Freo Council Votes On The Bridge Options

1. Provides the following general observations and feedback to the State Government and the Swan River Crossing Alliance:

a) Reiterates the concern that the Swan River Crossings project was proposed to be an infrastructure replacement project only and within a constrained project area; and as such provides limited opportunity to deliver improved transport and land use planning outcomes for urban environments previous fragmented by incompatible regional transport networks;

b) Welcomes the State Government’s recent commitment to develop the Future of Fremantle Planning Strategy and requests that it include a regional transport network that supports the continual growth of the urban fabric of Fremantle;

c) Agrees that based on the deteriorating serviceability of the Fremantle Traffic Bridge, it needs to be replaced as a matter of urgency and acknowledges that its replacement will be required in advance of the strategic planning direction to be established by the Future of Fremantle Planning Strategy;

d) Notes that the proposal to duplicate the rail bridge to provide a dedicated freight line is one of numerous strategies that would improve freight logistics relative to the Inner Harbour but that the need to establish a dedicated freight crossing is not critically urgent or based on unacceptable safety concerns;

e) Concludes that there is insufficient justification to warrant the immediate duplication of the rail bridge in advance of establishing the optimal regional transport network and land use plans as part of the Future of Fremantle Planning Strategy; and

f) Supports a bridge design that requires minimal or no interference with the riverbed and water flow in recognition of cultural concerns expressed by the Indigenous community.

2. Provides the following summarised feedback on each of the four alignment options:

a) OPTION 1 – is the preferred option out of the four because:

i) it aligns most closely with previous feedback from the City to MRWA;

ii) it optimises the heritage, public realm and place-making opportunities;

iii) it keeps the overall impact of new infrastructure as far west as practicable.

b) OPTION 2 – demonstrates no clear community benefits over and above option 1 but may result in major disruption to rail services in the future when the existing rail bridge needs replacing.

c) OPTION 3 – assessed as having little merit:

i) it results in an outcome that leaves part of the old Traffic Bridge structure ‘locked’ between two new bridges;

ii) it moves new infrastructure and traffic impacts further east towards existing residents;

iii) it compromises the Naval Stores complex.

d) OPTION 4 – has some merit, in that:

i) It potentially reduces construction time by 12 months;

ii) It opens possibilities for greater flexibility in bridge design.

However, before this option could be fully supported, the following matters would need to be addressed:

(1) that the demolition of the existing the State Heritage Register listed traffic bridge, is deemed acceptable.

(2) Traffic redistribution and local diversions during construction will can be managed to acceptable level of congestion and appropriate community consultation is carried out.

(3) Businesses along Queen Victoria Street (on both sides of the river) are consulted on the proposed traffic management plans, including forms of compensation for any loss of business due to reduction in passing traffic during construction.

(4) Any financial gains achieved with this option will be measured and fully costed, clearly demonstrate a better bridge design and improved place-making outcomes for the community.

3. Re-confirms that the 6 Principles adopted by council on 24 June 2020 remain applicable, and should guide the next phase of project design.

4. Re-affirms Council’s desire to continue working with the State Government and its Alliance team on the Swan River Crossing project to achieve the best possible outcomes for the community.

5. Writes to the Hon. Rita Saffioti MLA, Minister for Transport, Planning and Ports to:

a) Welcome the opportunity to continue to be involved in the design and development process for the River Crossings Project;

b) Thank the Government for re-opening the discussion with the community regarding multiple bridge alignment options;

c) Request confirmation as to why the rail bridge component is planned to be constructed simultaneously with the traffic bridge, ahead of the broader planning for the North Fremantle peninsula, suggesting that it may be beneficial to delay this component of the project until this strategic work is completed;