NEW FREE CITY CONNECTOR BUS SERVICE 99C and City Connector to merge

Community Consultation Summary Verbatim Comments

Transport Strategy Accessible City November 2013

SMART MOVE General responses

Comments • If this change is going ahead - which I am assuming it is (regardless of what the rate payers of the ACC want/need) then it is IMPERATIVE that the CURRENT drivers of the Free Connector Service CONTINUE TO BE EMPLOYED within this new service. As a local resident I much prefer the consistency of the same drivers who know the passengers, know the needs of the regular passengers and keep the current buses clean and free of abusive passengers. The most appalling elements of the buses are the fact that the buses are dirty, smell and are driven by drivers who do not have the time or desire to be friendly helpful, understanding or willing to eject disruptive/verbally abusive passengers. I am very disapointed that the ACC has once again chosen to ignore the voice of the local residents and do what they want rather than what the community needs (and is essentially paying for through out Council Rates. Not happy. • I don't think there's a need to go all the way down Grote Street then all the way back up Franklin. I think the bus needs to be an efficient transport option if it is to be used. • My main concern is buses travelling along King William Street. Thanks to Michael Harbison, you already have a TRAM. We do not need both (as I pointed out to M. Harbison at the time & he agreed). There must be some way of diverting buses from King William St. My other concern, a huge one, is on-street parking. I would like to see MORE on-street car parks & fewer buses in the city. Grenfell St is a disaster. Surely some of those buses could stop at Wet Tce, or on Dequetteville Tce, from where people could take a tram or some LIGHT RAIL TRANSPORT into the centre. Buses are far too big & cumbersome to justify the small number of people they carry. • Love the idea of hopping on a free bus and going up to after work, or for lunch, great idea, love it! • I am absolutely disgusted with the proposal(s). It absolutely ignores the needs of older residents in particular. Having just returned from visiting the wife in the RAH I see that the proposed routes and stops go nowhere near such services. The new routes also exclude a lot of the current residential areas of the city and North Adelaide. How are the elderly and those with mobility issues going to access the city and local services which are essential to them??? The only reason I can see for changing any aspect of the Connector Bus Service is that the current Council is sick of the job and does not want to be re-elected. • Are battery operated buses like Tindo possible - or some form of hybrid? I'm keen that the city minimises CO2 production and keeps city air relatively clean, I'd be happy to make a contribution for the use of the service. What about a box near the bus entry and people are encouraged to pay $1.00 coin - no compulsion or ticket? This isn't a big issue for me but Adelaide ratepayers (like me) I guess pay for many city users who are non ratepayers. • It would be good if the free bus went down either Currie street or Waymouth Street (West terrace end). There are a few residential areas down that way that are not being serviced by a bus. It would be good to catch the free bus from the east of town to the markets etc. Where the 99C is

2 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

currently stopping because of the hindley street water works is the perfect stop! • Ther current systems works I do not understand the reasons for changing. It is a wonderful community service and have met many loclas. • I personal think that the currently free connector bus is service is good and just need to improve to have more buses during peak hour and the current route is prefer for me. The bus driver is nice, kind and friendly and I don't think we can have this kind of service. Besides that it is very helpful whenever we need it for example guiding the route. Which very important and good for the people who need help such as fresh arrive or tourist and I don't think so we can find this type of service in other states. The new free bus service it might take longer time to get to the city and also some of the route or important stop is not there for eg. helping hand, Adelaide zoo, RAH and etc. I think this is very important. The current free connector bus service should maintain and just we need some improvement of the service during peak hour instead of changing the big free bus such as 99C. • I think the free bus should be left as is. • Long overdue! Ideally a tram extension would be most beneficial as it's low density and quiet, however the bus loop service is another alternative which may be short term. • You could never be sure with the connector bus because sometimes it could be early, so you never knew whether to keep waiting for the bus - an hour is a long time to wait if you have missed it. I will use it a lot more when the service is more frequent and reliable. I also found the connector bus stops hard to find, so I will appreciate the proposed clearer markings on the bus stops with the new service. • As there will be two free bus routes and buses operating - they will need to be clearly marked on the destination panel on the front of the bus so that people know which bus they are catching ie if you want the route which goes thru Nth Adelaide it will need to be clear. I love Tindo but it may confuse some people who are expecting a metro looking bus - clear signs here as well. The previous bus stopped using St because of long traffice delays and moved to Finnis St. I guess you considered this. • 1. and the Adelaide South West Community Centre are basically missed with the new stops, as the current comminity bus stops in Whitmore square are removed. If Tindo fits in these stops, then they must be big enough for a regular sized bus. On a stricly personal note this will reduce my use of the new service. 2. The new route and stops miss the Pulteney Street/Frome St area entirely. 3. Why not run the CBD route down Grenfell Street, instead of North Terrace, and have a stop next to the new library? 4. Will there be shelters at all stops? Something sorely missing from the existing community bus stops. • Fantastic idea, but would suggest adding 1 more stop along Hutt St and 1 stop near to the (Elder Park, near Victoria Drive corner) along King William St, ie for people going to . Problem with the connector bus now is so infrequent, fairly horrible mini buses, and so awkward of shouting out to the driver for next stop. Hardly use it because of this but would regularly use it if turned into a frequent service. Do it please • I am very surprised the bus does not go along South Tce and wind around some of the other sts in the south of the city. What is there in Sturt St to warrant a bus along the whole length?There are a number of hotels along South Tce and no transport. I am equally surprised about the need for free bus transport in North Adelaide . If you are catering in Nth Adelaide to tourists from hotels, that is good and if there are no buses

3 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

available then equally, I think that is fair. I am also surprised that you think there is a need for big buses. We are currently in the USA and Canada and in Quebec they have an excellent small bus operating a route in the old city like this bus route for $2 per ride. It is wheelchair friendly but the bus itself is small. Last year in Copenhagen we found the same. They have an excellent small commuter bus which goes to all the major tourist spots. Its smallness makes it easy to negotiate the traffic and when we were using it we were the only customers on board. Similarly we travelled on a very efficient small bus in Liverpool. I have used the loop bus in the city and don't think many people know about it so it needs to be well advertised and come with maps for tourists. As I said, I think it should wind around a bit among streets in the city and for that reason you don't want big buses but small light buses which have less impact on surrounding communities. If they travel frequently they will cope with the demand, though often there is hardly anyone using them now. You also need to provide information for tourist and locals on which buses intersect with the free buses so that people can make easy transfers if needed. • The new service is NOT USER FRIENDLY for the elderly as theyhave to walk further to get to a stop and does not cater for any internal streets within North Adelaide. The existing bus service works wonderfully and I see no reason to change this service except putting on more buses would be ideal. the new service takes away the community feel in the North Adelaide precinct and I do not agree with these changes. Also what is going to happen with the current drivers. They know the regulars on the service and will if need be drop people, especially the elderly, as close to possible to their destinations. Your and the ACC lack of concern of the residents of North Adelaide is clearly not taking into consideration the service but the cost cutting that you can make. • I notice that my 2 bus stops for the Adelaide connector are going to disappear with the new route. The route still passes by them but the stops will no longer exist. I am concerned that the 2 stops are the 2 nearest O'Connell St, which many people may need to get to. One is in Ward St, near O'Connell St. The 2 stops either side of it are WCH and Calvary which are too far for elderly, disabled or ill people to walk from to O'Connell St. I hope the present connector bus drivers are continued to be employed. They do a wonderful job. Why do we need full sized buses on this route? The mini buses seem to be the right size. Why isn't Tindo going to be used daily? It cost the ACC a lot of money and it is an environmentally friendly vehicle which we all love to see being used. Is it to become a token nod to reducing carbon emissions? • We are very supportive of the changes to the connector Bus Service. We also strongly support moving the Bus Stop on Sturt Street, from its current position in front of the residences (93-99) to the position in front of the (little used) Law Courts. We would also ask that the post box be moved along with the bus stop. This would have all services in the one place and make that end of the street far tidier. • I stopped using the current connector service as it was often unreliable and if I missed the bus it was too long to wait for another bus. • I would like the council to keep the service as it is now with the current drivers, along with the current route and times. It is very efficient as it is now. Please do not change it. • I have used the Adelaide Connector bus service since 2005, am very satisfied with the service and would strongly urge you to keep it exactly as it is, with the same staff (drivers), the same schedule and the same bus stops. I can see no need to fix something that isn't broken. The Connector service and the City Loop 99C should NOT be merged, I am confident that this is an opinion shared by the rest of the community using the Connector bus service. Please do not change the Connector service in any way!

4 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Great proposal, excellent to see that the State Government and City Council are better integrating . At the moment, for younger people at least, why would you catch the bus in the city when it is just as easy to walk. Obviously there are health benefits from walking, but sometimes it is just necessary to get to your destination a little quicker - for example, when you arrive in the city by train, but need to get to Halifax Street for dinner. Would be good to see this better advertised at tram stops and the train station to inform people about the connector service, especially if you don't visit the city regularly. • For the two loop routes, where does the bus stop for recovery time? A non-loop route is better for the customer who are travelling through. Why is the route duplicating the tram line along King William Street from Victoria Square to North Terrace? An alternative route for the Orange loop is to use Wakefield Street to Pulteney Street to to and then turn right into North Terrace. It would avoid bus having to turn at King William Street/North Terrace and service the Rundle Street and western end of Rundle Mall faster. The Rundle Lantern corner is midway along Rundle Street and Rundle Mall and also close to the university. With the Council library moving into Rundle Place, Pulteney Street stops would as convenient to get to as in King WIlliam Street. • Wouldn't it be cheaper to offer free transport on regular buses as they do in rather than go the extra expense needed to add buses. I want to use it to go to the Piccadilly Cinema. Normal buses do that. • Bring it on! • The service we are getting right now is very convenient. We r really confused about the merging. The drivers are very helpful and friendly. But the 99c drivers are not like that. We will be very much disappointed if the drivers of city council are not there. The level of service will be detoriate. • My main concern is that the proposed new service which will be run by the State Government is not "future-proofed" against potential changes or abolition of the free service by a future Liberal State government. The Liberal party in this State has a poor record in supporting public transport, is strongly aligned with the business and development faction in the council, and would be looking for any savings they could make. The Liberals opposed the tram and the tram extension and despite having an MP who represents the City area, are dominated by rural conservatives who have little interest in public transport or in supporting City residents and workers. What mechanisms have Council put in place to ensure that the service continues if the State withdraws support in the future ? In addition, no financial cost-benefit analysis has been provided as part of this consultation process. How about some details of how much the current service costs Council, and what will be the savings achieved under the new arrangements ? Finally, there are obviously impacts on the jobs of drivers and other council staff who support the current service. What will happen to them ? Will they be offered the possibility of working for the new contractors, Torrens transit ? • There are not enough parking spaces around Sturt/ Halifax Street areas and as it is, there are more people moving into this area who need on- street parking. It seems absurd to reduce the parking spaces. I totally oppose to it. I am happy with current buses arrangement, routes and service. Perhaps the only thing different and positive from the changes proposed would be a more frequent service (and extending the hours to earlier in the morning, to facilitate commuters to reach work). Thank you for your consideration. Regards. • I am a regular user of the service and would not receive the same level of service from Adelaide Metro please keep this service in council hands with the same wonderful driver

5 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I live close to north adelaide and get on the Adelaide connector service regular to shop in town and do studies at city west campus and on occasion visit adelaide zoo, with the new service i cant get to city west without having to change services and walking some distance, cant get to zoo either and used to get off at target when shopping and will have further to walk, i thought the idea was to make access to the city easier, i notice with the stop on morphett bridge for convention centre you say easy access to city west tram stop, i dont think you have tried it, it isnt easy at all unless you jump off the bridge ?? • Both buses on the formwe North Adelaide service need to be the same capacity. Currently 'Tindo' hass a much larger capacity than the other bus. This creates a problem whereby the supply that is provided by one half of the service is not matched by the other. Numerous times I will wait at the bus stop only to see the smaller capacity bus full! TIndeed there is no way to know if wether this service is 'TINDO' or indeed if it ids the small bus. If it is the smaller bus there if no way to know if the bus will be full or not. This uncertaintly makes a mokery of what is a great service. I also want to thank the bus drivers who are welcoming, dedicated and provide great 'customer sevice'. It will be a sad day when these people are relaced. • Disappointed that some stops removed (Finniss Street, Zoo, Railway station) but happy others have been added. Like the increased frequency of North Adelaide service and later evening additions. Like the Adelaide Oval (stops 14 and 22). Like stop 24 near . I am unlikely to make use of the City Loop 99C service, as I need to get from North Adelaide to the CIty, so the combination of the 2 services in the City is not of interest to me. • This is a great idea to encourage all types of people to ustilse city services and businesses more. • As a ratepayer in a normal residential North Adelaide street, my wife and I object vehemently to the proposed re-routing of the Free bus down Molesworth Street and equally vehemently to a bus stop outside number 11. We already have more than enouugh traffic, indiscriminate institutional and commuter parking in a street which is 90% without 2 or 3 hour parking. Noise, pollution and litter add to our objection. The Council who consider this proposal should be reminded that we pay generous residential rates and do not deserve the quality of our residential living being destroyed. Any Councillor who supports this change will never get a vote from us if he or she supports this change. • I think this is a fantastic idea. Anything to improve free CBD transport for visitors and tourists (as well as residents) will be a massive boost to the goal of making the CBD a more vibrant and utilised resource and increasing traffic to areas away from the Rundle Mall area. I have one comment regarding implementation of the service - please can you make the service as highly visible and obvious as possible? The existing 99C route is very low-key and if you hadn't specifically researched it prior to visiting the CBD you wouldn't know it existed. I moved to Adelaide 18 months ago and only became aware of the service a few months ago (and I work in the CBD, am a regular public transport user and regularly travel around the CBD by foot). The livery used on the buses is too similar to that of the standard Adelaide Metro colour scheme and I have also seen standard buses being used to service the route. I have not seen the service advertised anywhere outside of the Adelaide Metro office/website. A good example would be the CAT service in Fremantle. The route is served by two different coloured buses for the clockwise and anticlockwise routes, with both buses being a completely different colour to those of the standard Fremantle buses and highly visible. You can see the buses

6 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

coming from a long distance away. The route is widely advertised and all stops have very visible signage different to that of a standard service, with a map of the entire route showing key attractions. A first-time visitor to Fremantle would become aware of this valuable service within 15 minutes of arriving in the city without having researched it beforehand. This needs to be true of the new Adelaide service too. I feel this new service really needs to stand out almost as an attraction in itself and be as visible, well advertised and obvious as possible. This will lead to CBD visitors being able to hop on the bus on a whim and increase spontaneous traffic around the CBD bringing footfall to otherwise underused areas. Please don't underestimate the potential this service has to liven up the CBD through increased mobility to under utilised areas. It would be such a shame for this valuable new asset to be implemented and essentially fade into the background as a service only used by regulars and those who had visited a tourist information office prior to their visit. Please make the buses and the stops significantly different to the standard ones and ensure the service is as visibly obvious and easy to use as possible. Big bright buses. Big bright bus stops. Plenty of big bright signage. Thanks for working to make the CBD a fantastic place! • Not needed, Everything now is OK. • I am concerned that those of us who value the superb service by the present drivers will be at a disadvantage. To have help on boarding the bus or leaving, particularly with shopping bags, is a great bonus. The drivers are so cheerful and helpful. I doubt anyone would assemble a better team. and it would be a pity to lose any of them. If the change means that a significant number of present users do not continue to use the new service, I worry that it will be cut back or discontinued and that we will lose the community bus for ever. As a rate payer, I would be very annoyed.. So, I strongly urge you to leave the community bus service just as it is. • I think this is a fantastic idea. I think it would be great if the bus could run later in the evenings, to enable residents and workers to use the bus to go out for dinner/entertainment in the city/nth adelaide in the evening. The proposed times don't allow people to use the service after they have finished a meal - for example to travel from Nth Adelaide back to the city after a dinner out and then catch public transport home from the city. • This proposal just adds insult to the injury of removing all of our parking, including disabled parking at my place of employment (Tandanya - National Aboriginal Cultural Institute) & the recent refusal to allow us to install andvertising banners at the front of our building. The combination of the route change, the distant location of the closest bus stop (stop 10) & the fact that Tandanya is not even listed as a 'place of interest' on route map essentially wipes us off of the tourist map & smacks of victimisation, racism & bullying by the council. I'd suggest adding us onto the places of interest list, a rethink of the route change & at the very least a relocation of bus stop 10 to a closer proximity to our building are the minimum changes that need to be done to show that the council isn't completely run by racist bigots. • We reside at 11 Molesworth Street North Adelaide and have limited access to car spaces at present. A bus stop directly out the front of our property would be a major inconvenience not just for me but all people visiting our home and the nursing home across the road. The stop can be moved closer to the corner of Molesworth St and Wellington Square where the corner home faces Wellington square therefore not interrupting daily traffic. Also having a family of 5 and another child on the way having people and buses stopping directly in front of our property would be very disruptive. • Keep the same drivers and the same bus runnign as is. Why does this need to change? Leave things as they are please.

7 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I think this is a shocking proposal and indicates a lack of understanding of the current connector service and a lack of appreciation of a terrific service for Adelaide. This used by tourists and locals alike. The drivers are personable and take a real interest in passengers, whether regulars or visitors. They provide a full concierge service for elderly and disabled passengers. This service displays the heart and soul of Adelaide. Please do not turn it into a bus run. Save the Connector • The service is perfect the way it is. Changing the streets will make access for elderly difficult. Only complaint re: current system is that in the early morning the small bus is not sufficient for the amount of passengers - many cannot catch the bus. The Tindo bus is fantastic • Please keep the current service and friendly drivers. • Great plan to link with North Adelaide and frequently. Fantastic way to Encourage sustainable transport. • I am very supportive of a service of this kind but have one major concern which is that the new route removes the link along the (almost) full length of North Terrace and in oarticular that between the universities at the East end and UniSA (and the new hospital) at the West end. Please adjust the route so that there is a direct commenction (runn both ways) along the current route along North Terrace. • The service isn't broken, so why are you trying to break it! I don't want to see the Connector bus drivers loose their jobs as they have been a valuable source of community and kindness that lacks on other bus services. They are happy to help out older or disabled people on and off the bus which I have only ever seen occur on this service. There are also a plethora of problems with the new proposed bus route: closing Buxton St will make access difficult for me and many other residence- particularly those of the Helping Hand Centre many of whom have expressed their disappointment to me regarding the proposed changes. We are all rather disillusioned with the whole process after the surveys we filled out not long ago went largely ignored. And the reasoning that it is too hard to turn onto Jeffcott St is ridiculous as the drivers have been doing it for years without any problems. Moving the route back onto Melbourne street will mean guaranteed delays as the bus will get stuck in traffic, which is why it was taken off that street in the first place. If your reasoning is to avoid the roundabout, Tindo manages so why can't other buses of a similar size. By cancelling the stops along Frome Rd many people who use the service to get to the zoo, gardens, University, work and the hospital will be much inconvenienced. The statement that the new service will run more often is a farce; North Adelaide already has a half-hourly service with the current system so while you claim to be making improvements, all I see is complications and inconveniences. And for our beloved bus drivers to be tossed aside is appalling. When people say they like the service it doesn't give you the right to make so-called-improvements, it means that we like the service and you should leave it well alone. The only change necessary is for our driver to be rewarded with new buses because they've certainly made the effort for you and for us. Show them (and their passengers) some respect! • Is there anyone actually supportive of this new idea? There is nothing wrong with the service at the moment. Why fix something that isn't broke? Why get rid of the bus drivers who are amazing? They are friendly, cooperative and much better than general bus drivers who are rude, never greet you and are sometimes incredibly bad drivers. Why are you getting rid of the buxton street stop? A large percentage of people who use this bus are elderly and by taking away this stop you are taking away their ease of access to bus services. General buses are ALWAYS late in Adelaide. The connector is mostly on time except the frome street stop (that time just needs adjusting).

8 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

This is ridiculous, why are you changing this system which works Perfectly well for the residents of north adelaide and the city. DO NOT CHANGE IT PLEASE!! • I believe that there maybe job losses to drivers. The drivers are friendly and safe and don't need a raw deal due to political economical money making schemes. If this is the case then I don't think you should go ahead with your plans. Perhaps when there is an AFL game on or cricket at Adelaide Oval or special occasions such as the week leading up to Christmas there should be an extension of the 99c. As I put I'm not supportive of the new stops but they could be used with the odd extension times to the 99c as I have just written. But I don't think it is necessary to change the service as it is. I use this bus as it is quite convenient. It's on time unlike the disaster I had with the paid transport when I was standing in a thunderstorm on Jeffcott St and others have complained that those buses are unpredictable. Even though I understand it's still free it means that those drivers employed by the bus company don't have the same ethical work standards that the drivers at present of the Adelaide Connector bus do. If you change such a communal friendly service in this area it will take away a part of the spirit in North Adelaide. I have moved to North Adelaide only in the past few months and happy with the service I have received. Sometimes I walk to the city and catch this bus home either way it is good to have that back up with this reliable service available. I hope you take my thoughts into consideration carefully as I am a rate payer and will reside in North Adelaide for many years to come. thank you and look forward to your thoughts on my idea. • Looking at the route map, it would appear that you are intending on taking the 99C City Loop bus off the existing route of the Railways Station along North Terrace and then East Terrace, Grenfell Street, Pulteney Street, Wakefield Street - what use would this new route be to people wishing to do business in the city especially in and around Grenfell Pulteney Streets. I work in the east end of Grenfell Street at the Dept of Veterans Affairs and use the 99c to get from the Railway Station to and from work which has been a most convenient means of transport - but with the new route it is not going to service Grenfell Street or the . We also have lots of elderly veterans who access the 99c to get to and from our office to transact business and now with the proposed new route it will be not possible for them to do so. Please reconsider the change of route and continue the bus using Grenfell/Pulteney Street. • One of the key users of the bus- aged persons at helping hands will have more difficult access,Buxton street more ameniable to them. Until the new RAH 2016 the other group that disadvantaged by not going via frome Road is the people visting or attanding outpatients at NRAH. Maybe in 2016 yes move the bus. What about tourists- yes will capture Ade oval but existing route caters well for this group - but the zoo now missed out, tourist used to use this to access zoo. melbourne stree well covered by other bus services, this is congested and delays things, why not bypass melb street, keep the buses on time . Do not understand if bus now only going one direction or as now both ways- map unclear. • I am happy that the service will be more frequent. I really like the current connector drivers. They are all very friendly and go the extra mile to welcome people who travel on the buses. Ideally they can be retained as they have served the public so well. I am happy that the mini buses will be phased out because it was hard to get onto them if you had a pram. • Both my partner and myself regularly use the connector service and are pleased that the service is to continue. The current service and route provided by the free connector bus serves us well and all the drivers are courteous and helpful. Retention of the existing drivers for this community service is an important factor to consider in any changes. New route concerns; with 1 being the highest priority issue and 4 the lowest priority: 1. The move to Molesworth St may be an issue for elderly Helping Hand residents on the northern side of Buxton St, as they will need to walk

9 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

further to access the service. 2. Uses Melbourne St which can be slow in peak periods. 3. Loss of bus stops near the zoo and railway station - although the walk from proposed stops 14 and 13A is not far. 4. May need to consider additional stops near the NRAH and Adelaide Oval when these project are operational. • Thank you for this initiative. The proposed frequency and route are suitable. I can now catch the service both ways within the CBD. I can now also catch the bus after work (eg after 6:00pm) The service will help people move around the city to the main areas of interest. I would prefer to have a stop 26 Hutt Street included and not removed from the service. This stop is used often by residents and should be included. It will service many of the Hutt Street businesses. There is no information as to what the costs to council and ratepayers will be for the services and how it compares to the existing situation. Some have complained that moving to the new service will mean a loss of a "community" feel. I dont care about that - I dont catch the bus to socialise or have a BBQ with people. • The 2 services should not be merged. Primarily because the 2 services cater to 2 different sets of people who use either this or that. The connector bus service is famous for its service to the people by the drivers, which is fantastic. Nothing can substitute that. Merging the 2 services will leave out many important stops like the railway station and the zoo. Do not foresee that as a favourable option. • I have been using the existing Free Connector service now for 11 years. The drivers, in general, are courteous, friendly and helpful and, consequently, they've built up an amicable rapport with most of their regular passengers. My preferred option would be to leave the bus service exactly as it is but with an earlier start time, say 6:30 am. If this is impossible, then at least offer the existing drivers jobs with the proposed new venture. They deserve this in recognition of all the hard work they've put in. • Very disappointed with the meeting I attended today. Meeting dominated by North Adelaide residents concerned about the placement of bus stops and 'freeloaders' You have completed ignored many current users of the service viz UNISA staff travelling between campuses and international university students who live in the City. I was dissatisfied with your response to me about my options. You have failed to point out to rate payers the amount the Council is contributing to the bus compay. I would like to see the cost benefit analysis. Obviously the North Adelaide residents are too proud to use the bus servive. 'Tourists are freeloaders and should be ignored'. People who work in the city will be disadvantaged. MY SOLUTION - Cut out North Adelaide and continue the route along North Terrace as previously Keep the new buses you are buying and are giving away. Keep the community drivers Tourists are interested in the buildings along the whole of North Terrace. 99C drivers no longer give commentaries and lack the personality of the community bus drivers. STOP WASTING RATE PAYERS MONEY

10 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

What is the % increase in rate over the past 5 years • yes the other day when I had shopped at Central market I waited 1 hour for a connector bus only to discover it was not leaving from Grote Street due to the Victoria Square redevelopment project but the signage was not clear and it was waterlogged you need clear signage at the interconnector bus stops maybe in a few other languages Mandarin, Japanese, korean, french and not a sign that gets waterlogged and drops off the post.I proceeded to Cane Corner Gouger/Morphett St to wait another hour after ringing the Adelaide City Council. Also ringing Adelaide City Council to find out about bus times is not a good idea because it is not the usual infoline for public transport. We need a phone line that is concerned with bus times and info only. The bus drivers are very friendly helpful particularly with people with disabilities and it's wonderful to have regular drivers who develop relationships with regular customers that counts a lot. I am very happy you are changing the bus service to make it more frequent. it is a wise and sustainable choice for the 's future. • Please note, I work at the Department of Veterans Affairs , which is located on the corner of Frome Street and Grenfell Street. I have noticed with the new City Loop proposed resturcture of the 99C there will be no turning into Grenfell Street for our Veteran Community & the Blind Society, which is located around the corner on Pirie Street . As I travel on the City Loop regularly I see our Veteran Community use the 99c bus along with the Blind Society daily on the bus. Unfortunatley with the new bus route, not stopping on Grenfell street, our Veteran Community and War Widows and Blind Society clients will no longer be able to use this service to come into the city for meetings with there Organisations. Obviously this will cause major stress for the visually impaired and our Veteran community who frequent the City Loop on a daily basis. We encourage our Veteran Community to use this free service to attend appointments, as they are elderly in wheel chairs and have physically disability due to War Service and can no longer drive. Please take this into consideration when you are looking at the new restructure of the 99c. I have no problem with the merging of the community buses, but we need to also focus on our elderly and people who are visually impaired. • great plan, silly idea to not connect with the railway station, as it is the most important connection spot to link public and could increase the use of public transprt by people who would normally drive. Needs to include O"connell St and all of Melbourne st due to the number of business and shops ect in the area have a look at Perth's free city buses, they are excellent, with high frequancy use. The Perth Central Area Transit's (CAT) are free and high frequency services that operate in the Perth CBD. All CATs are colour-coded for your convenience and operate around the Perth CBD as follows: ■The Red Cat travels in an East-West loop from Queens Gardens in East Perth to Outram St in West Perth. ■The Blue CAT travels in a North-South loop from the Barrack St Jetty to Northbridge. ■The Yellow CAT operates in a loop from East Perth to West Perth • I have been working in Adelaide on Pirie Street and Frome Road for 12 years and have found the route the99c taking has helped me get to work with very little fuss. The health problems that I have would make in near impossible to walk the complete way from the train station to the top end of Pirie Street especial in the heat of summer and the very wet days in winter. Not having a stop at the train station were many elderly and ill people come into Adelaide so that they can get to the hospital easily is crazy. My thoughts are with the drive to keep more cars out of the city

11 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

this proposal will only increase people needing to drive in. I have been told well we have the tram, but this will not help people who work near Hindmarsh Square. Have the RSB or the Guide Dogs been notified because this could impact them a lot. Please rethink the route the workers are the back bone of the City and we need to be looked after. • I find that this idea holds no credence at all. Firstly the bus will not be servicing the Adelaide Railway Station where most people catch the bus to go to other areas within the city to conduct business. I work for the Department of Veterans Affairs in 199 Grenfell Street and we encourage our elderly veterans and their partners and widows to use the 99c bus when wishing to attend our office. Most are elderly and are unable to drive especially in the city. The Australian Hearing Office is also located just down from our office in Grenfell Street and this business also looks after lots of elderley people who would rely on the 99C bus service to get them to and from their offices. We also have the Royal Society for the Blind located just behind us in Pirie Street, and the 99c service is used by a lot of people who are vision impaired and have service dogs to assist them. By re-routing the 99c around East Tce & Hutt Street and along Halifax Street it is going to be of no use to the people that we encourage to use the service. I have also used the 99c service since its inception to get from the Railway Station to my office and retun in the evening. Whilst I'm able to walk or can walk to North Terrace and get a bus I find the idea of the re-routing of the service to be not justified at all. Why not leave the 99c service as it is and add the Adelaide Commuter bus to the expeanded route. I also note that the bus does not appear to service the Adelaide Central Market but will go down King William Street - surely KW Street is congested enough and there is always the option of the Tram to travel along KW Street. Likewise the 99C bus is also used for people who wish to attend the Registrar of Motor Vehicles on North Terrace - this will no long be an option as the bus won't service this stop any longer. Please I ask that before you make the decision that you consult openly with everyone via the Adelaide Advertiser and perhaps the Radio so that peopl will understand what you are doing. I impore you please don't change a system that has worked extremely well for many many years and leave it as it is, By all means add the Adelaide Connector or perhpas have the Connector Bus stop at a 99C stop so that alighting passengers can pick up the 99C to continue their journey. • This service does not stop at the train station. This makes absolutely no sense and will frustrate most of the current users of the 99C. The addition time to walk from the new stop will mean many people will have to change which train they catch and add to their daily travel time. It may not be far but it involves crossing a busy intersection. The removal of the stop at the train station is also a inconvience to the disabled and elderly. When I was unwell due to chemo I relied on the 99C so I didn't have to walk so far and could still go to work. I would support this if there was still a bus stop at the train station. • What are the big blue circles please • The Current City Connector Bus is a great asset for the city council and I would really want to see the service retained and maintained by the Council. This is a rare council initiative that is not available in any other city council around the country and even around the world and council should be really proud of being able to provide this service for the resident! Tindo bus is an example where it shows the world that Adelaide City Council is really leading the world when it comes to sustainability initiative and I would love to see all city connector buses replaced with more of this wonderful carbon-neutral bus! The top quality services provided by all the connector bus drivers should really be congratulated and when I say "Thank you Driver" as I get off the bus every day, I really mean it. They are true great ambassador for the Council and most reliable than any other transport services I have used

12 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

in Adelaide. They have become more than just the council service provider but closer to good friend or a family. I enjoy seeing them every morning and their friendly smile makes great start to a day. The current figure-of-eight loop around the city and North Adelaide still provide every half hour service based on the current time table and if you replace two mini buses with two more Tindo or even 3 Tindo, it would be able to meet the peak-hour demand no problem. Only other improvement that planning team could look into would be to integrate the Connector Bus, City Loop and the free tram services in the city in terms of time table for better connection between one side of town to another. • The proposed route is vastly inferior to the existing route for employees and students of and North Tce parts of UniSA (about 30K people - main of whom live in North Adelaide). The previous route down Frome and Kintore was perfect for commuting between the Uni district and North Adelaide. I rent a fairly expensive family home in North Adelaide near Childers - three of my UA colleagues also live on the same block. We all use the free transit - which means we can get by with fewer vehicles and we save money, gas, stress, etc. I can not speak for my co-workers but if the connector bus service didn't take me so close to work I would likely drive in and offset that new cost by finding another cheaper place to live to the east or south of the city. Further, King William may be easy for drivers but it is already over served by many buses - it makes no sense to add yet another there. I also enjoy the community aspect of knowing the current drivers, but understand that might need to change to remain cost effective - but the route you planned kills it for me. Move the route up & down Frome or Kintore and I would accept the change. • In theory I am supportive of the new proposals - the increased frequency and extended services. For me, the main concern would be if there was significant changes to the existing timetable. I use the service frequently to get me to and from work. I live in North Adelaide and work in the city, and if the timetable changed I might no longer be able to use the service for this purpose. • Please put the bus back to coming down the full way on North Terrace and then up West Terrace. This now services the University of and several schools in the area. Also, it is handy now to the RAH but there seems to be no free bus service for the new hospital, and it is further away from the city than it is now so will be inconvenient for people to go back up to the city. I use this bus every day to come down North Terrace to the university after getting off my local bus further up North Terrace, and many of us need it to go up to the city a lunch time and after work. I hope you will consider these suggestions favourably. • I would really like to see the stops be differentiated from other stops in the city so that they are really easy to find. It would also be great if these stops were fitted with countdown timers to the next bus (as is due to happen on the O-Bahn) as a priority. 15 minutes in the city is a great service standard, but 14 minutes is still a long time to wait without knowing when the next bus will be, especially given the relatively short distances that will be travelled on these busses. • Myself and my toddler, with pram, use the current 99C bus quite a bit. I will be sad to see it go from it's Hindley Street west end route as it has been very very convenient for us to go to readily travel to North Tce and also the Mall for shopping (to avoid taking the car). However the new route has it's benefits - Hutt Street - yay! And North Adelaide - yay! (With a pram the Connector Bus service was too much hassle in case we got the little mini-bus, so I have missed accessing Hutt St & North Adelaide :)). Only improvements might include running past the zoo and also the

13 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Aquatic Centre - though I can see it would be tricky trying to incorporate these versus the demand. Great work for the innovation in trying to get all the corners of the city and North Adelaide covered. Great stuff. • Great idea. It will give me and my family a 15 minute service instead of 60 minute service. I volunteer in the VIC in Rundle Mall and I recommend both free services to visitors regularly. We have a wonderful city and should use every resource to show it off. This new service will be more convenient for tourists to appreciate our many historic buildings and other city sights, especially picturesque North Adelaide. Many can not believe that the 99C and The Connector are free! It is most unfortunate that the drivers on the Connector will no longer be employed on the new service as they are all very friendly, helpful and entertaining. Some have been having conversations with us 'regulars' for many years. • Would like buses to North Adelaide to run every 15 mins between 7 to 9 am only. This is my only concern as there are many people head out to work in North Adelaide especially Women and Children Hospital. • The West End of the city is expanding and becoming a precinct of its own. It's great that things are being done to improve access West and encourage people to visit the businesses there. As a soon-to-be business owner on Eliza Street (Hello, Yes - a cafe), the stop on Franklin street wlll hopefully hugely benefit our business. • It is a brililant idea to extend this free bus service. However there is one glaring omission. It will not run past/stop at the New" Royal Adelaide hospital." It will be a shame to miss this opportunity . If it stops at the New RAH. it will help lessen the congestion on Nth Terrace. it will also free up much needed car parking at the facility • The route is not well suited, No zoo is served in this case as well as the train station. Please keep the current route or at least get rundle mall and the zoo served. keep the current drivers too, • I think it's a great idea as long as the service stays free, although you could possibly operate it from a little earlier until a bit later. • Great idea to merge the services, but it seems quite odd that one of Adelaide's premier tourist attractions (i.e. the Adelaide Zoo) is bypassed by the new service. A 30-min free bus service to the zoo would no doubt be very well used by tourists and locals alike. I would strongly recommend addressing this issue, as it would be unfortunate for the zoo not be included as part of the new merged service. • I strongly support this initiative. My only suggestion would be that some consideration be given to a stop on the western side of Whitmore Square to provide better access to the service for residents, businesses and visitors in the Sturt Street/Gilbert Street area to the west of Whitmore Square • I prefer the same old route because my house is located there. If I dont catch the bus, I will gave to walk longer and sometimes its very hard if uou have gone shopping. I would evwn request to increase the bus per hour. Currentky its onky one bus which makes it difficukt to use. I think 98c bus is already enough since it xan pass every 15 min ib each bus stop. Rather than merging routes, its better to increase bus number. • NO stop at Railway Station. Very important stop for a lot of people. This is the stop I use most! • 1. Whitmore Sq area currently well-serviced by Goodwood Rd buses; does not require servicing.

14 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

2. The current design has removed some of the most heavily used stops/sections of the 99C (U1 FamiliesSA on Morphett St, used by international and other students, backpackers, Law Society students and other attendees, FamiliesSA clients, etc; the Central Market stops on both sides of Grote St - are the people who designed this even aware of the large no. of people who use this bus in combination with e.g train to do their weekly shop?; and especially the Railway Station stops on both sides which, in addition to their convenience to all other users, are heavily used by teachers and vacation care workers taking their charges on excursions.) 3. It would be a GREAT improvement if the 99C ran earlier in the morning, especially on weekdays. Having it run later at night would also be beneficial and improve safety, especially for women and students. 4. The premise of moving the RAH was the availability of public transport, since there are few public car parks or on-street parking or provision for the latter in the west of the city. I cannot believe you are removing the 99C from the new hospital before it is even built!!! 5. A free bus down King William St is totally unnecessary. Not only do we have the tram, but many buses run the length of the street and road. 6. Do not make the bus route one-way. Firstly, many of the users of free buses are either working or studying. Secondly, even for people who are neither working or studying, their time is valuable: don't make them waste it moseying around the city - that is disrespecting your own employers. Your current routes sacrifice the elegance of both the services they purport to replace, which both circle the city in the least time feasible while servicing the major population and business hubs. • Two key destinations are being overlooked. The bus needs to service the Adelaide Zoo and the Railway station. These being major destinations used by tourists, workers, families. Key destinations at bringing people into our wonderful city. Also the north western corner of the city is not being serviced by the proposed new city loop. • Not happy that the 99c route has changed. It should remain the same. I catch the 99c from the train station to Hindmarsh square every second day as I suffer from a bad back and walking the distance everyday is a bit too strenuous. The 99c is great because it goes through the middle of the CBD. • I am very supportive of proposed integrated bus service, the proposed bus route and bus stops which will definitely make the commuters’ life easier and more convenient. It is a clear indication that finally Council and the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) have started to listen to people and their wishes to improve the current very inconvenient and outdated service. Plus, it shows that the Council and DPTI care about the environment in encouraging people to leave their cars at home and use the public transport. Being free is a very good incentive. It should have done a long time ago because I use the City connector service very often and listen to people opinions and complaints. Absolute majority of these people is not happy with the current situation and very supportive of the new changes. However, I would like to share with the Council’s management some of my observations. One of your free connector bus drivers Barry (he often wears the leather hat) has been very negative about the changes. He always tries to influence (sometimes aggressively) his passengers to resist these changes even if they are happy with the changes. Of course, he is entitled to his opinion but as the Council’s employee he should not enforce his opinion on other people who are entitled to their own opinions. I think it is called Conflict of Interest and the unacceptable behavior of this driver should be addressed by the management. • I am utterly disappointed with the decision of merging Adelaide Connector service with 99C. Although 99C is a great initiative, its service time is totally unreliable. I do not see how it can improve on its service with the additional route to North Adelaide. Adelaide Connector service is undeniably less frequent than 99C, its performance has significantly improved over the years. Its latest timetable seems to be working just right!

15 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Also, one thing that 99C will never have is the friendliness and great service provided by the bus drivers. The casual conversations with them after a busy day just tops it off! This is only possible with a smaller number of passengers in a small bus. In addition, the general population who uses the Adelaide Connector service is the elderly, have the council ever considered the challenges and hassles that cost them with a bigger bus (and maybe, less friendly drivers)? Not to mention that even I myself have encountered a few rude drivers on 99C before. Thanks to Adelaide City Council for the initiative to improve on the transportation system of Adelaide, and I do believe there are many things can be done to improve and expand our beloved city. I hope that the Council will make a great and fair decision based on the responses from the residents of Adelaide! Thanks! • great idea to promote visits to Rundle st shops and picture theatre and north tce Institutions halls by an every 15 minutes service also to Nth Adelaide every 30 minutes and to Light Square And longer hours of service and goes in both directions ACC are to be congratulated as Car parking is expensive and time consuming • Why do stops along the Frome Road removed? It's quite inconvenient for people going to uni! • I work in the city and 90% of the time I am unable to catch the Connector service as it is too unreliable. The times are also inconvenient, as if I do catch the bus, I am late to work, or need to leave early to catch it home at the end of the day. • So they are still two distinct bus services? The red route and the orange route? Please clarify more. If they are separate (as I assumed in my above answers) then I strongly support this. Thanks! • I am Unclear as to the objective. The current service goes down LeFevre Terrace, Frome Rd and Kintore Avenue-a visual survey would indicate that the residents, students and visitors on the bus use it for the convenience of access to the University precinct and retail sector. The new route not only does not satisfy this but also puts more bus traffic on the already clogged with buses King William Rd!!!!!!! A major issue is replacing the smaller and quieter bus-including the -with the larger and much noisier buses-and clearly heavier polluters. I am particularly concerned the impact this will have on the residential amenity on Le Fevre Terrace-already being compromised by what seems to be a plan to route more traffic on LeFevre Terrace-the impact at peak traffic times has clearly not been researched. The much used and loved Helicopter park accessibility for mothers and families will now be much more difficult and dangerous!!!!! Residents who purchased in this area and now being financially disadvantaged-both value and maintenance issues- with no compensation due to poor planning at Government and Council level. It totally undoes much of the excellent work that is and has been undertaken by Council!!! If one was cynical you could assume this proposal is designed to assist in rectifying major transport and parking issues associated witht he redevelopment of Adelaide Oval that were not thought through at the beginning of the process. • i think cutting out the west end from the current 99C bus route is a really stupid suggestion. The 99C connects the east and west of the city very well and is used alot by students and staff travelling between City West and City East. this will be even more critical once the Hospital shifts to the west end. The map suggests that the tram will pick up people from the railway station to take them to the west, but the reality is (given where the stops are) this will be a terrible option that will add many minutes onto the journey and huge inconvenience. The 99C also currently links the

16 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

north end of the city with the market and it will be terrible to see that go too. • We purchased a home in North Adelaide to take advantage of the community bus service provided by the Adelaide City Council. We do not want to loose this community service and consider changes will not be in the best interest of residents of the city. We do not want large buses in our quiet streets. The reduction of stops is also unacceptable with important places of interest eg. Zoo and railway station not being covered. The many tourists that now use the service will be disadvantaged with a compromised route and lack of knowledgeable drivers currently providing much information about our city. Please can the council fight to keep the running of this bus service . • I like the idea that the service is integrated. As a recent arrival to Adelaide I felt that the 'Connector' connected to nothing! I like the fact that there is a big loop which goes past the libraries, City Market, university, Hutt St and the hospital as well as going to North Adelaide. A great inner city bus service is one where one does not need a timetable so I am impressed with the increase in the frequency of services to every 15 minutes. I like the fact that the buses will be air conditioned and have CCTV, as well as being free!! Great idea Adelaide City Council - can't wait for the new free connector bus service to start! • the distance between bus stops will be a problem for people with mobility issues - so reducing the value of the more accessible stops. Can the buses run later in the evening during special events, e.g., Festival and Fringe? • The service frequency appears much too low to encourage people to hop on and hop off. I would like to see the frequency increased to closer to a 10 minute frequency for the large loop and 5 minutes for the city loop. • My one and only concern relative this plan is the removal of parking spaces. Specifically the removal of 12 parking spaces in Tynte Street North Adelaide. Parking in North Adelaide and specifically Tynte Street on any day of the week is very difficult and with the impact of Adelaide Oval traffic this will only increase. What other options are there to the removal of parking spaces? Do the spaces have to be removed or can the bus do as they do now and prop on the roadway for a short time while passengers enter/exit? I am a business owner on Tynte St and my views are based on ensuring my guests can park in suitable proximity to my business. I would appreciate understanding whether the parking removal is an absolute must? • 1) LARGE BUSES SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR SUCH A SERVICE * More polluting; VERY noisy especially on corners, and more difficult to manoeuver thus needing more space for stops. Rather than rate payers buying more large buses for Trans Adelaide, give back the 99C buses and ask the state government to buy SMALL hybrid buses for the "connector " routes. The present plan is NOT a good way forward for making the city a greener more pleasant place to live. As for the TOKENISM of the TINDO bus this is shameful. This bus, is not suited to the service for which it has been used, has been a major source of delays and thus overcrowding on other buses and is now being used as an excuse for a very environmentally unsuitable scheme (air, noise and visual pollution) . 2) THERE ARE TOO FEW STOPS. Any connector service should be available from any existing stop on its route. The lack of stops certainly does not make the new proposed service more suited to those with mobility issues. The biggest delays to the present system are due to road works

17 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

and the unreliability of the present fleet. • IT IS VERY SAD TO SEE SUCH A WONDERFUL SERVICE DEMISE. YES, I SAID DEMISE. YOU MAY THINK THAT BRINGING THESE SERVICES TOGETHER IS A FORWARD STEP BUT I BELEIVE THAT IT WILL CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR MANY PEOPLE. I DO NOT SUPPORT THE NEW ROUTE AT ALL - IT BECAME EVIDENT THAT CHANGING FROM MELBOURNE STREEET TO FINNISS STREET WAS A GOOD CHOICE IN SPEEDING UP SERVICES AND AVOIDING THE BOTTLE NECK OF TRAFFIC. THE NEW SERVICE WILL SEE THE ROUTE BACK ON MELBOURNE STREET. THE CHOICE TO THEN TRAVEL TO KING WILLIAM STREET IS ALSO A STEP BACK. KING WILLIAM STREET HAS MANY MANY BUSES TRAVEL IT. WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO CHANGE SOMETHING THAT WORKS ?????????? PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON FINNISS STREET HAVE EXPRESSED THEIR HAPPINESS AT WATCHING THE TINDO TRAVEL DOWN THEIR STREET. WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE STAFF WHO DRIVE THE BUSES NOW IF THEY DONT WANT TO WORK FURTHER SHIFT WORK? THEY WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS. WILL ADELAIDE CITY COUNCIL ABSORB THE STAFF BY OFFERING OTHER POSITIONS? • Hello ACC I am a disabled person in a wheelchair. I prefer the current route. It goes past Adelaide Uni on both Frome Rd and Kintore Ave. It also stops right in front the Adelaide Railway Station. I depend on the connector bus and the proposed changes will make my life a whole lot harder, not easier. The drop in the number of stops and the reduced coverage of both the CITY and NTH ADELAIDE is most dissapointing. I hope more time, consultation and consideration is given to the new proposals. • the new 99c loop is great. hope coming soon! • I live in the East End and work in the CBD. Currently I utilise the City Loop 99C bus twice a day Monday to Friday (and sometimes 4 times a day if I utilise the service at lunchtime). Often I will catch the 99C on weekends as well. I also sometimes use the Connector. For me, the City Loop 99C bus is not only extremely convenient (especially when carrying things that are heavy & cumbersome) but it has become a community experience for me. I have made friends with neighbours with whom I catch the bus with in the mornings, and we have come to know the regular bus drivers quite well and they have become part of our community as well. I also don't need to use my car anywhere near as much as I would with the 99C and the connector. I only use my car to drive outside the city zone and when in the city, I use the 99C (or the connector). I can understand the rationale and economic benefits of combing the two services, however, in its current form, the Connector bus provides a service around the circumferance of the city and the city loop provides a service laterally across the middle of the city east-west. No need to drive a car in the CBD at all with both these services. The proposed route change will negate this and for me it means that there will be no transport from my residence to my place of work. It will be quicker for me to walk to work than utilise the buses on the proposed route. Whilst I am fortunately fit and healthy enough to walk to work at this point in time, I will miss the out on the friendships I have formed in the 99C community and will not have any transport to work in the event that I am injured, incapacitated or disabled. I appreciate the free service of the 99C that has been provided and that I have enjoyed thusfar - thank you. I would also like to mention the 99C bus drivers, they are the heart and soul of the service and they do a fantastic job. They really look after us commuters and also make the journey very enjoyable. • I really don't like how many stops you've taken off and especially the stop on kintore avenue in front of the university that seemed ideal for

18 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

students • The current Connector Bus service does not follow the schedule very well. It is hardly ever on time. I hope the new service will be more punctual. • Did anyone read the surveys collected from the passengers? Why is Council abandoning its community bus? The Connector Bus is more than just a bus service, it is a community service that encapsulates our everyday understandings of what "community" means. The bus drivers are community ambassadors who know their regular passengers, provide community information, show genuine concern for all their passengers, are tourist guides, and offer a service that goes well beyond driving a bus. For the passengers, the bus service is a gathering place for community members to share community concerns with each other, disseminate local information, share insight with visitors, and genuinely engage in caring and support for each other while travelling to and from various destinations (quite often in short trips of 2 or 3 stops). The Connector bus stops are located strategically to ensure that most members of the community are able to access the bus, including the elderly and people with mobility problems. For most, bus stops are a short walk. I have not spoken to anyone who does not want the community bus service to continue but with better buses and increased frequency. The proposed City Connector is a bus service that is designed to move people around the city. It is envisioned to be a streamlined people mover that targets visitors to the City. It is not a community bus. Under the proposed benefits for the new service, community has been reduced to "convenience", "frequency", "connectivity", "accessibility", "capacity" and I dare say "economics". The proposed bus stops ignore the elderly and people with mobility problems; for many it will be a difficult walk to the nearest bus stop. I urge Council to retain the community bus service. Why not add two more community buses to an already excellent service? This would achieve a better outcome for community sociability and well-being than the proposed merger. Thank you for the opportunity to have my say. • Putting the large noisy and fume-generating buses on additional quiet suburban streets is a major backward step. I have attended one of the sessions at the City Council office with staff. It is clear that the dominating criterion was to have the same-size buses throughout the transport fleet, irrespective of the fact that they cannot otherwise be justified and are quite unsuitable for the route into North Adelaide. By doubling the bus size and doubling the frequency of service, the seating capacity is increased by a factor of four. There is no supporting demand information for this, and even at peak times buses are unlikely to be very full, and for the large majority of the day the buses will have a very light load. Nonetheless they will significantly detract from the urban value of the streets on much of the North Adelaide route. The proposal seems to be formulated for the benefit of the operators rather than for the benefit of the residents. It is a bad proposal and should not be approved. Small quiet buses would be much more appropriate, and there are many places in Adelaide where having a fleet of such vehicles would be an asset. The Council should be working to take the large buses off quiet residential streets where they currently operate, rather than imposing them on additional quiet streets. • Great work trying to make a more usable, frequent system. 1. Please maintain the Hutt Street Bus Stop by the servo on Hutt Street (both sides) - it is very well-used Please provide 'realtime information' at the bus-stops. DON'T 'BREAK' WHAT WE'VE GOT It will be a real shame though to lose the unique 'community' feel of the current buses. The drivers are fantastic, the music is fun and thewhole

19 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

experience is priceless in terms of 'community-building' and a welcome to the visitors who often travel on the current buses. It is a real PLACE_BASED ADVANTAGE for Adelaide as a city. Please keep the great current drivers employed and make that one of the conditions of the Torrens Transit contract for this service! There is no need for larger buses except at Peak hours. 99c are often not full except at peak hours. Please invest in more solar (not 'hybrid') buses. Route More frequent service from Hutt Street to UniSA western campus is great! But more direct would be better. It can take over an hour to get to the campus by a bus and a tram. 1. Repeat: Please maintain the Hutt Street Bus Stop by the servo on Hutt Street (both sides) - it is very well-used 1a Make sure there are stops near Rundle Mall for shoppers (inlcuding supermarket shoppers!) 2. South Eastern residents, and other "Victoria Square" workers and south west end residents who can no longer use Grote street library need to be able to get to the new Library in Grenfell St in the Rundle Plaza (Harris Scarfe building) and back during lunch hour. A small lunchtime shuttle would be good. 3 Please go along King William street with a stop near the Adelaide oval/gyn) and Writers Week (I met many confused visitors trying to figure out how to get to Writer's week last year). There are currently no stops near these event hubs. Also Montefiore Road is not very pedestrian friendly (especially at night) 4 Keep Frome Road route Going down Frome Road is good for The Zoo, Womadelaide etc. Last time I went to Womadelaide nobody knew there was a bus, or where it went. 5 Please don't go down Melbourne Street (it is extremely congested). Melbourne St should be services. You could 'loop' across it and back to service Melbourne Street. A direct, frequent route from South East to North Adelaide is great! It has taken me 90minutes to get to North Adelaide on occasion. So try to keep this route usable and fairly direct (again , a 'loop'at North Adelaide (from a central point, say from Tynte St) can offer a direct service from the city, then a meandering loop to pick up locals, then a direct service back to the city . Buy the way, the thing I ABSOLUTELYt support is a more FREQUENT service along Hutt Street - but this (FREQUENCY of service) was not a question on your SURVEY. I seem to be unable to be 'supportive' of investment in a more frequent service without supporting all aspects of the service )Q4. This is a misleading survey design, in my view. Cheers and thanks for all the effort! • It seems a shame that present "personal touch" contact with drivers will not be possible, but the improvement in frequency of circuits far outweighs this. • Think it's a great idea. I always believed that the connector route was too indirect and took too long. Also had bad connector times if you started at 9am (for the morphett st area anyway). I'm encouraged to see the buses in nth Adelaide will now be every 30mins and I'm not fussed about the change in routes, though the extra walk to uni might be unfortunate for the disabled. Hopefully the new timetable will be more useful! • Should work very well A great idea • We occupy a National Trust residence with the front facing Stanley Street and the rear facing Kingston Terrace. I have deep concerns with the

20 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

new bus route including Kingston Terrace. Our swimming pool is situated on Kingston Terrace behind a heritage wall hiding a private pool area to swim in and relax outside. Pedestrians walking past and drivers in cars can not see over the wall. However passengers in buses will easily be able to view the private pool area as well as anyone swimming or relaxing in that area. The front of our house (facing Stanley St) is very exposed with no privacy what so ever so this is the only outdoor space available for privacy. Buses driving past every 30 minutes will greatly effect our peace and privacy (especially if the passengers viewing our backyard include football and cricket fans) unless the council consents and funds the rebuilding of a much higher wall which blocks the view. I have attached a photo of the pool on the Kingston Terrace boundary. • Love the new proposed route. Well done its a great service • This will help our 'aging population' to move around the city easier and icomfortably. Also great for tourists. • Proposed Bus Stop 6 at Halifax St. Has the Traffic engineer who proposed the idea to remove the two carparks at this site been there in the morning when people are collecting their mail? Honestly this is not a good idea at all, there is insufficient parking currently to access the Post Office as it is, without removing the two most convenient, obvious carparks. I understand over 800 people per day access the post office. I suggest you do some studies to monitor the usage of these parks before removing to justify your proposal. The alternative parks in King William St or as proposed further east on the north side of Halifax St are not convenient to the Post office. The new Bus Stop could be shifted further east along Halifax St to avoid losing the carparks in front of the Post Office or perhaps in Sturt St west of King William St How many people do you expect to use this Bus Stop as opposed to how many people are actually using the car parks now? Tram commuters who wish to avail themselves of the Bus can travel by one stop further north and still catch the bus likewise bus commuters can catch the tram at Victoria Sq. In conclusion (if you hadn't realised) I am not I favour of the closure of the two parks in front of the Post office without much more justification • In my option a starting time of 7am and finishing time of 8pm is more suitable for the activation proposed for the city. Specially in summer more people are expected to be out in the city until (and after) 8pm. I don't really see the need of a very early bus (before 7am) as most of the people don't need to get around before 8am. • I am concerned about the number of car parks being affected on Tynte St and Kingston Terrace. Tynte St, this will affect the parking availability for the Library, Post Office, Church and surrounding businesses. The North Adelaide Village parking is now metered, the pressure for on street parking has increased substantially, especially due to the Good Life gym members now parking on the Street instead of in the supermarket carpark. Kingston Terrace, there are ongoing issues with parking for the Womens and Childrens and Memorial Hospitals. The removal of 6 carparks that are long term, will negatively impact on these essential services for the public. • While I am generally supportive of the proposed new bus service and route I wish to submit my objection to Stop 6 - Halifax Street. As a resident

21 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

of the city the Post Office is my primary postal address. This often requires me to collect or deliver heavy boxes & packages from the post office. The existing two 15-minute parks provide a safe and convenient location for me, and I'm sure many other post office users, to do this. The 'return' of two parking spaces on the northern side of Halifax Street a significant distance from the post office does not provide a safe alternative option given that I would be required to carry heavy packages across busy Halifax Street and negotiate the raised median strip you have installed. Furthermore the stated alternative of 15-minute parks on King William Street, some 30 meters from the Post Office, does not provide a safe alternate. Not only are the King William Street parks difficult to back out of given their close proximity to a busy intersection, trams and pedestrians also pose an increased risk to car park users and other motorists. I would submit that sufficient space exists outside of 11-19 Halifax Street (a short distance east of the proposed stop) for a bus stop. Furthermore by moving the proposed stop further east the bus can easily enter & exit the stop without impacting upon the flow of traffic at the King William Street intersection. The current proposal would likely result in the bus having only a short and acute angle at which to exit the stop which, given the size of the proposed bus, will result in the bus having to block two the two lanes of traffic while maneuvering. Moving the stop further east as proposed would not significantly increase the distance transport users would have to walk between the bus and tram stops if this is the main reason for the location of this stop. Alternatively the bus stop could be situated on Sturt Street, immediately west of King William Street. This would remove the stop from outside of a busy Post Office to a quieter location, without removing the convenience of it's close proximity to the tram stops. Submitted for your consideration • Very dissapointed. I use the 99c bus service every week day to get to work. With your new route the bus will no longer service my drop off area area(Hindmarsh sq)or go anywhere in the vicinity. There are quite a few commuters that catch this service to either Grenfell St or Hindmarsh sq or along Pultney st. There are no regular buses that service this part of the city. The only other option is to catch the very overcrowded tram and then walk for 10 minutes. The 99c route is very well patronised especially during peak times perhaps you should consider putting a special service on in peak times to service North Tce to the RAH, East Tce (Rundle St) Grenfell St, Hindmarsh Square and Victoria Square. This may a alleviate the overcrowding on the free tram as well. If you were to do a survey onboard the 99c during peak time you would get some very good feedback on why we use it and how often. I hope my comments will be taken into consideration Thank you.. • great idea - it will provide an easy and cheap way to access the Women and Childrens hospital and other areas of North Adelaide • The proposed route destroys the most important link that the City Loop 99C bus provided - that to Adelaide Station. I think that this is more important than any advantages coming from the integration of the two services. The City Loop was originally designed to provide access to many parts of the City from the old Victoria Square Tram Terminus and from the trains at Adelaide Station, and that access is being lost. While there are other fare-paying buses along North Terrace, those from the station do not serve other parts of the City. Any proposed loop needs to be consistent with the proposed tram loop - which is proposed to operate along North Terrace past the station - so why take something away now that will be reinstated when the tram loop is built. The importance of serving North Adelaide is very small when compared with the importance of the link the City Loop provides from Adelaide

22 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Station to many parts of the City. There are a number of normal bus services - generally more frequent than the new service - that link North Adelaide with various parts of South Adelaide. It is also important that plenty of stops are provided on any new route. In some parts of the proposed route they are too far apart. • The new service will definitely be beneficial for people using the free connector service because of improved frequency. • Overall, the new route and the integration of the two services is excellent. However, I would like to raise two issues 1. I believe there should be a non event day stop nearer to Adelaide Oval. (Bus stop 1, near corner of King William Street would be ideal) This is particularly important for visitors to Adelaide to do a tour of Adelaide Oval and also visit the Sir Donald Bradman Museum located inside the oval. From here visitors could then take a nice stroll along the river to the zoo. It would also be ideal bus stop for a leisurely walk along the torrens to the zoo even without wanting to visit Adelaide Oval. 2. I would like to see bus stop 5a remain as it is a good stop for St Dominics students to catch the bus without having to wander along the street alone. My daughter attends the school and uses this bus stop and the bus service • This looks like a good idea to increase the frequency of the free bus service around the city. I was immediately concerned that the new service will be contracted out to Torrens Transit. My specific concern is regarding the drivers. There is a huge difference between the drivers I have encountered on both services - and by extension, the behaviour of the passengers. The drivers on the City Council service are unfailingly friendly, knowledgeable and courteous to all. They treat their passengers like friendly members of a warm community, and the passengers respond to this. As a result of the drivers' inclusive, friendly attitude, I have seen passengers on the City Council bus all chip in to help a tourist, or offer their ideas (and they were strangers before they 'met' on the bus). By contrast, my experience of the drivers of the Adelaide Metro free bus (99C) is that they often do not greet people, perfunctorily call out the stops on the mic, and sometimes act as if they would rather be somewhere else. I call on the City Council to require of Torrens Transit a specific code of conduct for the drivers of the new service which expressly requires them to be cheery, welcoming, helpful to all users and behave like they really enjoy showing people our city, getting workers and students to and from work or Uni/school, helping people with questions, being a role model and an ambassador for Adelaideans. I had never seen people treated differently on the City Council bus because of their age, race, dress, social status, disability, outward appearance. By contrast, many drivers on other Torrens Transit services I have used have been openly racist, rude to people they didn't like, or just non- responsive. I know bus driving isn't the most glamorous or highly paid profession but I think we in Adelaide can do better than that in our flagship service. Let us remember that many of the regular users of the connector bus are elderly, semi-homeless, or international students. If the Adelaide City Council does not require a specific and unique-to-this-service behaviour code of conduct, then it risks bad PR, complaints and, well, selling our city short. Added to this is the potential sad loss of all the good PR built by the drivers of the Adelaide City Council bus to date. Good management surely calls for you to build on this valuable reserve, rather than risk damaging it. The Adelaide City Council are to be commended for introducing and developing the free bus service - as a resident and worker in the city, it has been my joy to use this service for shopping, playground trips, work transport and cafe appointments. The only restriction was the infrequency of the service. I am saddened to see that the Zoo is not serviced by the new bus route, but I applaud the effort to make the new service more frequent, and I certainly will be keen to see it up and running - with friendly, courteous, community-building drivers, under a specific code of conduct, of course.

23 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• will the bus be going in both clockwize and anticlockwise direcitons? • why doesnt the new route go anywhere near the adelaide zoo,? i thought the zoo was part of adelaide and have the pandas there would have encouged intersate and overseas vistiors to visit but there is limited publc transport to here. • Instead of having big buses and upgrading bus stops we should have Tindo size buses that come more often. A lot of the North Adelaide streets are one lane and already the Jeffcott side of North Adelaide is struggling with school traffic twice a day. • Great to see expanded running times and additional services during the day. • While I'm supportive of coordinating the existing services and sharing vehicles, I don't think the new routes will have as wide appeal as the existing service. Currently I think the council bus service caters slightly more to residents, while the 99C caters slightly more to visitors/tourists, with its focus more on the hotel accommodation areas of the city and its attractions. The new routes, within the CBD area, would appear to lose some appeal to tourists, as they don't cover key areas like North Terrace west of King William (for hotels on North Terrace and Hindley and connection with the railway station), and Hindmarsh Square (where there is quite a bit of accommodation and eating areas). The fact that every bus goes as far south as Halifax/Sturt Street, while good for residents of that area, would be a turn-off for visitors and would add considerably to the length of the trip. I would suggest the shorter (orange) city loop keep to the northern half of the CBD but service a little more of the west, to maximise appeal to visitors/tourists. I say this as a resident of Hindmarsh Square - whereas I currently use the 99C quite often, as it stops very close to my apartment, I wouldn't use this new service as it'd be quicker just walking/riding my bike. • Yes - keep the existing community bus! It would be a real shame to lose this service as community spirit is alive and well with current passengers. Everyone knows the drivers by name, and most people have a yarn to each other and the drivers are very helpful. We should foster this community spirit and keep the existing bus and drivers. Also, there is one wheelchair gentleman in the SE area. How is he going to get along with another type of bus? Are they all going to be disability-friendly? I hardly think that's likely. So, keep our community buses going please. However, I have the awful feeling the other is a 'done deal'. If that's the case, at least have the buses going to the Zoo. Tourists should have that benefit. • Route: Some very important landmarks are not addressed: e.g. UniSA City West, The Zoo, the new RAH (later), a gaping hole in Hindmarsh Square area. Stops: Need more stops (I realise that will affect schedules). e.g. at Adelaide Oval, midway along Melbourne Street, and maybe one more in Hutt Street ( relocate the single Hutt St stop accordingly), much closer to Whitmore Sq, and at the SE/SW corners of Light Square. Schedule: Every 30 mins in North Adelaide might be ok, but I think every 15 mins at peak times would be worth considering. Every 15 minutes in the inner loop is barely ok. In Perth for example, the frequency is so high that you don't need a timetable (wait max 10 mins, in my experience). Also, please make sure that the coinciding re and orange routes don't coincide, i.e. they lob in right on top of each other, so that instead of 1 bus every 15 minutes you get 2 buses every 30 minutes (the average would sill be every 15 minutes, but that would be just playing with the maths. Pls get this right!) Other 1: Consider a gold coin donation system - for a relevant charity perhaps. I don't expect to get anything totally for free.

24 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Other 2: In Perth, each bus stop is equipped with a sign, GPS-linked to the next bus, so you always know how many minutes remain. This is very helpful if you are tossing up whether to stay or walk. Even better - why not get these buses on an app like they have for the Fringe Bus - featuring a CBD map with live bus tracking. That would be the single best thing you could do - give me (i.e. the customer) the information needed to catch the bus on time (this is the greatest annoyance I have with the present city bus offerings - Have I just missed the bus? How long to the next one? Is it on schedule? Do I walk off, or wait? Gahhh!!! Just put it on an app already!!) • I am a frequent user of the connector free bus and whilst I can see some problems with the current service, like the poor state of the small buses and the irregularity of the Tindo on the route, I do not think the proposed changes will improve the service from my viewpoint. If the cost to the Council is the problem, I would be supportive of more of my rates being used to maintain the service rather than some other council projects. We could discuss that! It is a community service...and there are not many of these offered to City of Adelaide ratepayers. Specifically in relation to the proposed changes....I can not understand the logic of moving the North Adelaide section of the route to the West.... and King William street rather than Frome Rd and Kintore Ave. I use the bus to access the RAH, the Dental school and UniSa on Frome rd...all of which are beautifully serviced currently. This will no longer be the case with the new route. I also use the bus for city shoipping...in fact I have a personal motto "Don't Take the Car to Town" Using my timetable published in June 2012...I most commonly alight at stop 14 red coming into town and get on at stop 8 blue to come home. However by also using the stops 26 blue and 31 red, I effectively have a very convenient service about every 30 minutes. The figure of 8 cross over makes access to the main retail precinct very favourable and the current frequency of service very favourable to North Adelaide residents. If greater frequency is required there are plenty of Adelaide Metro buses available already exiting the city down KW Street...which is where I will have to walk to on the proposed route. Having used the bus since inception of the service, I appreciate how much easier it is in the busy traffic to have the bus use Finniss st rather than Melbourne St especially as Melbourne St is already choked with buses at busy periods and the R turn into Melbourne St is difficult. I can not understand why the change back to Melbourne St has been made. Re the larger buses....I am far from happy that suburban streets in North Adelaide will carry Adelaide Metro buses. I do not think the service requires 4 Adelaide Metro size buses passing through suburban streets hourly.( I understand there will be 2 buses clockwise and 2 anticlockwise hourly) If the option is only to have big buses or none at all, I would likely say NONE AT ALL and walk to Melbourne st or O'Connell st to meet my needs....or else just relent and drive my car to the city. The loss of car parking spaces and the noise/pollution of big buses in my precinct is detrimental. The Glover playground requires all the street parking possible as it is getting busier with time. Given we have been informed by the Council that there will be changes to parking arrangements in North Adelaide in relation to Adelaide Oval, I can't help but wonder if the changes to this bus service, both vehicles and route, are also related to transport needs in relation to the oval. • By taking away bus stops along the routes the usefulness of the service is reduced. The greater frequency is very welcome but misses the point when there are fewer places people can access.

25 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Using large busses so necesitating moving some stops is very disadvantageous to SW residents and workers. While it appears that the stops are not moved that far away it becomes more significant the further away you live or work from them. So those living and working in SW corner are definitely more disadvantaged than with current route and that was experienced as difficult by quite a few. The Whitmore Square stops at the very least should be made workable. I urge that small busses are used for the city. Helping people move around the city easily is enhanced by using low impact vehicles - visually not an encumbrance, bus stops can be small when using stops separate to designated stops and easier to move through traffic. To make a public people mover system work is to plan for everyone who could possibly use it - not assume you are keeping something goiing for those who have lots of time and just go to a couple of places. In the search for city icons we could have a large fleet of easily identifiable mini busses that zip around the city so frequently that no timetabe is needed. Everyone will promote the fact that every few minutes thaere is a bus. • Do not get rid of the train station stop, not only do I use it, but I know a lot of older people use it to get to and from the hospital!!! • I take the bus to Frome Road every Sunday. Please do not terminate the service to Frome Road. The free bus should go to the Adelaide Zoo to encourage tourists to visit it by making it more convenient to get there (free bus). I don't think you expect tourists to climb up that treacherous uphill slope to take the bus after visiting the zoo. Adelaide's bus system is already poor enough. Lots of people take the connector bus down Frome Road especially on weekends. I don't understand why you are taking the Frome Road stop out of the new route. The Medical School of Uni of Adelaide, a Cancer Research Centre, a Dental Centre and UniSA Medical Science Faculty and some other school buildings are located are also located along Frome Road. If the free bus can continue going there, we can encourage people to study in Adelaide by easy advertisement that doesn't cost us THAT much money. We don't need fancy websites or anything. Just good old free buses. The buses need to come more frequently also. 1 bus per hour??? The bus is very infrequent and sometimes late which I find unbearable, since it's only one bus every hour. How hard is it really?? I have to say though, almost all the drivers are extremely warm and friendly which I really like. And the Tindo buses are generally cleaner. it feels cleaner to be sitting in as compared to other buses. • In general the move from an hourly to a 15 minute interval sercice is a very welcome development and not before time. However: i.. the proposed lack of real time information displays at bus stops seems a serious deficiency; this facility is now widely available in many non- metropolitan centres in the UK and elsewhere (i,e, places with much smaller populations than Adelaide) . Waiting for a bus is far more bearable if one knows precisely how long one has to wait... ii. use of standard Metro type buses will surely add to the noise level, traffic congestion, capital and operating costs of this service? iii. I have been told by two current bus drivers on the Adelaide Connect service that none of them will be employed under the new arrangements. If this information is correct, it seems a poor reflection on the ACC's attitude towards its employees. If incorrect, it suggests that management should make more effort to improve communications with the workforce.. • Residents including myself in the townhouses/apartments on the north-western end of the city can no longer use the bus service. the new service means that we have to go up to North Adelaide first before going to the other end of the city (ie. Pultuney Street). Further, it will be inconvenient for students at City West campus to go to the City East campus vice versa. With the new Royal Adelaide hospital being built at the north-western end of the city, why is the bus being taken away from this area, instead,

26 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

there should be more transport. The new city connector bus should also connect to the train station. • I have been catching the 99C bus for many years now and the current service is extremely convenient. To change the stops and not have the bus available to catch outside of the train station is ridiculous considering the amount of passengers that get on at this point. The change in route means that the bus does not cover the main stops that the 99C currently does. This is of great inconvenience as it now will not stop anywhere near my workplace or the workplaces of many other people I am sure. Please take this into consideration as the new route seems to just cover the outskirts of the city and not the inner streets etc. Thank you. • I am a passionate supporter of public transport and the reduction in the use of cars, particularly in inner city areas. I am supportive of the connector service as it moves people around the city and North Adelaide and thus reduces the use of cars. I use the connector bus whenever possible. I understand what you are trying to do in streamlining the provision of this free service by integrating the 99C and the Connector and support your efforts. As it stands theses services do overlap. In an ideal world I would like to see this new service using a slightly smaller bus - to get through the CBD traffic more easily and to negotiate the residential streets in North Adelaide and the city, particularly the smaller ones or the almost totally residential ones. A mid-size bus would certainly meet demand in North Adelaide on most, if not all, occasions and probably cater for the 99C usage for most of the day. Would it be possible to have mid-size buses operate throughout the day and large buses during peak hour? At one of the information sessions it was stated that the Department of Transport wanted the standard size buses so they could use them on other routes. Would it suffice to have just 2 of the larger buses? For most of the day the majority of the buses allocated to the Connector route will be in use on that route so I can't see why the possible need for extra buses on other routes outside peak hours should determine the size of the buses on the connector route. I would also prefer the bus to travel through Buxton rather than Molesworth Street, for the convenience of the Helping Hand residents and to preserve the amenities of Molesworth Street. However I am not sure how a standard Torrens Transit bus will work in Buxton Street. It might necessitate removing quite a lot of the parking (which doesn't worry me). If the bus does go down Buxton there might be a need to reintroduce the use of the current bus stop in Hill St, on the corner of Molesworth St. ie an extra bus stop between the Strangways and Buxton stops. If the bus does remain in Molesworth St, I would like to see the stop further along towards Wellington Square, ie more directly outside Helping Hand, near the letter box. It seems more appropriate to locate the bus stop outside the administration area of a business rather than outside residential premises. Helping Hand could organise a convenient route through their grounds for residents to reach the bus stop. This upgrade to the connector bus is intended to attract more users. This could mean that more people will want to park their cars in North Adelaide and catch the free bus into the city. North Adelaide is a residential area with people paying high rates for residential amenities. It is important that North Adelaide not become a carpark for city users. It is important therefore that that parking in streets like Molesworth Street be restricted to 2-hour parking. Currently much of Molesworth Street is parked out by 7.30am by people who walk or bus into the city and don't return until 6pm. Is this really what the City Council wants for the residential streets of North Adelaide? The most critical aspect of this for me is that mid-size buses are used.

27 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Thank you for the opportunity to respond. The route from North Adelaide over the Morphett St bridge would likely be MUCH less used than the route in the other direction, as most people from North Adelaide tend to alight near Rundle Mall or the University. For those going from North Adelaide to the Central Market it is only a short additional distance at present. Most people in North Adelaide seem to prefer the present ‘figure of 8’ route. Molesworth Street is even further away for residents at the northern end of North Adelaide than the present Buxton Street route. The ‘right turn’ problem in Buxton St could be overcome by moving the traffic lights the short distance from Wellington Square to the Buxton Street corner (or having the ability to control the present lights from the bus). At the Helping Hand stop, the present service is effectively at 30 minute intervals into North Terrace. If the new service offers an additional bus in each direction half-way between the present buses, there would merely be two buses arriving nearly simultaneously, one in each direction. The ‘cost neutral’ requirement seems to be at odds with improving the service. Typical comments heard from residents include: (1) keep the present route and stops, but double the frequency, (2) keep the smaller buses in the residential streets of North Adelaide but use a type (like the solar bus) that also allows passengers to stand during peak times, (3) give priority to aged or less able-bodied residents over young students who could (and should) walk between the University and North Adelaide – given the number of students, they can easily swamp the service at peak times, leaving nothing for other residents. • The route from North Adelaide does not go near the city centre for workers to get to work in the morning • There used to be a bus stop on Buxton Street for the connector bus and that was the closest stop to the aquatic centre on Jeffcott Road. This new bus route has removed that bus stop and the new bus stop at Wellington Square is even farther away from the aquatic centre. I feel that there should be a new bus stop on either Barton Tce West of Jeffcott Road to provide convenient access to the aquatic centre for regular visitors. This would also encourage others to visit the aquatic centre more often. • I seem to have lost my comments when the form disappeared so I am trying to recreate them in case they did not get sent. I am not happy that you will be using big buses particularly in residential streets. Would have preferred Tindo sized buses. More parking spaces will be lost, The route should pass the Zoo & also City East & Uni Adelaide without having to battle along North Terrace. It should pass near all public/private hospitals & community centres/libraries as well as Helping Hand in Buxton St. The previous figure 8 configuration meant that both directions from North Adelaide accessed the city but I expect that the clockwise route will be more heavily used than the anticlockwise route although the increased frequency will help. Hutt St will be much better served than the other 'main' streets Melbourne & O'Connell. Returning the route to Melbourne St may cause problems in peak hour causing delays in the schedule. Also there may be a tendency for people to use the free service rather than the Adelaide Metro services. Perhaps proposed changes to fares may affect the usage. I am very concerned about the loss of the friendly personal service provided by our drivers. I hope that ACC will be able to assist them to gain employment with Adelaide Metro or ACC. I trust that drivers will be selected for their willingness to provide a community service & that the new service will be reviewed to ensure that it is meeting the community needs • It's a pity these questions are only now being asked of the community after the main decisions re route / type of buses / stops have already been made. I am concerned that many of the existing Connector Bus stops are to be removed. In particular, removing the stop outside St, Luke's on Whitmore Square will make it much less convenient for many residents in the SW to access the new service. It's also disappointing that the route

28 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

has not been extended further west than Whitmore Square to provide better access for residents. The new route leaves out many popular destinations currently serviced along North Terrace and Frome Road - Uni of SA, Railway Station, Convention Centre, Riverbank Precinct, Adelaide Zoo, for example.. These are essential destinations for many residents and visitors to the city. The new service would be more useful and convenient if it took in more destinations rather than less. The buses should be smaller to service to more of the residential areas. The frequency could be traded off against a more comprehensive service - buses every half hour would be adequate. • As one may or may not notice, the connector bus serves as a community bus where people connect and interact with each other. Besides that, majority of the passengers are elders as well, and not to eliminate other age groups as well. I've overheard some elder passengers complaint about decreasing the number of bus stops as they will have to walk further to reach the "nearest" bus stops. Besides that, 99c bus operates well on it's own (minus the part that they are not too punctual which I understand due to different traffic conditions). If the buses merge together, I don't see any benefits gained from the community. • While ACC have obvious concern for changes to car parking at the proposed bus stops, the potential impact on street parking throughout North Adelaide has not been addressed. The stated purpose of the whole scheme is to: a) increase the number of people using public transport b) improve access within/between the City and North Adelaide c) double patronage d) double the frequency of service Questions arising from this are: * has the ACC undertaken traffic/parking modelling of this augmented free transport scheme? * what will be the impact on street parking throughout North Adelaide? * is it acknowledged (or planned) that North Adelaide will become a Transport Node ie a parking zone for city workers connected to the city by an enhanced free bus service? * what will be the impact on those streets with no parking restrictions? • Re: CONNECTOR ROUT The CURRENT stops "1" (St.Luke's / Whitmore Square) and "21" (Whitmore Square/corner Sturt St.) should DEFINITELY be retained!, as - especially for older residents of the S/W corner, - these stops are more convenient, much safer to reach, as well as closer to the S/W Community Centre than the proposed stops "4" (Morphett St./corner Gouger St.) and stop "5" (Sturt St.). • I am very concerned about the reduction in stops, as outlined below: It’s proposed to remove the current stop on Whitmore Square at St. Luke’s, making it more difficult for many SW residents to access the service. In addition, the bus will no longer service a number of popular city destinations, including the Railway Station and Casino, Convention Centre, Uni of SA City West campus, Adelaide Oval, Elder Park, Riverbank Precinct, Adelaide Zoo, Botanic Park, Torrens Parade Ground, Adelaide Uni (Frome Road) and Uni of SA City East campus. • I think the current route suits better for student as it goes down Frome road. A lot of people seems to get off at RAH, Medical school and

29 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

UniSA/Adelaide uni on Frome road. The new route goes down king William road and there's really nothing much on King William road until reaching north Adelaide, so I believe the new route can be improved if it goes down Frome road instead of King William, as more students/hospital staff/UniSA staff will benefit from it. • I think an important stop at the Adelaide Zoo has been missed running down Frome Road perhaps taking a left down war memorial drive back up King William Street to the CBD. The zoo is a major attraction and seems to be left out - This will never be a Tram route as such and feel a bus loop service. I question the frequency it should be every 10 min in the cbd or under and every 15 at North Adelaide. I understand there is a cost associated with this perhaps consider a gold coin donation or a tourist day pass, and seniors card free. Auckland has the exact same thin with a far broader network - and is $4.80 is busy and used frequently. Cant get anywhere in adelaide in a cab under $5 Parking is $3.20 on average for half to an hour depending on the zone. Expand to Prospect, Norwood, Hyde Park, and Unley, Henley beach Rd and you will be on a winner. People won't mind a gold coin fee to not walk but the service must be frequent, clean, friendly, and on time. I am a city resident and business operator as is my wife the tram is free and packed i can see the same happening with this service but add frequency, reliability and a small cost and it will be used especially with the arrival of Football in the cvd. With an expanded service will encourage people to park on the fringes and catch the cheap service into the cvd reducing congestion. • I think the proposal is very sensible and a step forward in city transport especially in combination with the free tram. I especially like the frequency of service and the larger better access buses. It would be nice to have an additional stop somewhere near Elder Park and the Parade Ground. My only regret is that the route does not encompass the Zoo and Botanic Park. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. • I would love the new connector bus to operate. I think it is very helpful and convenient public transport and makes Adelaide residents live easier and more happy. • As a SW City resident and ratepayer I object to the continued erosion of Connector Bus service to the residents of our SW corner. I am particularly thinking of the great number of mobility-impaired elderly in our community. The original stops on Whitmore Square worked well for us, then the SW stop was moved to outside St Luke's, and the southbound stop was moved further away from the SW corner. Now you propose to move both stops even further away. Someone living on Gilbert St half-way between Morphett St and West Tce wanting to use the Connector to the Central Market would now (under proposed model) have to walk almost as far as the Market to access proposed Stop 4. PLEASE RETAIN THE ST LUKE'S STOP! The south-bound stop should stay on Whitmore Square rather than move even further east along Sturt, for the same reason. A more frequent service than currently would be welcome, but if you make the stops inaccessible to many of the people most in need of it, you will find it under-used, and considerable community resentment generated. We are paying higher and higher rates, for reduction of public amenities. As with the free Internode-ACC rollout, (which stopped just short of the SW), and the planned closure of the Grote St Library, with the loss of the St Lukes stop it seems that yet again we SW corner residents miss out on services provided to residents and ratepayers elsewhere in the ACC area. PLEASE, AT VERY LEAST, RETAIN THE ST LUKE'S CONNECTOR STOP.

30 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I am very supportive provided that the new service is scheduled and run like the 99C not the existing ACC connector bus. The 99C runs to a tight schedule (as tight as buses can of course) and I have caught it close to the scheduled departure time many times, so it seems fairly dependable to me. On the other hand the existing ACC connector bus has a "will arrive within 5 to 15 minutes of the stated time" guideline, which is a lot looser and has put me off using the service. Additionally, I use the top public transport app "TransitTimes Adelaide" on my iPhone and when I asked the developer why the existing ACC connector bus was not covered by the app, he stated that (1) the council doesn't provide the bus schedule in a format that his apps can use and (2) the "5 to 15 minutes" range makes it hard to add any meaningful scheduling to the app. So please can the new service be scheduled and run like the 99C has been, including publishing the schedule electronically in the same format as other DPTI bus routes so it can be fully used by smartphone apps? • I agree with many of the suggested benefits however I disagree with a few aspects of the proposed service. Having amended the current City Connector route this year the service is finally running like clockwork with a reliable timetable. Part of that must be thanks to re-routing away from Rundle St East but also Melbourne Street (which often created significant delays). I expect the proposed route will create delays due to using North Terrace as well as (especially) Melbourne Street and along with that frustration that the North Adl loop will not run to the scheduled times. The current Connector service acts very much as a community service and provides many elderly residents (mainly from North Adelaide) with a comfortable and caring service which they regularly use to visit the Central Market and other city locations for shopping, medical appointments etc. I know several of these residents who did not wish to provide feedback, but who are very wary of the proposed new service and feel they would not use it. They are comfortable with the current 'intimacy' or familiarity of the Connector service, they know all the drivers and don't wish to use 'public transport' which they feel will be busier on-board, less comfortable, less safe and less personal. The current service also acts as a fantastic tourist service with so many of the drivers being great ambassadors for the City of Adelaide. I just cannot see this same level of service coming with the proposed merger. If this is a cost-saving measure I don't imagine that it will lower our rates at all. I have used this service for several years but I won't be surprised if I use the proposed new service much less (if at all) and resort to driving my car within the city and North Adelaide...... which surely goes against Council's thinking and strategies? • The Connector Bus service should stay exactly as it is, with the same drivers and with no major changes at all to the route taken or the times or bus stops. Previously there was a survey conducted, and now there have been sevaral opportunities for community members to say what they mean about this new proposal but I wonder what the point is, since the Council seems to have already made up their mind. What is the point when our voices are not paid heed to? • I would like Stop 17 in Kingston Terrace to be closer to Jerningham Street rather than just around the corder from LeFevre Terrace. This would greatly assist me and other prospective users of the service living in the lower Kingston Terrace, Francis Street, Mann Terrace area. it would also equalise the distance between stops 16 -17 and 17 - 18. Please give this matter serious consideration. • Please lnclude the current route and current bus stops in the new plan - long time senior residents will be seriously disadvantaged if the Whitmore Square stop in particular is cancelled. Thankyou for the opportunity to comment. • There needs to be a stop on Whitmore Square to effectively service the South West corner of the city. There are a large number of residents in

31 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

this area who are elderly or do not own a vehicle who regularly access the current City Connector bus from the stop in front of St Luke's. The nearest stops in the consultation document are at least a 5 minute walk away from the existing stop, which increases their travel time from home. • My only negative comment would be about the bus no longer going along Frome St. The closest the bus will come to the zoo now is Melbourne St or North Tce, which is a bit of a walk when you've got a toddler to take with you. Otherwise, extremely supportive of the new service - particularly with the new and more frequent times. My family and I will be using the service more frequently, although, as mentioned, disappointed we'll have a bit of a walk to get to the zoo. • Hurry up and do it! Glad to see (I think) you are returning to the route down Melbourne St. • I am concerned that O'Connell/Ward Sts will no longer be serviced. There are a number of medical facilities in this area and the nearest proposed stops are some distance away. The drivers on the existing connector service are extremely courteous and helpful. I often seee them helping tourists or new users of the service with suggestions as to the best options available. I have not seen this same behaviour on the 99C buses and, in spite of the claim that the drivers will remain constant, this is not my experience with the 99C service, which is much more cold and distant. In my opinion, the approach of the existing connector drivers is much more friendly and reflects well on the city of Adelaide. • Thankyou for the opportunity to provide feedback on behalf of the RAA please contact at any time regarding this submission • I am astounded that someone has come up with a plan to not link with the railway station but to duplicate a number of other routes (ie the tramline along North Tce). It is absolute madness. Why would you not want to link the train station with a ring around the inner city. Please do not remove this stop. • need to have a stop outside the railway station as it is currently • Why would you take away the stop in front of the Railway station? People get off the train and straight onto the bus in the morning and vice versa in the afternoon. It is the primary way of getting to work for some people in the east/south end of the city. I think you should keep the 99C going past the railway station for workers/school kids especially in the mornings. How ridiculous to take this stop away. The tram does not service the eastern side of the city....please rethink this change a lot of people will be put out by this. • I think that removing the north western corner of the city is a mistake, and that the bus should continue to go all the way along North Tce. The tram won't get you to anywhere other than King William St and the 99C was the best way to get from somewhere west of KW St to the eastern side. The stop outside the train station was particularly well patronised. I used to catch the 99C semi regularly from the train station to the corner of Flinders and Pulteney Streets. The new route does not cater for that trip at all. • need to have a stop outside the railway station

• the bus needs to include Adelaide Railway station, many people going to destinations towards east terrace use this current service • You Idiots once Adelaide Oval is in use and the trains come back (like 10 years to late) you will need to return the stop back in front of the Railway station, so why take it away in the first place, I guess another bright idea and someones ego at work.

32 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• The plan looks like it needs more work, especially given that it has no key stops on Nth Tce eg. near train station / casino. I understand that it cannot be all stops for efficiency... but should consider if other stops would be more popular on the proposed path instead... • I work at Riverside centre full time, I use the 99C bus everyday and has found it is very useful to have the 99c bus stopped at the railway station, catching the free bus along North Tce (Royal Adelaide Hospital) to Adelaide Railway Station. • I frequently see people in wheelchairs waiting for the 99C outside the Adelaide Railway Station. Many of these people will find going up the hill past Parliament House to get the bus beyond their capabilities. Looking at the new route it doesn't look like they will be able to get on at the Convention Centre stop. Once again it appears that disabled people are being unfairly affected. • I work at the Riverside Centre. I am extremely concerned that the route being removed from North Terrace (and the stop by the Adelaide train station) will disadvantage many workers and clients who travel to and from the Riverside Centre around the CBD on the free 99C bus every day. The tram does not fill this gap and the proposed new commute via North Tce to King William Street for a City Connector bus stop is not appropriate for people with a disability, the aged or mums with prams. Furthermore this extra commute via North Terrace to King William Street for the City Connector stop is not feasible for Riverside and many other workers in the area who are time limited (ie on lunch breaks) and use the current 99C bus stop by the train station to contribute significantly to the local economy via shopping and doing business around the CBD. • The proposed route means the stop outside the railway station will no longer be available. I’m concerned this will significantly impact staff, clients and visitors to Riverside Centre who use this service in conjunction with other public transport. There is no proposed travel along Pulteney Street which means that if a traveller using the free tram service wishes to travel to a stop between East Terrace and King William Street there is a considerable distance to be managed, often without cover in the heat of summer and the rain of winter. The Pulteney Street precinct has recently experienced the building of a number of high rise office complexes so the number of people affected is greater than you could number. I would imagine travellers would prefer to stay on either a tram or bus without having to change modes of transport within the CBD. Please don't meddle with what ain't broke! • I support having free bus service to transport people to North Adelaide and around the city, but not at the expense of disconnecting the Adelaide Railway Station and new RAH from the service along North Tce. It would have been useful if you had put the existing 99 C route on the map of the new proposed route for comparison. Making this journey longer may distract tourists as it will take longer for a round trip. Have you considered what attractions are at each stop? 99C has traditionally been for tourists to get a feel for Adelaide and people to get around the city easily. What is there to see at stop 23 and how many people catch transport from there? More thought needed please! • Please bring back the Railway Station Stop! • This service is highly valued • Removing the route from going past the Adelaide Railway Station is a mistake. Direct access to these buses from the train station will be a problem for travellers with mobility issues who would need to make their way up North Terrace without any protection from inclement weather. There are also several important service centres in the Raliway Station precinct, icluding Services SA i the HP building, Department for Communites and Social Inclusion in the Riverside Centre, Convention Centre, Casino, etc. etc.

33 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Surely these routes should integrate very closely with the Railway station! • The curret 99C bus stop outside of the Railway station and Tram stop is not included in the proposal.. • Combining the services of the Adelaide Connector and the City Loop is an excellent idea. I am very pleased that the new service will be more frequent, that the hours of operation will be extended and that the service will operate seven days a week. Buses which are more easily accessible for people with pushers etc., "walkers", wheel chairs and shopping trolleys will be a great improvement from the current small buses with high steps which are very difficult for old people to use. I realise that the reason for reducing the number of stops is to enable a circuit to be completed in an hour, but I am very unhappy about the removal of the stops in Whitmore Square. I am sure that many other old residents of the SW corner will also be affected adversely by this. I ask that consideration be given to retaining these two stops. • It all sounds good, except that there's no mention of what will happen to the current Adelaide Connector drivers? E.g. compensation for redundancy or offering retraining (if necessary) so they could drive Torrens Transit buses? • I live just round the corner on the current Hutt St bus stop between Hume St and Carrington St. I would like that bus stop to continue. Hutt St is too long to walk if there is only 1 bus stop for the whole of Hutt St at Wakefield St. It would be very inconvenient to use the bus service when visiting Central Market carrying a bag of groceries or going to Rundle Mall. I ask you please to reconsider having only 1 bus stop on the whole of Hutt St. It does not make sense for other Streets such as Melbourne St or Halifax St to have 2 or 3 bus stops and Hutt St which is a major residential area in the city to have only 1 bus stop for its residents. I find this very unfair, backward thinking and bad planning especially for ratepayers to not be able to efficiently use this service. I always recommend this free bus service to my friends and family members who visit Adelaide and myself but it would be a great inconvenience for them to walk for 2 streets before reaching a bus stop that will help them utilise this free service in the future. I ask you please to reconsider and please at least reinstate 2 bus stops on Hutt St between Halifax St and East Tce of which the bus stop will be at Rundle St. That is a distance of SIX (6) streets between Halifax St and Rundle St which is only serviced by 1 bus stop in the new plan for the merge. Thank you and I hope you will create more bus stops on Hutt St. • As a resident of North Adelaide for the past 25 years and a keen supporter of the Free Connector service since its inception, this community service has contributed enormously to my enjoyment of city living. From the outset the circuitous routes have eased access to institutions and services inaccessible or inconveniently so by the metro bus service. Overtime I've been heartened by the continual use of the service by older citizens and foreign students, and especially the primary school children who use the service as their safe transport to school. A very early highlight of the wonderful community service the Free Connector was providing was witnessing an elderly gentleman alight the bus at the Helping Hand stop on Buxton Street having enjoyed an activity he could independently undertake, to travel safely and securely to the Central Market if, on that occasion, only to purchase a bag of bananas to share with fellow Helping Hand residents. Only today an elderly and mobility impaired couple hailed the Free Connector. When the Free Connector was waiting for a metro bus to move on to enable access to the Railway Station stop, the driver recognised the wife "stretching her legs" west of the stop. He beckoned her to come aboard and enquired after her husband by name, to which she informed was waiting at the stop.

34 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

She particularly, voiced her concern at the future loss of the professional and personal service she and her husband have cherished to date. Her concern mirrors my mine, that of continuity of service, and in her and her husband's case, caring, thoughtful and welcoming customer service, which I very much enjoy seeing extended to others, especially strangers to the city. I have never felt or experienced the service as infrequent or lacking capacity. I have never failed to secure a seat on a return journey to North Adelaide, and very rare that I've resorted to hailing a metro bus, or walking, if an in-bound Free Connector be full. If and when I require a direct route, i.e. along King William Street, within a specified time only then do I consider hailing a metro bus. Generally I avoid KWSt owing to traffic congestion, and most of all, the passenger queues at unsheltered stops along the thoroughfare. I am therefore, unhappy with the proposed new route as I cannot see the point of additional traffic/bus congestion when there is a free tram service. The new Connector service, as does the Free Connector currently, can and needs to go where trams cannot. The current Railway Station stops provide a very direct service for those, such as visitors, who seek access the railway station and the tram. From my observations the beauty of these stops is their clarity of location - it enables the driver(s) to clearly indicate to visitors where they need to go. This will be nigh on impossible and fraught with errors, misunderstandings, and leaps of faith (especially by those where English is a second language, or less) from the proposed Parliament and Rundle Mall stops. My fear is the community bus service will quickly evolve into merely a bus service. Proposed KW Rd & KWSt route risks cannibalising metro ticket users to the free service thus depriving the Torrens Transit of revenue, & displacing and disaffecting current regular Connector users. I am pleased, however, weekend and public holiday services are proposed to continue. Since the service extended beyond business days, and the times extended, I've been delighted to make further use. I don't think I quite understand what real-time passenger information is, other than perhaps the detailed schedule specific to each stop, and would be saddened if these are no longer - I use them and so do many others especially new users. It has been heartening to witness the volume passengers of late using the Zoo bus stops. Its a crying shame the proposed route eliminates Frome Road, not only for the tourists and visitors to the Zoo, the Torrens environs and Popeye landing, but the numerous international students (and workers) on the city in-bound route who access the Medical School and both university campuses. The Free Connector service has been truly communal in the community sense, and has made this North Adelaide resident very proud. • Not stopping by the train station seems entirely counter-productive. • not connecting to the train station defeats a lot of the purpose of an a free system to move around the city, I see this as a big step backward. It also seems clear that the route could easily continue to service the railway station, for many this is the difference between coming into town or not and would certainly restrict the choices i make about doing things in the city as well as those of my family. • I am concerned over the cancellation of the 99C bus stop outside the railway station. We deal with disability clients and our office is on the other side of the Intercontinental Hotel, next to the railway station. Loss of this stop will take away the link between us and the Royal Adelaide Hospital; and between the Railway station and the RAH. Further, the loss of the 99C breaks the link between UniSA's East and West Campuses. • I feel the stop in whitmore square should be retained. Thanks

35 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I can't not see the logic in providing a public transport option which fails to link passengers to other transport such as the tram and train. I think the proposed routes and changes have some advantages but it needs to link to other options. I believe you are making it difficult for people with disabilities and the elderly to access a range of public transport options. • Concern that a major hub i.e. Railway Station and significant number of Offices (inc. Government) on North Terrace between KW Street and Mprphett Street will be excluded. • Many people come out of the train station and jump on the 99C, noe they will not be able to Especially the people who need to get to the royal Adelaide Hospital????? • The route appears to bypass the Railway Station, the Riverside Centre and the Convention Centre, and many major hotels; all sites that need to continue to be on the connector/99c bus route and connected to other public transport routes. The Department for Communities and Social Inclusion has its corporate headquarters and some service delivery areas located at the Riverside Centre North Terrace. The current bus route is used by staff and visitors to this building (other tennats include courts, Department of Premier and Cabinet and Renewal SA). Please reconsider the exclusion of the railway station bus stop on north terrace from the new route. It is anecdotal evidence but I observe everyday older people and people with a disability queing at the free bus st is my observation that this route is well used by people with a disability and elderly people use this from the railway station and seems to be preferred to the tram route. Walking from Light Square and King William street will be difficult for some and the incline from the railway station to King William street will be difficult for those with limited mobility. It is diifcult to reconcile the route with the proposal to have seamless and connected public transport in and around the city to exclude the bus stop at the Railway station from the route. I would be pleased to be contacted to discuss this further/facilate further consultation at the Riverside Centre. • Removing the stop form the Adealide railway station makes the transition form trian to to schools in Wakefield St /Flinsders St very difficult - especially when they are located mi-way beween new route and Vic Square. • I am concerned about access to the Eastern part of the city by those: - arriving in the city by rail - arriving in the city by tram from Port Road - working on North Terrace between King William St and West Terrace . (I am in the third category, working in the Riverside building on North Terrace) Currently we can catch the 99C City Loop at the Adelaide Railway Station every 20 mins to go to Eastern part of the city. Now we will have to walk East to King William Street, choose either 13A or 13B, and wait up to 30 mins to continue East along North Terrace by bus. Alternatively we can walk to stop 12 and only have to wait up to 15 mins for the bus (but, hey, by then I've walked half way to the RAH and may as well keep walking - although it would still be worthwhile to catch the bus if I am heading for the city's south-east). I don't have a solution to offer (unless you can provide real time passenger information for stops 13A and 13B at the Adelaide Railway Station) - just pointing out that it is a reduction in service for a fairly large cohort.

36 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Why are you cutting car parks in and around the City!!! As majority of city workers that live in a 10-15km radius of the city don't have efficent public transport and the services are continously running late or not at all. Also clients and staff members that attend or work for the Department for Communities and Social Inclusion are not all phyiscally able to travel far distances and the new proposed route is not Disability freely. I would highly recommend you keep the 99C running along North Terrace. • You have removed all access to free bus services from the west of the CBD - UniSA City West campus and all those commuters currently accessing the service when exiting from the Adelaide Railway Station. I am not supportive of this at all. I understand the tram now runs down North Tce but it will just increase frustration for commuters to have to travel on the tram, get off at Rundle Mall and then transfer to the free connector service. Makes no sense to me at all. • * Don't like that it doesn't stop outside the Adelaide Railway Station anymore * Have also noticed that the proposed stops on the new service are spaced quite far apart * There is a big void / lack of service covering the area between King William St and Hutt St • Seems to provide better access to the city. I intend to use it for visitors / tourist friends. I can use it to get to Hutt St from Riverside centre North Tce. • My neighbours and I are opposed to the proposal by the Adelaide City Council and SA Transport to replace buses on the North Adelaide Connector service with large diesel buses and to double the frequency of service. There is no supporting demand for big buses and the four-fold increase in frequency as proposed. Even at peak times, the buses are unlikely to be fully utilised and for most of the day are likely to run with very few passengers. The buses will significantly detract from the urban quality of quiet residential streets in North Adelaide and will certainly affect the heritage atmosphere of North Adelaide which is a main attraction for local, national and international visitors and tourists. Putting the large, noisy and fume-generating buses on quiet residential streets in North Adelaide is a major backward step. The consultation sessions at the Council have indicated that the dominant reason for the large buses is so that all buses in the Adelaide fleet are the same size-- irrespective of demand or suitability on any particular route. This is a proposal for the convenience of the operators rather than for the convenience of the residents. As ratepayers and business owners in this district, the proposal is not welcomed by my neighbours and me and should not be approved by the Council. Actually, the Council should be working to remove the large and smelly buses from quiet residential streets where they currently operate, rather than imposing them on additional quiet, residential streets. There are many areas in Adelaide where a fleet of smaller quiet buses would be an asset and certainly one of these areas encompasses the historic, residential streets of North Adelaide. The proposed bus service is further compromised by the starting hour of 6:45am, well before other significant traffic starts on our local streets. The big buses, accelerating after slowing to turn the corners and when pulling away from the bus stops, will dramatically change the noise profile for residents and we are opposed to bringing more noise outside our windows. In particular, the proposed bus stops on Kingston Tce will significantly impact parking currently used for those who work at and attend appointments at the Women's and Children's Hospital. These parking spots are valuable due to the limited parking available for the hospital and it would be an extreme disadvantage to take them away for the proposed bus service. There is very limited demand on Kingston Tce for bus stops. The proposed bus stop is also very close to the at the corner of LeFevre Tce. This light is already congested at peak traffic times and is difficult to get through. In fact, between 830-9am, LeFevre Tce is almost a parking lot with bumper-to-bumper traffic. It makes no sense to

37 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

put a bus in the mix and add to the traffic slowdown. The buses currently operating on the main avenues of Melbourne St, O'Connell St, Ward St, Hill St, etc. are sufficient. There is no demand for increased bus service on quieter, residential streets in North Adelaide. Residents will already be subjected to increased traffic, noise, pollution and parking challenges from the Oval--we should not have to put up with additional noise, traffic delays, valuable parking spots being taken away, and additional exhaust fumes from big, diesel buses. My neighbours and I oppose the new proposed connector bus service and do not want it approved by Council. • The proposed stop 6 on Halifax Street is inappropriate. The 15 minute parking bays already there are utilized heavily by delivery drivers and people accessing the local businesses. With the building of the multi-story office block at 400 King William Street, the the newish buildings near to the corner of King William and Gilles Street and with the imminent completion of the new Quest Apartment building the demand for close short term parking has skyrocketed in this area. During the week they are rarely vacant. The bays on King William Street alone would not be enough to meet current demand. I often notice delivery vans and trucks driving around waiting for a vacancy to occur now. If you take away the 4 15 minute bays on Halifax Street that problem will be exacerbated. In addition the bays on the southern side of Halifax Street are the only parallel bays available close to King William Street and the larger trucks can park there and unload safely. It will be less safe for the delivery drivers to do so with the back of their trucks and vans sticking out into King William Street. In the buildings on King William Street there are a large number of legal practices and the 15 minute parking zones are very handy for couriers and clients dropping off documents. There are places that would be more suitable for the bus stop about 50 metres further down Halifax Street where the population of businesses are less dense. • Loss of Whitmore Square stops effectively renders the service inaccessible to much of the southwest corner, particularly for people with mobility dificulties (of whom there are many in the area). An extra 200-300m is difficult for some. The proposed routes do not service Adelaide Railway Station (currently served by both services), or Adelaide High School (which is currently served, more-or-less, by 99C buses), or the Zoo (currently served by the Connector). The new RAH site is not served. We cannot see any good reason why other existing (Adelaide Metro) stops in Hutt St, Jeffcott St, Ward St and Hill St along the proposed routes will not be serviced, as they are currently by the Connector. Non-servicing of these stops will effectively remove access to our most likely destinations by either existing service. Also, access to medical specialists in Ward St will be made more difficult. • I use the train - the removal of the bus stop at the Adelaide Train Station creates a great incovenience in connecting to my place of work on the other side of the city. Is it possible to include the Adelaide Train Station as a bus stop. I am sure a lot of other workers travelling by train into the city will find the removal of this bus stop a great inconvience. • Very disappointing. While a long term vision is always to be respected, when you have your first child you 'plan' to buy them a car to help them get to unit, you don't race out and squeeze a third one in the garage the day after you bring the bub home from hospital. Current buses are 19 seaters. The vast majority of travel time these are not full. Clear conclusion is that if a 19 seat bus is not full, then neither will be a larger one. Building bigger does not bring larger crowds unless you already have people being turned away (cough AFL cough football fans cough by the way when are we getting our parklands back Adelaide Oval cough).

38 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

The buses ARE often filled first thing in the morning with what one would assume is people using the service to travel into the CBD for work, an observation supported by the fact that the next bus some 30 minutes later (ie after most businesses have opened for the day and the good workers of adelaide are making their first coffee) is nearly empty. ACC need to determine what service they are attempting to provide - A service for residents and visitors to undertake day to day events? Or a bus service for workers? Route change? Casual imspection suggest this is to improve speed of bus movement, although there is an open question as to why anyone thought increasing speed bus was an advantage over all the downsides that will be brought in. Buses current go down Ward st, with the stop there normally transfering passengers, most of which from casual observation that seem to be very elderly. Moving the route to Molesworth means that anyone from the Barton Tec area will now have an addition block to walk. The block between Molesworth and Ward is rather large and dare I say it, if the people catching this bus liked walking they would instead be walking into town in the first place via our lovely parklands (that are not construction sites, thank you very much AFL). Ward st also has a lighted crossing. Molesworth does not. Is this a future hidden cost? Molesworth also has no infrastructure for buses to stop, or in fact on street parking. Are we led to believe that in order to allow for these new larger buses, parking on Molesworth is to be reduced futher? Although as a Molesworth resident, it is mildly nice after the ACC has going to great lengths to tell us they don't want us walking onto our street by ripping up all the footpaths on the square leading to us, to realise we are still loved in the overall plan of things. Speaking of buses large. The green thing. Get it to work or get rid of it. It is a bad and expensive running joke with regular users of the bus service that that thing is never working properly and it is safe to assume if your bus is ever running late it is because the 'Wonderful' Solar Bus isn't feeling well today. I repeat, get it to work, or get rid of it. Montefiore Road - Why? Okay, we know why, the buses can drive straight down there without having to stop, hence improving overall route times. Well of course they wont have to stop, there is nothing to stop for, and also completely defeats the major purpose for people from NA using the bus which is to get to the Mall as painlessly as possible via the stops on North Tec. As it stands as a North Ade resisdent, there is a bus, either Red or Blue every 30 minutes. This means that worse case (ie you just miss one bus when you step out your front door and have to wait) I can get to North Tec in a bit over 40 minutes on one single bus. If I am to read the 'new routes' correctly, if I fail to catch the bus going direct to North Tec, I am going to have to go via Montefiore bridge and either get off to trust my timing with a second bus or do the entire loop of the lower city. As I understand it I completely fail to accept that this is anything other then a reduction is services to me, the ACC rate payer. I will confess I may have the routes and times wrong. Some people were implying that there would be more buses more often and hence I could still catch a bus direct to North Tec every 30 minutes, which would be lovely, but that would imply that these new larger buses were now carrying the same amounts of people currently carried by existing routes, except spread across the more frequent buses. Basically in other words meaning instead of each bus having 5 or 6 people on it during the day, it would have 2 or 3. Or in other, other words, I completely fail to accept that this is good value for money for me, the ACC rate payer. Short answer? If it ain't broke, don't fix. If the ACC really wants to save money I fail to understand why the ACC seems to keep purcurement staff on board whose sole role seems to getting paid to look at bike shops. Instead of messing wiht established and popular services, maybe the ACC would like to turn their eyes inwards.

39 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

It is not without bemusement that I find it easier to find the ACCs policy online statement on reconciliation then it is to actually find a bus timetable. Bus user 4 to 6 times per week • Route completely misses Western end of North Tce. Workers in this area would usually catch the 99C from the Railway Station. With the new route, we would have to walk to the Library. This will also affect visitors to the Convention Centre, nearby hotels and the Casino. Having the tram service this section of North Tce doesn't help if you are travelling to the East End. • What number will the new services operate as. I suggest using 99A for the Adelaide City loop Anit-clockwise and 99B for Adelaide City loop Clockwise. Then 99C for FULL loop Anti-Clockwise and 99D for FULL loop Clockwise The only concerns is the traffic build up on North Tce and King William street during PM Peak. • I am a resident, rate payer and business owner (30 Walter St) in North Adelaide. I have discussed the North Adelaide Connector Bus proposal with my neighbours and we are opposed to the proposal to replace buses on the North Adelaide connector service with large diesel buses and to double the frequency of service. There is no supporting demand for the proposed four-fold increase in this service. Even at peak times, buses are unlikely to be fully utilised and they will significantly detract from the quiet, residential quality of the streets in North Adelaide. Putting these large, noisy and fume-generating buses on quiet residential streets in North Adelaide is a major backward step to maintaining the heritage atmosphere and outdoor appeal of the cafés and parks in North Adelaide which attract visitors. North Adelaide cannot support the same level of pollution and noise generated by the buses in the CBD. This proposal should NOT be approved by the Council. Instead, the Council should work to remove the large and smelly buses from quiet residential streets where they currently operate, rather than imposing them on additional quiet residential streets. North Adelaide residents are interested in a smaller fleet of quiet buses. The proposed bus service is further compromised by the starting hour of 6:45am, well before other significant traffic starts on our local streets. The big buses, accelerating after slowing to turn the corners and when pulling away from the bus stops, will dramatically change the noise profile for residents. You choose to live across from a park because you think it will provide some peace and quiet; you should not be subjected to noisy, diesel buses going back and forth outside your house all day. There is no indication of a demand for a bus stop or bus route on Kingston Tce. This is one of the streets that borders the parklands where pedestrians enjoy walking, jogging and cycling--they should not have to breathe in the diesel from buses while doing so. The parking spaces on Kingston Tce are also very valuable for Women's and Children's Hospital parking and it would be an extreme disadvantage to lose these spaces. They are relied upon by those who work at the hospital and those going to appointments. In addition, the proposed bus stops on Kingston are very close to the intersection at LeFevre Tce. This intersection is often congested at peak times and the operation of buses along this route would cause more traffic congestion. The buses would be pulling in and out very close to the intersection and would create traffic jams. There would be very few passengers, if any, who would utilise the stops on Kingston Tce. It is not worth losing the valuable parking spaces and creating more traffic and pollution on this street bordering the parklands. LeFevre is also a street with lots of traffic during peak times and it is not sensible to have buses operating (pulling in and out of the traffic) on this already, increasingly heavily-trafficked street. This road is unfortunately becoming a thoroughfare for getting in and out of the city in addition to Melbourne Street, O'Connell Street, Jeffcott St, etc. North Adelaide needs to maintain its residential atmosphere--it is not only a series of

40 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

thoroughfares for getting in and out of the city. North Adelaide residents will already be subjected to additional noise, pollution, parking restrictions and inconveniences due to the Oval. We should not be further subjected to the noise, pollution, increased traffic and loss of valuable parking spaces from the large diesel buses proposed to operate in North Adelaide. We think the Tindo is great and would be in favour of this type of transportation which is suited to the area. It would be a mistake to increase the level of bus service in North Adelaide with these noisy, fume-generating buses. The outdoor cafes and parks in North Adelaide are a big draw for local, interstate and international visitors. The proposed bus service would negatively impact the appeal (noise, pollution, traffic, etc.) of North Adelaide for residents, rate-payers, and visitors. My neighbours and I do not want the proposal approved by Council. • The service works well as it is with friendly and approachable staff. This service should remainin Council hands. Metro services would not take the time and care. • I have used the Connector Bus since it's inception. The proposed route will suit my needs perfectly. I can connect with the J bus route to travel to the airport. • Please keep the service unchanged. Great service! Great drivers! • Great service. Great drivers! I want everything under the control of City Council. No changes will be better. • Why can't the operating hours for the city connector be extended (if there's a real need)? Why can't the City Connector get new(and bigger) buses? Lets leep the community 'feel' of the buses and, as many other Councils do, keep the service run by the Council. The present circle of the City Connector is providing a real service for those who need it. Why change it? Why not keep the City Connector and 99C completly independent, seperate (and run by different organisations)? • The inclusion of a bus stop on Kingston Tce would increase my use of the bus and the loss of a few parking spaces would make minimal difference. • The extension and improvement of P/T in the city is a good thing. While installing the infrastructure why not put bicycle racks at each stop? And consider more motorbike/scooter parking in Halifax St, there isn't enough! • Wmy only question is why so many parking and bus stops spaces need to be removed • Unable to make any helpful comments about the service because 10 we very seldom use public transport 2)the property, although owned, is leased to a public entity • Thankyou for planning to put seating at the bus stops. I suffer from MS and by the time I've walked to the stop I need to sit down :) PS shelters would go a long way as well. • The service at time is excellent. The drivers act as ambassaddors for the city of Adelaide - with tourists as well as with locals - due to the fact that they are the same drivers. I see that the old people like to be friendly and have a feeling of comfort seeing the same faces. • I don’t like the new service because it makes me vey confused. I hope you can get the old one back. • As proposed the 'new free city connector bus service' would not connect many Nth Adelaide residents. It would 1) Not be improved (10 stops would be removed, with the reduction from 34 to 24) 2) Not be integrated (the figure of 8 would be removed). It would 1) be inaccessible 2) be unavailable to too many Nth Adelaide residents.

41 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I prefer the route of the current free Connector Bus. I am concerned that the current drivers of the Connector buses will no longer be employed. A friendly, helpful relationship exists between the current drivers and passengers. I foresee theis will disappear if these drivers no longer operate the routes • •Keep the current route and all the stops • Provide the current drivers with bigger roadworthy buses • Put seats at all the stops for young mothers and elderly users to use • Put up shelters at any bus stops that don’t have one • All members of the Council should spend 1 day each travelling on the buses talking to the users and drivers to find out what is really needed and to see the number of people who currently use the service on a regular basis. If the Council goes ahead with the merger and changes of the current service I wont use it as I dont support the merger. • • Adelaide has proud history of now having green buses. Please make sure that this continues with the new service. • Please consider training the bus drivers, not only to drive but to communicate with passengers e.g. where the hotels are, eating strips, hospitals etc. • Make the bus fun - poetry reading, music, comedy etc. - make it a creative experience at times on the bus. Thankyou and congratulations on this project. we look forward to it very much. • Excellent work, however to get greater benefit from this system key locations with car parks for long durations are required. Furthermore an increase in car parks and durations is necessary to keep people (businesses and gengeral punters) returning to the city of Adelaide as opposed to frequenting suburban shopping centres such as marion • The connector is a COMMUNITY bus. Nearly all of the residents visit the RAH at times. The bus not running up Frome Rd will affect visitors to the Zoo. The bus also used to run up Pennington Tce which was a backward step. I feel that this new bus service idea has been proposed with no forward thinking. I understand that most of the drivers will lose their jobs. At the moment they are all friendly and happy to give residents and visitors advice and a helping hand off the bus. I think you will find that this service is going to cost the ratepayer higher rates if this goes ahead. The Council has to replace the 2 old buses. Why cant the service stay the same? Our present public buses are never on time. • 1) How often each day? 2)Is this clockwise and Counter clockwise? 3)Current costs v new costs. I presumes there are savings. Route looks fine. • Excellent to see a connection to the SW corner. Good iontegration with Nth Adelaide. Better times/operating hours. Will mean for me only 1 paid trip home from Nth Adelaide rather than both ways. Will encourage me to visit Nth Adelaide more often. • No bus stop in Finness please. We are very pleased that the buses will be routed down Melbourne St. We have had a bus stop in front of our garages in Finness St, this has not been satisfactory at all - more rubbish in the street and more people blocking driveways. A potential dangerous situation! Alaso traffic has increased considerably in Finness street which is a residential street and making this street a bus route has not helped. Melbourne St is a much more suitable option. We would like the speed limited in Finness St reduced to 40Km/ph - it is a speed trap for many drivers. We would like signs indicating the speed limit to be placed in Finness St. We have had enough of drivers travelling at 60km/ph or above in our residential street. • I would suggest keep the larger buses to a minimum and use Tindo and the mini buses for all except peak hour times. Good to know that hybrid buses will be used. The new service will be a good opportunity to advertise the service - there still seems to be alot of people who aren't aware of the free tram and bus services that are currently in the city. • I am not happy about the new service. I have been in Childers St for 5 years. I use the free bus every Monday to go to Calvary Hospital and attend craft goup. I gave up my car about 2 years ago so I use the free bus frequently to go to North Tce. The new route takes me to North Tce but it would take me 15-20 minutes to walk to Wellington Sq as I am diabled and walk slowly.

42 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Please have the combined city loop on weekends - not just on weekdays. There are no shuttle trams on the weekends - just weekdays for uni students and workers. Extra services Saturday and Sunday until 9pm for the fringe festival would be useful for The Garden of Unearthly delights on East Tce. I am sorry to hear that the new bus service will not go down Frome Rd past the dental hospital anymore or past St Peters Cathedral. I have to go there for dental appointments next year. People from the city and Nth Adelaide would have found this useful for Sunday morning services and Port/Crows games at the Adelaide Oval. I hope this bus will run Easter saturday and Easter Day. i know there will be no bus on Christmas Day and Good Friday. • I strongly oppose the proposed route along Molesworth St. This is a residential St and inappropriate for the size of bus proposed. It will adversley impact residential amenity. The Bus route should replicate the current Metro bus routes - either straight along Jeffcott or Hill Streets. My preference is for it to go along Jeffcott St. The deviation along Strangways Tce is unneccessary. • I WANT: 1) Preservation of the figure 8 format - problems for tourists are solvable by GOOD DESIGN OF MAPS. 2) a) Preservation of Frome Rd route - delivering people to the Railway Station (as stated by personell from State Transit) ALREADY OCCURS with Frome Rd continuing into North Tce and Along to Morphett st bridge. b) • Preserve Frome Rd stops retain zoo stop. • Delivers students to Med school. • Delivers clients to RAH & Dental - a longer stop from proposed stop 11. • Delivers passengers to the Railway Station @ stop 3. 3) Keep the 32 seat buses (yes, get rid of the tiny ones, TINDO is the perfect size. 4) Maintain Finniss St - Melbourne St already changed lasy year as slowed services due to bottle necks. 5) Childrens Hospital is already served by stop 8 - keep Finness St and use stop 8 for Childrens Hospital. 6) Why duplicate other transit services by travelling along KW St to stop 13A - it's too crowded with buses. Passengers can already get to the RAILWAY STATION on existing route up Frome Rd to stop 3. 7) Keep TINDO. 8) Increase number of stops, do not reduce these. • Reduced number of stops will decrease usage. • People around Stanley St already do not use the service - They DRIVE to the city. Increase stops. • Elderlies go to the closest service, and currently they prefer the routes as they are. 9) Design of Consultation Pack.: Needs streamlining • having 2 seperate documents problematic as both noth always available together- "info pack" had run out at the NA library, also "stops document" not available on the bus this morning; COMBINE, REDUCE or add a phrase to the top of generic cover "1 of 2 documents". 10) Tell us how many parking spaces will be RETURNED as well as the info about the 41 loses. 11) Can we have a TRIAL first, before set in concrete? • Please keep the service. Great for international traver\llers. Helps traffic congestion • Please keep the route as it is now. Why change it? Keeps more jobs as it is now. • Must stay with the ACC. The connector bus is an excellent service, please do not stop this service and replace the drivers. • The current Connector Bus service is perfectly adequate and should not change. Both the buses and drivers should stay. Instead of buying new buses for the 99C by the buses for the Connector Bus. • The new service does not go near the RAH or the train station. The present connector servive must be kept with the same route and the same bus drivers. Knowing how many people use the service I am surprised that you are dismantling it. • Leave it in Council hands. Why fix it if it's not broken? • Seems a shame to skip the zoo, especially since they need all the help they can get • As a resident of Helping Hand aged care I am very concerned that there will be no bus stop in Buxton St and no stops on North Tce west of KW street accessing the railway station, motor vehicle reg etc. No stop on Pulteney street where passengers with bags can access J1 or J2 going to the airport. Helping Hand Centre is often booked, gate is always locked so it means a longer walk for the residents to access the Molesworth

43 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Street proposed stop. 2 current buildings on the norhern side of Buxton St are being demolished in the future - when rebuilding is complete there could be alot more potential customers. The who service should not be contracted out. The timing of an hourly service in each direction means that it is an 1/2 hourly service, because of that we do not want any more services. Council should run the 2 new buses and pay the drivers rather than pay Torrens Transit which will prove to be a retrograde step. We need to keep the drivers who know their passengers and are more helpful than any drivers I experience on Metro buses. • At 96 years of age I have considerable trouble walking. The proposed route cuts out Buxton St, Which is the central street for Helping Hand. The Helping hand building runs from Molesworth St - Buxton St - Childers St. 54 Buxton St (Harrison St) and (Roy Carter Ct) 56 Buxton St are now used as tempory offices, these will be rebuilt and be home to 60+ geriatrics. Changing the Pulteney and Rundle St stops easy access to the city. I will have to rely on taxis. I am not a logistician , i commend you for all your efforts to improve things, but I would prefer if possible, to keep the present route. • I am a concerned user of the Adelaide Connector service and have recently discovered that the Council has planned to integrate this service with the City Free Loop, 99C. The supposed integration of this service is in fact false, as they will both run seperately by Torrens Transit. After pursuing plans that change the current services, I don't believe it will better suit the travelling public. Under the new plan the ACC intend to buy 2 additional standard metro buses to be used along wiht Tindo as well as Torrens Transit buses. It seems to be alot of buses for a bus route that will be reduced from 33 to 24 stops, which I hope, does not give the new operator the excuse to make Tindo redundant. 9 stops less on a route would seem to me to be going against ACC poicy of providing the rate payers a better, free and accessible service. The changes I'm concerned about are as follows. • The reduction in stops includes moving Buxton St, which is hughly beneficial to the residents of Helping Hand Centre. The stop will be moved to Molesworth Street which will mean that the elderly residents have quite a distance to walk, as the rear gate of the Centre is invariable closed. My observations are that the Buxton St stop is utilised by numberous students and residents who will be inconvienienced by a move further away to Molesworth St and the removal of Hill St and Wellington Sq stops • The service is being moved out of Stanley St to Kingston Tce which I know will upset at least 1 resident who has complained about Tindo travelling through her street once per hour. Not only will she be very disgruntled about having 4 buses per hour pass her house the removal of a number of parking spaces at the top of the road for bus stops will add to her anger. • 12 months ago the service was moved away from Melbourne St due to traffic problems, yet the plan is to move them back there. Even more ridiculous is the change of route from Frome Rd to Sir Edwin Smith/KW, completely bypassing the Zoo and medical school and therefore ignoring the plethora of students and families who use these facilities seven days per week. • The removal of what looks like all free buses from North Tce sees the onus fall to the tram to carry passengers to and from the railway station, the convention centre, UniSA (west), The Jam factory, Mercury cinema, Adelaide High School and the new RAH services. It is blindingly obvious that the tram will not be able to service all these people so the alternative is to pay for a ticket and take a suburban bus. What ever happened to the free, accessible bus serviced promised by the ACC? Time does not permitt me to address all the changes proposed that will be detrimental to the rate payers and visitors to the city such as Whitmore Sq, Hutt St, Kintore Ave, O'Connell St and Pulteney St to name a few. Council has said that until November 8th, they wecome input from the users of the service however it appears that they are paying lip service tothe notion of 'consultation'. The Council has put out a media release stating that the changes will be taking place on January 26th and the drivers employed on this service have been told that their final day of work will be January 25th. I am outraged that the residents of the ACC are being bulldozed into accepting changes to the service they pay for and we are being hoodwinked by a farcical consultation process. I've utilised this serive for some time now and found the dedicated

44 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

drivers on this service have made it the service it is today. they know their regular customers and create a plesant environment that gives the passengers an much more personal and enjoyable trip. These dedicated drivers know their customers; they give excellent service and create a plesant atmosphere while travelling but unfortunately will be out of work on January 25th. I believe it will be a great loss all round. • I like that the operating hours have been increased including on public holidays. Also the waiting time being 15 minutes is really convienient. Overall this is a significant improvement to the Adelaide community and it is exactally the kind of projects that I as a taxpayer would like to see my reasources translated into $. As a bike rider I would like to see more bike lanes. It is unsafe to cycle without them. However, I clearly see the benefits of the new Free Connector Bus service. • Thank you for your presentation and interest in our suggestion regarding stop 18 (lefevre Tce) at the Council on Wdnesday October 16th. The proposal for the current stop 18 (North Adelaide Primary School - Tynte St) to be eliminated due to inadequate room in the current location and stop 18 be expanded absorbing 4 more on street carparks. I propose a relocated North Adelaide Primary School (Tynte St) stop be retained on the western side of beviss St/Tynte St intersection and stop 18 (lefevre Tce) be eliminated instead. Matters for consideration are: 1) Currentstop 11 (new stop 18) is a low use site of 56 people per week as no catchment comes from the Park Lands. The Tynte St site would have greater residential catchment as well as better service to the school. 2) Distance from the new stop 17 18 is short and the Beviss St/Tynte St location is more evenly spaces between the new stops 17 and 19. 3) The Beviss St/Tynte St location will absorb 4 existing parellel on street carparks and return an additional 8 carparks to Lefevre Tce being 4 from the existing stop and 4 from an expanded servive.4) Bus stops adjacent to traffic light regulated intersections such as the crn of Tynte St and Lefevre Tce are undesirable. I woul be interested in a responce from your consideration on this matter. • As I live in the city I do not have/drive a car so depend on the public transport when it is not possible to walk. It would be good if the free bus could service the Aquatic Centre (I attend classess there 3 times per week). • Why change, to the detriment of the service, by A)Handing the running of the service to Torrens Transit whose track record is poor. B) Taking away stops that real people use - SW community centre, Rundle St East, RAH, Zoo, University sports fiels and Helping Hand Centre. C) Having multiple destinations at the same stop • (THREE SEPERAT RESPONCES) When Torrens Transit city loop buses who are connecting with the connector bus service when the connector bus is merging with the city loop bus I don't know how the connector bus the blue route the red route should not stop at Adelaide metro stops they should have there own stops and not Adelaide metro stops H1 and S1 on Morphett St and Grote St bus stops left side and right side because it is confusing the Adelaide Metro commuters so I want to see the city loop buses and the Connector Bus should not stop at all Adelaide Metro bus stops in the city and North Adelaide. • 1) Buses should be Tindo or similar style as this will be more than enough with the increased frequency. 2) Changes will create more traffic congestion and safety concerns. 3)This will create a large free Park n Ride area particularily around the popular dog park. They're restricting parking for those who want to use them. 4)Will create serios noise and air pollution. 5) Route should include Zoo and university and not be designed to help more people to and from Adelaide Oval. 6) Loss of 24 car parks in North Adelaide are is a serious concern. Council should be looking to create more parks not less. • 1) Melbourne St is far to busy - delays! (that is why it was changed to Finness) 2) No zoo stop included/or botanic gardens, Pk 3) No railway stop included 3) Hinmarsh Sq not serviced (the only sq not to have a service) 4) Stop 23 on the map WRONG it is listed as being on the other side of

45 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

river - Northern side - on map shows it to be on the southern side. • We DO NOT FEEL SAFE woith Metro, and we love our connector, as it is a COMMUNITY BUS. We know the drivers, they have become like family - and we ARE DISGUSTED that they will lose their jobs, and that the Council wishes to palm this service off. If they do WE WILL NOT BE VOTING FOR ANY OF THEM EXCEPT FOR Ms MORAN who wishes to keep it as it is now! • We like the idea of 2 buses an hour however we feel the new route - along Melbourne St particluarily will result in the service being unreliable. Melbourne St has serveral sets of traffic lights and congested during peak hours. The new service does not appear to have considered tourists and general visitors to the the zoo (for example). The current route of the Connector bus services all the important places that people (especially from Nth Adelaide) would normally access via 2-3 buses e.g. zoo, library, Wakefield Hospital, Central Market etc, etc. It really is supurb the way that it is set up now and 2 buses per hour would make it perfect. • We would find it beneficial to keep Finness St, Frome Rd, North Tce route as this services our needs in Nth Adelaide as well as the city with the least walking distance to our various destinations. It also gives access to visitors to the zoo and botanic gdns again with the least amount of walking distance involved. If the Finess St bus stop has to go, at least keep the Frome Road, North Tce section so the students can access the university etc. • 1) I share similar sentiments of seniors and some parishinors of the Adelaide Cathedral on missing the convenience of the 99C bus stop at the said church. I cannot speak for the others, but I think it really takes time to get used to the new 99C bus route - missing out the convenience going to the cathedral and after shopping at the markets. 2) How can I identify an Adelaide Connector from the 99C. 3) I wish I could check real time bus schedule of both buses (99C and Connector) via google maps or perhaps a phone app. Also, I hope the schedule of both buses are available at the bus stops. 4) For me, Im always confused with the schedule and route of the connector and Tindo. They seem to pop out from knowhere. Looking at the proposed routr, I hope the free connector and Tindo buses will be as predictable as the 99C bus. Thanks for this. I think the initiative is great. • We do not want to lose the Community feel of the small buses provided by the Council. Why cannot these buses be maintained and the full service be kept with the current route and the drivers providing excellent service for both residents and tourists. There is funding in the Council for the buses - it needs to be spent on maintaining the smaller buses. The issue of parking spaces in Nth Adelaide is a problem as any reduction in numbers would be a concern for the area. • More buses down Melbourne St - Oh No! The personal, fiendly, helpful service that is currently provided by the drivers is always commended by visitors to Adelaide - and we locals love it too. It will be greatly missed. The closure of Buxton Tce route will especially be a great inconvienience to the residents of helping hand independent living units. • Very unhappy with the Connector bus merger. These drivers are amazing! Friendly, great service for how long?! Why change something that is already great. • 1) As chairman/presiding officer of Nth Adelaide Mewdical Centre (23 specialist suits) we strongly oppose loosing 12 carparks on Tynte St. The bus stop 19 is in the very busy commercial area (post office, channel 9, pub, medical centre) we cannot lose 12 car parks!! 2) Tynte St is not an arterial route and we do not need a big bus stop chewing up car parks. I don't see a huge increase in demand for a bigger bus. • Overall I think that the new service is not a bad idea. I am particularily interested by bus frequency and service times. Every 15 mins and until 7.15pm during weekdays is fantastic. However, I also have some concerns. I am unsure about wherther the friendly environment/atmosphere of

46 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

the small bus will be kept with the new service. Also I am wondering whether this new service will affect the bus drivers work position. I have already mentioned in the enquiry form, it is very important that the service will remain free. As an international student, this service allows us to go to the university and then back home and permits a considerable saving of money. • It is such a tragedy that a bus service which does it's upmost to remain a functional, personal,friendly, helpful and unique has to be changed. • I support the new free city connector bus service but I would be greatly inconvenienced if the bus stop in my area was discontinued. The relevant bus stop is in Hutt St between Angus St and Carrington St. This bus stop is essential if I am to ba able to use the free bus. OTHERWISE IT IS FOR ME AS IF YOU HAVE DISCONTINUED THIS FREE BUS SERVICE!! • I propose the follwing ammendments. 1) Travel up Buxton St not Molesworth St. Tindo has been using this route very successfully. 2) As the zoo is a major attraction for children and visitors the bus should travel up Frome Rd to the current stop at the zoo then can turn right into War memorial Dr and then connect with KW Rd. This would also be advantageous to Adelaide Uni medical students. 3) I don't know what the solution is but I think it is very unfortunate that niether the connector bus or the 99C stops at the railway station, particularily keeping in mind elderly or disabled passengers. • 1) I am supportive of the increased service. I believe that Finness St, Frome rd route services everyone better. There is not enough parking in Melbourne St already. The parks that will be taken will effect businesses badly e.g. Poat office. Finness St/Frome Rd services residents + students travelling to Uni - what about UniSA students? what about the zoo? 2) Helping hand Nth Adelaide, Molesworth St stop - close parking is essential to transfer people in and out of helping hand. Parking spaces are needed for frail and disabled peolpe. The bus should stop fruther down the road + leave parks free. Those who are physically able will be able to walk to the bus stop. • Does East Tce have any advantages over Hutt St? In as much as the current connector buses are inadequate, except Tindo, yes a properly designed bus would be better. With the hugh proportion of elderly users, yes, a good idea to have the same drivers on this route. Overall seems like a good scheme. Important to look after wheelchairs, walkers and shopping trolleys. I am in favour of non car city access. Essential the new service must operate on time. The existing Connector is always late at stops. The shambles of timetables in other buses, G10 for me, has eroded public confidence. • I am the presiding officer of a strata corporation in the Garden East precinct. Concern has been expressed on these changes by several, admittedly elderly, residents. 1) Removal of service from Grenfell St which is the closest for most residents. 2) Longer distance between stops, especially on Nth Tce, means longer walks. • 1) The Adelaide Connector is an essential service for Nth Adelaide residents. 2) The proposed new route a) does not serve the northern part of Nth Adelaide b) Uses roads/streets that are non-essential for "bus passengers/users" e.g. Montefiore only passes back enterances to convention Centre/Sports grounds/golf courses i.e. No use at all for residential areas, elderly people, students. c)DDoes not service areas much served by residents, students and visitors e.g. Frome Rd, Nth Tce railway station. 3) Your "map" needs to be much clearer - bus stops need to be identified with their location. Noindication about "2 way" direction. 4) My "lvel of support" for the new service is influenced by these factors - Hopefully the proposal can be modified. • I think that the connector and 99C work exceptionally well as separate routes. The ACC and the friendly bus drivers were a great partnership so why spoil it by change? Once a commercial business gets involved the ACC loses control & commuters will suffer. My next point is please don't take away the stop in Buxton st in front of helping hand. This is one of the busiest stops with people always there on both sides of the street. i

47 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

attended the consulation group discussion and i hope that people's objections will be listened to. My other worry is how long will this service remain free once commercial business gets involved. It's been a wonderful service thats been provided by the ACC and appreciated by all residents so please don't mess with it. • Please do not change this service. We do not want large buses on our quite streets. We do not want Council to give up running of this service. Our community wants to remain serviced by this excellent caring service. We moved to this suburb because of the bus service provided in our local rates. The new route doesn't cover many of the tourist areas e.g. Zoo, railway station. we are very proud of the sevice given to tourists by the caring drivers through their extensive knowledge of the city and surrounds. This must not be lost. we cannot afford to lose any parking spaces in Nth Adelaide which is at a low level. the number of places lost with the larger buses is not going to have a good outcome for this area. • Generally speaking I can see the purpose and understand the background for the new service and the benefits are tangible. However, there are several factors I believe should be given further consideration. The changes in the route will not have any major personal impact but I can see some glaring impacts on others. 1) There is no stop at the Zoo or the railway station, and the stop at helping hand is questionable. I find the tatoal loss of so many car parks alarming to say the least, with 2 of the most affected in Tynte St and Molesworth. Parking here is at a premium already and with the impact of further need with the Adelaide Oval upgrade it seems mad to remove a total of 41 parks! With more buses and therefore more drivers I hope that some consideration will be given to the current contracted drivers on the current connector service, as they provide quality, personal service. Please consider more frequency (as proposed) during peak times. I would be a shame to see empty buses running the city 9-3! • It is a massive overkill not supported by ratepayers or residents. It is doubling the size of the buses and the frequency of the service at a great financial cost when the demand for it is only in the morning and afternoon peak periods, the bulk of the time they will travel half empty. It will turn North Adelaide into a large free park n ride area especially especiaslly around medindie Rd and Lefevre Tce. this will restrict access to the very popular dog parks in that area. It will greatly affect the environment through more diesal emmissions and more noise pollution. The bus route should still continue down Stanley St, Finness St and Frome Rd thus servicing the zoo and university, It can the connect to KW st via Victoria Dr. It requires the removal of 24 parking spaces in Nth Adelaide when they are at a premium now and will be in huge demand when functions are on that the Adelaide Oval. It appears that the new route you propose is governed by traffic light controlled intersections rather than demand. • The proposed position of the community bus stop in front of 11a Molesworth St North Adelaide will interfere or remove the parking spot in front of our family home at that address. We oppose the proposed placement of the bus stop du to the ill health of my husband and his inability to walk any futher than 20m at any one time. • 1) North Adelaide: stop 23 seems sited on the Montefiore Bridge just south of the Torrens river. The stops on the Norther side of Memorial Dr and Montefiore Rd - South & Northbound , have been deleted. 2)Similarily , KW Rd and Sir Edwin Smith junction has not been replaced by stops on Edwin smith between 13a and 14. Suggested 14a - 14 is similar to 17 - 18 seperation. Presumably the removal of stops to 22 or 23 is to limit use by persons. Parking along War Memorial Dr support that is the planners reasoning - it seems somewhat churlish & could be revisited if 23 mapped incorrectly South instead of North etc. • Thank you for extending the hours, that is most welcome. If the 99C bus drivers need to learn to drive the Tindo, why not train our current drivers to drive bigger buses? Two things sadden me 1) The loss of jobs for our present drivers. 2) Cutting out the zoo in the proposed new circuit. Hoping that this will change the circuit in favour of the zoo and provide jobs for our present drivers.

48 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Stops 4-5 on Whitmore Sq not suitable. Living on Gilbert St the distance to stops on Morphett St and Sturt St is far too much. We have no transport on Gillies st/Gilbert St and Sth Tce. The stops on the Square (Whitmore) are more convenient. • I have lived at the Helping Hand Centre in a unit in Buxton St for 10 yrs. I have appreciated and used the buses all this time until a few months ago when I became ill. I hope to start using them again soon providing they remain in Buxton St. A number of residents use the buses to take them to Calvary hospital for x-rays & tests or short stays in hospital. It has been wonderful to be able to take the bus from Buxton St to doctors rooms nearby, or to Melbourne St Noth Adelaide. We residents do hope we don't lose access to the stops at the Helping Hand in Buxton St. Thank you for what has been a wonderful service. • Many people with limited mobility would find this service of little use i.e. they would either have to alight at Hutt St or KW St for any appointment between those streets in the CBD. If every alternate route went west on Pirie, across Gawler Pl and down grehill, it would be of greater service. Having real-time information would be a big plus for city visitors e.g. a boon in Quebec city PR with their 8m tourists p.a. Will this route be changed when the RAH is relocated? People need a statement that is a long-term committment or phased changes to route, timetable,hours of operation, freepricing. • I contend that the Connector route is fundamentally flawed for 3 reasons. 1) Melbourne St should be avoided at all costs. Before the route through lower Nth Adelaide was altered from Melbourne St to Finness St a couple of years ago, the Connector buses were regularily delayed by slower traffic, especially when moving from west to east. Surely your own drivers will tell you this. 2)I don't understand why the new route should miss the Zoo. I'm sure that, for interstate and other visitors, a free bus would be preferable for accessing this attraction. 3) I believe that the route should avoid the always busy Nth Tce/KW St junction. for these reasons I suggest that a better route between stops 12 and 17 would be: Kintore Ave, Victoria Dr, Frome St, Finness St, Jerningham St and Kingston Ave. Stops could be: on Victoria Dr near the northern entrance to the university campus; on Frome Rd outside the zoo,at the western end of Finness St (or Frome Rd near the juction of Finness St); and on Jerningham St. • I would like to see the electic busses remain as part of the service. • The current Connector service is probablt the best service ever offered to residents and others. The 2 benefits in the proposal is the extention of hours and the inclusion of public holiday service. My opposition lies in the change of route: 1) how can the exclusion of Buxton St benefit the Helping Hand residents. 2) Why return to using traffic choked Melbourne St? 3) How can responsible planners take the route away from the zoo, where so many are working hard to regain it's place as a top attraction? The current service allows visitors and volenteer/ workers to connect with the city centre, Railway station and Northern suburbs. 4) What will happen to students who regularily use the Frome St Stops? 5) Why use King William Rd, already filled with buses. 6) Access to the railway station will require either a long walk or a ride on the tram 7) The argument presented at a recent consultation for using Motefiore Rd/Strangways Tce is not convining - who will use the stops there? Under benefits listed on pg 2 of the pack increasing service to every 30 mins - I have used the servicesince inception - it has always been 30 mins between the red and blue. Is it planned to cut the time to 15mins between the two? There are many times during the day when the bus is far from full. Why not offer increased services at peak times only with larger buses and use the smaller buses at other times? The cost of work on bus stops and using large, largley empty vehicles all day will be costly. I fear that turning a simple, effective sercice into a grand affair will ultimately prove too expensive to maintain. DRIVERS: A service such as this is important in community building - the drivers are integral to this. It is not possible to find places for the current drivers in the new scheme? With a few very rare occassions over the years they are competent drivers, courteous and ever helpful to

49 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

regular passengers and to visitors. Finally, why duplicate the city centre service? The value of the current system is that it makes Pulteney St/Hindmarsh Sq easily accessible. Thank you for your consultation process. Please consider carefully. • 1) The omission of the Frome St route ignores a) Zoo visitors and staff b) RAH staff and visitors c) Dental hospital d) university staff and students particularily in the medical schools. 2) Loss of Kintore ave - certainly popular with university staff and students 3) Geography incorrect - NO Buxton st east of Jeffcott St, it changes to Gover St! 4) As a Buxton St resident the current 1/2 hourly service (running east to west) delivers one to Gawler Pl. 5) I question the need for bigger buses in off-peak times (think Europe ..... Rome) 6)The connector service to date has been excellent, promoted community communications. The drivers are excellent - none on the STA violent stops and starts which throw passengers around, it can be dangerous for older persons. (let alone bus wear and tear and unnecessary emissions) 7) Tourists benefit from the small bus as residents volunteer information. • 1) Changing the route from Buxton St to Molesworth St Buxton St is narrow, but I cannot see where the Moleswoth St change actually is and wonder if the location of the stop would interfere with the Helping Hand entrance - ambulances, disabled parking. 2) I think that the final route should include Adelaide's tourists attractions such as the Aquatic Centre, Zoo, - also on the original route, South Tce where many tourists find their accomodation. • Is this proposed service purely for the residents of North Adelaide and the city? Or is it designed for residents and others from outlying suburbs who would have to drive to Nth Adelaide to connect with the service? In any event, the continuing erosion of parking spaces is not acceptable and counter productive if you want non residents to use the service. Removal of parking spaces in Tynte St is Crazy as that area is always busy with people visiting the library and post office. Removal of parking spaces at Helping Hand Molesworth St also unhelpful to the aged and in one direction there is a perfectly good bus stop around the corner on Wellington Sq. I would like to see the current connector service/route maintained with greater frequency which would solve capacity issues. • The present route gets me To and From work. The new route only gets me from and not to (with reduced services). The present drivers are community minded. I don't know about the new ones. I have not seen any promise to keep the new ones. The Department of Transport are COMPLETELY INCOMPETENT! Please don't get into bed with them! If it aint broke DON'T FIX IT! - just get bigger buses. This is a severe reduction - what about the disabled and physically challenged at Helping Hand Centre - only Department of Transport could do this. Add wheelchair buses but avoid wheelchair people - HOW STUPID IS THAT! So far to get to Rundle Mall!!! Please listen to the people!!! This clown Yarwood will be thrown out at the next Council election! Overall - very ANTI Rundle Mall - Despite the make-over! • My concerns/what I'd like you to know: 1) I like the route down Finness St (it doen't compete with the 'paid' Melbourne St services). 2) It is convenient for McKinnon Pde and Finness St residents. 3) I like the route down Frome to the eastend of Nth Tce and through to the central markets. 4) I use it often - 2/hour would be good but not imperitive. 5) I like Tindo and would be concerned if bigger (articulated) buses used the route. Diesal engines not so good for the route. 6) The zoo and university sites + RAH need the Frome St service to continue. 7) Should not duplicate the Melbourne St/KW St services - alreadymultiples of these ever 15mins, but the Finness St connection is very convenient and reliable and well supported by the University college students, residents and families, some of whom park 'n ride. I'm concerned that this hasn't been more widely circulated - Iv'e done my own circulation to neighbours but few know of proposed rote changes. • 1) The current connector bus service has been an excellent service and much appreciated by myself. The bus drivers have also helped to make it a good experience too. 2) current service has a small enviromental footprint. 3) Why change something that is good and create something of an

50 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

enviromental monster (Larger buses, more diesal fumes). 4) The new bus services does not go down Frome Rd and tourists cannot access the zoo by the new service and also does not stop at the railway station:why not? 5) Another question, how nice would it be if the ACC made more street parking available in Nth Adelaide instead of taking these away from rate payers/residents. 6) More city workers will park all day in North Adelaide and use the new connector service to get to work as the parking time limits are not monitored. • 1) Happy that safety has necessitated changes to a) Melbourne St instead of Finness St (Large buses negotiating roundabout in Jerningham St and prblem of merging onto Frome St from McKinnon Pde. b) Kingston Tce instead of Stanley St (use traffic lights) and avoiding problem of crossing Brougham Pl/Le Fevre Tce from Stanley St. 2) Prefer bus uses Buxton St as current as alot of elderley people live in that street besides actual Helping Hand Centre. Also students. 3) Larger buses and more frequent buses will mean that I can get on the bus instead of finding it full when it arrives at the WCH stop or if I wish to go to Nth Adelaide shops the bus is full from the city and I cannot get on again!! Problem with being on the end of the line. I assume people will be able to stand on the bigger buses. 4) I understand balance between number of stops and frequency of service. • I am a regular user of the connector bus service and really appreciate it for these reasons: 1) The drivers are great - they are friendly, courteous and helpful and they know the regulars and welcome visitors. 2) It fosters a great sense off community and relationship to neighbourhood. Thesre is also a lovely friendly feeling between passengers. I also regularily catch the metro bus service. Although the service is convenient there is no comparison between them. The metro service is impersonal and anonymous - you could be in any city on any bus anywhere. the connector is a treasure and fosters a wonderful sense of a great community we live in. Visitors are welcomed by bus drivers and passengers alike and the goodwill this generates for Adelaide should not be underestimated. • the connector bus is a people oriented plaan and ACCESS! Your new red & blue routes are NOT people access orientated. NO-ONE goes to the convention centre daily. Your plans are visually nice but NOT PRACTICAL. I am disgusted that everyone on the Council (except Ms Moran) wants to get rid of their responsibilities, and PALM OFF the community connector bus to Metro. We need the Frome St stops for the zoo, Adel. Uni. and RAHstops - these are SAFER; less traffic, and much quieter/better than Nth Tce east proposed stops! Students, residents and Helping Hand residents need these Frome Rd stops and the bus to remain in Buxton St - as Helping Hand residents CANNOT access any Molesworth stops! It is patently obvious that these 'New ideas' are done by people WHO DO NOT USE the red or blue routes, or indeed, the ordinary Metro buses, and will cause overseas students, and residents of Nth Adelaide and Helping Hand - great difficulty to use - or even to AVOID altogether. Metro is not a community sevice. We value and know our bus drivers (Barry, Garry, Mark, Michael, Margaret, Joe and John) and do not want them replaced. • I wish to lobby for the retention of the bus stop between proposed stops 8 & 9, currently well used by myself and a host of other regular users of the connector bus. Most know it as 'The Caltex' stop in Hutt St, just past Angus St. It is more well patronised then the Wakefield St stop before it. It is closer to residents, the IGA local store, banks etc.. As a wheelchair user it provides a better link to shelter and service on very hot or very windy days. Given the small number using the stop before it, the timetable would not be affected by stopping at Caltex as well, and it would be of great value to users of bus services. Please consider seriously maintaining this stop. • Request Hutt St additional stops by Caltex • The route: 1) I am concerned that the bus no longer uses Frome Rd and/or Pulteney St. 2) The traffic on KW St between Victoria Dr and Nth Tce every morning is extemely heavy. 3) Hutt St/ East Tce is a long way away from Rundle Mall and the business district. 4) The bus no longer goes to the Adelaide Railway Station. The use of Metro drivers 1) One of the massive benefits for the current system is the familiarity with the drivers - in

51 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

relation to the convidence I have for my 17 year old daughter and 14 year old son to catch the bus. The current drivers have been able to develop a relationships and also act as tour guides for the many tourists who catch the bus - promotion of our wonderful city. In relation to the bus stops 1) I have no issue with the stops on the proposed route apart from my real concerns about the loss of coverage of the proposed routes. This connector service has been absolutely fantastic for us as a family of 4 to reduce driving to the city + car parking. With children who are educated at Pulteney, a city school, this service enables travel to and from school safely, and shopping + business. Please do not ruin what is a brilliant local service, employing people who really care about service and the city. • 1) there is no point in increasing frequency if it is less convenient. 2) The service offers LESS coverage and convenience 3)The 'shared vision' of Council and Dept of Tranport is NOT my vision 4) Council should NOT be in bed with the stupid State Labour Govt 5) It does not seem to loop in both directions in Nth Adelaide as claimed. 6)The extended hours are stupid! The shops dont open on Saturdays that early! Those early buses will be empty and a waste of money! 7) You are confusing 'Free' with 'Inferior'. 8) From stop 13a to 14 - nobody even lives there! Why go there? 9) Torrens Transit DO NOT EVER conform to performance standards. 10) The present staff should be employed. They are great with locals and explain features to tourists. 11) The new route is good for taking me home, but because it is circular, does not get me to work (or anywhere close). 12) Seems the decision was made before consultation (please publish findings). THE GOOD - The only change needed was bigger buses, similar to Tindo. The route was not broken so don't fix it! The drivers know the community - they are priceless. THE BAD - SA Deptof Transport should keep out - they have destroyed state transport and now you are selling out and running what only needed bigger buses. I will now have to cross 2 busy roads. Before I had none! • 1) why is it necessay to have larger buses 2) Certainly wheelchair/walkingframe/pram access is required 3) Hourly buses are sufficient. Why 1/2 hourly 4) ROUTE a) Why change the a route that todoesnt go past tourist attractions such as the zoo, arts theatre, library, museum etc, RAH, WCH, will not go near the railway station. 5) does this new route mean that we will have to change buses all the time. 6) If you drive down Montefiore Rd, gee wizz you will have a lovely view of half of the supposedly wonderful Adelaide oval. You may even see a few golfers. Why? • I am quite disapointed to hear that the current Free Connector bus driver will not be driving the new serice. For me the friendly bus drivers who always say hello upon arrival are what makes the Noth Adelaide service different to other, generic metro buses. Honestly, I think I will be using the service less once new drivers and unfamiliar faces take over. I am also unsure on how the service is actually that different from the one currently offered. Other than a slightly different route and buses twice an hour, for people in North Adelaide much seems unchanged. The merging of the 2 systems does not pose 1 new system - still 2; as there are still 2 routes, 2 timetables but the same looking buse. I believe this new 'service' will not effect or aid people like myself greatly at all. • I have lived in Nth Adelaide for 47 years, the last 30 being a ratepayer. I have recently moved to Helping Hand. From the inception of the City Connector I have been a regular user. I am against the merger with the 99c for the following reasons. 1) Buxton St is a shady St and easy access for residents to both sides to the bus stops. There is a crossing with lights outside the main Helping Hand building and residents can sit in the foyer out of the rain and heat until the bus is due to arrive. The trees afford shelter from the rain and the sun. 2) Molesworth St is a much wider st and by no means as shady and residents would have to walk through the Helping Hand building and then cross the Rd, for the direction they want to travel. Those with walkers could easily be knocked down. Also, I know people who live in Molesworth St. I feel you should of been down and studied the houses. Most of them do not have driveways, they park at the rear. When residents visitors come they already complain that there is no room for cars because of the staff from Helping Hand park there. To return parks to Buxton St from the present bus stops would be quite

52 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

inadequate. 3) You have in recent times changed the bus stops in Melbourne St to Finness street and the corner of Stanley street thus cutting out going down Frome Rd. You mention in your 'places of interest' 6. adelaide zoo, 18 Adelaide University (Many students reside in North Adelaide and attend the medical school and I suspect that you have not sent the survey to them in the many flats in the area. They pay the rent and the owners pay the rates), and the stop at the RAH is very convenient as it does not compete with other buses, especially at busy times. 4) The bus goes down K/W Rd which is already congested with other buses and only goes along Nth Tce from there to Hutt St. You obviously have not connsidered that people will want to go to the railway station and in future to the new RAH. 5) The bus drivers on the connector bus are very corteous and know the people and assist them. What about people in wheelchairs? is the driver going to get out and put down the lift at the back of the bus and help them in? I think not especially at peak times. As I understand, the bus will be taken over by Torrens Transit and the drivers are not going to get jobs with them, I know a lot of people are upset by your proposal and many have not been consulted. I ask that you reconsider and keep the connector as it is at present. • Bus stops needed Montefiore/Memorial Dr plus KW St/ Memorial Dr. AO main entrance for staff, visitors, tourslocked into southern security gates entrance - 700 staff on big event days. This also allows interstate visitors safe access to the oval and tennis centreanlong with permanent staff. Thank you for our participation. I would appreciate you sending a new timetable with stop times. • I do support the Connector service very much but the new proposals confuse priorities. They appear to reflect traffic priorities more than passenger priorities e.g the route. 1)Light Sq to Jeffcott St. Nth Adelaide via Montefiore Hill has NO residential or shopping requirements but has low traffic volumes. 2) To remove(?) the bus from Molesworth St and Wellington Sq denies a service to 1/2 of Nth Adelaide which has a high incidence of elderly residents and students. 3) To replace Kintore Ave with KW rd appears a traffic priority rather than a passenger priority given current practice (this need not effect service to Adelaide Oval). • Since many South West City residents and visitors to the Adelaide South West Community Centre are frequent users of the Connector Bus, the Advisory Committee has a keen interest in the changes proposed for the service. While we welcome the proposed increase in service frequency and the provision of a fleet of new buses operating over expanded hours of operation, we have some concerns regarding the decrease in the number of stops and the proposed route through the city. With regard to the South West city, we note it is proposed to remove the stop outside St. Lukes on Whitmore Square. This will make access to the Connector Bus much less convenient for residents of the SW corner and for visitors to the Community Centre. The closest stops would be Stop 5, north of Wright Street, and Stop 6, on Sturt Street, a considerable extra distance to walk. It is vital that the St. Lukes stop is retained with the addition of a corresponding stop for the south-bound bus on the opposite side of the Square. We would also like to propose an adjustment to the bus route to provide a stop on Sturt Street directly outside the Community Centre. We realise that, with the larger buses planned for the service, it would be impractical for them to U-turn on Sturt Street to return to Whitmore Square, so we suggest that the route be extended to the western end of Sturt Street, returning possibly via West Terrace and Gilbert Street. This would improve access to the Connector Bus for the many residents west of Whitmore Square. We are concerned that, with the significant changes proposed to the route through the city centre, a number of popular destinations will no longer be conveniently serviced, including: Railway Station and Casino, Convention Centre, University of SA City West Campus, Adelaide Oval, Elder Park, Riverbank Precinct, Adelaide Zoo, Botanic Park, Torrens Parade Ground, Adelaide University (Frome Road) and University of SA City East Campus. All of these are well serviced by the existing Connector Bus, and the proposed route should be modified to take in these important

53 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

destinations. In our view a community bus service should provide ease and convenience of use to the greatest number of potential users possible, and should stop at every major city destination. This means more stops rather than less, and greater coverage of the residential areas of the city. Smaller, quieter buses may be more appropriate for servicing these areas. Thankyou for the opportunity to contribute. • Molesworth Street is a wide street and apart from a few parks on the post box side, the other parks are parallel. I think 60 degree marking should be on both sides up to Hill Street. As I mentioned to you in my previous e-mail, visitors to people living in that street plus the staff of the Helping Hand make it difficult to find a park. Just a suggestion. Glad you are re-thinking Buxton Street and Frome Road. I still think you should go down North Terrace and over King William Street for the Railway Station. • Key Issues Route • Buxton Street – Helping Hands • Railway Station • Melbourne Street congestion • Finniss Street quicker • Frome Road – Adelaide Zoo and Universities • Kintore Avenue • Service shouldn’t cover existing Adelaide Metro Routes • • Adelaide Oval – served or not to be served? • Pennington Terrace • Congestion on King William Street • Duplication of Tram on King William Street • North Terrace Hotels missed (North Tce near Railway Station) • RAH to Wakefield Street (Victoria Square) direct service lost • Kingston Terrace – new road • Split route – one on Pulteney Street one on Hutt Street • University link – East Campus to West Campus • New RAH service? • Return to Gilbert and Gilles Street • St Andrews Hospital • O’Connell Street north (Cinema and restaurants) • Buxton – Jeffcott – Childers – O’Connell – Tynte suggestion • Removal of Stanley Street

54 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Service • Community feel of service • Social networking • Highly valued by current community • Extended operating hours will encourage Park n Ride in North Adelaide • Extend service later to encourage later CBD activity – not late enough • Safety at night – walking home and on the bus • All buses need to be accessible Buses • Size of buses • Emissions and noise • Larger buses on small street • Should buy another Tindo bus • Buses should be same size as Tindo • Issues of articulated buses in North Adelaide • More hybrid vehicles • Red fronted buses are problematic (vision impared) Drivers • Consistency of drivers • Drivers providing assistance • Driver education – separate training for new drivers • Customer Service of current drivers • Torrens Transit drivers – will they assist? Stops • Removal of parking at new stops • Less impact on residential areas • Additional stops in Hutt Street • Additional stop on North Terrace west of Frome Road for Uni and transfers • Molesworth Street parking loss • Transfer between route, tram and train not convenient • All stops need timetables at them • Adelaide Oval Stop – non game days only • Relocate stop 18 from Lefevre Terrace onto Tynte Street • Additional stop on Tynte Street near North Adelaide Primary School • Shelters and seats at stops

55 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Shelter cleanliness at Hindley Street stop • Bus stops near driveways • Relocation of Kingston Terrace stop (further away from intersection) Other • Adelaide Metro will now have information on service Non-related • Remove taxis from front of the Railway Station • 2 hour parking on • Opportunity to farewell the drivers • More service on Prospect Road off peak • Coordinated G10 and 222 services for O’Connell Street • Adelaide Oval Parking Consultation • Service should be three loops, one west, one east and one for North Adelaide • Donation box on bus • Traffic lights at Buxton/ • Comparison of current and future costs • Additional taxes • Whitmore Square I am a resident of the south west corner of the city (west of Morphett Street) and note that in the proposed new route there is no stop outside St Luke's in Whitmore Square, with the closest stop being stop 4 in Morphett Street. The distance from the South West to the propose stop 4 is too far for most residents of the South West, many who are elderly or are unable to walk long distances.There is now on the blue route stop 31 and this stop should remain so that the South West residents can use the new connector bus service. Also many residents catch the bus at the St Luke's stop to go to the Central Market. If they have to walk to the new proposed stop 4 near Gouger Street then as it is so close to the market it would be easier to walk, except many residents are not able to walk this distance. On the east side of Whitmore Square the existing stop 31 is not used by South West residents as much as the St Luke stop. This is because it is too far from the area and the elderly find it difficult to cross Morphett Street. It is however necessary that this stop also remain as the new proposed stop 5 makes the distance to walk even further. Zoo Once again an ACC consultation pack contains misleading information. In the Frequently Asked Questions the answer to the question Where will the new free bus stop? is "The new free bus service will serve all major destinations within the City and North Adelaide ...". This is not correct as it does not serve the zoo, which is certainly a major destination. I also note it does not service the railway station. I am amazed that the new route does not go passed and stop at the zoo. I have noticed this is a very popular stop for both residents and tourists. Parking near the zoo is hard to find and expensive. With a more frequent service I think more people, particular parents with young children, will use the service. Whitmore Square

56 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

I am a resident of the south west corner of the city (west of Morphett Street) and note that in the proposed new route there is no stop outside St Luke's in Whitmore Square, with the closest stop being stop 4 in Morphett Street. The distance from the South West to the propose stop 4 is too far for most residents of the South West, many who are elderly or are unable to walk long distances.There is now on the blue route stop 31 and this stop should remain so that the South West residents can use the new connector bus service. Also many residents catch the bus at the St Luke's stop to go to the Central Market. If they have to walk to the new proposed stop 4 near Gouger Street then as it is so close to the market it would be easier to walk, except many residents are not able to walk this distance. On the east side of Whitmore Square the existing stop 31 is not used by South West residents as much as the St Luke stop. This is because it is too far from the area and the elderly find it difficult to cross Morphett Street. It is however necessary that this stop also remain as the new proposed stop 5 makes the distance to walk even further. Zoo Once again an ACC consultation pack contains misleading information. In the Frequently Asked Questions the answer to the question Where will the new free bus stop? is "The new free bus service will serve all major destinations within the City and North Adelaide ...". This is not correct as it does not serve the zoo, which is certainly a major destination. I also note it does not service the railway station. • Originally the service was designed to assist ratepayers travel easily between council facilities, and home. Markets for shopping, city centre, libraries, community centers, parklands, medical centers, and for the frail, aged and disabled it has been a boon. It has facilitated greater independence and interaction within the wider community, for this I applaud ACC. However the specter of a redesigned service in league with public transport makes it more about public transport, and less about community building and support. I worry that the shift in focus may in fact undermine the type of service drivers have provided under the current arrangements. A level of personal interaction and flexibility that has made the service such a valuable use of council resources and ratepayers monies. I hope an outsourced service model would contain within the contract with the third party operators, the option to allow for the level of involvement by drivers with rate the paying customers as currently exists. May it continue to be at the centre of the service, now and into the future. All that is needed to change is the buses, newer rolling stock, same route, same drivers. Same great service. • I think the new service looks like a significant improvement, particularly the earlier starting and finishing times. I trust that all buses on the route will fully accessible (while also noting that Tindo is quite difficult to step up into). It looks like a stop has been removed from Whitmore Square? This is not ideal, as it is a fair walk to the nearest stop if you live in the SW corner. Another stop on Hutt St would also be good. I will monitor the service and provide commentary as required – noting the current unreliability of the Connector service (and variable quality of staff)! • I have a variety of comments and questions about the proposal that would affect both me and my family but also others I am aware use the current 99C service. 1. The information in the proposal give no indication of the time it will take between different stops or how long a complete circuit will take. I know this will vary a bit but it would have been helpful to have some idea about this because the routes are quite different, especially for the 99C. For example, how long will it take between stop 10 and the Market? 2. Will there be shelter and seats at all bus stops? If this is proposed I have a question about how this can occur for stop 10W when the pavement

57 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

is already taken up with seats for outside dining. This will also make disability access impossible. 3. Some of the distances between bus stops seem to be huge. For example, that between Stop 2 and Stop 13A. Getting on to a tram and then off again to catch the bus seems ridiculous when the bus will go the same way as the tram. 4. How accurate are the placements of the proposed bus stops? They are show opposite each other but we know that is never the case as is the current case for what would be stop 12. Also, how can a bus stop be in the middle of an intersection? E.g. stop 9. 5. How are UniSA students going to get from their City East to City West campuses, or from other parts of the city to the City West campus, especially when bus stops 13B and 24 are not operating? 6. How will the orange and red routes work? There is no explanation of this in the consultation document. Possible timetables would have helped, not just time leaving Victoria Square, because the routes are much, much longer. 7. Many St Aloysius students will have to leave home up to an hour earlier to take the bus right around the circuit as there is no short cut through the city from east to west and vice versa. 8. It really looks as if North Adelaide residents have been catered for to the detriment of those who live in the city square. This is certainly true for those who live in the SW corner of the city. Suggestions: 1. Stop 10 would be better between Rundle and Grenfell Streets rather than between Rundle Street and North Terrace as this would be closer to Tandanya, especially for visitors to the city. The whole consultation process seems to have been done in a rush. I saw nothing in the City Messenger about the consultation dates. If it was there it was too well hidden! We already walk a lot but cannot do so with shopping. This means we will have to take our car and do our shopping outside the city! Is this really what you want? • Please see the below notes for consideration in the Adelaide City Council Connector Bus Consultation. These represent the views of many constituents whom have contacted either myself or my office. There is considerable angst about the proposed changes. Issues: • Route Changes/Bus Stop locations o Buxton Street (no longer past Helping Hand, have to walk 500m to access bus) o Frome Road (now takes King William Street), route now misses the Zoo, University and RAH o Route seems to have changed to better service Adelaide Oval. • Large Adelaide Metro buses will be travelling down residential streets like Molesworth, Tynte, Sturt streets (will double length buses be used?) • Changes will encourage people to park in North Adelaide and use free bus to get to the city. • Driver will lose their jobs. • 41 car parking spaces to be removed in the Adelaide City Council area • Currently costs to ACC circa $500k/year • Cost of the new agreement covered by ½ SA Govt and ½ ACC (circa $500k/year) + ACC to buy two new buses – this doesn’t actually save Adelaide City Council any money.

58 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Will disability access be available 100% of the time as it is now on the Connector Bus? (DPTI cannot guarantee) • Connector bus was a tangible return for rates, particularly for elderly, people with fixed income and those with disability – provided access to areas not currently accessible by conventional public transport. Bus will now run down King William St (already accessible by public transport, should be going down Frome Rd). • Adelaide Metro buses services are not reliable; Connector Bus was always an on time and reliable service, exemplary customer service. • Residents are disgruntled that Council will not prioritise delivery of service like Connector Bus but will waste money on projects like Rundle Mall and Victoria Square. • Resident worried that the service will be provided for Adelaide Oval patrons. • The acquisition of the Connector Bus service by DPTI will ultimately see the service swallowed by the Department and eventually disappear. • Further to our conversation yesterday, please find below feedback on behalf of the Adelaide Zoo in relation to the proposed merge of the City connector bus service. Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback. • Adelaide Zoo is greatly concerned to see that the new free city connector bus service combining the existing 99C bus route does not continue to include a designated stop on Frome Rd for Adelaide Zoo and the proposed route completely by-passing the Zoo altogether. • Adelaide Zoo is a major city attraction, operating 7 days a week, 365 days a year and receives approximately 370,000 visitors per annum. Approximately 14% of Zoos total visitation is from interstate & international visitors. This market segment has increased significantly since the re- development of the Zoo and the arrival of two Giant Pandas in 2009 (the only Giant Pandas in the Southern Hemisphere), a major attraction for Adelaide and point of difference for Adelaide Zoo attracting international focus. • The international exposure that Adelaide Zoo enjoys, particularly since the arrival of the Giant Pandas provides a major focus for the Zoo attracting visitors specifically to Adelaide to visit the Zoo, view the Pandas and participate in tours, there is also a growth in markets such as Cruise Ship visitors, reliant on public transport from the city centre to attend the Zoo once delivered to the city centre from Outer Harbour. The economic benefits to Adelaide and South Australia as a result of the international and interstate market growth are significant (accommodation, restaurants, other attractions). • Parking around Adelaide Zoo is already under pressure from visitors to the Zoo and Botanic Gardens, in addition to city workers and University students. There is significant concern regarding additional pressure from overflow car parking requirements of Adelaide Oval once AFL commences at the Oval and how this may impact the Zoo. The free bus service from the city provides an outlet for visitors to attend and assist in eliminating some of the existing parking concerns, particularly during peak times (weekends, school holidays, public holidays) Whilst we fully understand the significance of the Adelaide Oval re-development and the benefits to the City, we believe this should not be at the detriment of other significant major attractions on the City fringe such as Adelaide Zoo and and urge you to re-consider the proposed route to continue the inclusion of Adelaide Zoo. • Dear Sir, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the proposed New Bus Service. 1. The bus stops are too far apart for the elderly, women with pushers and people carrying parcels. 2. With the Bus Stop # 24 not being available all the time – makes getting to the New R.A.H. more difficult. 3. Will City Ratepayers rates be increased to cover the costs of the service? 4. Due to MANY buses transiting King William Street on Northern routes it would seem logical to continue the Finniss Street route North then

59 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

King William Street South, as at present. • I am a male city resident, born 1945. I use the current Connector bus service occasionally to get to shopping and leisure locations in the city and North Adelaide Thanks for canvassing my opinion on the proposed changes. I am very supportive of the changes mentioned - merging the services, the new route and stops. I am also strongly in favour of the increased frequency and extended operating hours. I see no problem with any of the proposed stops, especially stop 5 close to my home. • ADELAIDE’S FREE BUSES I agree that the present services are unsatisfactory and under-utilised and some rescheduling is needed. I also appreciate that any changes will suit some passengers and inevitably displease others. However I do have two reservations about the proposed changes. Also I am at a loss to understand why so much attention is given, in your information pack, to changes in on-street car parking. Have we forgotten that streets are travelling along, not car parks? Bus stops should take priority. 1. Hutt Street and Pulteney Street. Hutt St currently has one small bus each hour. The proposed change will give it one large bus every 15 minutes, but some passengers will have to walk further to get to the bus. Are we sure that such an increase in capacity is justified? Why not have one bus along Hutt Street and one along Pulteney Street giving as half-hourly service while maintaining 15 minutes elsewhere along the route? 2. King William Road, Kintore Avenue and Frome Road. Many bus routes run down King William Rd., relatively few along Frome Road. Diverting the route away from Kintore Avenue and, more importantly, from Frome Road removes the entire service from the northern side of the University of Adelaide campus and especially from the Medical School on From Rd. Bearing in mind that there are four University Colleges in North Adelaide, it does not seem logical to take away the service to the University that their students now use. Additionally, the Zoo will no longer be serviced. Finally, I have an alternative route suggestion for your committee to consider. 1. Keep the current connector bus route as it is but double the frequency to a half-hourly service and have the route go no further south than North Terrace, where many passengers disembark anyway. Have a scheduled connection with the 99C at the museum stop for those who want to go further. 2. Retain the 99C as it is but have alternative buses go along Pulteney Street or Hutt Street. This will give Hutt Street a half hourly service with a large bus. Instead of the current hourly service with a small bus. • While we are not regular users of the existing service, it has been an unobtrusive part of Finniss Street for many years – ‘unobtrusive’ due to the smaller size of the buses (= quieter) and due to Tindo being an electric bus (= greener) – the “first” as proclaimed when launched by then Lord Mayor Harbison. The latest consultation proposal shows a new route along Melbourne Street which similarly did not appear to have any major effect on our use of the service, since we are happy to walk around the corner to use it. However, in correspondence more recent than the consultation document, it seems that we now have yet another proposal to run larger Adelaide Metro diesel buses along Finniss Street, in order to facilitate the reinstatement of the Zoo stop (an omission from the consultation diagrams). This is of concern to us, since it changes entirely the nature of Finniss street, because it has never been a major thoroughfare for buses of this size. To impose loud and polluting diesel in place of compact and electric defies two policy positions. One is of the continual greening of Adelaide City Council operations and the other is of significantly altering residential amenity. Accordingly we object to the introduction of a connector bus system route resourced with bigger, more

60 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

frequent and noisier equipment far worse than the previous form which was acceptable. The scope and scale of this proposal to use Finniss Street is far too great for a residential dormitory street. Another concern of placing larger bus-stops into anywhere along Mackinnon/Finniss to accommodate the bigger buses is the necessary removal of exceptionally valuable parking space, not only for residents and their visitors, but also in the context of extremely tight parking options for the nearby hospital users (visitors/staff and the like). In addition we are soon to be assailed with much more activity as a result of the Adelaide Oval Stadium opening for business, making the parking situation look even more bleak. Finally, the roundabout at the eastern end of Finniss Street will be difficult (but not necessarily impossible) to negotiate with the larger vehicles like the Adelaide Metro buses. If these larger diesel buses are to be used for the service (as I understand the State Government is prepared to provide), then the only place for them is the existing established routes, since there are already bus stops in place which have been there for years and will not consume further parking spaces. Hence, the original Melbourne Street proposal should be retained. Other options which should be considered are better muffler systems, better engine compartment sound proofing, introduction of more of the smaller coaster buses rather than heavy duty and a continued observation of the policy to keep greening Adelaide, perhaps with the addition of more Tindos (or their equivalent). Surely we should not be making retrograde strategic decisions when providing revisions to any service; it should always be for the better. • 1. As a regular user of the Adelaide Connector Bus Service since its inception, I was delighted to be invited to submit my comments on its proposed revamp. I was dismayed to find at the information sessions that decisions have already been taken which will fundamentally change our bus service. The process we are currently undergoing appears to be cosmetic – it is not a consultation, rather it is advice of a fait accompli. In my opinion the “Your Say” strategy, which has worked quite well in a range of issues, is in this case a sham. There are features of the current City Connector service which are apparent to users, but missed by the bean-counters who have engineered the change. They have not witnessed the interaction between the drivers and the community, and particularly the interaction between both these groups and visitors to our city. I have used similar services in a variety of other places (the circle tram in Melbourne, The City Hop-On bus in Penang, the Vienna Ring Tram, the Berlin 100 bus, to name a few) and never have I witnessed such a tourist-friendly interaction as occurs here. I’m sure that visitors who experience this have a positive impression of our city. Unfortunately the bean-counters, who don’t use the service, are unable to assign an economic value to this, although such a value certainly exists. I am an infrequent user of the 99C bus service and in my experience no such impression is created for the tourist. I think the buses on the 99C route are less intimate and the attitude of the drivers is different. What we should be doing is converting the 99C buses to be like the City Connector service, not the other way around! 2. The existing City Connector has undergone some fine tuning of routes and stops in the last year, making it easier to keep to the schedule. People who use the service know when and where to catch the bus. With the exception of a couple of peak hour circuits, there are always seats available, and the service was not initially designed for commuters anyway. With the onset of increased activity at Adelaide Oval, it is unlikely that larger buses and increased frequency of services will have much impact on the huge volume of people accessing the Oval precinct. The buses in use at present certainly need to be replaced, but the current usage levels do not warrant the use of larger buses. These buses are unobtrusive in comparison to the 99C buses, and economical in terms of space required for stops. I find it annoying to be advised that we will be doubling the frequency of the service to North Adelaide at no additional cost when the increased use of parking space, not to mention the cost of work required for the conversion, is real and obvious. 3. Route changes eliminate access the Zoo and medical facilities and education facilities along Frome Rd. Using Melbourne St has already proven

61 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

to be a problem which is why the current service was switched to Finnis St. Using Molesworth St instead of Buxton St will disadvantage many regular users of the service from the Helping Hand Centre, many of whom have limited mobility. Using Montefiore Rd only makes sense if Frome Rd is eliminated. I believe users are more likely to benefit from Frome Road stops than Montefiore Rd stops. The proposed new route does not incorporate the Railway Station, nor the new medical facilities being constructed at the west end of North Tce. (????) While it can be argues that these can be accessed by tram, changing from bus to tram takes time and causes difficulty to the elderly. 4. I am concerned that handing over the service to a private operator will result in Tindo being consigned to the warehouse, perhaps too be dragged out for the odd special occasion. While it has had teething problems, I think it is important to be seen to innovative and environmentally conscious and I was proud that Adelaide had the first such vehicle in the world. This also gives the tourist a positive impression of our City. 5. If the Connector Service has been seen by Council as an extravagance, I believe many ratepayers consider it as money well spent, particularly in comparison with sums spent on moving Rundle Mall sculptures a few metres, or the massively expensive Victoria Square upgrade incorporating extensive excavation at the northern end for a duckpond, instead of undergrounding the Grote/Wakefield Sts connector. • I am sad to to see that the new plans for the combined Connector and 99C bus services will no longer include a stop at the Adelaide Railway Station. Living in McLaren Vale it had always been great to suggest to our visitors that a great day could be had by catching a train to the city and catching the ACC's City Connector bus directly from the station to the Zoo and/or the 99C CityLoop for a "Hop on-Hop off" experience to Adelaide's interesting attractions. Sadly, neither option will be available from the station after January next year. Whilst I understand the logic of abandoning 70% of the current 99C circuit to free up buses to supplement the existing ACC CityConnector circuit it is a pity that the Adelaide Railway Station has been omitted despite that it is becoming the prime transport interchange for public transport in the city. I hope that the planning group will therefore give consideration to making the inner loop of the new plan follow closely the light rail loop route currently being studied jointly by the ACC and the DPTI and therefore be used as a test the viability of the route before any tracks are laid. This would of course include the full length of North Terrace and the City Connector route in the city's south. I thank you for this opportunity to comment on the project. • I have just returned from a Neighbourhood Watch meeting and concerns were raised regarding the potential LOSS of our community bus - the Connector bus. There is a meeting tomorrow night in North Adelaide that I am unable to attend and I wish to express my views to all of you personally as I am unsure who from Council will be at the meeting. I completed the survey that was circulated to passengers on the bus and returned it by mail. I have also expressed my views in "have your say". Have you read any of the comments from the community? For the life of me, I cannot understand why Council wants to abandon the community bus. This bus service is more than a bus service, it is a community service. The bus drivers are exemplary ambassadors of community spirit who know their passengers and the passengers take time (chatting on the bus) to know each other and care about each other. Do you use the bus? I recommend it to you. As a rate payer (two properties) and frequent user of the connector bus, I am opposed to the merger of our community bus with a proposed "streamlined people mover". that does not take into account that the elderly and people with mobility problems will have to WALK much further to catch the bus. I do not know of anyone who wants this service to stop but most would like to see it increased! Instead of merging our community bus with an

62 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

indifferent and impersonal service, please provide us with two more buses to increase the frequency of this fabulous service and retain community sociability and well-being at the same time. • We make no apology for contacting you again re the problems we face in this prestigious residential street. Some of you have courteously replied in the past and some council staff have also efficiently been in communication. We are not activists or serial pests - merely concerned residents of 42 years duration who do not wish to see this residential street desecrated any further. Please note that we have used the word residential [and resident] in the above, which is what this email is all about. We pay the same rates as other streets which are protected by restricted parking. While we have sympathy with the Council as they wrestle with the issue of Adelaide Oval Event Parking, we courteously entreat you all to consider the 2 major issues in our street. 1. All day parking by institutional workers and city commuters For many years, there has been increasing intrusion in our street by all-day parking to the detriment of all visitors, trade and delivery personel. The entire street is clogged all day from Monday to Friday. It will be no different when the construction workers from the Helping Hand eventually depart. We have championed 2 or preferably 3 hour parking for many years and this is surely the obvious way to go. Your favourable consideration of this matter is appreciated. In addition, the limited restricted parking at the Eastern end of the street, despite protestation from the Parking Authority remains totally inadequate. 2. Re-routing of City Connector Bus The residents of Molesworth Street have endured enough in recent years and the spectre of a bus traversing the street both ways half-hourly is unacceptable in the extreme. Noise, litter, pollution and increasing foot traffic would impinge greatly on residential quality lifestyle. I cannot imagine any Lord Mayor or Councillor wanting a bus stop adjacent to their home in a residential situation. I have heard the reasons for the proposed change and they are totally invalid. Any difficulty with a right-hand turn out of Buxton Street into Jeffcotte could only be attributed to drive incompetence or impatience while it also can be re-affirmed that there are adequate bus services nearby negating the need for the City Connector to pass through either Buxton or Molesworth residential streets. • I think this is a great idea!! I fully support it. It's a substantial improvement. • I have never realised there was a bus service from Ade3laide to Nth Adelaide. I think this is something I will use in the future. Based on the proposed route provided I think I would prefer the new route over the existing. • I work on the city fringe (Kent Town) and use the free City Loop bus on a daily basis. I appreciate the merit in merging this service with the free Connector bus. However, I am concerned about the removal of the train station bus stop. I catch the train into the city and then use the City Loop to get to work from there. The train station bus stop is a popular one. I have noticed that a broad spectrum of commuters board this bus at the same stop that I do. It’s not just workers such as myself but university students and people travelling to the Royal Adelaide Hospital. I support the move to merge the two bus services but strongly urge you to reconsider your plan to remove the train station bus stop. • Can I firstly say what a wonderful service the 99C bus provides for the public. I am concerned that there will no longer be a stop outside the railway station in this new plan. For people with disabilities/mobility issues, this stop is extremely convenient. It will make life more difficult for the elderly in particular and those people going to the RAH for medical reasons. I would like to see a plan that includes a stop close to the railway station. The tram is not an option because it travels a different way of course.

63 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I wanted to give you my feedback re the proposed bus stop outside the Australia Post Office on Halifax St (near King William St). We have a mailbox at that Post Office and parking is already extremely hard to get to just run in and collect the mail as well as doing business with the post office. There are only 2 x 15 min parks and I can usually get one when stop there very morning around 9.00am. If you replace these with a bus stop you are effectively moving all parking for the Post Office. Hardly anyone catches a bus around there anyway so I would think the number of people who park and use the post office would outweigh the number of bus users. There are only 2 or 3 other parks on that side of the road within a short walk of the post office and they are often full. You would need to provide additional parking along there somehow if you were to remove these 2 parks that are currently highly utilised. • I write to comment on what I see as good features in the newly proposed City Connector and City Loop bus routes and also to suggest some aspects that I think could be improved. I thank Council for the opportunity to comment on the proposal. I am a regular user of the current Connector service, travelling once or twice a month. About 70% of my trips are from Halifax Street to the Helping Hand Centre stop. Unfortunately the new route runs along Molesworth Street instead of Buxton Street which is not as convenient for me, particularly in wet weather. I have suggestions to help here, but make some more observations first. I see that a lot of effort has been put into the route design so that two operations are in "sync" for a regular 15 minute schedule in Adelaide city. Also the design of the stops is well considered as is that most of the stops are directly opposite each other providing simplicity for drivers and for users finding the stops. However as articulated below, I would find benefit in the clockwise and anticlockwise routes running in adjacent streets in a few specific locations. I also see benefit in the proposal to have common service standards between the Connector and City Loop services. This could also include a consistent colour scheme that is different to Adelaide Metro "fare for carriage" buses. While overall the current Connector service works well, during peak hours and times and when Central Market is busy, the Connector bus on-time performance can be poor, sometimes running 30 minutes late. The main congestion points that disrupt an "on-time" service I see are the Victoria Square loop, Grote Street when the Market is busy and to a lesser extent, the Wellington Square circuit. I note also that some of the new route has been aligned with Adelaide Metro arterial corridors: the northern end of East Terrace, along North terrace and along King William Road/Street. I see the move to King William Street between the River Torrens and North Terrace as problematic during peak times as I know when travelling home from work in the evening rush hour it often takes 20 minutes for Adelaide Metro services to get from the River Torrens to Victoria Square. Hence I see significant schedule risk at peak hour in this aspect of the current route proposal. I would like Council to consider three changes to the proposed routes with clockwise and anticlockwise routes running in adjacent streets to make more points accessible, and also to increase red route (ex Connector service) on time performance: (1) To make more points in North Adelaide easily accessible, have the clockwise service operate via Molesworth Street, Wellington Square and Tynte Street as per the new proposal, however the anticlockwise service operate via Archer Street, Wellington Square, Jeffcott and Buxton Streets. The increased frequency compensates for the journey one way being longer than the other way, and there is a remedy to walk one block to get the quicker reverse direction service. The current stop on the southern side of Buxton Street could be retained and I suggest merging stops 17 and 18 to a new stop on Lefevre Terrace near Archer Street on the Ward Street side. As a consequence of taking a stop off the east side, a stop could be added without impacting on running time on Montefiore Road near War Memorial Drive for access to the north side of the River Torrens.

64 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

(2) To eliminate the Victoria Square loop on the red route (ex Connector service), have the clockwise service operate from Grote Street through the Bus Station to Franklin Street and the anticlockwise service operate via Franklin Street, Pitt Street and Grote Street. Its a short walk to Victoria Square if that is a passengers destination. The proposed positions of stops 1 and 3 should still be OK. The orange route (ex City Loop) would still service stop 2 in Victoria Square. (3) To enhance on-time performance and offer an extra destination, have the red (ex Connector) routes use Kintore Avenue and Victoria Drive (as the Connector currently does) instead of turning from North Terrace into King William Road and vice versa. I suggest that both the orange and red routes use stop T1 on North Terrace (the current 99C stop) for stop 12 and that stop 13A be moved to Kintore Avenue near Victoria Drive benefiting University of Adelaide travellers (as is the current situation). Stop 13B is fine as proposed, but the current 99C stop U1 would also be suitable and is familiar to current users. Overall I believe that coordinating the Connector and City Loop services makes sense. I hope you are able to consider the suggestions made above that would help my use of the North Adelaide component of the new service, and by opening up some additional stops and increasing overall efficiency, other users as well. • I am a male city resident, born 1945. I use the current Connector bus service occasionally to get to shopping and leisure locations in the city and North Adelaide Thanks for canvassing my opinion on the proposed changes. I am very supportive of the changes mentioned - merging the services, the new route and stops. I am also strongly in favour of the increased frequency and extended operating hours. I see no problem with any of the proposed stops, especially stop 5 close to my home. • The South East City Residents Association (SECRA) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed new Adelaide City Connector bus service. The current Connector bus is important to our residents, especially those who don’t own a car, who can’t walk far, who have to carry heavy shopping bags (after shopping at the Central Market), who are accompanied by children and older people, who are accessing the services at the Hutt Street Centre, who wish to take grandchildren to the zoo, who need to travel to the RAH. The current Connector bus is more than a mode of transport. It creates a sense of community, especially for people living alone in our City. In our experience those who drive the current Connector buses create a welcoming atmosphere for those using the service; they know regulars by name and are cheerful and considerate to all patrons. These drivers are wonderful advocates for the City. We welcome a more frequent service (every 15 minutes) in our area but have concerns that a new service will not address the needs of current users of the Connector bus. To avoid this we propose the following: 1. There should be no reduction in the number of stops. Older people, and those with medical conditions, often cannot walk far, especially when carrying groceries. Adelaide should be an Age-Friendly City: a. Stop 26 of the existing service - Hutt Street (near Angas Street) – must be retained. This is an Adelaide Metro bus stop close to medium-density residential housing. 2 b. Stop 31 of the existing service – Whitmore Square – must be retained, to allow people to access service providers such as The Magdalen

65 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Centre (relocated to St Luke’s rectory), the Salvation Army and low-cost accommodation. Some of these people are travelling from here to the Hutt Street Centre. c. The new route should continue to include the zoo and the RAH. 2. The buses used on the new service must be wheelchair-accessible, have room for shopping bags, trolleys and prams, and be attractive and welcoming for residents, workers and visitors. Tindo has set a high standard. Its replacements should not be aging, noisy, non-airconditioned, clapped-out buses. 3. The Adelaide City Connector buses should be distinctive, perhaps featuring images of City residents and workers or City attractions near the route. 4. Residents are concerned that an unintended consequence of more frequent bus services will be an increase in the number of commuters parking in residential streets and adjacent to the Park Lands then taking the free bus service into the CBD. How will this be addressed? 5. Finally, some residents are concerned that the current Connector drivers will lose their jobs when a new system is introduced. How will this be addressed? • As a ratepayer I am mortified that only in July all the bus signs and timetable were changed at great expense how absolutely wasteful of rate payers money when this was already on the agenda - as at this time we filled in questionnaires on the north Adelaide free connector bus The new route does not come down Buxton street which will have a huge impact on the helping hands these bus stop are almost always busy The 30 mins appears to be in one direction not helpful if you want to get to the zoo oh actually to zoo is no longer on the route. Surely a service for north Adelaide and the city does not require going down montefore road somewhat out of the way. The present clockwise and anticlockwise route work well just need newer buses • The City Loop is worth saving It is disappointing that this awful proposal to wreck the City Loop bus service (disguised as a proposal to improve it) is being considered. A decade ago there were lots of CityFree buses: The City Loop service operating every 15 minutes, and the Bee Line service operating every five. When the Bee Line was replaced by trams, I had hoped its buses would be redeployed onto the City Loop service to increase its frequency. Instead the City Loop service actually deteriorated! I don't know when it officially dropped to every 20 minutes, as the change wasn't publicised, but I've sometimes had to wait even longer than that with no clue as to when the next bus will turn up. Meanwhile the North Adelaide Loop service is so infrequent and erratic that it's never worth waiting for, though I appreciate it on those rare occasions when I can see it coming. Improving it would be welcome - but not at the expense of the City Loop. The ACC seems eager to throw money at infrastructure improvements with a limited lifespan, so why is it so reluctant to commit the resources needed to make its buses genuinely useful? Problems with your proposed routes The railway station is normally the biggest single source of passenger demand on the City Loop buses, though demand has been depressed this year because of the total lack of Noarlunga Line trains. It is astonishing that the planned route completely avoids it and instead opts for a section of King William Street that already has buses to all parts of the City and North Adelaide! Contrast this with the Metroticket bus routes that currently serve the railway station: they barely stray from North Terrace! While the removal of the tedious detours to the NW and NE corners of the City is welcome, substituting them with an even more tedious detour

66 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

to Victoria Square is not. But perhaps the biggest flaw in the plans is that two partially concurrent 30 minute services don't make a 15 minute service. Even those passengers who only plan to travel between two of the stops on the concurrent section are likely to find it less convenient, as when buses are delayed in traffic, those in the City and North Adelaide are likely to be affected by different amounts of time. A better alternative If we accept that two infrequent bus loops are not an adequate substitute for a frequent one, we could instead gain substantial benefits from using the City and North Adelaide loops to greatly improve coverage. I suggest something like this: The red (City Loop) route would be fairly similar to what the ACC is proposing at the moment, but would run via Morphett Street and North Terrace to serve the railway station instead of Victoria Square and King William Street. Though missing Victoria Square may seem like an enormous disadvantage, it must be remembered that many people who go to Victoria Square walk from there to Chinatown, so wouldn't be too inconvenienced by having to walk to Morphett Street (assuming the loop bus continues to stop north of Grote Street as well as south of Gouger). Victoria Square is also very well served by buses from almost every direction. This reduces the need for the City Loop bus to serve it, as passengers on nearly all those bus routes (and the tram) would have opportunities to interchange with the City Loop buses elsewhere. Compared with the ACC's proposed route, the blue (North Adelaide Loop) bus route would have a southern half more similar to that of the current City Loop, enabling them to serve Victoria Square without detouring. In North Adelaide, running via Buxton Street instead of Molesworth Street, Wellington Square and Tynte Street would increase the area within easy walking distance while scarcely adding to the distance travelled clockwise (and not adding to it at all anticlockwise). Using Finniss Street instead of Melbourne Street is likely to decrease the susceptibility to traffic delays at peak times, while reentering the City via Frome Road would enable it to effectively serve the East End without having to detour to East Terrace, and would still allow it to serve Rundle Mall (from Pultney Street). Considering the unreliability of the timetables due to traffic (unless the schedule is extremely slack) the public would be much better served with a frequent service than one that runs at predictable times or extended hours. But if the resources to run a frequent service continue to be made unavailable, real time information at stops is the next best thing. • I wish to register my opposition to the placing of a City Connector bus stop directly in front of the Halifax Street Post Office where there are currently two 15-minute parking spaces. I understand alternative parking spaces are to be allocated further east down Halifax Street. This will, I suggest, be very inconvenient to customers such as myself, as I often have to deliver and collect large, heavy, cumbersome parcels to and from the post office. I currently am employed by a barrister at Bar Chambers, 34 Carrington Street, and I also collect mail from a box at the post office for a Judge of the Supreme Court. I would request that you reconsider the relocation of this bus stop. • I dont see a need for the bus to go along busy King William Street - Free trams. The Zoo would appreciate being one of the stops - need as many visitors as possible. A railway station stop would be good for people needing transport connections. Currie Street could also benefit with a stop, connecting with other bus services. The connector service as it stands has been well used for many years by the locals and tourists - staff have a friendly manner for people that need assistance and advice, and it is a good opportunity for neighbours to meet.

67 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

We have a blind man near Gilles Street and unfortunately when the service went to Halifax Street he was no longer able to access it, diminishing his life style. Whatever the Council decides, it will not have a great impact on me as I own a vehicle. However in years to come that may not be the case. • Why cannot the present route via Finnis Street and Frome Road be retained? It is very convenient for people going to University Medical School etc. The new proposed route appears to be designed especially for the Adelaide Oval. Why not retain the hourly route on the very user-friendly one now in operation, and use the new proposed route also hourly, so people are offered two possibilities - two routes- one on the hour- the other on the half-hour. This way all users can be accommodated. I have found the present route and service to be excellent, and am very grateful to the Adelaide City Council for providing such a convenient bus service. • Executive summary The ultimate solution in the current circumstance (of Adelaide Oval upgrade pressure) may well be to provide the new circulating shuttle services along the known large bus routes (with clearly marked rolling stock identifying them as such), and supplement these with the local connector buses continuing to operate in the smaller quieter streets as an auxiliary service. General overview content of the information brochure about this new proposal implies that there is something wrong with the current system, focused as it is on local demand. The new proposal’s content suggests a significant proposed level of change, and the extent to which it has provoked negative local feedback suggests that council and government planning is ‘out-of-synch’ with local assumptions and expectations. It is gratifying that council is conducting a thorough consultation, but it should be stated that there is a strong feeling that the proposal is not only ready to implement, but primarily driven by major new factors; in particular, the Adelaide Oval redevelopment. Matters in detail • The society notes the following matters on behalf of the numerous members of the society who have contacted it in the past few weeks to express their views and concerns about the proposed revised connector bus service. The matters below summarise those opinions and hopefully will assist in the optimum solution being found and to continue what has been considered by many to be a most valuable service. a) Route changes fail to acknowledge particular needs, particularly involving Frome Road and the Zoo, the various hospitals and the Helping Hand Centre in Buxton Street; b) The use of larger diesel engine buses contrasts starkly with council’s previously declared "green-ness" with Tindo; c) Access for disabled or elderly persons may disappear; d) Loss of essential car-parking spaces for bus stops where previously these spaces may have assisted the needs of hospital visitors and staff (Kingston Terrace, Melbourne Street); e) Noisy buses in quieter residential streets, where prior to this proposal there had been none; f) Heavier rolling stock damaging streets not meant for/previously designated as bus routes; g) Increased frequency at earlier and later times interfering with prior amenity in quieter residential streets; h) Alleged loss of current drivers’ jobs by removing the existing smaller buses; i) Lack of/disappearance of stops in certain areas where previously there had been some (eg Ward Street); j) Potential confusion between what is the free bus and what is normal fare-paying;

68 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

k) Ability of large buses to negotiate tight roundabouts (eg Finniss/Mackinnon); l) Suspicion about new route traversing both sides of the new Adelaide Oval complex, leading to possible shuttle use for event patrons; m) Greater encouragement for non-locals to take advantage of free parking areas in North Adelaide and catching free buses to and from work (ie abuse by non-ratepayers of a service meant for people within the ACC area). Conclusion 1 Council should identify clearly during this consultation period how much of the proposal is related to the looming completion of the Adelaide Oval refurbishment, and consequent major event visitation by non-local attendees, and how much the proposal is focused locally with a view to implementing change that makes the current system better for ratepayers. There appears to be a hazy definition about this. 2 The North Adelaide Society appreciates the existence of the current service, which while at times may be considered inadequate, has at the same time got its members seeking reassurances that this new proposal will not cause greater disadvantage through noisier, larger, more frequent services along routes not as relevant as the current system, because of a policy/service departure from the sound principles of greener cleaner solutions like the Tindo or the use of smaller coaster buses. The ultimate solution in the current circumstance (of Adelaide Oval upgrade pressure) may well be to provide the new circulating shuttle services along the known large bus routes (with clearly marked rolling stock identifying them as such) and supplement these with the local connector buses continuing to operate in the smaller quieter streets as an auxiliary service. This aspect may well clarify the currently ‘hazy’ distinction between local anticipation of local transport solutions, and city anticipation of visitor transport solutions, principally related to Adelaide Oval’s commencement of its major event operations. • I am a student and managing a small retail shop at China town. I live in a Waymouth st. apartment where there is no car park. There are not many apartments which have a car park in the city as you know. So I always feel thankful for your free bus services. I also have been enjoying the changed bus route which resulted from the Hindly st and Victoria Sq closure temporarily. This route have helped me a lot to access easily my work place, school and the state library. Thank you very much for that. I recently saw the signboard with the new bus route. I feel that the west of the city is totally excluded in the new bus route. I hope you may consider including some part of the west of the city. It is not only for myself but also for the equal distribution of city living. I personally even consider to move to the east or the south of the city if this route will be set. The rental prices in the city region don't have a lot differences. Inside the city, no car park, I have no choice for maintaining my study and work. This will cause more population concentrated on those areas. Thank you for giving me the opportunity for proposal. • I have some questions regarding this proposal: 1. Has the ACC considered the increased parking issues that would occur when people could 'park and ride' from North Adelaide to the Oval or

69 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

to the city, facilitated by larger buses, a more frequent timetable and longer operating hours? 2. Why is the service to the zoo, botanical gardens and Uni SA to cease? We use these stops frequently. 3. Why does the new route duplicate existing bus services on King William Street? 4. Why does the new route encompass the congested western end of Melbourne Street which consists largely of private medical practices? 5. Are there other proposed changes to North Adelaide bus routes proposed by the Dept P.T.I ? • We are concerned about the proposal to remove the 2 X 15 min car spaces from the front of the Halifax Post Office and replace them with a bus stop and then instal replacement car spaces well up Halifax St on the Northern side (approx. 100 meters we believe, as your plan was not clear) There are approximately 800 post boxes at the Post Office and to expect the majority of them to now park many more metres away is unreasonable. Elderly Post Office users will need to walk those meters which is not acceptable and may make it impossible for them to use the Post Office We visit the Post Office at least twice a day for mail and purchase of their goods. That will mean that there are at least 4 times a day that we will need to cross Halifax St to get to the Post Office from the new Northern car spaces. That in itself involves exposing us (and many others) to unnecessary risk in crossing that street which we do not now face. There could easily be a further 1,000 crossings of Halifax a day exposing staff and proprietors to risk of accident that they do not currently have. You mention the spaces around the corner on King William St – they are rarely available now with them being used for the business area along King William St rather than the Post Office. The current spaces would be used for multiple vehicle movements a day – a guess would be around 1,000 at least. It seems ludicrous to disadvantage so many users for a bus service that whilst necessary will only be used for a minimal number of movements and passengers a day You have other alternatives, either by using spaces further east of the proposed area or alternatively using spaces on Sturt St near King William St. The latter is sensible as the number of movements there would not be anywhere near that surrounding the Post Office which in this day and age is an established retail outlet for use by hundreds of businesses in the area on a daily basis. The passenger use of the spaces would pale into insignificance when compared to the business use of the current spaces. The Sturt St option is sensible as it does not involve the bus service users in any more distance using the lights nor does it expose them to any more danger than crossing with the lights in an easterly or westerly direction. Whilst I have no financial interest in the Post Office, this move may be detrimental to its business by making access difficult, and making the premises invisible when a bus is parked there. Any move by a government body that impedes business in these difficult economic times is nonsensical when there are sensible alternatives We strongly object to this proposal. It inconveniences many for the sake of a few, exposes many to unnecessary risk and danger for the sake of those few, puts an unnecessary physical strain on the elderly for the sake of those few, and may have a detrimental effect on the business of the Post Office. All of this for no substantial gain by the bus service when it has alternatives that do not have those effects. • It has been brought to the notice of the North Adelaide Baptist Church that there is a proposal to remove eight (8) car spaces from directly outside the Church (bus stop 19) on Tynte Street, North Adelaide. I'm happy to consult with you, but must firstly protest most strongly regarding this proposal. This Church relies heavily on car spaces on Sunday mornings - there are never sufficient as it is - and to

70 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

remove another eight would make parking extremely inconvenient for members of our congregation. As well, to place a bus shelter directly in front of our Church signs comes close to a disregard of freedom of worship and we do, most strongly, protest the Council's suggested change. • Why are you providing two services via King William Street (Tram and Connector Bus) and eliminating a service along Pulteney Street? The 99C provides an excellent service for those commuters who work along or near Pulteney Street. If I wanted to travel along King William Street, I would catch a tram from North Terrace. With the aging population in South Australia, did you consider that you will be making life incredibly difficult for those of us who are not able to walk long distances? Have you considered the number of tourists that travel via the 99C and how much they consider this service to be equal to any in the world? I have studied the proposed route and I believe I will need to walk some considerable distance to my place of employment in Flinders Street, regardless of whether I travel from the train station via tram or connector bus. I am currently walking from Hindmarsh Square and that sometimes is more than I can physically cope with. It does not get my working day off to a good start! You state that you are improving the conditions for commuters, but for the majority of people who currently use the 99C, you are making life more difficult. Please reconsider a route that encompasses Pulteney Street. When the weather is forecast in the high 30’s or rain storms, it is not a pleasurable experience to commence one’s work day either drenched with rain or sweat! • I absolutely agree 100%. A fantastic idea and I hope it goes ahead. Transport around the city is limited, with the need to change buses, but this is a great idea. Many other capital cities have such services in place and they work !! My vote: Yes • To place a bus stop in the three car spaces directly outside a post office is to inconvenience hundreds of people who use the services of the post office daily for commercial transactions. By contrast relatively few people use a community bus. I am an ACC ratepayer of 19 years (to Febuary 2013) who for continuity reasons is tied to using two mailboxes at the Halifax St post office. Keeping this marginally profitable post office in the city is what you should be encouraging, not forcing it to the brink by taking away its 15- minute client zone. The CEO of Australia Post is reported to have told a recent meeting of business people in Adelaide that he would be delighted to get rid of these endangered species. The post office is normally entitled to priority use of the space outside its front door. Gilles Lane is a cul de sac used by Australia Post. Why can’t you locate stop 6 just south of it? This is a 30-minute zone and so would involve no loss of metering revenue. As to so-called alternative parking slots removed from the post office, the northern side of Halifax St tends will continue to be monopolised by the coffee-drinking set. And the four spots around the corner in King William St, that is popular with couriers, can be as tight as a sardine tin;

71 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

furthermore backing out into on-coming traffic is not for the faint-hearted. With the onward southward march of the parking meters to fund extravaganzas like the Victoria Sq makeover there are too few free short-term spaces now, and this is crippling intra-city trade and especially City South. • The SWCRA committee would like to stress that, although ACC has the habit of counting submissions from community groups such as SWCRA as single responses in their consultations, we are representing the views of our membership in particular, and also of other interested parties with whom we correspond on a regular basis. These people may not submit separately but will rely on SWCRA’s submissions to get their message across. This submission should therefore be considered as a community response. SWCRA is highly supportive of public transport, with many SW residents not using cars and relying on the Connector Bus for transport within the city. We therefore welcome any improvements to the service, for example the proposed increased frequency of buses. We are concerned, however, that in some respects the new service will be inferior to the existing one. We are disappointed that it is not proposed to extend the service west of Whitmore Square as suggested in SWCRA’s budget submission. And in fact, the proposed service will be less convenient for many SW residents, with the removal of the stop outside St. Luke’s on Whitmore Square. From reading the Information Pack, Consultation Pack and other information regarding the proposal it would appear that all the major decisions relating to the new service have already been made, including the decision to use larger buses which have already been ordered. In particular we note the warning on page 5 of the Consultation Pack:- ‘The route is based on the funding available from combining the Adelaide Connector and 99C Loop free bus services. Any changes to the route may have serious cost implications to Council and the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure.’ This seems to us to say that any changes to the proposed new route are unlikely to be implemented. In addition, it’s disappointing that meetings for consideration of this proposal by ACC were conducted in confidence, prohibiting the general public from taking part in the process until the matter was decided. Although we understand there are reasons why some matters must remain in confidence, we feel that if the ACC is genuinely after better outcomes for the City and wishes to include all stakeholders in the discussion, this consultation should have happened at an earlier stage, not after the matter has largely been finalised. SWCRA looked at the service provided by the existing routes, being: • a community-based bus service by ACC, providing connections to destinations throughout the City primarily for residents; and • the 99C public transport route primarily moving workers and visitors between destinations within the CBD. The proposed combined route removes more than 60% of the 99C route and the remainder is absorbed into the new City Loop. Effectively the 99C loop has been deleted. Unfortunately, instead of minor alterations to the existing Connector Bus route, the connections to North Adelaide, the North-West corner of the City and parts of the CBD have been totally changed, resulting in diminished services for business, workers, visitors, students and residents. A number of important destinations in the City are not well served by the proposed new route, including:- • Adelaide Railway Station and Casino • Adelaide Convention Centre • University of SA City West campus • Adelaide Oval • Elder Park

72 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Riverbank Precinct in general • Adelaide Zoo • Botanic Park • Torrens Parade Ground • Adelaide University (Frome Road) and University of SA City East campus Returning to the original Connector Bus route would reconnect with all of the above destinations. The increase in service frequency over an extended timeframe in a fleet of new buses, with expanded times of operation, is an excellent facility to provide for people movement throughout the City of Adelaide. However it was disappointing to learn at one of the Information Sessions that the smaller City Loop would not operate on weekends or public holidays. Running the City Loop on these days would assist residents and visitors to get around the City and engage with what the City has to offer. In addition it would have been more appropriate to have used a larger number of smaller buses to reduce congestion/disruption throughout the City and provide for more diverse route options. The large commercial vehicles will be noisier, cause more pollution, and be harder to negotiate through the City. It’s also likely they will cause road surface damage as they negotiate residential streets not designed to handle heavy commercial vehicle use. We ask if the following points were considered in the selection of large commercial vehicles to provide the new service:- • The new fleet should operate on natural gas or electric power to reduce the level of pollution, in keeping with ACC’s green policy. • There should have been investigations into whether the residential streets to be used on the route were built to a standard that will resist damage from constant usage by heavy commercial vehicles. • The new fleet should be fitted with more effective muffler systems to reflect their frequent passage through otherwise quiet residential streets. • Use of the larger vehicles will impact on traffic flow and possibly add to traffic congestion. In any case, regardless of the size of the buses chosen, the following should be implemented:- • The buses should be clearly identifiable from normal Transit buses so as not to cause confusion. • They should also be clearly identifiable as City Loop or City/North Adelaide Loop so that passengers will not, say, board a bus to go to a destination in the City to find they do so by way of North Adelaide, or vice-versa. • The buses should be clearly marked as a ‘free’ service, in particular for the information of new residents and visitors to Adelaide. • The stops where buses can be hailed should be clearly marked and recognisable by users, particularly new residents and visitors to Adelaide. • The proposed route plans at each stop should be clear and easy to read to meet the needs of residents and visitors. The plans in the consultation package are difficult to read. • Timetables should be included at each stop, as they are for the existing Connector Bus, to assist passengers in their journeys. • Consideration should be given to providing ‘event day’ stops at Elder Park, Adelaide Oval and, if the original Connector route is retained, Botanic Park. It would make sense to assist residents and others to access events held in these areas. It is our view that for the City to be better serviced by this ‘new’ facility, the City Loop should continue westward along North Terrace and turn left into Morphett Street, not follow the Tram route into the centre of the City along King William Street. The links used to connect North Adelaide should be closer to the old community Connector Bus route using Frome Road and King William Road. These minor modifications would provide superior access to a large number of current destinations that will be excluded by the proposed route and importantly will provide a link to the

73 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Adelaide Railway Station, an entry point for large numbers of people to the City, thus assisting in keeping cars out of the City. SWCRA is concerned in particular with the provision of bus stops in the South West quadrant of the City. Access for many South West City residents to a community bus stop has been moving further away with each modification to the Connector route. Now it is proposed to remove the stop at St. Luke’s. If the only access to the bus will be at the proposed stop 4 (north of Wright Street) or stop 5 (on Sturt Street), people living in the SW corner will have a much greater distance to walk to access the service. We therefore propose that the stop at St. Luke’s is retained and that a corresponding south-bound stop be installed opposite St. Luke’s on the east side of Whitmore Square. We also propose that both these stops be provided with shelters. • Introduction The property owners making this submission This submission is made by the owners of the properties from 121 to 138 Kingston Terrace North Adelaide 5006. Names and addresses of the relevant property owners are set out in the Schedule to this submission. For ease of reference, in this submission the group of owners and rate payers is referred to as “the Kingston West Group”. The properties affected The properties owned by the Kingston West Group are identified in the Schedule at the end of this Submission and on page 4 of this Submission, in Figure 1 in paragraph 3. Figure 1 shows the location of the properties and their relationship to Kingston Terrace. It also shows proposed Stop 17 of the New free City connector bus proposal on Kingston Terrace and its relationship with the properties. The properties represent the continuous 150m of frontage on Kingston Terrace from the corner of Kingston and Lefevre Terraces running east down the hill. These properties are particularly and unfairly impacted by the current proposal and they bear the lion’s share of the brunt. Proposed Stop 17 on the suggested new route is sited within this frontage. The location of Stop 17 greatly intensifies other adverse impacts described below 1. Overview of the objections This submission to Adelaide City Council sets out the objections of Kingston West Group to the proposed changes to the New free City connector bus service. The Kingston West Group believe that the proposal, in so far as it relates to (a) the re-routing of the New free City connector bus via Kingston Terrace, instead of Stanley Street, and (b) the siting of proposed Stop 17, is a bad proposal and should be rejected. In the Group’s view, the proposal is ill-conceived, will cause acute traffic problems near the already vexed Kingston Lefevre intersection and the concentrated cluster of driveways on the affected properties. The proposal is inconsistent with the heritage values central to the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone. They are the values that give Kingston Terrace its special character and make it a highly desirable place to invest in and to live. The proposal will seriously damage those values for no good reason and when the perfectly adequate existing route via Stanley Street remains available. This route passes the Stanley Street frontage of two of the properties affected but the owners have no objection to that. Importantly the proposal ignores the Council’s own Public Realm Policy that specifically applies to the locality of Kingston Terrace namely the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation ) Zone. Further the proposal conflicts with a number of city wide Principles and Objectives which are comprised in the Adelaide City Development Plan which the Council itself applies2. 28648792v1 in granting planning approval for development assessment applications to people spending their own funds to build new dwellings or adapt old dwellings in the Zone. We strongly believe the parts of the proposal identified in sub paragraphs (a) and (b) above should not be pursued. This is particularly so as the existing route via Stanley Street carries none of the substantial problems that will arise on Kingston Terrace. In the paragraphs which follow, this submission sets out in more detail the grounds of our objections. 2. There is no demonstrated demand for the route to travel via Kingston Terrace nor for a bus stop on Kingston Terrace. Neither the members of the Kingston West Group nor their families are likely to use the New free City connector bus at greater frequency than extremely rarely. If the move is for the benefit of persons parking on

74 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Kingston Terrace, as happens during the week, then the Kingston West Group object on the basis that the proposal will be at a cost in loss of amenity and the character of their locality for the benefit of people from outside the Adelaide Municipality who do not pay rates let alone the high rates paid on the west end of Kingston Terrace. To the extent that there is any demand for the service in the vicinity of Kingston Terrace it is easily met from the existing service via Stanley Street. Why should ratepayers suffer the imposition of a burden upon their street for the sake of something they do not want and which comes at the cost (see below) of precious and unique qualities in their local environment that they strongly wish to preserve? 3. The proposal changes the New free City connector bus route from Stanley Street to Kingston Terrace. Kingston West Group opposes this plan. It will cause acute traffic problems and significant traffic hazards on Kingston Terrace which are wholly unacceptable to the Kingston West Group. In the 150 metres leading to the traffic lights on the intersection of Lefevre Terrace and Kingston Terrace, eight existing driveways serving 11 households, enter Kingston Terrace. Within this already overcrowded section of roadway a new Stop 17 is proposed to be sited. In the result, access to properties will be impeded, delay caused, risk increased and amenity reduced for all of our properties. Serious traffic congestion will be generated on Kingston Terrace whereas none is caused on Stanley Street at present. The Kingston West Group oppose this change. It imposes inequitable and unnecessary risks and burdens on ratepayers and is destructive of the character of the locality. The proposed change of bus route from Stanley Street to Kingston Terrace is poorly thought through, introduces a new level of risk and destroys much of value in the Kingston Terrace environment Stanley Street is a significantly wider thoroughfare than Kingston Terrace yet Kingston Terrace carries a much higher volume of traffic than Stanley Street, especially through traffic from Hackney Road. Figure 1 shows that Kingston Terrace is eleven metres in width while Stanley Street is twenty metres wide. 3 28648792v1 Further, Stanley Street and has angle parking. This allows vehicles speedier ingress to, and egress from parking spaces, reducing delay as compared to the parallel parking that operates on the narrower Kingston Terrace. The greater space on Stanley Street makes for greater ease of vehicle manoeuvring. Risk of vehicle mishap is reduced and safety increased..These factors, on their own, make a compelling case in favour of retaining the status quo route via Stanley Street. However, there is a further and very important factor, namely, the number of driveways carrying traffic to and from the main Kingston Terrace thoroughfare. In Kingston Terrace, in the frontage owned by members of the Kingston West Group, there are eight closely spaced driveways serving, from time to time, eleven separate households. Each entry and departure from these driveways holds up the traffic flow. No such equivalent factor exists on Stanley Street. In the equivalent stretch of roadway on Stanley Street there are no driveways at all on the north side and only one on the south side which is rarely used as the property has an alternative entrance on its south side via Old Street. Nor is congestion and delay the only consequence. In the 150 metres containing the eight driveways the planners of the new route have chosen to site Stop 17. This decision has caused us grave disquiet. There is deep concern amongst the Kingston West Group that the siting of Stop 17 will introduce a strong inducement for passengers alighting on the north side of the stop to take a short cut across Kingston Terrace near the east end of the stopping area and avoid going back to cross at the traffic lights. It would be surprising if this did not happen in most cases. The tendency of extra pedestrians to take this short cut generates safety risks both for the pedestrians and for drivers on Kingston Terrace. For residents, queuing traffic backed up behind large buses manoeuvring in and out of the bus stop potentially every half hour will impede ingress and egress to homes especially at busy times. Both residents and bus service will suffer Perhaps these local effects are not easily visible to planners. To members of the Kingston West Group who are familiar on a daily basis with the traffic and parking patterns on Kingston Terrace the congestion effect is all too obvious. That effect will be to induce a huge increase in traffic queuing across each of the driveways in the approximately 200-250 metres leading up to the intersection of Kingston and Lefevre Terraces. Further, if we are right in thinking (see paragraph

75 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

8 below) that it is contemplated to use diesel buses larger and longer than the electric bus now in service, the risks are heightened and the concerns are even greater. The use of large diesel buses in what will be a highly congested section of roadway, will cause a significant reduction of the ability to keep a proper look out for drivers exiting their driveways. The amenity of all of the dwellings will be significantly reduced by these factors. When accidents occur, as will be significantly more likely, the Council can expect to be a defendant in the inevitable litigation on the basis of that this project has created foreseeable and unnecessary risk. When the present route on Stanley Street is free from all these hazards, the decision to move the bus route from Stanley Street to Kingston Terrace appears nonsensical. It courts danger when there is a clear, easy, safe and already existing alternative. 4. 28648792v1 Figure 1 Plan view of the Properties on Kingston Terrace North Adelaide owned by the ratepayers making this Submission. 4. Introducing a frequent bus service of large buses changes the character of Kingston Terrace very much for the worse. Residents of Kingston Terrace have chosen to invest and live in this special place because of its desirable residential characteristics including its parkland setting, the heritage value created by its listed historic nineteenth century buildings and the desirability of living in a low density environment in high quality residences with beautiful gardens both public and private. These are the special characters of the North Adelaide Historic Conservation Zone. The intrusion of a bus service every half hour in both directions will bring an increase in the number of people using the street, in vehicle manoeuvring and queuing of traffic, traffic delays while passengers board and alight from buses and smelly diesel fumes spoiling the air and the rose gardens maintained personally by members of the Kingston West Group on the Kingston Lefevre corner. Further there will likely be infrastructure at bus stops and the 5. 28648792v1 inducement to loitering at the bus stop. These factors together with the associated delays and problems described above, very significantly change the character of the locality and reduce its amenity, charm and atmosphere. It is for these factors that owners and residents have chosen to invest in Kingston Terrace and create a special environment. It can be hardly surprising that they resent this proposed intrusion and oppose it strongly. They will fight for the retention of the status quo. 5. Wherever the New free City connector bus may be routed, the siting of Stop 17 is wholly unacceptable. A bus stop in the locality, if there is to be one at all any, should be sited well away from all of the Kingston Lefevre intersection and its gardens, the adjacent cluster of driveways and the Heritage Listed mansions at 121 and 127 Kingston Terrace. 5.1 There is no identified or justified need for any Bus Stop in the location of Stop 17. The siting of Stop 17 in the proposed location is both (1) incompatible with the efficient functioning of the western end of Kingston Terrace and the junction with Lefevre Terrace and (2) incompatible with the Heritage values inherent in North Adelaide Historic Conservation Zone and Kingston Terrace in particular. The reasons why this is so comprise the following matters. 5.2 Seriously increased traffic congestion Such traffic congestion will be generated near to and about the intersection of Kingston Terrace, and Lefevre Terrace caused by large buses manoeuvring in and out of Stop 17 holding up both local and through traffic together with the increased queuing and delay for both east and west bound traffic on Kingston Terrace. These factors have already been discussed above. 5.3 The inequitable deprivation of on street parking spaces from particular dwellings (a) The removal of the six existing on-street parking spaces proximate to the dwellings at 138 -127 Kingston Terrace (each of which contain multiple households) placing an inequitably harsh burden and reduction of amenity on those properties. (b) The proposed removal of the two parking spaces on the southern side of Kingston Terrace is particularly harsh on the residence at 133 Kingston Terrace the two spaces to be removed are frequently used by the occupants of the dwelling and the dwelling at 248 Stanley Street which shares the driveway with 133 Kingston Terrace. (c) The ten hour parking used (6.00am to 5.00pm) by nurses and staff of the nearby hospitals on the north side of Kingston Terrace (shown in orange on Figure 1) means that the nearest street parking space to those two dwellings, likely to be available, is now some 80 metres away. This is a dramatic and unfair loss of amenity especially as the presence of the two parking spaces, now proposed to be taken away, were factors in the 6. 28648792v1 planning process by which plans for 133 Kingston and 248 Stanley were approved. (d) Further the loss of the two spaces outside 133

76 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Kingston Terrace has a knock on effect for all of the dwellings 138 -121 Kingston Terrace as each of the few remaining spaces proximate to the dwellings (those on the north side being either removed in this proposal or practically unavailable due to use by hospital staff) becomes subject to greater competition. (e) The adverse effects and reduced amenity identified above, because of their special qualities, particularly impact on the substantial State and Local Heritage Listed dwellings at 127 and 121 Kingston Terrace (specifically mentioned in the Adelaide Development Plan and the North Adelaide Historic Conservation Zone) and other proximate dwellings at the west end of Kingston Terrace. 5.4 The grave impairment of heritage values The North Adelaide Historic Conservation Zone, amongst other regulatory instruments, restricts options for owners and creates further costs and delays for any development of Heritage properties. These burdens are placed on Heritage owners ostensibly in the public interest. (a) It is incumbent on the Council, as a key authority appointed to preserve the Heritage values expressed such regulatory instruments, to respect those values in its management of the public realm. Likewise the Council should not treat the Zone as expendable in the interests of convenience or the transport budget. The quid pro quo for Heritage restrictions must be the preservation of the setting surrounds so that the listed items remain a part of an appropriate street scape which the public can enjoy. (b) To impose heavy transport, acute traffic congestion and marked reduction of amenity (described in this submission) at a key and highly valued location within the North Adelaide Historic Conservation Zone impairs and disrespects the setting of the listed items in Kingston Terrace. This does not make sense and is contrary to the regime created by the Council itself. 6. The New free City connector bus proposal, as it affects Kingston Terrace, offends the Council’s own Policy for the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone, and numerous Principles and Objectives of the Adelaide City Development Plan. Council should follow its own Policy and avoid undermining the Adelaide City Development Plan. 7. Both the routing of the connector bus via Kingston Terrace and the siting of Stop 17 in the location proposed appear to be inconsistent in a number of respects with the Principles and Objectives of the Adelaide City Development Plan and also the Council’s own adopted Policy for the specific locality. 7.1 The Council has bound it itself to abide by its adopted Policies when acting in the Public Realm. It that context it is reasonable to expect that the Council should also avoid actions which undermine the Principles and Objectives of the Adelaide City 28648792v1 Development Plan which the Council applies to its own ratepayers in relation to applications for Development Approval. 7.2 Principles and Objectives relating to development are contained in the Adelaide City Development Plan (which includes the North Adelaide Historic Conservation Zone). Ratepayers might well expect that, in its own activities, the Council would not act in a manner contrary to these Principles and Objectives. Council Policy for the Public Realm 7.3 The Council has committed itself in relation to its own conduct in the Public Realm to abide by its adopted Council Policies when, as here, it is proposing to take action to install public facilities in the North Adelaide Public Realm. Further, for Kingston Terrace and Stanley Street that Policy is focused by the Stanley West Policy. We set out relevant sections of the Policy: “Stanley West Policy Area 10 North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone Consolidated - 17 October Introduction The desired character, objectives and principles of development control that follow apply to the Policy Area ……… Desired Character The Stanley West Policy Area should remain one of the lowest density residential areas in Upper North Adelaide with a distinctive and cohesive character derived from its townscapes. These are established by large nineteenth and early twentieth century dwellings comprising more substantial Victorian, Edwardian and Georgian Revival villas, and other low density detached and semi-detached dwellings in a variety of forms and styles. ……. (a) Kingston Terrace; The townscape character is established by large one and two storey detached residences on individual allotments set close to the street with a Park Lands frontage. Towards Lefevre Terrace, the townscape is dominated by the imposing rear elevations of two large mansions with frontages to Stanley Street. …… (b) Stanley Street (northern side): The townscape features two large mansions set well back from the northern frontage on elevated ground above Stanley Street. The of the townscape comprises large detached and semi-detached residences.” (Emphasis added) 7.4 This extract shows Council

77 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

itself has established that the Desired Character of the Zone (including for Council activities in the Public Realm such as the New free City connector bus) is to be “one of the lowest density areas … ” with “a distinctive and cohesive character derived from its townscapes.” The two large mansions referred to are 121 and 127 Kingston Terrace, North Adelaide. They are identified as 8. 28648792v1 substantial elements of the townscape and are two of the properties on whose behalf this submission is made. 7.5 The New free Bus proposal imposes on a “low density residential area” traffic problems more characteristic of a high density zone and that fact derogates from the “ distinctive and cohesive character derived from (the locality’s) townscapes”. The dignified residential setting of these elements of the townscape will be diminished and spoilt by the regular half hourly traverse up and down Kingston Terrace of large buses. The City of Adelaide Development: Plan Principles and Objectives 7.6 The City of Adelaide Development Plan is the basis on which development is assessed for Planning Approval by the Council’s Development Assessment Panel. It would be strange indeed if the Council in its own activities in the Public Realm were to act in a manner that contravened or undermined the Council Wide Development Principles or Objectives or took action which prevented others maintaining the Principles or attaining the Objectives. 7.7 Yet many of the Principles and Objectives appear to have been ignored in the Council’s New free City connector bus proposal. For example the following: “Community Facilities PRINCIPLES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL 2 Community facilities should: …….. (e) be situated in suitable locations; and (f) not unreasonably impact on the amenity of the surrounding locality through excessive traffic generation.” (emphasis added) It is clear that the City connector bus routing via Kingston Terrace has exactly the effect sought by the Principles to be avoided. The amenity of Kingston Terrace is degraded in a manner which is plainly unreasonable. 7.8 The following Principle appears to have direct application: Residential Zones and the North Adelaide “Historic (Conservation) Zone should develop as follows: (a) North Adelaide is associated with the foundation of the City of Adelaide. It retains many buildings and sites of State and local heritage value and provides strong cultural and historic evidence of the creation of the colony, the establishment of early settlement and the development of the capital city over time. (b) The North Adelaide area contains excellent examples of a diverse range of residential architecture from all periods of the City's development, which individually and as groups, reflect the periods of economic prosperity of the City and the social composition of the colonial population. The remaining historic housing is an essential and defining element of North Adelaide's cultural value and is a microcosm of housing styles and periods in the State as a whole. The historic value of the residential parts is such that they are identified as the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone within which development should complement and protect the historic character.” (emphasis added) 9. 28648792v1 It cannot be said that the new free Connector bus proposal “complements or protects the historic character” of Kingston Terrace. Rather, it degrades and disrespects that character. 7.9 Similar points can be made regarding a number of other Principles and Objectives for instance, amongst others: Objective 46 regarding car parking areas and driveways; Objective 43 regarding the heritage value and setting of heritage places, Principle 150 regarding the retention of heritage value and the settings of Heritage Places in North Adelaide. 8. The proposal appears to be driven by a desire to use larger diesel buses. This consideration is not set out in the Council’s “Have Your Say” flyer which, if the rumoured desire is correct, turns out to be a misleading communication. Some members of the Kingston West Group have heard, anecdotally, that a major reason for the change in route is to allow for the use of larger diesel buses than the presently used electric bus. If this is the case, it makes the objection to the proposal all the stronger. A choice of bus type made by unstated persons on the basis of unrevealed criteria should not be allowed to destroy the very factors which give Kingston Terrace its particular attraction. Such an approach lacks common sense and leads to distorted outcomes for reasons discussed in this submission. The value and the specialness of Kingston Terrace is that it is an environment that is relatively free from intrusions of this type. The Kingston West Group wish to keep it that way. They oppose further intrusions of an industrial nature such as a regular frequent service of large diesel buses. If the proposal

