Those fighting to repurpose the Fremantle Traffic Bridge say it can serve a practical, modern purpose as well as a historical one.
CAST your eyes over the heritage listing assigned to the 83-year-old Fremantle Traffic Bridge and you’ll soon understand why seeing isn’t always believing.
The Heritage Council categorises the landmark across the Swan River at Level 1A, which comes with an unequivocal definition.
“Exceptional significance, essential to the heritage of the locality,” reads the council’s handbook.
The City of Fremantle certainly adopted that sentiment in 2006, by identifying the traffic bridge as having “an exceptional cultural heritage significance in its own right within the context of Fremantle”.
On August 21, however, the heritage handbook became irrelevant when Mark McGowan, armed with $280 million of state and federal money, called a press conference and sealed the bridge’s fate.
“Just look at it,” Mr McGowan said while addressing the media from the southern end of the bridge.
“It’s nearing the end of its use-by date. It’s old and tired and we can only do so many repairs to keep it operational.”
While the premier can apply a truth defence to his words, the statement was ominous for those fighting to save the bridge and repurpose it as an over-the-water meeting place and crossing point for pedestrians and cyclists.
If the death knell wasn’t bad enough, an accompanying government press release was red rag to a bull for the traditionalists and self-appointed guardians of the 193-year-old port city.
“Under my government, the transformation of Fremantle into a modern and vibrant city is under way,” Mr McGowan said.
For Fremantle Society president John Dowson, the use of the word ‘modern’ was close to a declaration of war.
“We’ve got a lot of character and we should be building on that,” Mr Dowson said. “We’re not giving up. We think we’ve still got two or three years to work on this.”
Supporting the push to save the bridge is former Western Australian premier and federal member of parliament for Fremantle Carmen Lawrence.
“It is an opportunity to keep something so significant to our industrial heritage,” Dr Lawrence told Business News.
“If we don’t, it will be a sad reflection on the thinking of government that looks at efficiency as the only apparent value. It’s straight-line thinking. It’s an engineering solution where a social solution is required.”
Cars and trucks on the bridge, circa 1940. Photo: Fremantle Society
The bridge
There can be no doubting the historical importance of the bridge. Construction on the first incarnation started in 1863, when convicts were ordered to build a stick-like structure to allow horses and carts to cross the river near the entrance of a developing harbour town.
Three decades earlier, the desperate need for a bridge was emphasised when two men–one named John Whatley–drowned while trying to ferry a cow across the river in a small boat.
Having secured the labour force and funding, the first Fremantle traffic bridge officially opened in 1866, after a notably low-key ceremony.
According to a research paper by eminent engineer Peter Palmer titled ‘Fremantle’s Bridge Heritage’, a band marched through the township to the bridge before one of the men responsible for its design and construction, Captain James Manning, gave a short address.
He said the bridge would be a “great boon to the colony” but regretted the task of building it had been left to convicts.
The November 28 edition of The Inquirer newspaper in 1866 reported there had been “no public rejoicings” about the opening because it was completed by criminals.
Within the first 20 years of the bridge’s life, concerns were raised in state parliament about its integrity.
A load test was done in 1883, using bullocks pulling wagons carting up to two tonnes of material. The consensus was that the bridge was sound enough to retain.
It was a different outcome in May of 1886, when a notice prohibiting heavy haulage was circulated.
“No persons shall be permitted to drive or lead any mob of cattle, camels or horses exceeding four in number across this bridge or any part thereof,” the notice read.
A new, lower-level bridge alongside the existing one was commissioned and opened to traffic in September 1898, before major renovation works were required to allow trams to cross by 1909. Soon after, the original bridge was demolished.
Bridge number two served the state well up until 1934, when an underwater survey found the main support timber poles were rotting and would cost more money than was practicable to replace or repair.
The commissioner of main roads, Edward Tindale, recommended the bridge be replaced by a new timber structure at a cost of about £75,000, and the bridge as we know it today was opened in December 1939.
Its predecessor was eventually removed in 1947 after the threat of WWII had passed.
It could be asserted that the McGowan government is simply repeating history in deciding to replace the old with the new.
The counter argument is that we’ve come a long way in understanding the imperative of keeping, where possible, buildings and other structures that represent history and will continue to tell a story of the past to future generations.
“When you look at the bridge, it’s magnificent,” Mr Dowson said.
“The bridge, without the vehicles travelling on it, could have decades longer and become a highline-type of development like they’ve done in New York with disused above-ground rail lines.”
An artist's impression of the new bridge. Image: Main Roads
The highline plan
The vision of the Fremantle Society, and other community groups determined to save the old traffic bridge, includes the creation of a parkland across the 220 metres of bitumen.
It’s a concept that became a reality in Manhattan, when more than two kilometres of abandoned elevated rail lines were transformed into walkways, gardens and play areas.
“It could become quite a focus for Fremantle,” Dr Lawrence said. “No-one has said it couldn’t be saved as a highline-style development. We’re talking foot traffic and bicycles.”
The former premier said there was no disputing the costs of creating a community space on the bridge and suggested a philanthropic foundation be set up to pave the way and maintain the area.
“The government could also save money on building a smaller bridge without the need for the cycle and pedestrian paths,” Dr Lawrence said.
“Let’s have a proper discussion about this, given there’s a whole planning process going on around changes to the port ahead of plans to build the outer harbour. The approach seems upside down.”
A soon-to-be-released short film, complete with an actor explaining the significance of the bridge to his grandchildren during a visit to the river, sets out the Fremantle Society’s hopes for a highline development.
“You know, they said the bridge was only a temporary structure,” the actor tells the children.
“They said that about the Eiffel Tower, too. Thankfully, our bridge is still here today as a heritage entrance to our heritage town.”
Part of the film’s argument for not destroying the bridge is the fact $26 million of taxpayers’ money has been spent repairing and maintaining it over the past five years.
“It would be a wonderful entry statement into Fremantle,” Mr Dowson told Business News.
“We need some key people who have the ear of government who think this would be a great attraction.”
In 2018, when the City of Fremantle released a vision titled ‘Freo 2029’, the highline proposal appeared to have the council’s support.
“Not only could you access across the river for pedestrians and cyclists be significantly improved, but the bridge could also become a major public space in itself, providing lookout places and seating and could even accommodate community activities such as markets,” it said.
The council leader at the time, Brad Pettitt, was in favour of the plan and recently posted on Facebook his reaction to the concept designs of the new bridge.
“It looks as if one of the longest and oldest timber bridges in the state will be entirely demolished,” the (now) Greens MP said.
“The other big disappointment is the bland design of the new bridge itself. While other recent bridges, such as the Matagarup Bridge and the soon-to-bebuilt East Perth pedestrian and cycling bridge, show some architectural flair, this one’s come straight out of the Main Roads standard bridge design manual circa 1970.”
Fremantle Mayor Hannah Fitzhardinge has reluctantly accepted that it’s unfeasible and impractical to keep the old bridge in any form.
“Romantically, I and everyone else in Fremantle have a lot of attachment to the current bridge,” Ms Fitzhardinge said.
“It is a beautiful structure with a lot of romanticism about it. But in practical terms there are a lot of challenges with it and that is what has convinced me that the best way forward is to completely move to a new bridge and not retain any of the structure.”
She said the notion of a highline-style future for the bridge was naïve to the costs of creating and maintaining one.
“Funding a highline is definitely not within the capacity of the City of Fremantle,” Ms Fitzhardinge said.
“I can’t see a government agency that would step into it, so unless there is a serious benefactor, I can’t understand who they think might fund it.”
There was also the problem of space for a new bridge if the old one was left in place because of the road alignment required on the north side.
Finally, the 26 piers on the existing bridge have long created a risk for boats trying to navigate through. The new bridge will have only three.
The mayor accepted that people were angry to see a heritage-listed structure destroyed. Along with the bridge, a nearby ferry capstan base is also part of the Heritage Council’s registration of ‘place 04027’.
“The capstan base is a rare surviving example of the technology used to haul river vessels in the nineteenth century,” the register concluded. “It may be the only extant capstan base in Western Australia and is one of a few in Australia.”
However, it appears the Beach Street capstan will be buried as part of the new bridge’s surrounding road system and plan for public open space.
A view of the current bridge from above the Swan River.
The new bridge
To reach the decisions made about the old and new bridges, the government has relied on an advisory group called the Fremantle Bridges Alliance, comprised of Main Roads and engineering, design and planning companies Arup, Lang O’Rourke and WSP.
Retaining the old traffic bridge was never an option because all government agencies agreed it had to go.
“The Fremantle Traffic Bridge as a piece of road infrastructure is obsolete and unable to be maintained,” the Environmental Protection Authority concluded.
“The wooden structure has deteriorated in the marine environment over the past 80 years of its life and is at risk of catastrophic failure.”
In 2016, after the severe erosion of one pier was recorded, the bridge was temporarily closed to allow further investigation and strengthening works.
By 2021, the alliance had prepared its Swan River Crossings sustainability report to reinforce the view that the old bridge was dangerous.
A like-for-like four-lane bridge was needed with wider pedestrian and cycling paths and a new rail bridge to cater for public transport, rather than the existing freight and passenger rail bridge to the west of the traffic bridge.
“There are risks over the longer term with increasing demand for freight on rail and/or passenger services, which will put pressure on the shared rail line,” the alliance report said.
“This restriction on container rail freight movements is likely to have a more significant impact as the volume of freight transported to and from the Fremantle Port inner harbour by rail increases.”
The new passenger rail bridge would have a lifespan of about 100 years.
Another key part of the new bridge plan is the removal of the traffic light-controlled intersection where Queen Victoria Street meets Canning Highway.
Once complete, Canning Highway will pass under the bridge entrance to Beach Street.
“This is a project about the future,” Planning and Transport Minister Rita Saffioti said during the August 21 press conference.
“We’ve been working on retaining some parts of the bridge, but it’s clear most of the bridge will have to go. This is about ensuring we get a safe bridge for commuters.”
