Lesser of 2 Evils Roe 8 or the Outer Harbour

Seems Fremantle’s Mayor Brad Pettitt has had his crystal ball out again as he was reported in the West Australian that the Outer Harbour project has the broad community support, using his magical gift of knowing what the silent majority is thinking or maybe I missed his community engagement survey he conducted on this subject?

Strangely enough a Cockburn Councilor ran a strong campaign in support of Roe 8 and got elected in his ward in the last local election. I wonder if Brad was taking into consideration communities like this, or maybe their POV doesn’t count if it differs from his?

Reading Peter Newman’s comments on the decade old plan for Lat 32, it sounds like he plans it to be the replacement for Kewdale as an inter-modal area. So does that mean everything gets trucked from Kwinana that sounds like a lot more truck miles than the current scenario? Not to mention without Roe 8 how does Brad and peter intend all the trucks to get to Canningvale a huge industrial area, Ranford Rd is a single lane road in parts.

Amazing and Newman thinks you can build the outer harbour with little infrastructure, brad sees no reason for land infill? It’s amazing it will be like a MacGyver port. Places like Singapore have spend decades planning their new ports, Billions of $$ on infrastructure, if only they had Brad or Peters mobile number they could have had it done years earlier and for a fraction of the cost.

All that said they still didn’t deal with the current traffic congestion for Fremantle or the fact the number of trucks coming out of the port even with the new harbour will still increase. Great to see the Mayor Fremantle, solving issues for Cockburn and Kwinana but still hasn’t addressed the Freo issues, perhaps that’s why Fremantle is still on its downward slope?

So which is worse for the Environment a bridge over the Beeliar Wetlands or Dumping 10’s of thousands of Tonnes of infill into Cockburn sound?

Each has separate issues though as we saw in Queensland last week when a train derails the impact can be massive.

If the health of the wetland is such a major concern why would they want to open it up to the possibility of what we saw in Queensland this week?

http://www.abc.net.au/…/3100-litres–sulphuric…/7058000

When trains crash they crash big, at least with trucks the size of the disaster is limited.
I wonder if all the people in Kwinana and those living side by side to km’s of rail track realize the potential size of a disaster if a train derailed in our suburbs some up to a 100 carriages long.
https://goo.gl/maps/z5uALFmZtMu
click the link above for a map the grey line shows the train track route
https://goo.gl/maps/YEk2yo66tQ42
The picture from google earth shows the rail line running between the Samuel Carpon Reserve and the Beeliar Regional Park both with large wetlands, then into the suburbs that runs alongside Bibra lake road.


As the train/rail track from Kwinana runs through suburbs and along side the hotly contested Beeliar wetlands, I wonder what damage a derailment of this magnitude would do to the critical wetlands, 10’s of thousands of litres of toxic chemicals in one hit, dumped into the ground around Bibra Lake? .
Makes the road impact look insignificant.

Up to 31,500 litres of sulphuric acid has possibly leaked…
ABC.NET.AU

Councils Push for Big Road Projects, well not Freo Council?

 

Councils push for big projects

Amazing the city of Cockburn and Armadale are pushing for big road projects in the cities, guess why;

  • To combat major road congestion
  • Growth of the cities
  • To improve Productivity
  • Road safety
  • To make hotspots safer
  • To attract business
  • To attract good development
  • To improve employment prospects
  • Efficency

According to the Mayor of Cockburn, congestion erodes business competitiveness and impacts negatively on productively and employment.

So these councils say building a new road will help improve their city’s.

Yet Fremantle City Council believe a new road into Fremantle

  • Will destroy business
  • Kill off the city access
  • Make roads more dangerous
  • Add congestion
  • Stop development
  • Kill off employment
  • etc.

Does this not sound strange, other councils are fighting to get government development, business, infrastructure, etc  into their city ,yet COF  is doing its best to stop or drive it out.

