Matilda Bay Ferry Plan Sparks Safety Concerns

The safety of swimmers and water sports enthusiasts at Perth's popular Matilda Bay has again been thrust into the spotlight as the state government sticks to its plans to build a controversial ferry terminal at the spot, despite ongoing opposition.

Construction has yet to start on the Metronet project, which would connect ferry services from Matilda Bay and the southern suburb of Applecross to a floating pontoon at Elizabeth Quay.

The Western Australian Planning Commission approved the Matilda Bay site in December last year. A government-commissioned analysis found the area, across the road from the University of Western Australia, was the safest location for a ferry terminal.

The report said all water activities there could continue with "adjustments" that were still being finalised.

However, another commissioned report by advocacy group Safety on Swan found the project would put children, novice sailors and other water users at "serious risk" of injury or death from being hit by a ferry.

The group has long opposed the project, and hired Paul Chivers, a risk assessor and the founding director of Riskfacilitator, to conduct a review of Matilda Bay.

The review also looked into the site the group would prefer — an area further along the foreshore at the location of a now-closed restaurant known as JoJo's.

Mr Chivers's report found the government would not be able to mitigate what he said were serious risks for a high-frequency ferry service moving in and out of a busy recreational waterway.

He found people in the water would be too close to the ferries, putting their safety at an unacceptable risk.

"The issue is introducing a high-frequency vessel into an already complex recreational system when an alternative location provides greater opportunity to separate those activities by design," Mr Chivers's report stated.

Opponents of the project say water users would be at risk.

"Good risk management should favour designing out foreseeable conflict rather than relying on people to continually manage that conflict in real time."

Mr Chivers said there would be a much better and safer separation between ferries and people in the water at JoJo's.

Critics say the ferry terminal would be better built at site of the now-closed restaurant JoJo's.

Transport Minister Rita Saffioti disagreed.

Speaking on 102.5 Perth, Ms Saffioti pointed to the government's analysis of the different possible sites based on environmental, operating, waterway safety and public transport use criteria.

"Any bit of infrastructure we deliver has risk attached to it. But the aim is to mitigate those risks," Ms Saffioti said.

She said Matilda Bay was clearly the safest and best option.

The government's analysis found JoJo's had an "unacceptable safety risk" to windsurfers and kiteboarders due to the "informal" nature of the sports, and the ferry route would also cross over vessel traffic lanes in Melville Waters.

At Matilda Bay on the other hand, it found all water activities could continue with "adjustments", including a wide exclusion zone where the ferry could not go.

Criticism of the planned $29.9 million Matilda Bay terminal has drawn mounting public backlash.