THE controversial Matilda Bay Ferry terminals development will go ahead despite months of community division.

The decision was handed down last week by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

Out of 1,884 public submissions 68.8 per cent opposed the development on a Matilda Bay terminal outright and 13.5 per cent only supported a ferry terminal if changes were made.

Public objections stemmed from a range of concerns focused on the proposed Matilda Bay location with the size and design of the development impacting water and foreshore users.

Others were concerned about the impact on trees, fauna and ecosystems in the water, the effect on heritage and cultural significance to the area, and the removal of parking and increased traffic. 

The WA Planning Commission believes these issues can be “ameliorated through conditions of approval”.

Safety on Swan spokesperson Megan Bagworth says the approval undermines the true value and use of Matilda Bay.

Disconnect

“The result highlights an increasingly troubling disconnect between public feedback and government decision making” Ms Bagworth said. 

Ms Bagworth who represents over 7000 water users including people with disabilities says the development at Matilda Bay is the start of a permanent change that will lead to surrounding development.  

She says the lack of a social impact assessment or management plan made the approval process “fundamentally flawed”. 

“Given the scale of concern, it is incumbent on the Minister for Transport to provide greater transparency, clearer justification, and a willingness to genuinely reconsider the location in line with public feedback,” Ms Bagworth said. 

One submission from the public says the proposal is “profound and [a] misalignment of purpose”.

Another said: “Putting a ferry terminal in the middle of a widely used beach is not in the best interests of the users of the area.”

Others say the development will divide the beauty of Matilda Bay, destroying the natural environment many waters users enjoy by turning the Bay into a transport hub. 

The City of Melville also has concerns about the site chosen for the Applecross ferry terminal, requesting the project be put on hold until a raft of issues are addressed. 

Raffles

Among the City’s recommendations was a change “to the terminal design, materials and colours to minimise impact on the adjacent Raffles Waterfront Apartments”. 

The Environmental Protection Authority says the terminals could impact marine fauna however gave recommendations for mitigation through a construction environmental management plan. 

For those supporting the terminals’ location the expansion of public transport options are a high priority. 

“The idea of being able to quickly access UWA, Subiaco, West

Perth, Perth CBD, and Leederville via a river connection to public transport (such as the CAT buses, normal buses, walking and cycling paths) is fantastic. Also, an alternative todriving on the freeway is a great,” one submission said.

The terminals are expected to be finished in time for the expansion of the ferries by 2027.

by CARLA LANE