A version of Perth Freight Link could bring a lot of opportunities to Fremantle, but only if the local government fights to get the best possible outcome for its design, just like other citys in Perth are doing for their developments. Instead our Council just says no they don’t want it.

Anti-car of course means anti-road, which leads to anti business, anti growth, anti development, anti employment.

Look around Western Australia, find a  place that’s really thriving, is it going forward by stopping cars getting to where the occupants/shoppers/visitors want to go?

Ones a plan for growth, the others a plan for vacancies, not hard to see how Freo’s plan is working out?

Great to see So Many “Lat 32” Clicks

Great to see so many readers hitting the Lat 32 click or link.

This is really important that people inform themselves on the issues and not just listen to the tabloid style information being put out on the PFL from both sides of the argument.

Its knowledge, good information and listening to both sides of a debate that allows you to make an informed decision. Sadly this issue has had no debate and most of the information is loaded to suit their soapbox speakers own argument or point of view.

Questions; if you had to choose, between the impact on Beeliar wetlands and the impact on Cockburn sound which one would you choose. Now of course its ok to choose neither, then I hope you don’t buy imported products as they have to get here somewhere?

No where in this barrage of ranting on this issue has any arguments been for the pros and cons of the decisions before us, its all just crappy politics. It was quite clear to see when our council quite inappropriately invite a politically based Media group to film their decisions on the PFL. Cheap politics yet we hear them say they have no political leanings, really 1st thing is don’t just listen to what they say, look at what they do and how they vote, its just politics.

Kudos for those who choose to inform themselves on the issues.

Perth Freight Link Damned if we do Damned if we don’t Pt 2.

If they bothered to read the Lat 32 plan it does not take trucks off roads or shorten truck trips it actually increases them and requires a longer road to be built. Plus it has Roe 8 as part of its plan. If anything the Lat 32 would increase truck miles and more than likely the number of trucks needed to do the job. Have a look here is a link latitude32.com.aulatitude32-location-map2

 

Premier takes passenger s seat – The West Australian

Premier Colin Barnett joins State Political Editor Gareth Parker to discuss issues concerning WA voters.

Source: Premier takes passenger s seat – The West Australian

Here is the bit I’m sure interests all the locals on the PFL.

The section on the light rail is interesting as well.

PERTH FREIGHT LINK

GP: One of the issues that a lot of people wanted to talk about on our Facebook pages and on Twitter is the Perth Freight Link. It’s a very expensive project, it’s a very contentious project. Why are you going ahead with it?
CB: Perth is quite a unique city. We have a population of just under 2 million, but Perth is also a major trading point. We don’t have much manufacturing industry scattered around the suburbs of Perth, and yet we’ve got huge mining, petroleum and agricultural industries. So we’ll always have large amounts of heavy transport, chemicals transport, agricultrual produce, minerals, coming out of rail systems and the like. That makes us a little bit different, our ports are very important. The project, I think, should be looked at in two stages. The first stage is Roe 8, which is taking (traffic) from the (Kwinana) Freeway through to Stock Road. Now, whatever the future of the port may be, Roe 8 is needed, both to service the Fremantle Port and a future port at Cockburn.

GP: Do you say that Roe 8 could take traffic south as well as north (from Stock Road?)
CB: Wherever the port goes, you need Roe 8. So Roe 8 will be the first stage and a lot of work has done into that, its design, environmental approvals, it really is ready to go. We think work will probably start next year on Roe 8. The second component is getting heavy vehicles, not only through Roe 8, but into the port. There are all sorts of issues there, because we’re going through established residential areas. So the design work is not yet complete. A fair bit of work needs to happen on that. We do need to have a better access into Fremantle. Fremantle will continue to grow as a port for another 15 years, then it will continue (as a working port). It’s not going to close. There seems to be a view that Fremantle is going to close. It won’t. It will reach its capacity then continue to operate at that capacity. In about 15 years time you will start to see extra port facilities develop in Cockburn. It won’t be as big as Fremantle initially, but by 2030 maybe it will become the main port. So at that stage, you will also need the access to go to Cockburn.

GP: There’s two main options beyond Roe 8. One is to take it north on Stock Road, then west on Leach Highway and High Street. The other option the Transport Minister is looking at is tunnelling. You’re supposed to award a contract by December. Are you confident you’ll have enough information to be able to pick an option that’s within Budget by December?
CB: No I’m not. I think that’s probably a bit tight.

GP: It will be pushed out?
CB: Well I think we’ve got to get this right. And it is complicated. For the moment, the concentration will be getting Roe 8 underway.

GP: So you’re now saying this is really a two-stage process?
CB: There are two projects. Interconnected, but Roe 8 is the start, get Roe 8 built, then build the connection into Fremantle. So there is a bit of time to sort that out, and there are complex issues, one of which is the choice between different road routes, or tunnelling – a lot of work to be done to investigate that. There is also the issue of how do you get across the Swan River and into North Fremantle and the port facilities.

GP: Indeed, because even if you build the $1.6 billion link, it only takes you to Canning Highway, doesn’t it.
CB: It will get you there, then you need to get across the river. That’s the southern part of my electorate of Cottesloe. I’m very conscious of the issues of getting that tight corner into the Fremantle port area.

GP: So I guess given that uncertainty, and that issue about getting traffic into the port, a lot of people are wondering why you don’t just take the investment, send it further south to service a new road and rail corridor into a new port down at Cockburn.
CB: Well, the new port is probably $4 billion or $5 billion to build. And it’s not needed yet. It will be needed, but probably not for another 15 years. So we’re not going to build a road system to a port that isn’t there.

 

 

Fremantle Bias Where We Need Balance

Bias_Pio-Clementino_Inv279 (1)

Do I blindly accept the governments Perth Freight Link (PFL) old options, of course not.

The real question on the various issues before Fremantle is, do we get a balanced source or feed of information? Sadly Fremantle council is deeply entrenched in partly politics, labor, greens and even the little known socialistic something, whatever they call them. To give us all the pros and cons of the various issues, as it doesn’t suit their political agendas.

Personally I can see some major faults with the government’s old PFL plans but currently we don’t actually know what is planned for the PFL.

As the current Transport Minister has asked for 3 new proposals from 3 different consortiums with some that do not even build roads!

Personally I find it hard to protest something, I don’t even have the facts on, that’s not saying the current government will not drive some 1/2 cocked idea. The issue before us, can we make an intellectual objection before we 1st have facts on what we are objecting to.

I have major issue with council’s current fear mongering over the PFL? What’s that you ask, well 1st of all it’s not much to with trucks. It’s mostly to do with cars. Cars are the major part of the PFL issue if anyone has bothered to check the real facts/data, its cars that are the majority of traffic clogging the road systems we are discussing.

Before I forget the so called PFL will not make more trucks carrying containers, that’s just pure bullshit. What makes more containers in a port, is people buying things that need to be imported. This is one of Fremantle’s council major problems, fact or fiction, all that drives the ports increase in containers is demand for offshore or imported products. If people bought more Australian made or produced products we would need to import less. Hence less containers, a new road will not make more trucks it will only depend on what is imported into the country.

The council supports a group like Aldi coming to Fremantle, guess what, they import huge amounts of product from overseas, which means more containers, more trucks, etc. Try supporting local business and lessen the demand for imported goods, less containers, less trucks.

So getting back to the cars, if someone is against expanding or increasing the road network for cars, personally I respect that point of view but only to a point. If that person uses a car but objects to new car drivers adding to the network, that’s a double standard. You can’t expect to use a car yourself and then expect everyone to use something else? Just recently I went to the Stock Rd and Winterfold Rd protest, not surprisingly to see cars parked everywhere, imagine going to a protest to complain about the road network you just drove on to get to the protest, does no one find that hypocritical? It’s a little like seeing a 350.org protest or something similar at Freo in the evening and seeing all the street parking full on a Tuesday night, if you are going to demand people divest money from fossil fuels stop buying petrol or diesel yourself 1st.

One of the real problems is,  the council is actively promoting fear or hate mongering with little facts,  one day they are driving the PFL thru East Fremantle, the next thru Hilton or Hamilton Hill, it can’t be both or all 3 so which is it? Well, what they are hoping is for is to trigger all the nimby attitudes to protest everything with little or no facts, fear is what they hope to drive, is this what’s best for Freo or is it their own personal political futures.

If people expect to drive cars u cannot expect to double the population over 50 years and not increase the road network? So if u drive a car and protest the increase of the road network like 80% of our council who drive cars, you are just another hypocrite, like them. Our council is quite good at “Do as I say, not do as I do”.

Our council should be working for the best possible outcome for Freo not their own personal political benefit.

If this road is going to go ahead as most of the councillors seem to believe it will from what u hear at council meetings, wouldn’t it be better to try and be part of a plan and ensure that Fremantle gets the best possible outcome. Instead of behaving like a spoilt child, stamping their feet and screaming no no no no no.

There must be a better way to do the Link than knocking down people’s homes along High St and Leach Hwy. If the tunnel option is taken that sort of cancels the whole fear campaign the council is driving on that front.

So far, apart from putting everything on the rail which does not seem to be possible, or shifting the port to Kwinana, i.e. just pushing the problem to some else’s back yard. I have not heard any solutions on what happens if the PFL was cancelled. The demand for imported stuff is not going away, the trucks that carry the containers even if rail is doubled will not lessen as the port continues to increase volume. The # of cars will continue to increase. The congestion will continue to worsen. The councils increasing the density of our suburbs which will bring more cars and congestion. Their fables of rail links running everywhere just aren’t going to happen. They are blindly adding density with no ability to add the needed ingredients to make the density sustainable or workable. We are more than likely to just get extra people and cars in our suburbs with no added infrastructure, lets be honest the Fremantle councils record on getting deliverables from any colour of state government is less than poor.

So what is the solution?

What is the impact on Fremantle if we increase the rail through town? Noise, vibration, pollution, etc.

What safety issues would it cause at all the level crossings through Fremantle, this could happen 30 to 100 times a day depending on which scenario is used, can u imagine how Fremantle would function with a 100 trains and day going through the city.

  • Fremantle cut roads by train
    • Phillimore
    • High St access for round house
    • Bathers beach pedestrian crossing
    • Warden Lance
    • Mews Rd
    • Capo D’Orlando Drive
    • Intersection at Scott St
    • Ocean Rd
    • Rollinson Rd

Imagine going to South Beach with a 100 trains a day going past, how many people and pets will end up getting injured or killed at the multiple crossings, along this track, not mention the noise, vibration and smell. I don’t imagine that would be great for cockburns new coastal community around the old power station development. It would also kill all the property prices along the coast for the new developments between South Freo and Cockburn

What impact will it have in Spearwood/Cockburn where trains would cut off at least 3 major roads with 30 to 100 trains a day going through the suburbs?

What safety issues would it have for homes in Spearwood where the train track is higher than the roofs of the house and only metres away?

Would the extra trains past the Round House have any impact with vibration?

The real problem is the whole issue is not being addressed by anyone, it’s just each camp yelling the loudest on what they are against, is anyone looking at all the pros and cons and giving a true picture of what is best for Fremantle and being honest about what impacts different scenarios would have on different parts of Fremantle.

What does Kwinana think of Fremantle kicking its problem further down south? The government doesn’t have the billions needed to build a new port down there.

Where will the increasing number of cars go to without new road infrastructure, you will frequently hear some Fremantle Councillors rattle on about the international known facts that more roads means more congestion, strange then, that governments all over the world are spending trillions on Hwys, Freeways, Motorways etc.

So before we jump onto the council’s bandwagon of screaming no, what are we saying no too and what will be the effects of doing nothing or implementing a different approach, considering we don’t have details/facts on anything yet?

 

 

%d bloggers like this: