THE O-BAHN CITY ACCESS PROJECT - Home · Basic Portal

THE O-BAHN CITY ACCESS PROJECT

Project Impact Report

File no: 9641541

Date: August 2015

The O-Bahn City Access Project – Project Impact Report

KNet#: 9641541 Page i

Contents 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 1

SECTION A Project Overview, Planning, and Developme nt ................................................ ............. 6

2 What is the O-Bahn City Access Project? ............................................................................... 7

3 Community and Stakeholder Engagement ........................................................................... 21

4 State Strategic Policy Context ............................................................................................... 29

5 Strategic Rationale and Outcomes for the Project ................................................................ 41

SECTION B Transport Demand, Traffic Access and Park ing ............................................... .......... 52

6 Traffic: Existing Conditions .................................................................................................... 53

7 Traffic: Future Conditions ...................................................................................................... 77

8 Parking: Existing Conditions ............................................................................................... 116

9 Parking: Impacts and Mitigation Options ............................................................................ 139

10 Cycling and Walking ............................................................................................................ 145

11 Cycling and Walking: Mitigation and Improvement Strategies ............................................ 153

SECTION C Urban Design, Park Lands and Social and E nvironmental Impacts ....................... 160

12 Urban Design and Landscape Opportunities ...................................................................... 161

13 Employment and Industry/Workplace Participation ............................................................ 166

14 Economic evaluation ........................................................................................................... 168

15 Community and Business Project Impacts ......................................................................... 169

16 Heritage ............................................................................................................................... 186

17 Flora and Fauna .................................................................................................................. 192

18 Ground and Surface Water ................................................................................................. 195

19 Geology, Soils and Site Contamination ............................................................................... 197

20 Noise and Vibration ............................................................................................................. 198

21 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................ 199

22 Greenhouse and Sustainability ........................................................................................... 201

SECTION D Construction and Staging, Concept Design Guidelines ........................................ .. 203

23 Concept Design Guidelines ................................................................................................. 204

24 Construction staging and design ......................................................................................... 208

25 Project Impact Report Conclusion....................................................................................... 214

SECTION E Appendices .............................. ..................................................................................... 215

26 Key Stakeholder Interaction ................................................................................................ 216

27 O-Bahn Historical Context ................................................................................................... 218

28 Community and Business Profile: Additional Information ................................................... 220

29 Business profile and the City economy ............................................................................... 239

30 Traffic and Passenger Demand: Additional Details ............................................................. 251

31 Urban Development and Planning ...................................................................................... 270

32 References .......................................................................................................................... 275


KNet#: 9641541 Page ii

List of Figures Figure 1: Existing O-Bahn Bus Service routes ........................................................................................ 9

Figure 2: Overview of the key features of the project O-Bahn City Access Project .............................. 15

Figure 3: Overview of the key features of the project O-Bahn City Access Project: Bundeys Road to Botanic Road (indicating priority lanes, u-Turn facility and changed parking conditions) ..................... 16

Figure 4: Hackney Bridge and Hackney Road: Concept Design Cross Section .................................. 17

Figure 5: Hackney Road: Concept Design Cross Section .................................................................... 18

Figure 6: Bus Only Tunnel emerging from Rymill Park and Rundle Road: Cross Sections ................. 19

Figure 7: State strategic policy context ................................................................................................. 29

Figure 8: 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide: Major transit corridors and structure planning priorities, including the O-Bahn corridor. .............................................................................................................. 31

Figure 9: ITLUP Public Transport corridors* ......................................................................................... 34

Figure 10: 2038 Mode split objectives of the Smart Move Strategy ..................................................... 36

Figure 11: Components That Make up Timetable Travel Time ‘Time Points’ ........................................ 42

Figure 12: Figure showing the daily passenger boarding increase to achieve the public transport target and modelled before and after project results ............................................................................ 45

Figure 13: Cars, buses, and passengers .............................................................................................. 46

Figure 14: Analysis of cars and buses and how many people they moved on Currie / Grenfell Street near King William Street prior to the introduction of bus lanes. ............................................................ 47

Figure 15: Previous Rundle Road Tunnel option, announced in February 2014 .................................. 49

Figure 16: Map of the O-Bahn user catchment area for the purposes of this profile ............................ 55

Figure 17: Current access conditions on Hackney Road including all turns ......................................... 58

Figure 18: Hackney Road Bundeys Road Intersection - Turning Counts ............................................. 60

Figure 19: Hackney Road Richmond Street Junction - Turning Counts and Crash Data ..................... 61

Figure 20: Richmond Street Junction – Easbound Traffic Splits ........................................................... 63

Figure 21: Richmond Street Junction – Westbound Traffic Splits ......................................................... 63

Figure 22: Hackney Road Botanic Drive/Cambridge Street intersection - Turning Counts and Crash Data ....................................................................................................................................................... 64

Figure 23: Hackney Road Wyandra Lane Junction - Turning Counts and Crash Data ........................ 65

Figure 24: Hackney Road Plane Tree Drive/Athelney Avenue intersection - Turning Counts and Crash Data ....................................................................................................................................................... 66

Figure 25: Hackney Road/Botanic Street/Goodman building parking main entrance intersection - Turning Counts and Crash Data ........................................................................................................... 67

Figure 26: Hackney Road Westbury Street Junction - Turning Counts and Crash Data ...................... 68

Figure 27: Existing turning volumes - North Terrace and Osborne Street ............................................ 69

Figure 28: Hackney Road/Dequetteville Terrace intersection with Botanic Road/North Terrace .......... 70

Figure 29: Existing turning volumes - Dequetteville Terrace and King William Street, Kent Town ....... 72

Figure 30: Dequetteville Terrace – Rundle Road/Rundle Street – Turning counts ............................... 73

Figure 31: Existing and post O-Bahn City Access Project turning movements for all modes (including buses) AM Peak .................................................................................................................................... 80

Figure 32: Existing and post O-Bahn City Access Project turning movements for all modes (including buses) PM Peak .................................................................................................................................... 81

Figure 33: Average Inbound Bus Travel Time (AM) .............................................................................. 84

Figure 34: Average Outbound Bus Travel Time (PM) ........................................................................... 84

Figure 35: Average Intersection Delay (AM) ......................................................................................... 86

Figure 36: Average Travel Time Inner Ring Route, southbound (AM) .................................................. 87

Figure 37: Average Travel Time Inner Ring Route, northbound (PM) ................................................... 88

Figure 38: Average Travel Time East Terrace, northbound (AM) .......................................................... 89

Figure 39: Average Travel Time East Terrace, northbound (PM) .......................................................... 89

Figure 40: Average Travel Time Rundle Street (E) to North Terrace (W) (AM) ..................................... 90

Figure 41: Average Travel Time Rundle Street (E) to Rundle Street (W) (AM) .................................... 91


KNet#: 9641541 Page iii

Figure 42: Scatter Plot of U-turn Capacity of U-turn and Conflicting Traffic Flow for unsignalised median openings ................................................................................................................................... 94

Figure 45: Proposed Access to Northern Section of Hackney Road .................................................... 96

Figure 44: Proposed Access to Southern Section of Hackney Road ................................................... 96

Figure 45: Proposed Wyandra Lane changes .................................................................................... 101

Figure 46: Botanic Garden/Goodman Building – proposed changes to entry and parking ................ 103

Figure 47: Alternative access to Hackney Road (south-to-north) for Athelney Avenue, Botanic Street and Westbury Street ........................................................................................................................... 104

Figure 48: Location of and recorded turning movements to and from access points on the north side of Grenfell Street ................................................................................................................................. 108

Figure 49: Car Park Access 4 conflict assessment ............................................................................. 109


Figure 51: Charlick Circuit conflict assessment .................................................................................. 111


Figure 53: East Terrace turning movements to car parks and access lanes ...................................... 115

Figure 54: Diagram of off-street public car parks located within 400m or 5 minutes walking distance of Rundle Street/Frome Street Corner .................................................................................................... 117

Figure 55: Arrival and departure profile of the three U-Park car parks located in the east end, U PARK website ................................................................................................................................................ 118

Figure 56: Cumulative usage of the three U-Park car parks in the east end, U PARK website ......... 119

Figure 57: Cumulative U-Park Occupancy Thursday 23/04/2015 ...................................................... 122

Figure 58: Cumulative U-Park Occupancy Friday 24/04/2015 ........................................................... 122

Figure 59: Cumulative U-Park Occupancy Saturday 02/05/2015 ....................................................... 123

Figure 60: Cumulative U-Park Occupancy Sunday 26/04/2015 ......................................................... 123

Figure 61: Time of parking along Rundle Road (source McGregor Tan Survey 2015) ....................... 129

Figure 62: Duration of parking along Rundle Road (source McGregor Tan Survey 2015) ................. 130

Figure 63: Duration of stay (parking) along Rundle Road (source ACC Survey 2013) ...................... 131

Figure 64: Utilisation of Loading Zones in the East End precinct ....................................................... 137

Figure 65: U-PARK vacancies on a Tuesday night, U-Park website .................................................. 142

Figure 66: U-Park car park vacancies on a Friday and Saturday, including nights – sourced from U Park website: http://upark.com.au/ ...................................................................................................... 143

Figure 67: Existing cycling and walking infrastructure, and pedestrian/cyclist counts........................ 147

Figure 68: Existing Cycling and Walking scenario .............................................................................. 150

Figure 69: New Shared Path Bridge (Cross Section) ......................................................................... 154

Figure 70: New Shared Path Bridge Plan View, showing existing and new connections ................... 154

Figure 71: Diagram of Rundle Park/Kadlitpinna, the location of numerous events. ........................... 163

Figure 72: Rymill Park/Mullawirraburka, the location of various events and leisure........................... 163

Figure 73: Land use description map of the Adelaide central business district. ................................. 170

Figure 74: East Terrace businesses opening hours and current parking arrangements .................... 173

Figure 75: East Terrace current parking arrangements and segment lengths .................................... 174

Figure 76: Grenfell Street businesses opening hours and current parking arrangements ................. 175

Figure 77: Grenfell Street current parking arrangements and segment lengths................................. 176

Figure 78: Bent Street and Union Street Parking Controls Map (source Adelaide City Council) ....... 177

Figure 79: Vardon Avenue Parking Controls Map (source Adelaide City Council) ............................. 178

Figure 80: Aerial image highlighting the position and scale of the historic brick frontage along Grenfell Street as well as the set-back apartment buildings. ........................................................................... 183

Figure 81: The building on the corner of Grenfell Street and East Terrace may get an increase in traffic of up to 6% on the Grenfell side, but experience a significant reduction of up to 12% on their East Terrace side. ........................................................................................................................................ 184

Figure 82: Apartment buildings set back from Grenfell Street and protected by the historic brick frontage. .............................................................................................................................................. 185

Figure 83: Colonel Lights' vision for Adelaide: The City grid and defining park lands ........................ 188


KNet#: 9641541 Page iv

Figure 84: Land use description map of the O-Bahn user catchment area. ....................................... 220

Figure 85: Percentage of City workers who travel by car to work, ABS census 2011 ........................ 222

Figure 86: Percent of resident City workers travelling to the Adelaide CBD by bus. .......................... 225

Figure 87: O-Bahn User Catchment: CBD workers commuting by car............................................... 226

Figure 88: O-Bahn Catchment Index of relative socio-economic disadvantage (SEIFA index – darker shades represent greater socio-economic disadvantage) greyed areas not included in catchment .. 228

Figure 89: Employment Survey block analysis by Adelaide City Council (ACC2011 Land Use Employment Report). .......................................................................................................................... 230

Figure 90: The location of City residents, survey block analysis by ACC (Draft). ............................... 231

Figure 91: Percent of the population currently attending university. ................................................... 233

Figure 92: Location of City students, survey block analysis by ACC (Draft). ...................................... 234

Figure 93: 2011 Journey to Work patterns of RAH employees ........................................................... 238

Figure 94: Land use description map of the Adelaide central business district. ................................. 241

Figure 95: City users purpose: City User Population Research (ACC, 2013) .................................... 242

Figure 96: Origin of City users, City User Population Research (ACC, 2013) .................................... 242

Figure 97: Accessing the City, City User Population Research (ACC, 2013). .................................... 243

Figure 98: Purpose for bus travel ........................................................................................................ 243

Figure 99 : Restaurant chairs by survey block (ACC, 2015 Draft) activities. ...................................... 246

Figure 100: Industry share of the O-Bahn user catchment employment sector. ................................ 249

Figure 101: Schematic of all O-Bahn bus services and interchange connections including non-City bound services .................................................................................................................................... 251

Figure 102: Services and connections provided by the three interchanges. ...................................... 252

Figure 103: Currie/Grenfell Street as the main east-west corridor for the O-Bahn and key destinations. ............................................................................................................................................................ 253

Figure 104: Average daily boardings at eastbound bus stops in Currie / Grenfell Streets (excluding North Terrace boardings) .................................................................................................................... 254

Figure 105: inset of the number of daily bus services per City route in the central CBD area (2012), based on current contracts.................................................................................................................. 255

Figure 106: Klemzig Interchange to Hackney Road: Trip times across Time of Day (DPTI) .............. 258

Figure 107: Hackney Road and Grenfell Street: Trip times across Time of Day (DPTI) .................... 259

Figure 108: Bluetooth Detector Locations ........................................................................................... 262

Figure 109: Hackney Road, St Peters AM Origin-Destination survey ................................................ 263

Figure 110: North Terrace, Kent Town AM Origin-Destination Study .................................................. 263

Figure 111: Rundle Street, Kent Town AM Origin and Destination Study ........................................... 264

Figure 112: Model extent of subarea for meso-scopic simulation (Google Maps) .............................. 267

Figure 113: Model extent of subarea for micro-scopic simulation (Google Maps) .............................. 268

Figure 114: Development Plan Zones. ................................................................................................ 273

Figure 115: Development Plan Policy Areas ....................................................................................... 274


KNet#: 9641541 Page v

List of Tables Table 1: Concept Design Progression ................................................................................................... 12

Table 2: O-Bahn City Access Project contribution to South Australia’s Strategic Plan Objectives ....... 30

Table 3: Project contribution to the ITLUP Goals and Objectives ......................................................... 35

Table 4: Growth targets for Adelaide’s northern region from the 30 Year Plan. .................................... 38

Table 5: Growth targets for Adelaide’s eastern region (excl. CBD) from the 30 Year Plan. .................. 39

Table 6: HELSP estimated dwelling targets for the northern and eastern Adelaide regions. ............... 39

Table 7: GPS Based Travel Time Survey, Indicating Significant Variability in Travel Time ................... 44

Table 8: Existing Crash Summary – Hackney Road ............................................................................. 71

Table 9: Summary of changes to right turn movements into and out of side streets ............................ 92

Table 10: Origins of westbound Richmond Street traffic at the junction with Hackney Road ............... 97

Table 11: traffic likely to be affected due to banned right turns from Richmond Street ......................... 98

Table 12: Estimating U-turns at Plane Tree Drive ............................................................................... 102

Table 13: Geometric Criteria ............................................................................................................... 106

Table 14: Bus lane queue length calculation and comparison for Grenfell Street .............................. 113

Table 15: Off-street and On Street Car parking pricing ....................................................................... 120

Table 16: Rundle Street Carpark Utilisation on a Wednesday, 21 November 2012. .......................... 124

Table 17: Rundle Street Carpark Occupancy on a Wednesday, 21 November, 2012 ........................ 124

Table 18: East Terrace and Rundle Road Carpark Utilisation on a Sunday, 9 March, 2013 .............. 126

Table 19: Rundle Road Car park Utilisation on a Friday Night, 26 July 2013. .................................... 127

Table 20: Rundle Road Carpark Utilisation on a Wednesday night, 22 April 2015 ............................. 128

Table 21: Rundle Road and East Terrace on-street car parks ............................................................ 140

Table 22: Project case On-Street car parking on Rundle Road and East Terrace .............................. 141

Table 23: Overview of the Cost benefit Analysis for the project .......................................................... 168

Table 24: Summary of State Heritage places within or in close proximity to the project area ............ 189

Table 25: Summary of Local Heritage places within or in close proximity to the study area. ............. 190

Table 26: Summary of vegetation impacts .......................................................................................... 193

Table 27: Mitigation / management measures .................................................................................... 194

Table 28: Mitigation Methods .............................................................................................................. 202

Table 29: Geometric Criteria ............................................................................................................... 204

Table 30: O-Bahn Geometric Criteria .................................................................................................. 205

Table 31: Summary of the demographic characteristics of the O-Bahn user catchment area. .......... 221

Table 32: The top 15 LGAs to which workers from the O-Bahn User Catchment commute............... 223

Table 33: Change in travel to work by bus (wider metro area) between 2006-2011 Census years ... 224

Table 34: Percent of the population currently studying at university. .................................................. 232

Table 35: PPES population projections for each SLA within the O-Bahn user catchment ................. 250

Table 36: Timetabled average trip times for O-Bahn journey segments (derived from Adelaide Metro published timetable data) .................................................................................................................... 257

Table 37: Travel time comparisons from DPTI GPS data assessment ............................................... 257

The O-Bahn City Access Project – Project Impact Report 1 Executive Summary

KNet#: 9641541 Page 1 of 275

1 Executive Summary

The Project Impact Report describes the O-Bahn City Access Project and summarises investigations and planning work to date. It presents the environmental, social and economic effects and opportunities of the Project. The Report has been prepared to help interested groups, individuals, businesses, government agencies and local government understand the rationale behind the project and the potential changes, impacts and mitigation measures.

1.1 The Current Problem At 12 km long, the Adelaide O-Bahn is the longest and fastest guided bus service in the world. It is the most highly patronised public transport corridor in South Australia. The on-road section of the O-Bahn corridor between Gilberton and the Central Business District (CBD) currently has limited measures to protect public transport services from the effects of road congestion. Between the guided busway corridor exit and entry point at Gilberton and the CBD, O-Bahn buses operate within the roadway, either sharing the carriageway with other vehicles, or running within short sections of priority bus lanes. Between Hackney Road, and Grenfell Street, the efficiency of bus services is significantly compromised by the current heavily congested traffic conditions.

This congestion impacts on bus services by increasing travel times and increasing the variability of on-time running. During peak periods, it can take almost twice as long to travel the 1.45 km from Gilberton to Grenfell Street as the 12 km trip along the guided busway from Tea Tree Plaza to Park Terrace. Average bus speeds can be as low as 20 km/hr and 25% of travel time can be due to delays at intersections.

Vehicle movements at the Hackney Road/Botanic Road intersection are currently at or approaching capacity, with around 79,000 vehicle movements on an average weekday. Delays currently experienced on this section of the O-Bahn but route would increase over time without an infrastructure solution and would be exacerbated by the additional buses and services which are proposed to operate along the O-Bahn corridor over the next decade.

1.2 The Project Solutions In 2014, the Premier announced that $160 million would be provided by the State Government to extend the O-Bahn track from Hackney Road into the City.

The primary objective of the O-Bahn City Access Project is to:

Improve travel times and reliability, and reduce on-road delays for users of the O-Bahn service between the end of the busway at Gilberton and Grenfell Street over the next 30 years.

Other key objectives (refer section 2.2) of the project are to:

• Improve safety and travel time, and reduce congestion for traffic on the Inner Ring Route;


KNet#: 9641541 Page 2 of 275

• Allow for potential long term transport initiatives;

• Minimise impacts to the travelling public, business operations and the wider community during construction;

• Minimise impacts upon the environment and heritage, including the Park Lands; and

• Complete the project within the $160 million allocated budget by the second half of 2017.

Following a review of the 2014 scheme, a revised design was announced on 25 February 2015. The main features of the 2015 scheme included:

• Hackney Road at-grade priority bus lanes : Provision of two (one in each direction) centrally aligned bus-only lanes along Hackney Road, providing priority access for buses between the end section of guided O-Bahn track at Gilberton and just north of the signalised Hackney Road/Botanic Road/North Terrace intersection;

• Bus-only Tunnel : A tunnel commencing on Hackney Road, taking O-Bahn buses below the Botanic Road intersection, Dequetteville Terrace, Rundle Park and Rundle Road, before returning to grade within Rymill Park on an alignment which lines up with the existing priority bus lanes on Grenfell Street;

• Realignment of Rundle Road : Provision of a road link that effectively realigns Rundle Road so that it ties into Grenfell Street at its western end. The existing Rundle Road carriageway would be closed, enabling the net return of approximately 3,000 square metres of current road reserve back to Park Lands, effectively consolidating the north western portion of Rymill Park with Rundle Park;

• Bridgeworks : A new bridge structure constructed adjacent to the existing western Hackney Road Bridge to accommodate a shared use pedestrian/cycling path crossing the River Torrens.

1.3 Public Consultation Following the February 2015 announcement, extensive public consultation was undertaken to engage with a wide range of stakeholders, including government agencies, local government, emergency services, business and industry groups, O-Bahn users and the wider community. This process included community information sessions and open days, in addition to several key stakeholder forums and briefings, to ensure South Australians had the opportunity to put forward their views on the revised proposal (refer Section • for further details). The key issues identified during this consultation period included:

• Impacts on the character and amenity of the Park La nds , in particular, the impact on Rymill Park;

• Impacts on businesses due to the loss of on-street parking , in particular, the loss of Rundle Road parking spaces;

• Hackney Road traffic conditions , including impacts on local access such as right-hand turning movements restrictions;

• Traffic congestion on the Inner Ring Route and through key intersections; and

• Provision for pedestrians and cyclists .


