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.

 

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

 

%d bloggers like this: