Mayors exchange words

MELVILLE Mayor Russell Aubrey has criticised the City of Cockburn for backing a $290 million road project to unlock traffic in Perth’s south-east

Source: Mayors exchange words

Good to see both Mayors of Melville and Cockburn driving development that will make their own citys, less congested, more efficient, more productive, safer, better for emplyment etc.

The ALP seem to have no issues building new roads, with great promises to Armadale and Cockburn.

I hope they have a big budget as Metronet and the Outer Harbour looks like costing them 10 billions on just to projects. I wonder if that leaves any money for the Freo area or are we due to miss out again on any state funds.

Cockburn is driving for new roads and connections to keep their area, driving forward with development. Of course they want the Outer Harbour to develop and possibly more importantly the Lat 32 giving the area a huge boost in revenue, developments and jobs.

Seems that both Roe 8 and the outer harbour will have environmental impacts.

Back to Freo with all the chat on the various issues and views, if Roe 8 and Roe 9 don’t go ahead what will be done  for Freo in the 10-15 years to fix the growing car traffic and of course the every expanding Port.

Considering at the last meeting I saw with the Premier and Peter Newman they seem to agree that the while Fremantle port already has best practice in Australia for Rail use, it would not be possible to expand containers to Rail much past 30% which is the current target. The also both agree Fremantle Port will continue to operate and with cap and transitions (once the outer Harbour opens) will see the port grow in containers movements over the next 15 years at least.

So the question stands what will happen to improve Fremantle’s every worsening  traffic situation? I still haven’t heard a solutions just objections.

In my reading i found this doc below which had some interesting reading in.

Southmetroconnect

On pg 11 (of the above link) shows some of the environmental studies/info which shoulders right to the Lat 32 area.?

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.

 

 

What is Fremantle?

confusion

Over the weekend we saw a heavy community backlash against the process of amalgamation, so what will this mean for Freo?

As the once to be greater City of Fremantle, we have lost East Freo which I think would have added a new depth to our city.

What happens to areas of Fremantle that where going to Melville?

What happened to the areas of Melville that are suppose to come to Fremantle?

What happens to areas of Cockburn coming to Fremantle?

Fremantle and Cockburn depending on what the State does, could end up being smaller than they are currently? How does that effect the budget and decision making process of our councils

Today I read and heard that this morning the Premier had admitted that amalgamation had failed but was talking to the party to see where next? This afternoon no amalgamation and council changes would happen without council approval, what does that mean, we already know Freo and EF council have cut deals on amalgamation, so does that mean the Premier is listening to the Poll or a Chat with the Mayor?? quote “By the afternoon, the Premier had clarified his comments, telling reporters no amalgamations or boundary changes would happen without the support of councils.

Then later I hear reported that all focus would be quote”He said the proposed City of Perth Act, to enable the capital to acquire Vincent and parts of the western suburbs, was the “immediate focus now”.

How does council tomorrow night have a Special Committee meeting and vote on Policy when they don’t even know what suburbs will be effected by the policies, surely making a policy for 26000+ residents or just under 60,000 is a little bit different god know it must effect the cost??

So in the process of good governance how can a council bring policies into place without knowing what suburbs it will even effect. I suppose that makes it clearer for the broader community, to see if the policy they make are based on their own ideology or whats the need and representation of their residents? Considering they don’t even know what residents and suburbs they will have? Must make it harder speaking for the silent majority when u don’t know who they even are?

which way confusion

%d bloggers like this: