GPP & WGVP … Joint Meeting …3rd April 2018 … High Street … Shane’s Presentation

by kpaterson on 9 June, 2018

Shane Chambers

How did we get here?

Roe 9

Roe 8


1955 Atlas – “Plan for the Metropolitan Region“ (Stephenson & Hepburn)

Formed – Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS)

What the 1950’s planners did not foresee

(1) Increase in S/SE corridor population/development ? Fremantle Port (~1900) wrong side of river!

(2) Modernity of environmental impact
? Placement of roads (air/noise pollution) Fremantle Eastern Bypass

  • Election Issue (2001) – Labor Win
  • Deleted from MRS in 2004
  • Land sold off, but no foresight for freight logistics

    => Political Football
    ? Traffic/Freight Distribution Planning Mess ? Stagnation of High Street Upgrade

Fremantle Container Port

Kwinana Freeway

2007/2008 Kwinana offshore/land terminal
2008 Change of Government (Liberal Win)
2009/2010 PPP South Metro Connect (AECOM/MRWA) ? Roe 8 (Toll Road) No Fed funding
2011 Outer Harbour Study (container overflow)

2012 IA Funding – Leach Highway/High St Upgrade Misrepresentation on IA proposal
Option 4A – 150m vs 270m ROC
$118m ~50/50 State/Fed Split

2013 MRWA concept proposal (Not – Option 4A) 2013 Public Consultation – Open/Closed

2014/2015 IA Federal Funding (Abbott) ? Rebranded Perth Freight Link

$1.5 billion on the table, few wanted it for a road

High Street upgrade caught up in the melee

2017 Change of Government (Labor Win)
2018 Concept Proposal Round 2 ($118m funded)

Perth Urban Freight Network

Reasons for Building I Road Freight Task

IA Submission 2012

High Street at over capacity
Not able to deliver projected freight increase
Increase in freight at least until 2027 (dependant on economy, oil and AUD)

Reasons for Building II
Road Safety IA Submission 2012

Omission of Pedestrian Safety Statistics
What % is from running red lights? (pedestrian danger)

Road Design 101

New Expected Traffic in 15/20 years?


Road Safety Audit

Expected Noise

Other Environmental Factors (Determined by EPA)

Available Land Financial Cost

Upgrade (Function/Demand) Road? % Heavy Vehicles

Road Traffic Modelling

Final Road Design

Community Needs? (After thought)

Old Design Concept Proposal

  • Large ROC
  • Heavily trenched
  • 2 lane slip road (old High Street)
  • No entry exit points local traffic
  • 6 Lane road reserve High Street/Stirling Highway
  • E/W pedestrian access blocked by noise walls
  • Pedestrian overpass placement NE/SW
  • Both golf courses affected
  • Mature Tuart trees cleared

New Design Concept Proposal

  • Trees kept (reduces noise for GPP)
  • No pedestrian access
  • One lane slip road (no barrier?)
  • Wilkinson Street – Exit East Only?
  • Montreal Street South
  • Dedicated truck lane
  • Large roundabout (=>at level, no trenching)
  • Parking for Netballers (drop in the bucket)
  • No land take Private Golf Course (cheaper)
  • Land Take Public Golf Course -> Boo Park

Overlaid Designs

  • Radius of Curvature (ROC) ~ same
  • Different ROC Entry/Exit
  • New design road not to scale
  • Land take similar
  • Pedestrian access in old design not possible

Planning Horizon for Road And Outer Port

MRWA incumbent to build a road
with minimum 15 year planning horizon

? Planning currently likely to not include a new port ? Has flow on effect for design

Cart before the horse?

Noise I
(Mitigation informs road design)

State Planning Policy 5.4 (Road and Rail Traffic)

2009 2017

Road Surface/Type Cut
Elevation Trenching

Noise walls

  • Noise mitigation only for new roads
  • 1st Floor Only
  • 5 dBA uncertainty (fudge factor) allowed
  • => less stringent
  • Applies to roads ~ pre mid 2017 (WAPC)
  • Base Level Noise compare pre 2017
  • 15 year planning horizon

• Noise mitigation for new roads and upgrades • 1st Floor and 2nd Floor

• 5 dBA uncertainty (fudge factor) scrapped • => more stringent

• Applies to roads ~ post mid 2017 (WAPC)

• Base Level Noise compare post 2017

• 20 year planning horizon Uncertainty on High Street Upgrade Planning Application Date

Noise II
Mitigation informs road design

Dominant Noise Source – Road/Tyre
? Trenching road is effective
(May be used again => Raft of other problems)

Noise III
Mitigation informs road design

  • Noise Mitigation => new road or upgrade?
  • Outer harbour build date is key factor
  • Dedicated trucking lane => noise walls (refer to EPA if none)
  • Barrier required at High Street slip road (~minimum 2m)
  • Unknown effect of at level roundabout for residents West and South/West
  • Roundabouts quieter than normal intersection
  • Two lane separation using trees reduces noise for greater GPP
  • Noise walls help properties in shade zone most

Pedestrian & Cycle Access I

Overpass Concept 2013 Design Cut off large part of GPP

MRWA offered upgraded lights at Marmion/Stirling Unacceptable to community ~ 700 signatures on petition Affected > 400 Households

From Community Focus Group, Sep 2013 Key Community and Stakeholder Concern

“Ensure pedestrian and cyclist connectivity – north/south and east/west”


“Provision made for north/south overpass. East/west overpass/underpass options not practical and land take excessive.”

Pedestrian & Cycle Access I

Late Stage Solution from MRWA (2014) (Staggered Noise Walls) – Lets play Frogger!

Stirling Highway – 6 Lane road reserve + noise walls + trenching

? Neither overpass or underpass possible in 2013! Or VERY expensive resulting in more land take
Noise walls may be unavoidable due to SPP 5.4 in 2018 (affects pedestrian access)

New Government, New Solutions?

Pedestrian & Cycle Access II

Dedicated Truck Lane
? Crossing at Montreal (N/S), Holland St (E/W) not possible ? Roundabout crossing impossible

Main Constraints

  • 1:12 gradient (disability access)
  • Excessive height to span overpass for oversized trucks ? Underpass at Forrest St best option (E/W)
    ? Overpass somewhere at High St? (N/S)

Lighting is to be provided at a P10 level.

If longer than 20 m => lighting day and night.

The walls to be finished with a light colour

Design dependent on the structural and traffic characteristics of the infrastructure.

(Planning and Designing for Pedestrians – Guidelines)

Possible Solution E/W Access

Underpass at Forrest most feasible, low impact solution


Path for entry/exit 1:12 gradient down 2.3m width path
2 transects
Underpass level -3.5m

1:12 gradient down 2.3m width path
3 transects

Possible Solution N/S Access

Overpass at Netball Courts most feasible low impact solution

Split Lane hinders underpass (possible but expensive) Barrier likely on slip road
=> Utilise Netball Courts as entry/exit for pedestrians Connect Gibson Park to Boo Park by cycleway
Provides safe passage across High Street, midway located

Overflow parking for netballers shared with Golf Course

Traffic Network

  • Port Direction – Outside Lane for trucks only on roundabout?
  • Network change to use Holland, Forrest and Marmion instead
  • Wilkinson Street Entry/Exit does not make sense
  • GPP <=> WGV travel impossible!
  • Stops rat run and Montreal, but diverts to Amherst and Wood
  • Large intersection footprint (green lines misrepresent)

• • • •

Noise walls may trap NOx May have to be modelled Mature trees help scatter Dependant on wind direction

Diesel Pollution

Land Take – Booyembara Park

Reconfigured Public Golf Course ? Lose Olive Grove

Community Cost/Benefit?

Supporting 2 golf courses at expense of public space


  • Never been a better time for residents to demand needs and action
  • Have wealth of information from past attempts (being treated like mushrooms)
  • Road has potential to cut off precincts if not dealt with properly
  • Road is unique, up to 60% heavy vehicles => safe pedestrian crossings essential !!!
  • Does not make sense to not provide E/W, N/S access given WGV infill and broader planning policy
  • Need to plan for 50+ years, not use current short term snapshot
  • You cannot retrofit underpasses

Leave a Comment

By submitting my comment I accept the Terms and Conditions of using this site

Previous post:

Next post:

This website is designed by Jumping Jigsaws