Freo's View


Posted in development, fremantle, victoria quay by freoview on July 11, 2015


I had not seen this artist impression of the planned Fremantle Ports Victoria Quay development that Oneperth published on-line, so wanted to share it with you. The publication reports State Planning Commission has recommended the approval of the plans.

What is missing in the picture is the railway line crossing at Pakenham Street that was going to connect with the extended Peter Hughes Drive, that was proposed, but we do see a substantial building taking up most of Pioneer Park.

The independent Oneperth also suggests there would be a four-storey bus exchange, probably to the east of the railway station. From memory it was suggested a pedestrian bridge would connect with the to be developed Woolstores shopping centre.

It will be interesting to see if State Government will release final plans for the project ahead of the planned sale of the port as that might well increase the price and put more money in the empty mismanaged coffers of our state.

According to Oneperth there had been no submissions received during a 21 day period, which seems extremely strange, but then again, I am not aware a submission period had been advertised, so most people in Fremantle probably would not have known about it.

I believe the ten-storey tower just to the east behind the railway station needs to be lowered to no more than six storeys as it overpowers the heritage station, and the huge building at Pioneer Park is unacceptable. Mayor Brad Pettitt has just written about increasing public open spaces and Fremantle can’t afford to lose Pioneer Park as a lingering and recreation point to offset the proposed commercial ugliness at Victoria Quay.

Roel Loopers

12 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. RobinH said, on July 14, 2015 at 8:01 am

    If this go ahead, that will be the end of Sirona’s big plans for Freo. MM

  2. Caroine said, on July 13, 2015 at 9:56 pm

    It will be chain yourself to the trees time if they want to do anything to that side of Pioneer Park. The building plan for Pioneer Park is misguided. it is hard to get green spaces back once they have tons of concrete on top of them.

  3. freoview said, on July 12, 2015 at 11:22 am

    It needs to be activated with better landscaping, something to do for children, as it is next to Spareparts Puppet Theatre, some nice seats, shade structures, etc. not a big building!


  4. Jayne said, on July 12, 2015 at 8:53 am

    I just googled the ‘Pioneer Park Precinct Plan’ and found a substantial document concluding the park become a site for a large 2-3 storey building. Apparently, various people, mostly with commercial not residential interests, have decided that this sliver of nature doesn’t need beautification, it needs to be “activated”.

    You know, I can’t imagine Perth people saying, “Oh that Kings Park is just greenery doing nothing. People just sit and look at the trees, go for walks, cool down in summer and appreciate nature. No no no. We need to make it busy. Let’s concrete the park and build apartments and shops there and just leave some verges green….” But it seems in Freo, parks and natural area must be built on and/or commercialised – and we’re going to cram in another 10,000 people all living on top of each other. Bring on the stress and mental illness! Anyway, here’s the plan – is this really what we are getting?

  5. freoview said, on July 11, 2015 at 4:18 pm

    I did not see it advertised but it must have been a State Government submission period that not many knew of. NO submissions for such an important project? Unheard off!!


  6. Lionel said, on July 11, 2015 at 3:58 pm

    So where do we get the actual document? Where was this advertised?

  7. freoview said, on July 11, 2015 at 1:18 pm

    That explains it, Andrew. It’s a while since I saw the three options so did not remember all the details.


  8. Andrew Sullivan said, on July 11, 2015 at 11:59 am

    Unfortunately, OnePerth extracted that image from the section of the Victoria Quay Commercial Precinct Plan document that outlined the three different scenarios explored by CODA. The image shows the “Open City” scenario but it was the “Street Views” scenario that was progressed to create the recommended Indicative Development Plan. In that plan the road crossing over the railway line is on the Pakenham Street alignment and the freight line remains in place. The buildings on Vic Quay are generally capped at 3 storeys with one block next to the E-Shed at 6 storeys and the taller one at the north-eastern end shown as 12 storeys. The upper level link at that end is also shown in the draft plan.

    The matters relative to Pioneer Reserve are covered in the separate Pioneer Park Precinct Plan. The issue of what happens between the Spare Parts Theatre and Pakenham Street is a matter that remains in abeyance.

  9. Nige said, on July 11, 2015 at 10:13 am

    I noticed the same thing. The entry point was proposed to be via an extended Pakenham Street but it now looks like its Market Street. And I agree with gnangarra’s last comment, I wouldn’t trust anything this government says.

  10. gnangarra said, on July 11, 2015 at 8:48 am

    really the same government that wants to spend billions building a truck toll road which terminates at stirling bridge. Past practices across Australia has been when building toll roads is to close all alternative routes down, freight to rail is not only a better alternative its the one the community is calling for so closing that option down through a development its trying to sneak past the community appears to be anything but a mistake

  11. freoview said, on July 11, 2015 at 8:36 am

    I had not noticed that but it makes little sense to stop the rail line at the train station and no longer allow freight to come from the south past the west end and Roundhouse, so it might be a mistake in the drawing. I can’t see State Government closing that line any time soon.


  12. gnangarra said, on July 11, 2015 at 8:29 am

    notice also that the rail line terminates at the station so freight on rail in this plan

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: