River tunnel gets minister’s ear | Fremantle Herald Interactive

Source: River tunnel gets minister’s ear | Fremantle Herald Interactive Perth Freight Link issue

Just a few clarifications, while I did speak to Main Roads about the PFL their meeting was not 90 mins, they suggested another person who gave us a 90 mins meeting which lead to the meeting with Dean Nalder. Whom I must say was very generous with his time and open to our suggestions. I imagine he has dozens of restricting issues let alone how much they it would cost.

Also our idea was a little more sophisticated than dumping the rocks over the end of the port, but the intent or suggestion was to use the earth extracted from the tunnel to further extend the port for space, giving the port almost double its dock  current space, freeing up other space for residential or mixed space use, partly to offset the additional cost of tunneling option. A huge cost and time saving issue i’m sure?

The main idea if we had a tunnel and motorway that serviced the area it would work for the port , then at a later date if it had another use, the motorway access would service its next function as well as freeing up our major roads from through traffic, these are the  roads used by local residences and businesses.

It has the potential to seriously lighten traffic on

  • Stirling Hwy
  • Old Fremantle bridge and Queen Victoria St
  • Hampton Rd
  • High St
  • South St
  • Canning Hwy
  • Curtin Ave
  • etc.

Again the point is if the PFL is going to be built, trying to get the best possible outcome for Fremantle, its business and residents, instead of just a motorway in and out of the port.

Perhaps not perfect but the 1st step in a bigger conversation for the greater benefit of Fremantle.

 

 

Perth Freight Link Damned if we do Damned if we don’t Pt 1.

Again today in the Herald we see the howling about the PFL and the road to rail crew beating on about his conspiracy theories in, Barnett, secrecy and Brookfields. Babbling about knots, kites and elephants?

Fremantle has a huge traffic problems right now on;

  • Hampton Rd
  • South St
  • High St
  • North Freo Stirling Hwy
  • Stirling Hwy Canning Hwy lights
  • Tydeman Rd
  • Rat runs developing through the suburbs
  • The council increasing density up to R160 which will just bring more and more cars.
  • Today Friday, I drove west down South St over Stock road, the traffic going east on South St were backup from Stock Rd backup to Travis St and it wasn’t even 1pm.

All of this will continue to get worse trucks or not. Port or not, as cars are the major part of the issues on the roads in and around Fremantle. Bad enough the council has actively made parking worse in Freo now our roads are more congested with no real improvements in roads infrastructure for decades.

So residents will have to accept if there are no PFL there will be NO improvement to our roads in the area, congestion will worsen, trucks will continue to increase for decades from the port about 7% a year with more and more trucks rat running off the main roads. Not having a PFL will guarantee more trucks through our suburbs on exactly the same roads they drive on now.

  • More trucks on Hampton Rd
  • More trucks on Stirling Hwy
  • More trucks on Curtin Ave
  • More trucks on High St
  • More accidents at Stirling Hwy and High St intersection
  • More congestion on all of them
  • More stop start with many changes between light changes to get through just one intersection.

Does anyone seriously think the Outer harbour will be operational in the 10 years or even started? Labour promises to build it, but where is the $5billion coming from plus the money for the Tonkin Hwy Link plus all the other infrastructure that will be needed in the area to make it all work.

Here is an extract from the EPA report on the impact of building the outer harbour from 2006, I imagine the criteria will be much tougher now, 9 years on?

“The EPA submits the following recommendations to the Minister for the Environment:

  1. That the Minister notes that the EPA does not express a preference for any particular port option. It appears all options would have significant environmental impacts, especially within Cockburn Sound.
  2. That the Minister notes that cumulative pressures along the eastern margin of Cockburn Sound will increase the threat to the improvements in the condition of Cockburn Sound which have been achieved through strong action by Government, industry and the community in recent decades.”

What the R2R fails to address is roads are not just used by trucks but cars, and an Eastern by pass for the city is not a new idea as claimed it has been around as long as the road reserve that it may run along, which has been around for decades. “Over a period of approximately 20 years, Main Roads Western Australia procured most of the land in question for the future road. In 1985, the first kilometre of this road was constructed, which extended Stirling Highway southwards from Canning Highway to Leach Highway (known as High Street west of Carrington Street).  The remaining 3 km strip of land south of High Street then became known as the Fremantle Eastern Bypass.” 1985 not exactly a new idea???

An eastern bypass would help take traffic off local roads that are now used by transient car traffic with no business in Fremantle but are just driving through to go somewhere else. That’s what highways, freeways, motorways and bypasses do.

See pt 2&3 for a follow up, to have it all in one blog may be a bit long as there is a lot to digest. So to make it a lighter read I have divided into 3 parts.

 

%d bloggers like this: