Greens for trees | Fremantle Herald Interactive, But their actions tell another story

THE Greens are promising to double Fremantle’s tree canopy by 2040 under an “urban forest” plan. Freo council has already adopted a policy to increase the dire coverage of trees over barren streets…

Source: Greens for trees | Fremantle Herald Interactive

Where’s the Trees, where’s the Green?

 

Words are one thing all politicians are good at, action is another thing completely.

The Fremantle Council has a few greens on it and currently Fremantle has the 2nd worst hard surface amount in WA, according to the 202020, report.

Since that report was done we have seen the Esplanade Concreted over, worsening that particular situation.

We have seen the majority of these councilors; approve a plan that cut down 100+ mature trees in White Gum Valley on the Old Kim Beazley site.

They also did not demand that the developer give the necessary 10% additional open public space as is normal with these developments, instead allowed them to use the public space that was already there. So the developer could get in more small blocks adding more concrete and hard surface covering.

Then we see the Burt St development went down a similar path with council again not stipulating the required 10% open public space, again allowing more concrete more hard surface covering.

We see this council with all these Fremantle council members most of houses, driving for smaller and small blocks, higher R-codes, high density, more med high rise development, which leads to more and more trees being cut down.

Again we see the Concrete from our green council pouring into our parks so they build basketballs on park land which Fremantle already in short supply.

Most councils in the world supply similar services to their residents, sporting areas are great. What most councils with an ounce of common sense do is invest that money into areas that are run down or poorly utilized, in disrepair etc, to build these public services. Not Fremantle council they go straight for the park land and trees, pouring in the concrete.

Then we see more concrete coming down a Port beach with the new flow rider system, more open land for concrete.

We see in a report last year that over 90% of new trees planted by councils don’t make, so for even the ones that do we have to wait 2 decades to see some benefit from them. You think that would make the existing trees even more precious, well I guess not for Freo council.

So when they say they will improve the tree canopy to double by 2040, I see they didn’t make a note of what the coverage is presently, so we are clear from what point we are starting from. Otherwise just expect more of our Mayors unique smoke and mirrors, slide of hand. Also not clarified is whether, Fremantle’s means the CBD, the greater city of Fremantle, the State Electoral boundaries, or the Federal election boundaries

We have many of these councilors and mayor for a decade now, yet still our tree canopy shrinks.

So with it taking at least 20 yrs. to get a tree and its canopy established , all going well, that means  for the Greens to succeed they would have to double all the trees currently in Fremantle, have them all survive and grow above the roof line of houses to be considered a canopy.

That’s a bit hard when the greens on council are hell bent on density, which now is just clearing blocks removing everything just to squeeze as many dwellings as possible.

Then we have the Councils drive for urban rail and the route the Mayor and his team are taking that will be hundred’s more trees cut down to facilitate that.

Then we have the ever increasing amount of containers coming from the Fremantle port even if the Outer Harbour is built, and of course our council has objected to that too. Instead building the massive Lat 32 which adds 140 km2’s of hard coverage to Cockburn and destroying any tree canopy there too. So it’s hard to see how they will double tree canopy when the Fremantle Council supported policy is to build the biggest industrial park in Australia.

So actions speaking louder than words, it’s a fairly pie in the sky promise, which should have its intended action of rallying a few voters for the green cause and have its disciples sprouting the virtues of the Green Dogma, while its agents at Council, keep driving up the R-zoning clearing more trees, and laying more concrete. Going in the opposite direction of the said promise, only to blame, capitalists, Tony Abbott or conservatives about the evil ways when in fact it looks like the greens are just showing their hypocrisy yet again.

What is Urban Tree Canopy?

Urban tree canopy (UTC) is the layer of leaves, branches, and stems of trees that cover the ground when viewed from above. In urban areas, the UTC provides an important storm water management function by intercepting rainfall that would otherwise run off of paved surfaces and be transported into local waters though the storm drainage system, picking up various pollutants along the way. UTC also reduces the urban heat island effect, reduces heating/cooling costs, lowers air temperatures, reduces air pollution, increases property values, provides wildlife habitat, and provides aesthetic and community benefits such as improved quality of life.

Urban Bush land Council’s Mary Gray agreed that more trees were needed in metropolitan areas,,,

“Unfortunately, they tend to bulldoze the whole landscape instead of looking at what’s there and then building in amongst it.

“It seems crazy to wipe the whole lot out.”

Killing the Great Australian Dream – Limit urban sprawl, says Freo mayor Brad Pettit – The West Australian

 

 

Fremantle Council Only Green in Politics

Its quite sad that we have a Greens political driven council yet over the last 8-10 years our parks and Tree canopy and has suffered at their hands and has gotten worse across the board.

Research reveals Perth’s hottest real estate… in terms of tree canopy.

  • Fremantle has the 2nd worse Metro Tree Canopy in WA, now shown to have direct negative health issues.
  • Fremantle has the second worse hard surface covering in Australia, according to the 202020 study
  • Fremantle council has approved to concrete over parts of the esplanade reserve, replacing grass with concrete, how this suits a green plan I have no idea.
  • Fremantle council has plans to approve more buildings for Princess park, more concrete to replace grass and cutting down more mature trees.
  • Fremantle council has approved plans to build on and fence part of an A class reserve at J-Shed, turning over public space for private companies to profit off.
  • Fremantle council has more plans approved for more concrete for the esplanade reserve, maybe they should call it Fremantles grey plan, not green plan
  • Fremantle council has approved plans to concrete grass areas at south beach, again more concrete to replace grass.
  • Fremantle council approved plans to cut down 100+ mature trees at Kim Beazley, which will take decades to replace and thousands of tonnes of additional water with possibly a 30 % of trees that are planted that will not survive. Leaving this area with lost tree canopy for decades.
  • Fremantle council approved plans for the Kim Beazley site not to have the additional 10% open public space.
  • Fremantle council approved a plan for the green fill site @Burt St to ramp up zoning to over R100, with no need to supply the required 10% open public space again.
  • Plan to flatten 100’s of homes and cut down all the trees on South st to build their light rail.

So from all this, we should believe they give a damn about open public space, parks and the tree canopy of our suburbs?

I know I  have raised these points before but as council consistently says it cares about, open space, tree canopy etc, but its actions tell another story completely.

Read the article from the West above in blue, its worth reading.

Remember don’t just believe what council says but look at their actions as it tells a different story.

Since the 202020 report was done, in Fremantle hard surface has increased and tree canopy has got worse. That’s just in 2 years under a council driven by green politics. So since our mayor brad pettitt and many of the current councillors have on council, our tree canopy has got worse and hard coverage has increased, leaving Fremantle in current,  2nd worse rating in Australia.

They drive their own politic ideology not the resident’s best interests. Politics 1st people later.

 

 

Perth low density stuns planner – The West Australian

Expert says Perth the lowest density major city he has seen.

Source: Perth low density stuns planner – The West Australian

Currently we see in Fremantle a protest against the Perth Freight Link.

One of the issues driving congestion on roads is obviously more cars.

Now as density increases it is only going to make the issues worse. Seems we are creating problems and then looking for a solution to the problem we have just made for ourselves, wouldn’t it be better to not create the problems in the 1st place.

Fremantle council seems very good at creating its own problems then to spend even more of our rates on finding solutions and then even more money telling us what a great job they are doing at solving problems they have in fact create or made worse.

A few examples

  • Selling car parking and making Freo harder to get into and find car parking, they have spent years giving Freo a anti-car image, then they spent reportedly $20,000 on an app for parking which get a iTunes Customer ReviewsAlmost useless, by nickname1950. Can’t say I have ever met anyone who admits to using it. Problem made, money spent, no solution. Or even better their great big parking signs which are regularly broken and no-one really knows what they mean anyway. More $$$$ gone.
  • It’s a bit like the massive bug killer lamp outside at chambers, great idea, then you look around and see stagnant water everywhere in their street flower pots, made an environment to breed mosquitos, then bought the solution to kill them, brilliant?
  • Mayor Brad says Fremantle is a progressive city so they view graffiti vandalism as art, now we have graffiti everywhere and spend a small fortune cleaning it up and leaving Freo like ghetto that no-one cares about, which in reality should be a thriving tourist destination, another council made problem needing to be fixed.
  • Mayor makes areas for “dedicated begging” in our streets, the solution he made for the problem he created when Perth clamped down on street begging and homeless and our mayor invited them to come to Freo, it surprisingly created another problem, needing to be fixed. What’s not so easy to fix is the dodgy anti-social image it gave Freo killing off more business.
  • Fremantle has an anti-social image with substance abuse driven by the number of large licensed areas in town, Fremantle makes a good alcohol policy then completely ignores it by leasing the J-Shed out for another 1800+ booze barn. Another problem to be fixed in the future?
  • Fremantle has the second worse rating for hard cover surfaces in the 202020 report, then concretes the esplanade, then straight into a new green plan after approving a plan that involved cutting down over 100 mature trees at the Kim Beazley site. They currently say they want to increase the park space in Freo yet are wanting to build or develop on Pioneer Park.
  • Fremantle councils direction over the years has allowed all the negative issues for Fremantle to build up, graffiti, substance abuse,, drunkenness, the need for a spew patrol, anti-social behaviour, loss of parking, the constantly messed with road systems, loss of groups like Myers, causing a loss of visitors frequenting Fremantle, hence causing a loss of business, leaving COF in its current situation, causing Fremantle again to spend $$ fix a problem it help create. Like $42M or is it $44M perhaps $52Million to help regenerate a CBD its help run down. Sorry about the different figures it’s not clear what the is cost is going to be, its only rate payer money, perhaps another issue to fix in the future with a massive rate hike for instance?
IMAG0116

The scenery our new Hilton guests can view from their windows

IMAG0628

The scenery our new Hilton guests can view from their windows

Does this seem logical to anyone, you could go with dozens of examples like this.

Now we come to density. So we cut block sizes, up the R-code, increasing hard surface coverage, causing more mature trees to be destroyed, increasing the population then yell about not building road to help with congestion caused by increasing density. Now as people don’t have backyards we have to build more parks and connections to the ones we have, another problem caused by council to then need fixing.

Here’s a quote from the article

“Perth’s the lowest density major city I’ve ever seen,” he said.

Mr Gordon said the good news was that Perth had land near major roads and railways that could be developed. He said it was not always necessary to “disturb stable residential communities” to do infill well.

“You’ve got miles and miles and miles of main roads just strung with dreck, low density shopping centres half abandoned, car dealerships, industrial areas . . . these are fantastic opportunities for infill and growth,” he said.”

So why is our council driving density in areas with traffic congestion issues in some cases over R100? Why are we doing infill to areas that are stable residential communities, building more problems like destroying tree canopy, increasing congestions, lowering services, increasing rates, causing more disputes with neighbours over development. Not ensuring suitable parking is allocated for new developments, only to cause more disputes in the future.

Fremantle’s road infrastructure has been eroded over the years, now by having one of the higher density increases in the metro area, these problems are being added to, while all the necessary services needed to help cater for this increase in density are not being supplied.

The Council has blindly followed Barnett’s government infill strategy while getting none of the services needed to support the density increase. We see more people coming to the area, no improvements or even plans to improve Public Transport. We have seen thousands of jobs leave the Freo CBD, yet more people planned to live here. If you want all these people to live here would it be better to ensure jobs are here for them, so they all don’t have to drive miles to get work, again adding to the congestion issues. Let’s face it you struggle to get a pair of kid’s school shoes in Freo and the council calls Freo the second city for the state.

Are residents happy about it judging by the satisfaction survey I guess not?

So again they have created another plan to create more problems only needing to be solved in the future. Every $ spent fixing a problem they made or help make is a $ less spent on services to rate payers and residents.

Of course we can increase density in perth buts lets do it where we have the infrastructure and the right ingredients to make it work well. I guess they will just add their poor density and its impacts to their legacy of solutions needing to be found?

What a Crock

My god what a crock, our Mayor Brad Pettitts while on his rate payer funded junket is singing the praises of a suburb in Freiburg  on their 30% green area or perhaps called open public space. Where he runs down Perth for only having a 10% requirement.

Would this be the same Mayor who drove the Kim Beazley higher density while not even applying the Perth’s petty 10%  open public space for the new development, allowing existing public space to be used to fill the requirement.

Could this be the same Mayor who drove the issue for R160 for Burt St with no requirements for open public space to be included in the new development. With councillors pointing out as the issue was raised well we do have nearby school sporting fields.

I know as I have asked these questions myself in various public forums about the lack of council requirements for additional public space in new developments.

Would this be the same mayor speaking of European green space who has actively made Fremantle’s green spaces worse with concreting over parkland with more concrete in the pipeline. The mayor who received the rating in having the city with second worse hard surface covering in Australia and its getting worse if you see the plans for South Beach and worse the Master plan which will see more hard surfaces added to the Esplanade. Even a proposed road.

The Mayor who approved a plan which led to the  cutting down of over 100+ mature trees on the Kim Beazley site going against the wishes of over 170 written submissions not to approve this destruction of a suburbs tree canopy?

So now we should be in awe because Brad flies to europe at our expense to tell us something his community has been telling him for years, but now the Germans are going it, its all cool right?

What a crock.

Even worse we see across  the suburbs in  Perth an additional 600ha of ovals and sporting fields to allow for increase in the population density, I wonder where in the world we had to fly to find that was a good idea. Well that’s not the worse part that’s all good, the bad part is it seems for Fremantle’s increase in population density we are getting bugger all of that additional lovely open green public space, sporting fields or ovals?

 

A few links below to similar issues and councils hypocrisy, where they seem to say one thing but but another way

More Council Concrete for Fremantle Parks?

Fremantle First

Residence’s Speak, When Will Fremantle Council Hear???

Inside Singapore’s ultra-futuristic inner city gardens

Comment to Roel Blog post RESIDENTS’ TSUNAMI AT FREMANTLE COUNCIL

Fremantle’s Real Problem, Too Much Politics in Council

 

Fremantle’s Real Problem, Too Much Politics in Council

aus parliament house

Are there Delusions of Grandeur on Fremantle Council?

Yesterday on Freoview we see one of the real problems Fremantle faces, state and federal political ideology deeply entwined in Councillor fundamental position.  Quote ”Worse still, not only is Barnett willing to sell the Port but will use scarce funds to privatise the road that feeds it. Barnett & Abbott are racing to build their new truck sewer straight through the middle of East Fremantle and North Fremantle. In doing so, they will sever with the swiftness of a terrorist’s sword the connectivity’s that several generations of Fremantle people have fought so hard to maintain and rebuild.

Imagine a life behind high concrete walls that divides Fremantle like Berlin was. The freeway style toll road will make access in and out of our city centre hopelessly constrained especially from the north and east.”

I don’t get how he thinks the road is being privatised by selling the port?

Tonight Councillor Sullivan’s comments are emotive, politically motivated and basically should have no place in the council arena. Making emotionally provocative statements comparing the sale of state assets to the actions of terrorists beheading people have nothing to do with local government issues.

It seems clearer and clearer that council’s political ideologies and allegiances are clouding the real operation of council from its true function. The political links/loyalties of councillors should be secondary to their paid responsibilities of council duties.

If they feel their political ideologies are more important than their fiduciary duties to the rate payers and residents of Fremantle they should fore go their council positions to concentrate on state or federal politics.

It must be quite clear now if not before that comments that Dave Hume, Bill Massie made on Wednesday night that council’s actions be driven by their responsibilities and duties to its rate payer and residents base not personal political agendas is valid, as it is a real issue in Fremantle council?

The state government decision to sell the port may be dumb but the effect is on the whole state and best handled there.  The FPA make their own operational decisions, state or private owned, the COF opinion is just that?

Here is a little tit bit of the freoview discussion from Andrew and his Shakespearean style theatrics over the Perth Freight Link

Here is my response to Andrews’s theatrics, in fairness you should read his comments as well as mine, as I unlike the City of Fremantle believe people should read both sides of the story to better judge for themselves. I have posted it here on Fremantle Reform, so I can add links easily, so click on Roels link to see Andrews and others comments on the issue

FREMANTLE PORTS SALE A CONCERN FOR FREO; Freoview

My Comment to Andrews, see link above as seen on freoview

“First Andrew I will wait to see what proposal the 3 consortiums come up with before, I support one thing or the other (a point made by Rachel Pemberton at SPC) or start comparing High St to an active berlin wall. I would rather see an actual plan in black or white to form a view than make one, based on your over sensationalist rhetoric with executioners, swords, terrorists, communist walls, sewers etc, Isn’t it possible to have a normal discussion?

Trying to cross High St now on foot at times is a pretty risky affair now! I wouldn’t say it’s a safe road for neighbours to ample across now. Come to think of it if I wanted to go north or south I wouldn’t use that part of High St anyway I would cross over at Amherst where I’m not running the current truck gauntlet.

I must have missed the game of thrones series where they had terrorists, your quote was “In doing so, they will sever with the swiftness of a terrorist’s sword” doesn’t sound like a game of thrones analogy to me, though people should try and google “terrorist sword” and see how many links they get back to the game of thrones series. It may prove to be a fruitless task?

As for guaranteeing what kids will and don’t do I will leave their actions and accountability to their responsible guardians.

For a highway dividing a community I can show you examples of how they can be built where it’s a positive outcome with parks and grass but that would just leave you with another place to pour concrete as we saw in More Council Concrete for Fremantle Parks or you could look at Fremantle’s Councils Perceived Anti-Car Stance

13-11-18-schnelsen-13-portal-nord-600x400

Hamburger Deckel project in Germany is burying the A7 autobahn to make parks and new land

As the state government is about as forthcoming with detail on plans as the City of Fremantle is, i.e. Kings Sq hidden documents, I expect to see little in transparency from either. Didn’t the CEO reference that fact in his mini-series called the response.

As for little eco systems, I wasn’t the one who voted for the chainsaws and chippers to destroy 100+ trees on the old Kim Beazley site. In the name of higher density, that sounds like something Barnett would do though oh and a group of Fremantle councillors.

It’s great you’re so concerned about Cockburn wetland, perhaps if the councillors put as much effort into the tree canopy/open public spaces of Fremantle we wouldn’t have the second worse rating in Australia from 202020 report. Perhaps you could focus on the city you were elected to actually represent, a good point made by Dave Hume on Wednesday night. A quick look at google earth shows how barren Freo is from Parkland and the only significant greens spots are the esplanade, some sports grounds and the golf course and you poured concrete onto one. (I would mention the footie ground but if that’s handed over to the COF I can’t imagine it lasting to long.) Luckily the 202020 report was done before that, as that little gem could have tipped us over the line for no1 spot for worse hard covering report from the 202020 report.

HARD SURFACE HEAVY

  1. City of Maribyrnong (VIC)
  2. City of Fremantle (WA)
  3. City of Holdfast Bay (SA)
  4. City of Rockdale (NSW)”

 

%d bloggers like this: