Ambitious plan to transform Freo port – The West Australian

Waterfront homes for thousands of people, an international standard cruise ship terminal and a $1 billion boost to State Government coffers are key outcomes of an ambitious plan to change the face of the southern side of Fremantle port.

 

Source: Ambitious plan to transform Freo port – The West Australian

 

More pie in the sky spin from our Mayor Brad Pettitt

How many decades before such infrastructure could be built and with Fremantle’s geographical  location would it ever warrant such a development for the cruise ship industry, the state gov would need to get commitment from the cruise industry before developing such a place, to ensure it just didn’t become unused infrastructure.
Barnett has already said live export would move to the outer harbour once its built. So why is bringing this into his discussion as its moving anyway.

No need to move the car off load for RORO and double the distance for cars to be delivered to car yards, just make this part of the development.

The picture attached of Broadwater is hardly a good comparison as this area of the gold coast is all estuaries, mariners, beaches, residential development, leisure activities parks etc.

The google link above to the map or earth shot is movable and can zoom in and out so have a look just touch and drag to explore it.

Not what fremantle harbour is, being active cargo port, narrow river mouth surrounded by concrete.


What escapes the Mayors grasp of reality or suits his latest agenda is without a proper road network how will the thousands of guests and crew, new residences, workers get in and out of the city area in a efficient manner.
He and his council have made our road system into a dogs breakfast with their Anti-car platform.
Not to mention he needs to remove the rail out of the way, as this will also be a problem for development of residential apartments with trains riding down the side of it with heavy freight rail at night. Which would just create another problem.

Attached here is a link (Click to see it) to a post I wrote a while back, doing some of things this idea above mentions, but also deals with removing the heavy rail from traveling through town,

  • Sorts out the traffic problems,
  • Opens the north side of Freo up to more residential use and provides better access PT to new residents,
  • Opens north Freo back to the beach fronts,
  • Slashes traffic movements down Stirling Hwy
  • Cuts traffic of South st
  • Diverts, trucks off Hampton road heading south or north
  • Removes passengers vehicles from Fremantle who are only driving through to get somewhere else.
  • Opens up poor used land for better use in the north port side
  • Brings back a village feel to the Tydeman road precinct, well till Sullivans try’s to approve a 15 story building for it.
  • Lowers noise pollution
  • Makes our local roads safer
  • Lowers emissions to the local area, by taking away the stop start of heavy vehicles making them more efficient.
  • Opens up the heavy freight line running south of Freo back to PT (Public Tranport), linking the new developing suburbs to the rail stations, with rail cutting the need for people to park and ride in town.
  • Giving space for more cycle and pedestrian ways.
  • Opens the possibility to link the north lines PT rail to Freo in a circle line opening up direct PT rail to Cockburn and the Mandurah line also allowing a rail service with one change to the hospital and Murdoch.
  • All while keeping an operational port in town.
  • Improving Freo’s Green space and lowering the amount of concrete surface our council loves so much.

In case it’s escaped his attention the outer harbour is not planned to replace Fremantle port but be a spill over once Freo harbour/port reaches a cap which is higher than its current container movements right now.

.
Which will put more freight on rail without increasing the % moved on rail and will bring more container Trucks to our suburb as he was against the infrastructure that would have removed them. Being the PFL, Roe 8 or Roe 9 or which ever way its portrayed.

.
So too add to the congestion he proposed thousands more to come to work, in the city and more visitors while he wants NO new roads, while increasing freight rail through town, creating More division and social problems and less car parking.

.
Sounds like a recipe for disaster, but at least we have a rapid charging point for EV in town and guaranteed you can get pissed at a noisy concert right in the centre of a what was a quiet historic area of town, now  heavily used for residential.

.
Maybe that’s the plan with J-shed if the noise is loud enough from his approved, piss up concerts, it may drown out the noise from the trains.

Oh and Paul I think this is offering a solution while disagreeing with another POV, just in case you missed that point again.

Roe 8: Turnbull Government agrees to $300 million deal | PerthNow

 

THE Turnbull Government has struck a  with WA to start construction of the controversial Roe 8 highway.

Source: Roe 8: Turnbull Government agrees to $300 million deal | PerthNow

Looks like things are starting to move ahead.

Lets hope the Roe 9 development is announced quick so the people effected by the possible High St & Stock  Rd,etx can get on with the lives and not have it hanging over their heads.

Even if the government holds off on developing it they should announce the planned route or where its road or tunnel to give people in the area certainty. Then invest the money so this link to the port goes in with as little impact on the residences as possible and delivers a better transport corridor than Fremantle has now.

Fix the North Freo issue, open up the beach to the suburbs and sink the port link underground right till it rise in the port giving back the surface roads to the residents and directing transient traffic underground, to the south or the east.

Fremantle council has failed the community with ideology politically based approached, playing politics instead of ensuring the best come for Fremantle residents.

A properly planned road network linking into this planned system could have given Fremantle huge benefits, sadly our council said no to safer roads in and around Fremantle.

 

Chalk and Cheese over Perth Freight Link

What a well-run meeting by the North Fremantle Community great job by Gerry MacGill, a nice civil community Q&A. Well done to the crowd that attended too.

But Whoa what a difference a couple of weeks makes. I went to the Victoria Hall meeting with Peter Newman as the headline name for the night, all on the Perth Freight Link (PFL). Last night I went to the Nth Fremantle community meeting on the PFL impact especially focused on Nth Freo. Here Peter Newman was again a headline draw card with the Premier Colin Barnett giving the governments opinion, as the local member. But the sting was really not in his presentation in Nth Freo as it was in Victoria Hall. Side note at vic hall when the council wants a crowd they put one buffet, no need at Nth Freo.

Great to see the Premier make time to speak to his electorate.

What surprised me was the whole CUSP report was all front and centre at Victoria Hall, the Mayor sprouting its contents and not surprising as it cost the rate payers $20,000. At Nth Freo it barely rated a mention, Peter Newman spent as much time talking about his new book as he did the CUSP report that our council dropped $20 k on.

In fact I think the City of Kwinana’s new Indian Ocean Gateway document got more attention than the CUSP report, that Fremantle council paid $20,000 for. Good to see at least one council driving for investment, jobs, infrastructure and developments in the city, well done Kniwana.

So I wonder what we the rate payer paid for in the CUSP report as I expected  Prof Newman would be using it to give the Premier both barrels, instead they spent the most of the night agreeing with each other. Peter Newman put forward of course the inter-nodal issue which I believe various governments have been talking about for years with Lat 32.

Peter Newman could not even definitely say the Roe 8 was not needed for the outer harbour system as it’s in the plans for the Lat 32.

His point was the Roe 8 went to the wrong port, which sounds like an endorsement for the Roe 8 to be built. Yet he no solution for Fremantle’s coming years of traffic issues as the current ports needs to operate for at least the next 20-30 years till it gets to the cap and transition that Peter and Colin agreed on. Quite a surprise from the Victoria Hall presentation? It was agreed by both speakers that Fremantle’s Port could double in container volume over the next 10 years to about 1.4 million containers, yet Peter Newman had no solution for how to handle the increase of containers Fremantle will have until the Outer Harbour is finally operational.

So one question that needs answering is that if PFL is not built, what is the container solution for Fremantle as even Peter Newman believes the maximum achievable container on rail will be just over 30%. Leaving 70% of container movements to go by truck.

Good to see someone bring up the emission control regulations from Euro 5&6 for diesel engines and Peter Newman admitted that truck emissions dropped drastically over the years with new technology and believed that trucks would go to gas over the coming years removing the diesel emission issue.  California is also moving into trucks running on Hydrogen also cutting out truck emissions as an issue. We could also bring in the 80/20 diesel blends which would have an immediate reduction on emissions.

Strangely the Mayor was very quiet at the meeting not even a question?

It was also interesting to see the 2 speakers agree that WA was the best performer for freight on rail and they both agreed, even if the Outer Harbour is built without massive investment in the inter-nodal systems the rail volume would still not increase much past 30% which is the current target of the Inner Harbour.

It was good to see the Premier so clearly state the Roe 9 part is still under evaluation and needs lots of work before the final route is chosen. While good that the decision will get public debate, sucks for those who live on the proposed routes as they will be left hanging in limbo till a decision is made.

I think the argument that the Roe 8 will bring more trucks to Fremantle is done, it’s only more containers that will bring more trucks to fremantle, which will still come whether PFL is built or not.  Something needs to be built to handle the next decades of increasing trucks to the Port and the ever increasing smaller vehicles on the road around Fremantle.

Our council has blindly followed the Barnett governments in fill plan while not getting any infrastructure to handle the increased density, population and the cars they bring. Last night the Premier said about 90% of houses have 1 car and over 50% have two. I think those figures are from a census some time back as I drive around my suburb the number of cars in front of one house is more than that. Just think our Mayor Brad has 2 cars himself.

Time for council to stand up for our amenity and tell the government no more infill or density increases till we start to see the necessary infrastructure to deal with it, PT or better roads I don’t mind which I just want to see some guarantees of delivery. Of course that also means when the government tries to put some in place it helps for the council not to say no.

So I go back to my “Thinking Allowed OPEN MINDS” where I called for public debate on this issue. If the 2nd leg of PFL Roe 9 goes ahead, now is the time for people to say what we need from this road/tunnel, to make our suburbs more livable,  as truck free and safe as we can make it.

 

 

%d bloggers like this: