101 Northwood St are already Heritage protected.
      2. Melita Brown reported that the residents had protested the change in R codes when they occurred, and asked if there would be any merit in trying to reverse them. Individual appeals for review are costly. Alan reported that the plans for the big developments do not go through the Town – they go straight to DAP, and are not restricted by R codes.
      3. Michael Green agreed that it is good that negotiations are underway to preserve the house in Northwood St. In East Fremantle, the council gave owners bonuses to enable them to retain (and upgrade) the existing house, and this was effective in maintaining the streetscapes. Perhaps this could be formalised in the Town Planning Scheme.
      4. The floor instructs the committee to write to the  CEO of the town of Cambridge to implement a Heritage Registry, with concessions available for upgrades and development of properties of Heritage significance. Houses were not reviewed in the 1997 review and need to be. Moved: Sallie Ness, Seconded: Shannon Lovelady
    3. High rise developments and compliance with Town Guidelines.
      1. Georgiou own two properties in Blencowe Street, and are negotiating with the local residents to optimise development, and have a DAP application going in shortly. Peg reported that the concerns of the local residents is that although these developments are architecturally more pleasing, the six storeys will cause problematic overshadowing. Louis reported that the Town has changed the regulations to prevent such high rise developments. However, TOC does not have the role of approval for these large developments. Peg reported that people, especially children, tend to cross laneways expecting to have right of way and with high level traffic coming out of the lane, injuries will certainly occurs. Blencowe Street is zoned R30.
      2. Henry Stawarz asked about the status of the Precinct Plans, and whether it should influence the DAPs. Alan advised that it is in force, but although it should influence the DAPs they seem to have the right to ignore it. The amendments to the scheme are available on the Town website.
      3. Melita asked whether there had been any plans submitted for the old petrol station site. No plans have been submitted. It is a small, difficult site.
    4. West Leederville Town Centre
      1. The High Street development is nearly complete. The cars leaving the JB O’Reilly’s carpark sometimes use Holyrood Street inappropriately and dangerously. A review of traffic flows is mooted for the future.
      2. Peg Davies affirmed Town of Cambridge for taking notice of the residents, and for trying to improve the area, but it has now become a dangerous place for pedestrians and cyclists. Alan acknowledged that the project had many shortcomings. The engineers have found 258 faults which still need to be rectified. Modifications may be required. Peg asked for the exotic plants to be replaced by natives when the time comes. Felicity Simpson congratulated the Council on lovely streetscaping.
      3. Anne thanked the Town for supporting the High Street Festival, which had a lovely atmosphere, and encouraged community spirit in a lovely way.
      4. Carole noted that right turns from the underground carpark at Coles are still occurring and are dangerous. There are modifications to be done.
    5. Carole also reported increased traffic problems further west on Cambridge St. There is inadequate pedestrian crossover near the Hospital, despite the increased number of medical establishments on the north side of the road. The meeting will write to the Town requesting a review of pedestrian safety at the McCourt Street / Cambridge St end of the Hospital. Moved: Carole Duffil, Seconded: Noelle Stawarz.
    6. Henry Stawarz suggested that the planned re-examination of the High Street review might include the hospital precinct in the western extent.
    7. Alan informed the meeting that the two hour parking restrictions are spreading wider to prevent people from parking in our suburban streets and walking to the bus stop.
  5. Business Arising
    1. Several questions for the meeting were submitted with apologies, and as we ran out of time, they are recorded here:
      1. My name is Bruce Stevenson and my wife Ruth and I have lived at 73 Woolwich st West Leederville for 24 years.
        About 10 years ago I wrote a letter to Town of Cambridge recommending they establish a heritage trail in our community.
        In short my suggestion was-
        Identify the tram route up Woolwich /McCourt Streets  by laying half metre sections of tram track level in the road every 50 metres with a plaque in the middle with historical details displayed. ie. Date tram commissioned- date decommissioned etc, etc.
        Using plaques on the footpath identify where places of significance existed such as delicatessens, petrol stations, butchers, garages, fire stations, tram stops, Bob Hawke went to West Leederville Primary School etc, etc.
        Need to employ an historian to map out significant locations of interest and provide more detail.
        The plaques on the footpath have a number and link to Cambridge website and tell a story of the significant landmark and identifying the historical trail.
        Sorry I can’t be at the meeting but this would be a fantastic innovation for our area. No other area has done this plus has our history. Wouldn’t it be great to walk around the streets and walk the trail?
        Regards   Bruce Stevenson, Manager Commercial and Recreational Licensing Services
      2. Sue Benson added: “will this include aboriginal history as well?”
      3. George Davies submitted a report in actions pertaining to the Northwood St developments.
  6. Reports:
    1. President

In many ways this year was a little quieter in terms of resident responses to some of the major issues that confronted our lovely residential environment this year.  This I think was a result of the hard fought battle against the Kimberly Street development. It appeared to leave some war weary.  The three biggest issues that were expressed in received emails were the length of time it took to complete Cambridge Street, the Northwood Street development and the lack of respect for the residents and the State Administrative Processes and the lack of planning to preserve valuable Heritage.    It was only towards the end of the year that residents found their passion to demonstrate their displeasure in both development and heritage areas.

Once again the Town while not always agreeing with our suggestions has listened respectfully to our concerns and where ever possible have provided assistance by way of staff input or responding directly to residents.  Perhaps the most successful newsletter was the one dedicated to Council responses to questions and concerns put by our members.

It is difficult for us to feel that we are heard and our concerns given consideration by DAP panels who appear to pay lip service and often have already made decisions in a forum not always open to our residents.  The Subiaco Post has always been willing to give us the publicity needed when we feel an injustice has been done and at best has ensured that a broader circulation is aware of the issues facing western suburbs residents in real time exposure. With more participation it would be possible to have a greater influence

In addition to the advocacy role we could consider a return to the family New Year Eve celebrations which bought families together in a same local environment.

Once again Our Community Garden has won acclaim as a model of what a community gardens can look and feel like.  There is a never ending train of visitors from other communities wanting to set up the same model in their locality.   It’s difficult to explain that our model is only successful because of the sense of community that is so evident in West Leederville and without that sense and commitment other gardens are not likely to succeed in the long term.  Another element to our success is the generosity of the staff of the Town of Cambridge who offer every assistance to any issues that may arise in the garden and we are very grateful for their interest and assistance.  If you would like to become involved then please just go to our website   and follow the links.

Speaking of our website, we are once again indebted to Sue Taylor for her inquisitiveness which led to the development of this very user friendly site.  Thank you for your generosity of time and spirit.

It is my hope that our community continues to thrive and with such willing committee members, committed and open residents and a supportive local government the future of our lifestyle and sense of community is very encouraging.

    1. Community Garden

The community garden looks great. Increasingly, it is a lush and green haven as the fruit trees grow and plots as well as the general areas are better managed. Felicity reported that more young involvement on the committee would be most welcome. The garden has links with the Youth Centre but their commitment comes and goes.  WLCG Report for WLRA AGM Nov 27 2014

    1. Financial Report

The bank account held by WLRA is used almost exclusively for the Community Garden, although historically, some WLRA business, such as the New Years Eve party have used the account. Some explanatory notes for the General Ledger [Summary recent] and the Standard Balance Sheet 2015 follow. Retained earnings includes an “end of year adjustment” on 1 July 2013 of $2848, done as an attempt to mitigate the “payment in kind” figures from years gone by. “Historical balancing” is from before June 2013. Trade debtors is only $210 over the past two years. “Trade Creditors” is from 2011 mostly. Fundraising includes a Lotterywest Grant, takings from BBQ and jam sales at the Spade-to-Table event, and donations from WembleySupa IGA.  Of the Lotterwest Grant of $5760 we have so far only spent $1754. Furniture and Fixtures are things like Wheelbarrows, padlocks, spades etc.

    1. Heritage report

Was covered in the discussion minuted at 4.b

  1. Election of Office Bearers
    1. President – Anne Lake
    2. Secretary – Sue Taylor
    3. Treasurer – Sue Taylor
    4. 5 General committee members – Henry Stawarz, Sallie Boyd, Felicity Simpson, Noelle Stawarz,  Sonja Mennen
  2. Anne asked that we write to the Town to thank them for all their help. Anne offered to put some information in the newsletter about the council amalgamations, district boundary changes. St Barnabas was thanked for hosting the meeting. Sue will produce a description of the work involved in the Secretary position and circulate to Committee members.
  3. Meeting Closed at 21:30

Plea for help from Blencowe Street

A call out to all West Leederville Residents:

Psaros building are pressing ahead with a call for Expressions of Interest this Saturday from 12-3pm and again Sunday on site at 23 Northwood St, West Leederville.
Their proposed development has a 7 storey building on the laneway overlooking and overshadowing our single storey character homes and back gardens. More information can be found  here.
The DAP have twice voted against it being allowed as it is in clear breach of the West Leederville precinct policy guidelines which was formulated after a long consultation within our community.
Psaros have little regard for any of the uniqueness of our suburb, build as big and for as much profit as you can get!
The Blencowe St residents have spent many unpaid hours in defending our position and ask all West Leederville residents to gather @ 23 Northwood St this Saturday 12pm for the Subiaco Post to witness our unity.
The Town of Cambridge Council have been very supportive in opposition but this matter will now go before SAT yet again.
Today it is on our doorstep.
Tomorrow it will be yours!
Jane Langsford
10 Blencowe St
Some further background:
Since March this year we were made aware of the purchase of 21-23 Northwood St and earmarked to be developed by Psaros Building Pty Ltd.
The section of Northwood St between Cambridge St and Railway Parade has been the home of flower markets and wholesalers. Cambridge council even considered a ‘market street’ during the drawing up of a precinct plan for West Leederville.
It has now become of great appeal to developers for its proximity, accessibility and price. This development will set the precedent for future developments in West Leederville and has been vigorously opposed by the residents of Blencowe St, streets west of Pether Lane and the Cambridge Council.
The first proposal was a 8 storey Building extending back to  the lane way with a ground floor commercial space and 7 more storeys comprising 38 apartments. They have called this development FIORE. The bulk of this building with apartments overlooking into our homes and backyards saw it rejected at the first DAP meeting. Psaros immediately appealed to SAT and through mediation were made to revise their plans to address the overshadowing, privacy and lack of sympathy with surrounding single storey character homes.
Psaros returned plans for a 7 storey development, comprising 36 apartments but without compliance to the precinct policy or addressing the community concerns. At a DAP meeting in July, again members voted to allow time for residents to respond to the new plans. Many Blencowe St residents attended. We have had neighbours spend more than  100 hours of unpaid work drawing up architectural plans showing the sight lines, building shadows and size comparing it to other developments in the near vicinity.
On Monday, DAP refused the revised development of FIORE but arrogantly, Psaros has pressed on with the building of 6 -7 stories of scaffolding at the site and done letter drops and advertising in the Western Suburbs and The West Australian. They have stated the opening for EOI to purchase apartments commences with a grand opening on Saturday.
No doubt Psaros will appeal again to SAT where potentially they can get their original 8 storey development approved overturning the council, DAP and the communities wishes.
The residents can apply to be permitted as ‘ interested third party’ in the SAT process but it seems likely you need a lawyer to help achieve this.
Psaros by the way promote themselves as ‘sustainable living’ ‘community minded’ ‘helping the urban sprawl’ but after seeing the boss Danny Psaros behave after the DAP meeting and another loss, we would seriously doubt those statements. The residents of Blencowe St realise we need the rest of our suburb to be made aware of what we agreed upon for West Leederville and how imappropriate developments for small sites shouldn’t be allowed just for a greater profit margin.

Meeting 11th April

For those who could not make it to the resident’s meeting about the high development on Northwood Street we resolved a few strategies ‘looking forward’.

1. Henry Stawarz from the West Leederville Residents Association has agreed to speak at the DAP meeting with Joseph speaking and presenting on our behalf as Blencowe residents.

2. We should send our individual submissions in to the DAP members if possible.

3. Write as individuals to local papers outlining our concerns with the development.

4. Joseph to collate key points for our submission.

5. Discussion points from our meeting with key arguments

– Extreme overshadowing of backyards and loss of privacy with easy view into backyards.

– Setting a precedent for a block development all along the street.

– Oppressive size and bulk, visually confronting when going from  single storey housing to 8 storey in one street space. No gradual increase in height.

– Dramatic increase in traffic in Pether Lane

– Reduction in ambience for neighbours with impact for families spending time in back yards.

– Town Plan says ‘4 stories maximum with up to 6 if it can be shown for the public good’. No evidence of ‘public good’ in this development.

– With restriction on morning sun from over-shadowing, residents’ solar panel collection time and morning sun for back garden severely reduced.

– DAP training notes 3.3.8 state there are also ‘moral considerations’ to be looked at. All advantages given by the developers suggest advantage to the residents within the development rather than surrounding households.

– Existing residents acknowledge need for multilevel developments up to 4 stories. For example the buildings on the corner of Northwood and Railway and the multistorey in Rosalyn St do not impact visually and oppressively on neighbours.

– Having Northwood St developed is a positive advantage for the area to give an improved amenity to the street. However not at the expense of the long standing neighbours adjacent in Blencowe St and beyond.



New Year Newsletter

News Letter December –January.

Update on the Cambridge Street Redevelopment and Development Concerns in the area.

On the 19th December the Association held its Annual General Meeting, which was well attended by both residents and the media.      As you would have now read in the POST our meeting was attended by a Councillor from Subiaco who related the experiences that she and the City of Subiaco had worked through in order to come to the conclusion that some of the practices of the DAP were not in accordance with the regulations attached to that government body.    As a result of her comments those at the meeting resolved that a deputation should meet with the Mayor to see if the Council may be prepared to participate in the legal challenge being mounted by the City of Subiaco.

The Association was very appreciative of the efforts of the Mayor, who arranged to meet with representatives of the WLRA on the Friday before Christmas at very short notice. The Mayor was about to embark on his long leave break and would not be available for some time after Friday.   Ideally we would have preferred to have invited all members with an interest to attend but there was no time to put this meeting out to our membership.

Due to the very short notice three Committee members (the President Anne Lake along with Committee Members Noell Stawarz and George Crisp) attended the meeting with the Mayor at the Town’s Administration Building.

In point form the following details the discussions and outcomes covered at that meeting:

The Committee presented Mayor with the construct that the DAP’s decisions have been made under a flawed process and (like the Subiaco Council) the Cambridge Council could also appeal the legality of   the decision.

  • The Mayor was unwilling for the Council to become involved at this time and that it was his view that if the process was flawed the government would change the regulations and reissue all approvals under the new regulations.  He felt that the present Government was determined that the DAP process would stay.
  • The development in question at 110 Cambridge St now was within the guidelines (almost) of the then existing Town of Cambridge guidelines and most likely would have been approved by the Town if it had come before the Council under the old scheme
  • The President requested that the Mayor write a letter to Chairman WAPC, to ask if he was aware that there were questions about the legality of the DAP, in not publishing meetings or providing minutes of these meetings and why these meetings were held in private instead of being transparent to all who had an interest in the process.
  • The Mayor also discussed future development of The West Leederville High Street, Town Hall, footpath/concourse link between Oxford St and West Leederville train station.
  • The Mayor was in favour of open meetings but understood that the Department had ruled against this.  The Mayor and our Councillor on the DAP felt a new applicant should have been received with the change of the design but this did not happen.
  • As the Associations’ concern was about the process and not the developer, Noell very kindly researched the following information from Planning WA website FAQ’s:
    • 24. Can an applicant request a secret or private DAP meeting?
      No. Regulation 40 requires DAP meetings be open to the public.
    • 29. Can DAP members meet privately if required for a SAT proceeding?
      Yes. Regulation 40(2) requires all DAP meetings, with the exception of r.17 minor amendment applications, be open to the public. However, these provisions do not apply to the extent that they may be inconsistent or overridden by the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004, which empowers the Tribunal to direct attendance at private conferences, mediations and other meetings.

I do apologise to the members who would have liked to be in attendance but unfortunately the meeting was called at very short notice.  We are as I said very appreciative of the Mayor’s efforts to see us just before he left for his holidays.

I do think it’s important to remember that the Association is not just about DAP Process Issues but also about the community at large and we all look forward to working together to maintain that special quality that living in West Leederville brings to us all.  It would be lovely to have a spring picnic tea in the Park with the Dads and talented young musicians playing again like they did in the past.  The Spade to Table (Community Garden) will also be on again in September and that was a great success last year. If you have any thoughts just let us know.     Be safe this new year and enjoy whatever you are doing, best wishes the Committee of the WLRA.


Annual General Meeting

Our Annual General Meeting was held on Wednesday 19th December 2012 (7.30 pm at St Barnabas Church located in Woolwich St opposite West Leederville Primary School). In addition to the usual formalities, including election of the 2013 committee we considered issues about town planning in general as well as a more specific focus.

The Draft minutes are available for review. I will make them “Final” after Christmas, once those present have confirmed their accuracy.

Psaros building


Garden Committee Meeting

Minutes – Community Garden Meeting, Sunday 9 November 2012

Present: Carole Duffill, Anne Lake, Lesley Letham, Felicity Simpson, Sue Taylor, Lou Toy

Apologies: Mike Perring, Ian Johnston

1. Previous minutes

Accepted               Moved:      Felicity        Seconded:   Sue

2. Coordinator’s report


Garden boundary

TOC records show that the Garden’s eastern fence is on land belonging to the apartments next door which means that the boundary runs through the shed, the paved area, the bays storing grass and manure and the area for the proposed pergola.

If the pergola cannot be erected where planned, the area between the entrance and the orchard was suggested as an alternative location.

As TOC approval is required to erect the pergola, the building plans are now on hold until this boundary issue is resolved.

The following was resolved:

The TOC would be asked to check the original development plans for the apartments to review the boundary decisions and use of the land made at that time.                                                                                                                  Anne

To ensure that the Garden does not lose its pergola funding Janine Roets (TOC) has offered to notify the Lotteries Commission about the reason for delay in accessing the funds. Anne will ask her to do this.                                                                                                                   Anne

The mayor and councillors for the ward will be notified about situation (included in any email correspondence about the situation.


The firm contracted to erect the gazebo will be notified of the reasons for the delay.                                                                                                                    Felicity


3. Treasurer’s report

Sue will reorganise the account once the funds from the Lotteries Commission have been received, payment for the patio made, Felicity’s access to the account confirmed and subscriptions for 2013/14 received.

Currently the closing balance is $5,319, the cash draw so far $3,988 and $3,150 owed for the patio (funds from the Lotteries Commission not yet received).



4. Plot manager’s report

Lou reported that all plots are currently taken.

A few plots are neglected and need attention to limit the weeds and their seeds encroaching onto adjacent plots and the community area. These plot holders will be asked to tidy/weed their plots.                                                                                                                                                 Felicity

Some plot holders have asked for their plots to be cared for during their absence while on holiday and the arrangements have been made to do this.

Plot sitters are always required and anyone who is willing to do this should contact Lou.

5. Green manure

Planting green manure crops in soil which needs building up or is left fallow (which may result in weed growth), is an easy and cheap method of enriching the soil. Nitrogen and other nutrients are put into the soil when the crop is dug in.

Plot holders who are unable to tend their plots for a few months could consider planting a green manure crop for that period.

It was decided to buy some green manure seeds to plant in some of the communal garden area where the soil need enriching and to have green manure seeds available to plot holders for use in their plots                                                                                                  Carole

6. Board on the main shed

There is large board attached to the outside of the western wall of the shed. It was decided to paint over the faded artwork so that the board could be used for notices. It was decided to do the sanding, priming and painting of the board over the summer.               Carole


7. Kiwi fruit

The fence in the southeast corner of the Garden was considered the most appropriate area for Todd to trial growing kiwi fruit.                                                                                           Felicity

8. Grass cuttings bay

The Sports Club have agreed to leave grass cuttings near the western entrance to the Garden when a bay to contain the cuttings is erected.                                                                     Adam, Todd, Greg


9. Compost making

Having good and sufficient compost is essential for the Garden. All members need to know how to make the compost and help do this. It was suggested that this is emphasized during orientation – perhaps a practical component could be included at the time. Lou could consider liaising with Felicity or Peg to organise this. There was some discussion about how to encourage current members to help make the compost but no specific plan to do this. This may need further consideration.                                                                              All committee members

10. Task teams

To help manage the Garden, members are allocated to teams, each with a leader, which are responsible for ensuring that necessary ongoing tasks are undertaken for example, emptying rubbish bins, pruning, weeding. Team leaders need more assistance in doing the tasks from members of their teams. A reminder email will be sent to members.                      Sue

11. Other business


The issue of the need for additional steps between some of the allotments to make it easier for people to get to the upper level of the garden and to water both sides of their allotment was held over for consideration at the next meeting.

The next meeting will be held as required or before the end of March 2013