KNet#: 9641541 Page 3 of 275

1.4 The Current Proposal To address these issues raised during public consultation, following the community consultation period, the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) worked collaboratively with Adelaide City Council (ACC) and other key stakeholders to identify further changes to the design that could be implemented, whilst still delivering on the key project objectives to improve travel time and reliability of O-Bahn bus services, enhance safety, and ease congestion on the Inner Ring Route.

The outcome of this work was the development of a scheme that retains Rundle Road with the following features:

• Retention of the existing Rundle Road alignment ; including some modifications to the cross section to separate bicycle movements from the main carriageway;

• An extension of the tunnel by an additional 140 met res; (to a total length of 650 metres), with the entry/exit portal located closer to Grenfell Street, to reduce the impact on the amenity of Rymill Park;

• Modification to the layout of East Terrace and Rund le Road to accommodate a net increase of over 50 on-street parking spaces;

• A new off-road shared-use pedestrian/cycle path ; The Botanic Gardens preferred option is to provide a tree lined shared pedestrian - cycle path along Botanic Park and to improving the landscape character for users of Botanic Park, and making the eastern entry of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens safer for pedestrians. This option requires relocation of car parking to the Gardens eastern entry.

Information on the O-Bahn City Access Project, including an animation showing how the project would operate once complete is also available on the project website for public viewing: www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/public_transport_projects/o-bahn_upgrade_projects

1.5 Benefits This O-Bahn City Access Project will further promote the O-Bahn as a more favourable travel option than private motor vehicles for accessing the City, leading to a predicted travel mode shift for these journeys over time. Benefits delivered by this proposal include:

• Improved travel time and reliability for bus servic es will enable O-Bahn timetables to be optimised, allowing for up to a 7 minute average daily saving as well as improved service reliability. For those people living in the North East suburbs who commute to and from work in the CBD, the benefit is exponentially greater during peak times when traffic is at its heaviest ;

• Reducing traffic congestion on the Inner Ring Route by grade-separating the bus corridor from key signalised intersections along Hackney Road and Dequetteville Terrace, thereby improving functionality for commuters and freight traffic traversing the City fringe;

• Improvements to traffic safety through the proposed restrictions to various right turn movements, and replacement with alternative u-turn facilities to retain access to the local road network, whilst addressing the significant existing safety issues associated with these movements, and reinforcing Hackney Road’s functional role as part of the Inner Ring Route;

• Improvements to pedestrian and cycling access and s afety to provide safer links to the existing City pedestrian/cycling network, and improve their attractiveness as a means of accessing the City including:

• a new shared-use path alongside the Botanic Gardens on the western side of Hackney Road (including a new bridge over the River Torrens); and


KNet#: 9641541 Page 4 of 275

• improved pedestrian and cycling facilities along Rundle Road.

• Improving the East End business precinct by providing improved customer access with a quicker and more reliable public transport system, including increased parking capacity for those travelling by car; and

• Improved amenity , along East Terrace and Frome Road by re-routing O-Bahn buses into the realigned O-Bahn corridor.

The benefits obtained by the successful delivery of this project will contribute to achieving the goals contained within the State Government’s Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan (ITLUP), which identified the need “to improve O-Bahn access to the Adelaide City Centre” as a priority. This improvement to public transport infrastructure also aligns with the State Government’s South Australian Strategic Plan targets, in particular to increase the use of public transport to 10% of metropolitan weekday passenger vehicle kilometres travelled by 2018.

1.6 Challenges During Delivery The main challenges in delivering the O-Bahn City Access Project are associated with ensuring impacts on the environment, business operations, residents and the hosting of major events during the construction phase are sensitively and effectively managed in consultation with the relevant stakeholders.

The project team has conducted an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) in accordance with the state and federal legislative process. The impact assessment focuses on flora and fauna, hydrology, soil characterisation and contamination, non-indigenous and indigenous heritage values, noise, vibration and air quality. A number of technical specialists have been engaged to provide assessments and recommendations which will be used to manage the range of environmental issues encountered.

The successful contractor will need to develop a range of management plans and strategies to minimise the impacts of construction on businesses, residents and event coordinators in close consultation with the department and relevant stakeholders. This includes the management of traffic congestion and bus operations, minimising the impacts of noise, dust and visual impacts, and facilitating accesses where required.

The Project team has established a number of working groups with relevant Councils and other key stakeholders impacted by the proposed construction works. As project planning and concept design progresses, the Project team will continue to work with stakeholders to ensure the best overall outcomes are achieved.

1.7 Purpose and Objectives of the Project Impact Re port This Project Impact Report describes the O-Bahn City Access Project, summarises investigations and planning work to date and presents environmental, social and economic effects and opportunities of the Project. Although investigations have already been undertaken, further assessment is required during the detailed planning and design phase of the project.

The Project Impact Report has been prepared to help interested groups, individual businesses, government agencies and local government understand the project. It also addresses DPTI’s response to issues raised during the formal community consultation stage. It aims to:

• Introduce and explain the need for the project;

• Describe the development of the project;

• Describe the existing environment in the project area; and

• Outline the effects and opportunities associated with the project.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 5 of 275

1.8 Content and Structure of the Project Impact Rep ort The Project Impact Report identifies the key issues, impacts and changes associated with the project, as well as presenting key mitigation measures to minimise these impacts and maximise opportunities.

It contains the following key sections:

• Section A: Project Overview, Planning and Development

• Section B: Transport Demand, Traffic Access and Parking

• Section C: Urban Design, Park Lands and Social and Environmental Impacts

• Section D: Construction and Staging, Concept Design Guidelines

• Section E: Appendices, Glossary, General Abbreviations, References


KNet#: 9641541 Page 6 of 275

SECTION A Project Overview , Planning , and Development

The O-Bahn City Access Project – Project Impact Report 2 What is the O-Bahn City Access Project?

KNet#: 9641541 Page 7 of 275

2 What is the O-Bahn City Access Project?

2.1 Introduction The Adelaide O-Bahn (sometimes referred to as the North Eastern Busway), is an iconic bus rapid transit system, that is the longest and fastest guided bus service in the world, as well as the most highly patronised public transport corridor in South Australia. Built in the mid1980s the O-Bahn 12 kilometre long guided busway with three interchanges along the length of the corridor connects the north eastern suburbs of metropolitan Adelaide to the Central Business District (CBD). The guided busway ends at Hackney Road just north of Bundeys Road, Gilberton. O-Bahn services then travel with general traffic along the Inner Ring Route via Hackney Road, through the east Park Lands and into the CBD along Grenfell Street and Currie Street (refer Figure 1).

Between the guided busway corridor exit/entry at Gilberton and the CBD, O-Bahn buses operate within the roadway, either sharing the carriageway with other vehicles, or running within short sections of priority bus lanes. On the on-road section of the O-Bahn corridor, the efficiency of bus services are significantly compromised by the heavily congested traffic conditions impacting on journey times and most importantly, timetable reliability.

The Hackney Road/Botanic Road and Rundle Road/Dequetteville Terrace intersections on the Inner Ring Route are currently at or approaching capacity with approximately 79,000 vehicle movements on an average weekday. Unless there is infrastructure intervention, current delays on the on-road section of the O-Bahn are projected to worsen with the increased number of bus services that are proposed to operate along the O-Bahn corridor over the next decade. The current O-Bahn bus routes are shown in Figure 1.

2.2 Project Objectives In 2014, the Premier announced that $160 million would be provided by the State Government to extend the O-Bahn track from Hackney Road into the City in line with the directions of the State Government’s Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan (ITLUP). The primary objective of the O-Bahn City Project Access is to:

To improve travel times and reliability, and reduce on-road delays for users of the O-Bahn service between the end of the busway at Gilberton and Grenfell Street over the next 30 years.

Other key objectives of the Project are to:

• Improve safety and travel time, and reduce congestion for traffic on the Inner Ring Route;

• Allow for potential long term transport initiatives;

• Minimise impacts to the travelling public, business operations and the wider community during construction;

• Minimise impacts upon the environment and heritage, including the Park Lands; and

• Complete the project within the $160 million allocated budget by the second half of 2017.

The project planning and concept design also needs to remain cognisant of expected growth and preparing for future demand and provide an inclusive and accessible movement network for local and regional attractors.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 8 of 275

2.3 Key Elements of the O-Bahn City Access Project

Following a review of the 2014 scheme, a revised design was announced on 25 February 2015.

The Project broadly consists of the following elements:

• Hackney Road at-grade priority bus lanes : from the current O-Bahn exit point at Gilberton, buses will continue via two (one in each direction) centrally aligned priority bus lanes along Hackney Road. The inbound bus lanes would commence after Richmond Street and continue all the way to the tunnel entry ramp approach to the Botanic Road/North Terrace intersection. The outbound bus lane extends from the tunnel exit ramp north of the Botanic Road/North Terrace intersection to the O-Bahn’s dedicated corridor entry chute on Mann Road. Provision of this lane requires an upgrade of the western bridge structure over the River Torrens, as well as a modification to the layout of the Bundeys Road signalised intersection.

• Bus only tunnel : grade separation of key intersections has been determined to be the most efficient means of addressing capacity issues through the most congested section of the O-Bahn corridor. After entering the tunnel via the entry ramp on Hackney Road’s northern approach to the Botanic Road/North Terrace intersection, buses will travel in a tunnel for approximately 650 metres beneath that intersection and Dequetteville Terrace, following the old tramway embankment south of Rundle Park and Rundle Road, before returning to grade within Rymill Park approximately 40 metres east of the East Terrace/Grenfell Street intersection (refer to Figure 2 for details).

• Bridgeworks : a new pedestrian/cycling bridge structure constructed adjacent to the existing western Hackney Road Bridge to accommodate a shared-use path crossing the River Torrens.

• Rundle Road and East Terrace layout modifications : modifications to the layout of East Terrace and Rundle Road, between existing kerb lines, to improve pedestrian and cycling facilities along Rundle Road and to provide a net increase in on-street parking capacity by over 50 spaces.

The O-Bahn City Access Project seeks to improve the efficiency and reduce the travel time into the City for O-Bahn users and reduce congestion at Inner Ring Route intersections and further promote the O-Bahn as a favourable travel option, reducing on road private vehicular traffic as people decide to switch modes of travel over time.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 9 of 275

Figure 1: Existing O-Bahn Bus Service routes

Rundle Road

North Terrace

Grenfell Street

Wine Centre

Botanic Gardens

Rundle Park

Rymill Park

Legend

Existing Route

Optional Route (Subject to Driver Discretion)

Proposed O-Bahn City Access Tunnel Route

Botanic Park


KNet#: 9641541 Page 10 of 275

2.4 Design and Concept Progression The detailed development, design and delivery of the O-Bahn City Access Project is ongoing, however the key elements of the project are intended to remain unchanged (i.e. the bus only priority lanes, bus only tunnel) to achieve the project objectives (refer to Section 2.2 of this report).

As project planning and concept design progresses, the project team will continue to work with key stakeholders and multiple discipline areas. Opportunities for the refinement to the project will be incorporated where possible as the design progresses and during the detailed design and construction phase of the project.

The project enquiry line: 1300 443 198, project email: [email protected] and project website: www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/public_transport_projects/o-bahn_upgrade_projects will be maintained as primary communication methods for the life of the project.

2.4.1 Design assumptions and features The road design for the O-Bahn City Access Project is based on the following operational assumptions and features, which have been considered and incorporated into the latest concept design (refer to Figure 2 to Figure 6):

• The Inner Ring Route functionality and capacity is to be maximised;

• Hackney Road will have a continuous, dedicated bus lane northbound from the tunnel portal to the existing chute;

• Hackney Road will have a continuous dedicated bus lane southbound from south of Richmond Street to the tunnel entrance;

• The historic Hackney Road Bridge (East Carriageway) over the River Torrens is to be retained;

• The existing (1965) Hackney Road Bridge (West Carriageway) over the River Torrens is to be modified to enable an additional bus lane and a new shared path bridge to be constructed to provide pedestrian and cycling facilities;

• Access to side streets adjacent to Hackney Road shall be modified to balance improvements to safety whilst providing appropriate access to key stakeholders and residents. U-turn facilities will be provided at a number of locations and alternative access routes are also available;

• Where practical, bicycle facilities will be separated from the Inner Ring Route traffic;

• Existing pedestrian crossings on Hackney Road are to be retained and where practical enhanced;

• Historic buildings on the north-east, north-west and south-west corners of the Hackney Road / Botanic Road intersection are to be retained;

• The road design shall minimise the impact on the Park Lands and improve the amenity of both East Terrace and Rundle Road while encouraging cycling and walking in the precinct;

• Improved pedestrian and cycling facilities will be developed along Rundle Road;

• Parking will be increased by more than 50 car parks through reconfiguring East Terrace and Rundle Road;

• East Terrace is to be re-aligned between Hutt Street and Grenfell Street;

• Landscaping opportunities within the medians and verges of Hackney Road, Rundle Road and East Terrace shall be maximised; and


KNet#: 9641541 Page 11 of 275

• The project design shall consider and allow for a future transport initiatives as identified in the ITLUP.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 12 of 275

2.5 Changes to the scheme in response to community consultation and ongoing design development

The current concept for the -Bahn City Access Project was announced in 10 June 2015 following an extensive community consultation period. The following table summarises the resultant changes now captured in the current concept design announced on 10 June 2010:

Table 1: Concept Design Progression Key issues Responses

Character and amenity of the Park Lands - In particular, impact on Rymill Park: Concerns were raised that the project will negatively impact on the landscape and urban design characteristics within the project area. In particular, the amenity and safety of Rymill Park.

The project has established urban design principles which will guide high quality design responses for progressing the O-Bahn City Access Project, while respecting and enhancing the existing cultural and heritage aspects. DPTI has worked collaboratively with the Adelaide City Council (AC)C in the development of a “Rundle Road Retained” option, which contained the following features:

• An extension of the tunnel by an additional 140 metres (to a total length of 650 metres), with the entry/exit portal located much closer to Grenfell Street, to reduce the impact on the amenity of Rymill Park;

• Lowering of the grade line of the busway in Rymill Park as it ramps back to ground level in the vicinity of the old tram embankment.

• Better use made of the embankment to aid in the provision of screening between the Rymill Park lake recreational area and the busway.

• Retention of existing vegetation on the southern side of the old tramway embankment.

This will increase the physical separation, and reduce the visual and noise impacts from buses in the vicinity of Rymill Park Lake.

Parking impacts: Comments were received that the loss of existing on-street parking facilities on Rundle Road would impact on business operations within the East End Precinct.

• Modification to the layout of Rundle Road and East Terrace were undertaken to provide a net increase of over 50 additional spaces.

• Increased on-street parking capacity, the majority of which are located closer to East End businesses and eateries.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 13 of 275

Key issues Responses

Hackney Road traffic and local access: Concerns were raised about the local traffic access for the suburbs of College Park and Hackney.

Accident statistics over the last decade indicate there is a significant safety issue associated with existing access arrangements to/from Hackney Road from the adjacent local road network. In particular, greater than 60% of accidents recorded along Hackney Road have involved vehicles attempting a right-turn manoeuvre. Irrespective of this project, there is a need to address this existing safety issue. Accordingly, DPTI have endeavoured to develop a practical solution to this problem (refer Section 8), whilst balancing the requirement to maintain reasonable access for the local residents of Hackney and College Park, with the need to address the significant existing safety concerns associated with these movements. The proposed solution involves the use of u-turn slots within the central median at various locations. Following the community consultation process, the following refinements to the design were made:

• Provision of an additional u-turn/right-turn facility at Vailima Court;

• Provision of an additional u-turn facility on Dequetteville Terrace, opposite King William Street.

• Modifications to the “Bus Lane” and red “Bus Only Lane” pavement markings to facilitate easier access to the proposed u-turn lanes.

This treatment, including the proposed right-turn restrictions, reinforces the function of Hackney Road as part of the Inner Ring Route. Typically, to maintain the high level function of this road (i.e. the safe and efficient movement of all types of vehicles around the City); these roads should have minimal disruption to traffic flow, with minimal direct side road or property access (potentially using service roads).


KNet#: 9641541 Page 14 of 275

Key issues Responses

Pedestrian and cycling access – in particular safe crossing of Hackney Road and connections with pedestrian/cycling infrastructure.

• Extension of the off-road shared-use pedestrian/cycle path along the Botanic Gardens side of Hackney Road (including a new shared-use path bridge crossing of the River Torrens), increasing the safety and accessibility of those links into the City. The Botanic Gardens preferred option is to provide a tree lined shared pedestrian / cycle path along Botanic Park and to improve the landscape character for users of Botanic Park and to make the Eastern entry of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens safer for pedestrians. This option requires relocation of car parking to the Gardens eastern entry.

• Retention of the existing Rundle Road alignment, including modifications to improve cyclist and pedestrian safety.

• Retention of and minor modifications to three existing pedestrian refuge crossings on Hackney Road – each remaining in close proximity to their existing locations.

• Additional off-road cycling facilities in the Park Lands to connect with existing cycling infrastructure (such as the Norwood Bikeway and Adelaide Park Lands Trails).

• Further development of Park Land trails is proposed in consultation with the Adelaide City Council.

Traffic Congestion – Inner Ring Route and through Key Intersections : Concerns that the closure of existing Rundle Road with impact on traffic flows along Inner Ring Route and through major intersections in the East End precinct.

Increased capacity achieved by:

• Rundle Road existing alignment retained. • Provision of second right turn lane from Hackney into Botanic

Road (i.e. replacing existing bus only lane) and tunnel providing grade separation of bus movements.

• Re-routing of O-Bahn buses from North Terrace – Frome Road – Grenfell Street route (35 buses in peak hour).

• Introduction of free flow left turn slip lane Dequetteville Terrace into Botanic Road.

2.6 Current Concept Design The following figures (Figure 2 to Figure 6) illustrate the most recent project concept designs and cross sections for the O-Bahn City Access Project.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 15 of 275

Figure 2: Overview of the key features of the proje ct O-Bahn City Access Project


KNet#: 9641541 Page 16 of 275

Figure 3: Overview of the key features of the proje ct O-Bahn City Access Project: Bundeys Road to Bota nic Road (indicating priority lanes, u-Turn facilit y and changed parking conditions)



KNet#: 9641541 Page 18 of 275

Figure 5: Hackney Road: Concept Design Cross Sectio n


KNet#: 9641541 Page 19 of 275

Figure 6: Bus Only Tunnel emerging from Rymill Park and Rundle Road: Cross Sections


KNet#: 9641541 Page 20 of 275

2.7 Project timing

DPTI will continue to refine the concept design through the detailed design phase of the project. A procurement process is being undertaken to appoint a contractor that will undertake the detailed design and construction of the Project. Prior to awarding the contract, the Project will be presented to the Parliamentary Public Works Committee for its consideration and reporting to Parliament. It is anticipated that the main contract will be awarded in late 2015. It is therefore envisaged construction works will commence in late 2015/early 2016 with expected project completion in the second half of 2017. DPTI will also complete other early works packages such as service relocation works in last quarter of 2015.

In summary, there are a number of separate and parallel processes are being undertaken to ensure the project can be achieved in a timely manner including:

• Ongoing collaborative work with established working groups, including councils and key stakeholders;

• Progression of procurement processes;

• Preparation of the report for presentation to the Parliamentary Public Works Committee;

• Ongoing detailed design development; and

• Obtaining required approvals.

2.8 Approvals

The nature and extent of construction works required within the Park Lands and River Torrens areas invokes the requirements of a number of Acts.

Of specific note, the Adelaide Park Lands are a nationally listed heritage site under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC) Act.

There are a number of regulatory and legislative approvals processes being undertaken for the project including the following:

• Working in compliance with approvals from the Adelaide City Council for the project works in the Park Lands, site investigations and design development in accordance with relevant legislation such as the Adelaide Park Lands Act 2005; and the Local Government Act 1999;

• Obtaining approvals as required from other key stakeholders such as City of Norwood, Payneham and St Peters and Corporation of the Town of Walkerville;

• Progression of a Ministerial Development Plan Amendment (DPA) for approval to work in the Park Lands;

• Preparation and lodgement of a Development Application for approval under the Development Act 1993;

• Preparation and lodgement of a referral under the EPBC Act for works affecting the Heritage Listed Park Lands;

• Obtaining approvals under the Roads (Opening and Closing) Act 1991;

• Obtaining approvals under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1998; and

• Any other regulatory or legislative approvals or permits as required by the project works.

The O-Bahn City Access Project – Project Impact Report 3 Community and Stakeholder Engagement

KNet#: 9641541 Page 21 of 275

3 Community and Stakeholder Engagement

3.1 Overview

Following the announcement on the 25 February 2015 by the Premier and Minister for Transport and Infrastructure advising that a preferred alignment for the extension of the O-Bahn corridor from Hackney Road into the City has been selected, an extensive engagement process was undertaken with a wide range of stakeholders including government agencies, local government, emergency services, community groups, peak industry bodies, representative bodies, O-Bahn users and the surrounding community including residents and businesses. A summary of these activities and outcomes is provided below. The concept plan has since been refined in collaboration with Adelaide City Council and the current concept, which retains Rundle Road and extends the tunnel, was announced on 10 June 2015.

The purpose of the community and stakeholder engagement process was to:

• Raise awareness of the project, and specifically the details of the preferred alignment and differences between this scheme and the one previously proposed in 2009;

• Develop an understanding among stakeholders and the broader community about the strategic objectives, project context and objectives of the project;

• Establish and promote mechanisms for interested parties to source project information, contact project team members, register their contact details on the project mailing list and provide feedback; and

• Consult with key stakeholders and the community for the purpose of identifying issues and opportunities related to what is proposed and determine how these can be taken into account in the detailed design and operation of the new infrastructure.

3.2 Consultation Activities to Date

The consultation process has included community information sessions, a community open day in addition to the conduct of several key stakeholder forums, briefings and meetings. In addition, people were invited to complete a feedback form, either online from the project website, or at the community information sessions and open day.

Information on the project, including an animation showing how the project would operate once complete was also available on the project website for public viewing: www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/public_transport_projects/o-bahn_upgrade_projects

A letter providing an overview of the project and details of how people could have their say and gain further information was distributed by the DPTI project team to approximately 2,500 properties adjacent the proposed alignment and emailed to a wide range of local and state government authorities, government agencies, peak industry bodies and community groups on 26 February 2015.

In addition, newspaper advertisements promoting the consultation period and opportunities to find out more, meet the project team and provide feedback were placed in the City, East Torrens and Leader Messenger newspapers on 11 March 2015 and Advertiser newspaper on 14 March 2015.

Posters at Tea Tree Gully, Paradise and Klemzig interchanges were also erected, and 15000 information fliers were distributed to O-Bahn passengers to raise awareness about the Project and opportunities for community involvement in the project.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 22 of 275

3.2.1 Community and Stakeholder Interaction

About 450 people attended the following community events:

Community Information Sessions:

• Tea Tree Gully Library, 3pm – 7pm, 18 March

• Rundle Mall, 2pm – 6pm, 19 March

Community Open Day:

• Adelaide Bowling Club, 10am – 2pm, 21 March

In addition, over 135 businesses and residential properties in the East End and Hackney Road were doorknocked during March 2015. This interaction provided the project team with the opportunity to explain the details of the project, key benefits and feedback on what was being proposed.

Regular, meetings have occurred with relevant staff from the Adelaide City Council and the City of Norwood, Payneham and St Peters to discuss issues relating to Council’s areas of control or interest.

A summary of the key stakeholder interaction activities are summarised in the appendices.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 23 of 275

3.3 Key Findings of Stakeholder and Community Engag ement Process

3.3.1 Extended Reponses and Consultation themes

Outlined below is a summary of the high level issues raised during the consultation period relating to the proposed concept, by key themes.

Park Lands

• Concerns regarding the amenity of Rymill Park resulting from the project;

• Impacts to the lake and children’s playground due to close proximity of the alignment (specifically noise, visual impacts and safety issues of children crossing the road to the lake);

• Concerns regarding construction impacts (i.e. tree loss, noise, dust, access restriction); and

• Business impacts if the amenity of the area changed.

Rundle Road Realignment

• Perception there will be a loss of business in the East End – Rundle Street being the main street people drive to come for shopping, entertainment and restaurants; and

• Impact on residents of the East End (resulting from visual amenity changes to some properties and increased noise from buses entering Grenfell Street).

Car Parking Losses

• Rundle Road – impact to East End traders and residents in Garden East, families who rely on low cost parking, Petanque Club and event attendees; and

• Hackney Road – loss of some on-street car parking and impacts to businesses, residents and Botanic Gardens users.

Tourism and Events

• Extent to which the return of Park Lands space will be useable for both events and recreational use in operation (power, infrastructure etc.) and alignment may have potential conflict with events such as Clipsal, and the Adelaide Fringe Festival etc;

• Construction impacts – access restrictions during construction for event organisers – set up of events and truck deliveries, event may not be accommodated during construction, noise, dust, amenity changes, reinstatement of area after construction; and

• Impacts to tourism / functions during construction – caused by access difficulties and traffic congestion.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 24 of 275

Traffic and Access

• Traffic congestion along Hackney Road due to decrease in traffic lanes from 3 to 2;

• Congestion pushed out creating bottlenecks in other areas of the road network;

• Increased congestion and traffic times for traffic coming from the East into the City (resulting from the Rundle Road realignment);

• Lack of right turn access options onto Hackney Road to head north from within the suburb of Hackney;

• Increased travel time for time for residents on the eastern side of Hackney Road to travel north using Hackney Road;

• Insufficient u-turns to service all of Hackney Road;

• Impacts on local road network in Hackney and College Park;

• Access impacts during construction for businesses, major facilities and residents along Hackney Road;

• Emergency service vehicles access and delays into restricted side streets; and

• Clarity needed around future routes for tram and bus connections in and around the city.

Pedestrian and Cyclist Activity

• Safe access across Hackney Road for pedestrians and cyclists – easily accessible crossings on Hackney Road, particularly adjacent to St. Peters College, Vailima Retirement Village and Botanic Gardens crossing a busier, wider transport corridor on Hackney Road is a major concern;

• Safe access across the realigned Rundle Road and the Park Lands for pedestrians and cyclists (concerned that Park Lands are divided in two and no obvious crossovers included on the plan); and

• Lack of connectivity with other pathways i.e. Linear Park, into the City.

Public Transport Infrastructure and Bus Services

• Insufficient parking at O-Bahn interchanges to support improved O-Bahn services;

• Reduction of buses servicing North Terrace and the University of Adelaide and Royal Adelaide Hospital (RAH) buildings in particular;

• Maintaining bus services to Botanic Park, Botanic Gardens northern entrance and Adelaide Zoo’s southern entrance; and

• Maintaining regular kerb-side buses on Hackney Road.

Landscaping, Urban Design and Environment

• Landscaping treatments on Hackney Road to improve overall amenity and character of the area;

• Hackney portal concept design to be in character with the Hackney and surrounding areas; and

• Opportunities to create better use of the Park Lands – power, lighting, urban design features.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 25 of 275

3.3.2 On-line feedback forms

A feedback form available online for completion from the project website and at community information sessions and open days was the key mechanism used to capture community comment on the original project concept design.

Outlined below is a summary overview of the responses received via the online and hard copy feedback forms by 7 April 2015. The total number of feedback forms received was 324 with (235 received online and 89 hardcopy). Of these, 92 were not fully completed, with responses provided to only some questions.

Opinion was divided on the proposed alignment, with 34% of respondents being positive, 4% being neutral and 40% of respondents not positive in their opinion. A total of 22% of respondents did not respond to the question.

On a scale of 1 – 5, with ‘1’ being very positive and ‘5’ being not at all positive

Rating 1 2 3 4 5 No response

Number 77 32 13 29 101 72

Percentage 24% 10% 4% 9% 31% 22%

Of those who were positive about the project made comments such as:

• Excellent balance of returning the existing Rundle Road back to Park Lands, in return for a much more efficient route;

• The new proposed alignment is a lot more streamlined and simpler than previous designs – great idea - just get on with it;

• This proposal fixes a difficult congestion issue, providing smoother and more effective traffic flow and consolidating open space with return of extra Park Lands. A win!;

• Will encourage more people onto public transport, which I am sure is in the 30 year plan; and

• I think these innovative solutions are the sorts of project necessary to tackle traffic congestion which is only going to get worse if nothing is done.

Those who were not positive about the project made comments such as:

• Use of tax payers money – there are more important issues that need funding e.g. health and education;

• Car parks at Klemzig are full by 9.30am, so no point in trying to get more people to use the O-Bahn when you can’t provide car parks;

• Doubting cost benefit analysis has been conducted; that the $160 million cost will have a payback (saving people 7 minutes) and will put the State even deeper into debt;

• Removal of a significant part of Rymill Park;

• Concern about Hackney Road access; and

• Don’t want Rundle Road to be closed – will cause traffic congestion, loss of on-street parking, impact to the East End.


KNet#: 9641541 Page 26 of 275

Those who were not overly positive or negative made comments such as:

• Should run a tunnel all the way under the Park Lands and not come up to ground level in Rymill Park;

• Concentrating O-Bahn express buses to go to Stop 3 in Grenfell Street may not be the best solution – many people want to go to the Uni SA East campus, Adelaide University and the relocated Adelaide High School on the old RAH site. Currently the buses stop at North Terrace / Frome Road (M44, C1 and C2);

• Pedestrian / cyclist access to cross over the wide transport corridor will be impossible;

• Hackney Road residents between Westbury Street and Athelney Avenue will become landlocked, unable to cross Hackney Road;

• Support the realignment of Rundle Road, but not the actual tunnel itself. Bus lanes painted red with priority at traffic signals will suffice;

• Concerned about removal of the trees or any changes to beautiful Rymill Park.

Respondents were invited to provide an opinion on the extent to which they agreed or disagreed, with a number of key features being incorporated into the design. The following provides a summary of the responses.

3.3.3 Return of approx. 3,000m² of Park Lands:

Overall opinion was divided as to whether respondents agreed with the return of approximately 3,000m² of road space to Park Lands under the initial concept which included realignment of Rundle Road. From overall comments received in relation to the initial project concept, some people did not believe that this amount of Park Lands space would be returned as a result of the project. Several stated that they felt that the realigned Rundle Road would instead reduce the amount of Park lands area and have a detrimental impact on Rymill Park.

Response Agree Disagree No response

Number 105 92 127

Rating 32% 28.5% 39.5%

3.3.4 Provision of bus only priority lanes along Ha ckney Road

The majority of respondents agreed with the provision of bus only priority lanes along Hackney Road. Dedicated priority lanes for buses was viewed by those who made comment as an action which would improve public transport service reliability and allow for a quicker journey time.


Number 105 92 127

Rating 32% 28.5% 39.5%


KNet#: 9641541 Page 27 of 275

3.3.5 Guided track tunnel under busy intersections and Park Lands

A small majority of respondents were in favour of this feature; however there were a high proportion of respondents that did not give a response. General comments about the project suggest that those who favoured this feature did so, because they thought it would reduce traffic congestion and improve bus journey times. Those not in favour, did so because they thought the tunnel wasn’t long enough and should extend under the entire length of the alignment or through the Park Lands and to Grenfell Street, or objected to the route going through Rymill Park.


Number 122 106 93

Percentage 37.5% 33.5% 29%

3.3.6 A separate footbridge crossing the River Torr ens:

The majority of respondents were in favour of a separate footbridge crossing the River Torrens.


Number 172 54 98

Percentage 53% 17% 30%

3.3.7 Joining a section of Rymill Park with Rundle Park to create more recreational space:

A small majority of respondents agreed with joining a section of Rymill Park with Rundle Park, although a high proportion of respondents did not answer this question. General comments received about the project, indicate that those who agreed with this feature did so, because it provided more useable Park Lands space for events and other recreational users. Those who did not agree, were most likely to have made comments that the route through the Park Lands would have a negative impact on Rymill Park, reducing its overall amenity for families and visitors and acting as a safety hazard to families with children who use the lake and children’s playground Loss of trees in the Park Lands and construction impacts (noise, amenity, access etc.) were also raised as concerns by some.


Number 126 98 97

Percentage 39% 31% 30%


KNet#: 9641541 Page 28 of 275

3.3.8 Support for realignment and modifications to East Terrace:

The majority of respondents supported the realignment and modifications to East Terrace. General comments received about the project, indicate that those who agreed with this feature did so, because it removes buses off East Terrace and provides opportunities to improve the East Terrace amenity (landscaping treatments) and provide additional car parking in this location. Of those who did not agree, did so because they were concerned that they would not be able to do a right turn on East Terrace or that removal of buses from East Terrace and North Terrace would negatively impact on the University and RAH buildings.

Agree Disagree No response

112 47 76

47.5% 20% 32.5%

3.4 Ongoing Engagement Processes

Community and stakeholder engagement activities will continue throughout the project. A comprehensive stakeholder engagement strategy will be developed for the construction stage of the project which will outline the mechanisms to keep the community and a wide range of key stakeholders informed about the progress of the Project and ensure that any issues or concerns raised are effectively managed.

Ongoing, collaborative meetings to collaborate with staff from the City of Adelaide, the City of Norwood, Payneham and St Peters and the Corporation of the Town of Walkerville will continue to discuss construction and operational issues of interest. Community information sessions, stakeholder briefings and other forums will also occur during the life of the project.

As a general principle, advance notification of all works with a direct impact will be given. Notifications will include details of the type of works and timing, how the works will be managed and include project contact details for further enquiries.

The project enquiry line: 1300 443 198, project email: [email protected] and project website: www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/public_transport_projects/o-bahn_upgrade_projects will be maintained as primary communication methods until project completion.


KNet#: 9641541

4 State Strategic Policy Context

4.1 South Australia’s Strategic Plan

A number of key strategic documentAustralia’s Strategic Plan, 2011 (SASPreflects South Australia’s aspirations for 2014 and beyond. It also provides the framework fodevelopment and implementation of other planning strategies and policy initiatives, such as the Planning Strategy for South Australia which (incorporatesInfrastructure Plan for South Australia (ITLUP).

Figure 7 : State strategic policy context

The Premier has also nominated seven priorities for action to focus and guide the government’s work in delivering the Strategic Plan. SASP sits alongside the seven strategic priorities identified by the South Australian Government to guide all other governand ensure the future prosperity of the state. They are:

• Creating a vibrant City

• Safe communities, healthy neighbourhoods;

• An affordable place to live;

• Realising the benefits of the mining boom fo

• Every chance for every child;

• Growing advanced manufacturing;

• Premium food and wine from our clean environment.

Project Impact Report 4 State Str

State Strategic Policy Context

South Australia’s Strategic Plan

A number of key strategic documents guide the decision making process in South Australia. South (SASP) is the overarching strategic planning document for the state

reflects South Australia’s aspirations for 2014 and beyond. It also provides the framework fodevelopment and implementation of other planning strategies and policy initiatives, such as the Planning

r South Australia which (incorporates The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide), The Strategic Infrastructure Plan for South Australia (Figure 7) and the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan

: State strategic policy context

The Premier has also nominated seven priorities for action to focus and guide the government’s work in delivering the Strategic Plan. SASP sits alongside the seven strategic priorities identified by the South Australian Government to guide all other government initiatives to improve the lives of South Australians and ensure the future prosperity of the state. They are:

City;

afe communities, healthy neighbourhoods;

n affordable place to live;

ealising the benefits of the mining boom for all;

very chance for every child;

rowing advanced manufacturing; and

remium food and wine from our clean environment.

State Strategic Policy Context

Page 29 of 275

s guide the decision making process in South Australia. South the overarching strategic planning document for the state

reflects South Australia’s aspirations for 2014 and beyond. It also provides the framework for the development and implementation of other planning strategies and policy initiatives, such as the Planning

Year Plan for Greater Adelaide), The Strategic Land Use Plan

The Premier has also nominated seven priorities for action to focus and guide the government’s work in delivering the Strategic Plan. SASP sits alongside the seven strategic priorities identified by the South

ment initiatives to improve the lives of South Australians

Documents

THE O-BAHN CITY ACCESS PROJECT - Home · Basic Portal