78 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

were to be implemented, residents on Kingston Terrace would be faced, not only with the unwanted intrusion of the bus service as set out in this submission, but the additional derogations from the enjoyment and amenity of their environment of the noise of the diesel engines, diesel fumes and the loss of privacy inherent in the large buses from which passengers can overlook hitherto private spaces screened by the high fences typical of the locality. If the larger buses are the indeed factors driving the argument as suggested, then the Kingston West Group believe the bus choice should change or the proposal be deleted altogether rather than to let the proposal proceed and destroy the special character of our locality which the Council should support and preserve. 10. 28648792v1 9. Conclusion For many reasons, including especially the points set out in this submission: (a) The New free City connector bus must not be routed via Kingston Terrace. (b) The existing route via Stanley Street should be retained. The route via Stanley Street, is acceptable to the Kingston West Group, despite the bus travelling past the Stanley Street frontages of 121 and 127 Kingston Terrace being two of the properties owned by members of the Kingston West Group. (c) The siting of Bus Stop 17 is wholly unacceptable. If there is to be a bus stop in the vicinity, it must be placed in a position far removed from the Kingston Lefevre intersection, the cluster of driveways at the western end of Kingston Terrace and the Heritage Listed mansions on Kingston Terrace. The Group has no objection to a bus stop site in the far more suitable and roomier Stanley Street. • All in favour – great idea! Well done. • I am not happy with the 99C no longer operating along Nth Tce to West Tce . Scrub KW St from Nth Tce to Vic Sq. Maintain West Tce to Frankiln St then Vic Sq. Important for both vistors and tourists. • Didn't anyone pay any attention to the results of the survey conducted on the existing free Community Bus that showed most patrons wanted the service to remain as is? This new proposal has a number of shortcomings as far as I can see. First and foremost is the idea of turning over control to Torrens Transit and the State Government with their problematic performance. The ACC has just gotten the Community Bus running on time, why lose that achievement? The passengers know the existing drivers and they know us. We know where the bus goes and when. The proposed 'double route' compounds the problem of the double stop outside the State Library, having 10 stops each way where two different routes use the same stop causing the driver to ask boarding passengers "where do you want to go?". How many times will he have to tell them to catch a later bus because this is the wrong one for their destination? The new route talks about an improved service but doesn't mention the 10 stops that have been deleted ;stops4,6, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19,23,26 and 31. The destinations not serviced or with stops more distant include: Adelaide Oval Buxton Street Helping Hand Centre (major passenger source) East Rundle Mall and Hindmarsh Square Motor Vehicle Registrar (SA Service Centre) O'Connell Street South (Ward Street) Railway Station (Is this to be stop 23 at the Convention Centre?) Southwest Community Centre (Whitmore Square) The Scott Theatre (University of Adelaide) University Playing Fields Zoo These are popular with both the young passengers and the older patrons. It also appears that the proposed route will travel through high traffic congestion, with some difficult right hand turns. Examples are: King William Street, North Terrace to Victoria Square (limited stops) Melbourne Street (moved away once already because of traffic) Stop 24 Morphett Street, Light Square (I shudder to think) The tum right from North Terrace into King William Street, heading north The tum right from Jemingham Street into Melbourne Street (deleted before) The tum right from Kingston Terrace into LeFevre Terrace (limited turn lane) One final question 'What happens when the Clipsal is on'? Thank you for your attention, Russell Hermann, Resident, Ratepayer and Bus Rider • I am very disappointed to see that this service does not travel along Frome Road, past the Adelaide Zoo. Our Zoo is a valuable tourist attraction which should be well serviced with good transport options. As well as housing the giant pandas, the zoo is also the location of three conference and function centres, the 'Sanctuary', 'Fig Tree' and the 'Santos Conservation Centre'. If this route change takes place, it will become increasingly

79 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

difficult and unwelcoming for zoo visitors and conference attendees to access these significant venues. Tourists visiting Adelaide do not have time to walk long distances in our often extreme weather conditions or try to decipher complex bus timetables. To mitigate this and the negative impact of parking problems and other financial pressures experienced by families, the New Free City Connector Bus Service must be well advertised and it must include a stop right outside the zoo. As our climate becomes hotter and parking in the city becomes more difficult and expensive, zoo visitors will be under greater pressure to leave their cars at home and use public transport. Many zoo visitors include older people, the very young, and people with disabilities, who fmd it extremely difficult to cope with an extra walk in the heat at the end of a busy day, therefore this new bus route as it is, discriminates against this large and significant group of citizens. Regardless of the frequency of the New Free City Connector Bus Service, it will not be used by the public if it is not well advertised and does not go where people want to go. If the route does not include Frome Road, it will become increasingly difficult to access the zoo and visitor numbers will fall causing South Australia to miss out on valuable tourist dollars. • We own a unit in Hurtle Sq which we keep purely for family use, consequently the bus services are/would be rarely used; however for those rare occassions that the family are staying in the unit the new bus route down Halifax St I feel would be used • My partner and I regularily use the service along Finness St. Nth Adelaide from Nth Tce. We also catch the bus at other stops along this route with our grandchildren when going to the zoo. We do not like the prospect of the Frome Rd route being lost because of our own use but also the use of this route by students living in this part of Nth Adelaide travelling into the city. We would like to see the Frome Rd route kept, as it will be a long walk to catch it on KW St as we use it primarily to get to the east end of the city. • 1) The merging of the services compromises the route to meet an 1/2 - 15 min service schedule. The route is now not as ammenable as before. 2) The route now missing Frome Rd and the zoo is unacceptable - big impact on families (mother, babies) and tourists. 3) With larger buses and stop locations stop 22, 14 will become a park and ride option for Adelaide Oval users and limit the ammenities use at oval use times - especially with the extended hrs. 4) The route using Morphett Rd to Montefiore Hill is not a useful route - apart from the quickest option to get to Nthe Adelaide - Few residents live on the route - considering the new route is 13 kms + the old route is 16 Kms - use should still be made of Nth Tce at the railway station and Frome Rd. • I am 58 years old, live in Angus St close to Hutt St and use the free connector bus regularily to go to the markets to shop. The chnga of bus stops means I must carry my shopping an extra distance to get home. To participate in my volunteer work at Salisbury I will be forced to travel extra time to get to Salisbury. Walk further to access the connector bus, losing the Caltex stop. Disembark at city south stop and hope that I don't miss the tram, which I will need to get to the railway station. The thought of standing 10-15 mins in the middle of winter, this will be the experience I will be faced with if the railway station stop goes. The current route takes me from the Caltex stop straight to the railway station, with minium exposure to the weathre conditions. The extra distance in the summer conditions won't be pleasant either. I am unempoyed and being under 60 I don't get free bus/train travel yet. The free connector bus saves me money to a degree. The extra costs to acess closer stops is just not a financial option for me. I already degrade myself to collect cans and bottles to pay fo my metro credit. I want to cut out the extra walking time, especially on shopping days, I have to collect MORE recyclables to pay for the extra fares. Finally, The Council buses is a genuine community service. The drivers are great. They are friendly, personable to the passengers. It's good to be on a first name basis with the drivers. Metro drivers are in the main helpful and pleasant but they couldn't match that of the Council drivers. • I object to this proposal because 1) The route will not service the zoo, botanic Gdns, hospital and the university from Frome Rd. 2) It provides a

80 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

free park n' ride for people living outside the zone with no car parking to support it. 3) It completely ignores the current community feel of the small buses that service the local community. 4) The extended hours are not warrented 5) It duplicates unnecessarily the bus service available on O'Connell St 6) It doesn't include the swimming centre 7) we don't need a 15min service. • Please leave the service as it is. • I have been a keen and appreciative user of the connector service over the last several years. I am comfortable with the fact that it is ready for a re-think an expansion, and I appreciate the effort that you have put in to finding a model which makes a continuation of the service viable, albeit somewhat altered. I understand the reasons for the alterations in the format and am supportive of your new plan. I very much hope that the service will be able to offer employment to our existent bus drivers, who have proven themselves to be helpful, kind, and friendly. I like to think that those qualities can continue in the new format. • I think the combination of resources is a good idea in order to produce the best service, and you have done a good job given the various requirements. As one of the main planners of the routes followed by both the Bee Line and the several versions of the City Loop, I do feel a responsibility to raise some issues with you: The Bee Line and City Loop were designed primarily to better connect the Victoria Square Tram Terminus and Adelaide Station with the rest of the City, due to the then-poor city passenger distribution supplied by those services. The Bee Line has been replaced by the Tramline extension, so we don't need to worry about the tramline's northward connections. I am very concerned, however, about the withdrawal of the City Loop from Adelaide Station. While I applaud your efforts to supply a better service frequency (I think the current 20 min frequency is very poor), I think that a major requirement of planning the new service should be continued connections from Adelaide Station to various parts of the City south of North Terrace. I know that there are other bus services along North Terrace (although I don't know if all potential passengers realise that most of them can transfer to/from those services for free), but they do not provide links from Adelaide Station to the eastern and western parts of the City south of North Terrace. I realise that it is difficult to plan a bus route that can do all that is required while also serving Adelaide Station (due partly to the lack of an intersection at which bues could turn between North Terrace and the Morphett Street Bridge), but I think that the link with the station, until we get an underground railway or a tram loop, is more important than any integration of the two services. Perhaps there are not that many people now using the City Loop to travel to and from the station. If so, it may be because the frequency is so poor. I also have some reservations about the loss of a link between the tramline and the former City Loop at Victoria Square, for travel to and from north-eastern parts of the City, although it could be argued that those passengers could transfer at the City South tram stop. The proposal means that the frequency between the Grote Street area and the north eastern part of the City will reduce from a 20 to a 30 minute frequency, as, although the combined frequency of the inner and outer loops is 15 minutes, this type of journey could only sensibly be made on the inner loop. I trust that the timetable for the two services works so that an even 15 minute frequency can be supplied on the common portion - I think getting two unequal length circular routes to mesh together is going to be a challenge. It may work on paper - but it's sometimes hard enough to get bifurcated straight-out routes to mesh together with even headways!

81 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Another consideration in planning the service is that it should desirably fit into plans for the City Tram Loop, which I would assume will serve Adelaide Station. One difficulty with this of course is, I can't see how the City Tram Loop could incorporate the detour from Morphett Street to Victoria Square, unless the Tram Loop becomes a figure eight service. However, at least the retention of the existing City (Bus) Loop's connection with Adelaide Station would be consistent with a future City Tram Loop. On a more detailed note, I think that some of the bus stops are too far apart. While this might not present a problem for young people, our community is ageing, and one of the reasons for services like this is to assist those people who have difficulty in walking (able bodied people may be more likely to walk anyway). At present the stop spacing on parts of the City Loop is too wide, particularly around Morphett Street / Light Square. Also, the Department had a request for an additional stop in North Terrace by the University a few years ago, and the Department only rejected that request because Torrens Transit said that they did not want more stops because the buses could not keep to time. Perhaps you could move proposed stop 12 westward to the War Memorial and put another stop in at G2 or G3, North Terrace. Apart from those, I think there is too much distance between the following stops: 3 to 4; 6 to 7; 9 to 10 (perhaps more 9 southward and have another stop near Pirie Street); 20 to 21; 21 to 22; 24 to 1, and 13B to 2. Note that putting in some extra stops may not significantly affect running times as many of the stops won't be used by every bus. Stop 2 southbound in Victoria Square could be a problem for right-turning buses. We had always avoided such buses having a stop at that location. Stop 24 southbound in Morphett St - I had been told by the stop experts that the space there wasn't long enough for a bus stop. • The figure 8 that is the present route is adequate and tested. That the new proposed route is to go along KW St, which already has many buses travelling this road, as a user of Trans Adelaide buses also, there are often 3 buses at the stops causing delays for passengers to alight the bus. That a Connector Service will not pass the railway station, zoo and many important buildings on Frome Rd should be reviewed. A few less bus stops would help the drivers maintain their time schedules, and the present drivers have delivered a special service to the community which has been unique.Do the Council and Transport Dept. e.g. planning, really think that a 15min service is necessary, 30 mins would be adequate with the new buses carrying more passengers per journey. May I emphasise that the existing route serves well. • As a regulaer service of the connector bus, the route as is, is very good that it connects to the main hospitals, bus station, railway station, zoo, which would serve the wider community and visitors to Adelaide city very well if it was advertised as the Adelaide Connectoer Bus. It has a unique function, and hope the new drivers can still provide this high level of service as it is not the usual service that serves the wider community. Thankyou for the information provided. The existing service is adequate. • I am a regular user of the Connector bus as the current route into the city serves most of my needs. The new routes will not be as appropriate to my needs, but accept that they may serve a broader population (The increased frequency is no advantage to me as the routes are not as accessible in the CBD area I use). I also use the current connector service in preference to using my seniors card to travel free on the metro buses, as the drivers deliver a very personal and friendly service. I have also observed their interactions with tourists and helpful attitude to all passengers., with directions and helpon and off the bus. This is in marked contrast to tavelling on the larger buses. I feel very cautious about endorsing the proposed changes. • Comments on the merger: With regard to the feedback questionnaire and our opinion of the merger of the 99C City Bus and Connecter Free Bus services, we do not believe

82 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

it is a merger, but the effect of this is that 99C has been effectively cancelled and the Connector Free Bus service has been greatly diminished, providing a poorer service both to the CBD and to residents and others throughout the City. Comments on the new route: We would have preferred the old community bus route was retained as the old route provided access to a large number of destinations that will be missed by the new proposed route. Stops on the new route: As residents of the South West corner of the City we are finding our community bus stop has been moved further away from us with each new change to the route. We request the existing stop outside St Luke’s Church on Whitmore Square be retained in the new proposed route. Other comments: We also understand from the meeting we attended that there is currently a difficulty in filling the existing small buses each day, except for peak times, so to run 40 person capacity buses in lieu of the smaller buses does not make very much sense. Further, we would have thought that using a larger fleet of smaller buses would have been more appropriate as the route uses residential streets and the predominantly diesel fleet will greatly increase levels of both noise and air pollution. The larger commercial vehicles in fact are likely to cause damage to the residential street surfaces which would have been designed to take smaller, less heavy vehicles While we applaud the extended daily operating hours of the service generally, and the increase of frequency of buses within the City we are disappointed to learn that this new City Loop will not operate on weekends and public holidays even though the information pack led us to believe that this service would operate on those days. Our preference for the new service is to retain the existing Connector Route and the majority of the stops on it. • In general I support the merging of the Adelaide Connector and 99C Loop bus services. In particular I support: • The opportunities for a more frequent and coordinated service; • Adequate information to passengers including bus stop maps and timetables and availability of timetables at the Adelaide Metro Information Centre. No one wants to catch a bus that runs once an hour but they don’t know when. • Disability friendly bus stops; • Extended hours of running. • Service to the Box Factory Community Centre. I have however the following criticisms and less favourable comments: • The extended hours for evening services are not late enough. Take “Mary” a hypothetical resident of Halifax Street, who likes to attend the Festival Centre from time to time and feels it unsafe to walk in the city after dark. If her performance ends at 10 pm she will either have to walk (unsafe), take a taxi (expensive) or use her car (current planning aims are to reduce need for or use of cars). Other people attend meetings late at night. Being a suburban resident without a car I use public transport if not offered a lift and feel safe walking to and from the bus stop for CBD destinations but have reservations about walking alone in the dark to and from destinations south of Victoria Square or west of Morphett Street. • Since Adelaide Zoo and nearby destinations would not be served by the new route, I suggest that Adelaide City Connector patrons wishing to go to Frome Road destinations be issued with a free “Z” return ticket, that gives them free travel on a regular Metro Bus as far as Stop 2 on Frome Road, with free return to North Terrace on the same day. This would be unnecessary at certain times for holders of Senior Cards. • It is desirable wherever possible that City Connector services coordinate with regular Metro bus services, that is, people can get off the City

83 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Connector and catch a Metro bus that suits their destination at the same or a nearby stop with a wait of only a few minutes. • The Disability Information and Resource Centre on Gilles Street is not directly served by the City Connector, although the bus serves the next street, Halifax Street. People with electric wheelchairs should be able to travel a reasonable distance to bus stops, but those on walking frames or with manual wheelchairs would find it more difficult. • The bus does not serve Buxton Street, where there are many aged residents. • Are all these buses disability accessible? • It has been noted by another person that there should be three routes, not two, to increase frequency and also enable faster and more direct access to some destinations, by making the route shorter. Such a solution would also enable the City Connector to service Adelaide Zoo. • There should be a request stop before the bus leaves King William Street for Sir Edwin Smith Avenue to enable easier access to the Adelaide Oval and St Peter’s Cathedral. However, I note that these are well served by King William Street buses and are a short walking distance for from the City for many people. • Access to city hospitals, including St Andrew’s on South Terrace, should be considered. • I am a member of The North Adelaide Baptist Church. It was with amazement that I was shown this morning by one of our observant members that a 'Have Your Say' sign regarding a proposed bus stop was posted outside our church. It was with disappointment that we noted that the reply date has already passed. It is with alarm that we note that the proposed bus stop is outside a church building. Our congregation need carparks close to the church building for the elderly and handicapped to be able to access the Church with ease. This would not be the case if the bus stop was taking all of the close up carparks. When there is a wedding at the Church there has been, in the past, a request for a temporary zone for the bridal party to park parallel to the curb for the wedding party to alight. When there is a funeral at the Church it would be good to know that a hearse does not need to pull into a bus stop for the coffin to be carried in to the Church. I understand that that the new bus stop has been proposed to make it easy for people to access the North Adelaide Library and Community Centre and the O'Connell Street precinct. I think the bus stop needs to be placed so that it is not directly out the front of a place of worship • Firstly the service operating times sound suitable. The proposed route that the inner loop takes needs some extensive review though! The objective of the proposed bus services should be to assist the movement of persons to places in greatest demand. Then it should be there to assist those persons who are not able to get to locations due to a disability (difficulty walking) and then to get people to locations that the existing public transport system does not service effectively. The existing council connector bus for some time has been used by lots of persons who park on the perimeter of the city and ride to the city centre (park and ride). That at certain times caused severe overcrowding. That aspect of the service (larger loop) needs to be reviewed too and if that type of usage is to be allowed and supported in the future a frequency change during those times needs some review.

84 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

A more effective route for the Inner City loop is required. The major locations to be serviced in the Inner city loop are • Royal Adelaide Hospital • Adelaide Convention Centre • Adelaide Railway Station • Adelaide Central market • Victoria Square • Adelaide Zoo • Adelaide Oval • Adelaide Central Bus Station • Rundle Mall (Hindmarsh Square) • Adelaide University • Adelaide West Campus • East End and West End precincts. These locations should be serviced far more frequently! The higher frequency proposed on the larger loop isn’t required. I also understand that this inner city loop route will need to be substantially reviewed when the Adelaide Hospital and possibly the Children’s Hospital is relocated. I suggest that the changes made now to the routes could mitigate such a dramatic change at that future time. • I refer to recent discussions between yourself and David Samardzic (Colliers International, Real Estate Service Provider to A\,Jstralia Post) regarding the proposed City Connector Bus Service with particular reference to proposed parking control changes at Stop 6, Halifax Street. The purpose of this correspondence is to provide formal feedback and objection in relation to the proposed change in parking controls and bus stop installation directly outside of the Halifax Street Post Office. Australia Post has occupied the ground floor of 7 Halifax Street for in excess of 20 years, providing the local business and private community with essential mail services from the site. The existing short term car parking directly adjacent the Post Office would have, no doubt, been provided as part of an agreement between Australia Post and the Adelaide City Council to ensure appropriate convenient and safe parking for customers. The proposed installation of a new bus stop and subsequent removal of two 15 minute parks directly adjacent the Post Office will seriously impact on the community's ease of access to the Post Office. Furthermore, the loss of these car spaces will impact on the collection and delivery of mail, with the Street Posting Box currently being located directly outside of the Post Office, directly adjacent to the proposed bus stop. To summarise these objections: • The loss of essential community parking (2 x 15 minute spaces directly adjacent to the Post Office) will severely impact on customer's short term access to their post office boxes and the Post Office. Ultimately, it is envisaged that this will result in loss of essential business to Australia Post and may necessitate a review of the viability of the outlet. • These parking spaces are also used by Australia Post to collect and deliver mail from both the Post Office and the Street Posting Box. The close proximity ensures ease of access by mail contractors and further ensures mail does not get wet during inclement weather etc (therefore ensuring

85 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

compliance with Australia Post's Commonwealth obligations). • Loss of these car parks will also result in the general public having to walk a considerable distance to access the post office boxes. This is of particular concern for customers who access their post office boxes "after hours" and will result in potential customer safety issues. • It is envisaged that the arrival and departure of buses at the proposed bus stop location will create considerable issues associated with noise and exhaust fumes entering the Post Office, which is located directly adjacent to the proposed bus stop location. The Australian Postal Corporation strongly objects to the proposal associated with Stop 6 Halifax Street and requests that consideration be given to positioning the stop further east along Halifax Street. We look forward to your early favourable response.

86 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Bus Stop responses

Comments Stop 1 • i use the connector bus from this stop. i work at right near this stop, which is perfectly located, takes just 5 mins to get to the station and is well manned by nice efficient drivers. if you change the service to incorporate the 99c, this will mean that the bus will take longer and not be a viable option when it is a 15 minute walk to the train station anyway. In the past i have found it is quicker to get off the 99c at the Uni on north terrace and walk to the train station as the bus takes so long and is heavily impacted by traffic. However, i also note that you do not include the current stop at the train station, what is your rationale behind this, when i would think that linking the main transport hubs is paramount for a free service called "city connector", even though you don’t connect the 2 on the new route. • OK • Torrens Transit takes over the Connector Bus Blue routr and Red route in north Adelaide are is OK these streets are not in the Adelaide metro zone except Ward Street which is part of the Adelaide Metro bus zone. Stop 2 • Having a stop near the GPO is a significant improvement over the old 99C, I support it and vote for it. • OK • The City Connector should stay in Franklin St and I proposed to locate stop 2 and bus stop U1 northbound and southbound is a good idea • We do not use this stop - my sister and myself. Good to keep it.

Stop 3 • OK • I am in against to proposed to locate stop 3 on Grote street at existing Adelaide marto stop near the central market stops D2 and W1 and near her majesty theatre. • Great idea to keep the Grote St stop; handy for Central Market shopping

Stop 4 • the current stop on Whitmore square is already a long walk from my house. The proposed stop is further • You need to keep this bus stop. It is pivotal to a number of other key places therefore people who get off at the bus stop can easily access important places too numerous to mention. I am a resident who would like to get on the bus there. I do not want to walk a long way from Little Sturt Street where I live because sometimes I cannot do so. Please consider those who are not always mobile.

87 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• "A stop actually on Whitmore Sq (i.e. between stops 4 & 5) would perhaps better service more people in the SW corner." • OK • I am in favour to locate stop 4 on Morphett Street at the existing Adelaide metro bus stops on Gouger St and China Town bus stops H1 and S1 which belongs to Adelaide Metro the connector bus should not pull up near these stops. • Great to have Gouger Street stop back AS IT IS USED

Stop 5 • I use the free bus regularly on daily basis from and to this stop. it is also a stop that is close to the city community child care centre where my child goes during my work and study time. I appreciate if you can keep it in any new plans." • Since changing the route out of Gilbert St the bus stops keep getting further away. The stop that WAS at St Lukes has to be reinstated. It is crucial for SW residents. • Further the stop that was at the Salvos has now gone further up Sturt St. Why not have it in Whitmore Square opposite St Lukes on the eastern side." • This is the nearest stop to Sturt Street It is proposed to remove the current stop on Whitmore Square at St. Luke’s, making it more difficult or impossible for many SW residents to access the service. In addition, the bus will no longer service a number of popular city destinations, including the Railway Station and Casino, Convention Centre, Uni of SA City West campus, Adelaide Oval, Elder Park, Riverbank Precinct, Adelaide Zoo, Botanic Park, Torrens Parade Ground, Adelaide Uni (Frome Road) and Uni of SA City East campus. ACC . The present plan is a disaster and I cannot possibly use it • OK • There should be less cars in the city anyway. If the service is successful, citizens may be able to park further away and use the new bus to commute to destinations. • Not all bad. Seems reasonable • I think it is a good move • I am in against the proposed to install bus stops on Sturt St (southern side)near Russell and Sturt Street. The Northern side of Sturt St is an existing Adelaide connecter bus stop does not requires expansion to accommodate the new larger buses • Feasible and fair

Stop 6 • I disagree with the location of the bus stop in front of the Halifax Street Post Office, the bus stop should be placed on the other side of King William Street next to Fuji Xerox giving passengers shelter when getting on and off the bus.

Also the loss of the short term parking will negatively impact on the Post Office business, which has a high traffic turnover of

88 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

business people driving to the site - if the post office looses business and closes or downgrades all local businesses loose. • Please move the stop to the other side of Sturt street or back a couple of business back on Halifax street." • I am strongly opposed to the location of Stop 6 on the south side of Halifax Street. The 15 minute spots outside the post office are essential for Box Holders collecting their mail. The stops in KW Street provide insufficient parking. The spots in Halifax Street are essential if one is driving across town - turning left onto KW St means a complete detour from a cross-town route. More 10/15 minute spots outside the PO are required, not less. • "If a bus stop is put in front of the Halifax St post office, what little parking is available there will then be lost.

This will have an immediate and enormous impact on all people who stop by and park in front of the PO to pop in quickly to collect their mail & post parcels etc. Consequences: 1 people will end up parking illegally so they can gain access to their mail 2 people who may ordinarily pop in and use the PO facilities will go elsewhere as unable to park 3 businesses that ordinarily keep a PO Box will make alternative arrangements as no longer able to park and pop in to collect 4 the PO will eventually close down due to decrease in use by businesses, residents and passing trade • 5 A lot of people will be extremely unhappy if that is the end result when a bus stop could quite easily be relocated elsewhere which won't have such a detrimental effect eg in front of Fuji Xerox shop at 1 Sturt St or at 11 Halifax St" • This stop will make it extremely difficult to collect mail, and especially in the morning when many business owners are there. It is bad enough now so why make it worse. Surely the stop can be located where it won’t impact on already busy business people. • OK • Good outcome. Seems reasonable. • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Halifax St near the intersection with King William St these stops are a good idea. • Feasible and fair

Stop 7 • By continuing to go down Halifax Street there will be restricted access to the Hutt street Library, the Hutt street centre, and St Andrews Hospital. I was assured by my local councillor that the bus would definitely run down Gilles street. • "Halifax Street has been designated for bicycle traffic from Fullarton Rd, thru the parklands, & along Halifax to the west.

The original bus stop on the south side of the road is close to the Box Factory (noted as the council reason for the bus stop) and this location provides an easier stop/start location for the bus given the road is wide there. Conversely at 42 the road is narrow and would not allow the bike lane, bus stop space, and cars to pass. The narrowness of the road at the median strip presents a danger to cyclists who may be squeezed between the bus and cars.

89 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

The median strip at 42 Hurtle Square is a popular thoroughfare for bicycle and foot traffic. The crossover and the path through Hurtle Square (in front of our office) links up along Pulteney St with the path that goes diagonally through the parklands and up Porter St from Greenhill Rd. Porter St going south from Greenhill Rd through Parkside to Unley oval has been designated for bicycle traffic. Putting the bus stop at 42 Hurtle Square will seriously endanger the foot and bicycle traffic that uses the crossover to and the path through Hurtle Square (SE quadrant). Why place the bus stop near Hurtle Square when a better location would be further east , ie. across the road from the current bus stop location. Cars travelling south off Hurtle Square turn left onto Halifax St to travel east. If the bus stop is located, as proposed, close to Hurtle Square it will present a danger to cars turning east off Hurtle onto Halifax – as the car is accelerating after turning the corner the bus will also be looking to take off from the bus stop and as the car emerges from behind the bus the bus driver will not see the car exiting Hurtle Square. If the bus stop is located closer to the Box Factory near Regent St South, the bus driver will have clear sight from behind for cars travelling east along Halifax St Simpler solution – leave the existing southern side bus stop where it is & put the northern side bus stop opposite it ! !" • OK • Probably not huge traffic congestion. Sounds reasonable. • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Halifax St near the intersection of Hurtle Sq and it helps the residents who lives in Halifax St and Hurtle Sq. A great idea • Feasible and fair

Stop 8 • Please maintain stops S1 & H1 - Hutt St • OK • Appears that Halifax St is in need of bus stops. Leads me to believe that this street is probably a bit underused. The new bus system might breathe some life into Halifax vendors/business. • This may impact on the childcare facility for peak times. Good Luck!! • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Halifax St near the intersection with Hutt St and is a good idea. • Feasible and fair

Stop 9 • "Current Connector bus stop 26. This stop serves residents in Angas & Carrington St., If this stop is moved to Wakefield St it means 1 to 1/2 blocks to walk back. Connector stop 25 MAYBE closer to Wakefield Hospital but I think there is a bus stop just past Flinders St.. Stop 26 is well served by residents, especially returning home from the Central Market with shopping, I would like your planners in upper age to walk carrying your shopping, maybe they should try. Please inform me the patronage from Wakefield St and Angas St.

90 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

I REALISE MY COMMENTS ARE PURELY SELFISH, but I am the one that will get wet in winter, hot in summer just because someone has decided we do not need stop 26, which as far as I know does not need any changes, repairs or long stop times, I keep hearing use Public Transport, not your car , or I walk on occasions when it is a small shopping."

• "Hutt Street: Great! thanks!"

• "I live just round the corner on the current Hutt St bus stop between Hume St and Carrington St. I would like that bus stop to continue. Hutt St is too long to walk if there is only 1 bus stop for the whole of Hutt St at Wakefield St. It would be very inconvenient to use the bus service when visiting Central Market carrying a bag of groceries or going to Rundle Mall. I ask you please to reconsider having only 1 bus stop on the whole of Hutt St. It does not make sense for other Streets such as Melbourne St or Halifax St to have 2 or 3 bus stops and Hutt St which is a major residential area in the city to have only 1 bus stop for its residents. I find this very unfair, backward thinking and bad planning especially for ratepayers to not be able to efficiently use this service. I always recommend this free bus service to my friends and family members who visit Adelaide and myself but it would be a great inconvenience for them to walk for 2 streets before reaching a bus stop that will help them utilise this free service in the future. I ask you please to reconsider and please at least reinstate 2 bus stops on Hutt St between Halifax St and East Tce of which the bus stop will be at Rundle St. That is a distance of SIX (6) streets between Halifax St and Rundle St which is only serviced by 1 bus stop in the new plan for the merge. Thank you and I hope you will create more bus stops on Hutt St. " • Losing the stop at the Caltex means that I have to walk to stop 8 or 9 to access my closest city connector stop. The Caltex is a popular stop picking up multiple passengers often • Distance to great to walk between Wakefield and Halifax!! Pensioners. • OK • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Hutt St at the existing Adelaide metro bus stops near Wakefield St bus stops F1 and T1 it is great that these stops are close to the Wakefield hospital and it helps the community who visit the Wakefield hospital • Feasible and fair

Stop 10 • 99C has already covered this stop and runs more frequently than connector, why bother to have stop 10? It makes more sense to have turn right on Pulteney St and all the way to south terrace. • OK

91 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I am in against the proposed to ilocate bus stops 10 on East Tce at the existing Adelaide Metro bus stop near north Tce and Rundle Rd bus stops B1 and Y1 but the new connector bus should be moved from the bus stop near the rAH on North Tce. • Good Idea- but keep our drivers and one hourly service - when it works well for all of us why mess around with the service.

Stop 11 • There should be stop closer to Pulteney St. • "I am unhappy that you are removing the stop outside the Railway Station. This is a very busy stop and is utilised by people getting on and off trains and trams, use by workers at this end of town easily getting from the west side of the city to the East and the South. Huge amounts of time are saved by having this service out the front of the Railway station as people move between offices for example. There are many people who alight a train and jump straight onto the 99c to get to their work destination, in some situations, much quicker than they can walk and of course, I don't need to highlight the bonus of this when people are physically disabled. It's also a fabulous service for people going to the east end of the Mall or the city and of course it can take them directly out the front of the market (the tram goes near the market of course but not out the front, excellent for people with disabilities and or a lot of shopping). It's also safe for people who are not keen to walk in the city, straight off the tram or a train and onto the 99C to get around. I think, from your map, the closest stop is in Hindley Street or further up North Terrace? " • North Terrace: Please bring back the Railway Station stop. • OK • I am in favour to proposed to locate bus stop 11 on North Tce at the existing Adelaide metro bus stops near the Frome Rd/St intersection bus stops 11 and R2 these stops are close to Rundle St RAH and UniSA • We prefer the bus to go down and up Frome Rd for our RAH bus stops - Nth Tce is a shambles with all the buses stoping there - and DANGEROUS for us elderly passengers alighting. Will cause even more congestion

Stop 12 • "I am unhappy that you are removing the stop outside the Railway Station. This is a very busy stop and is utilised by people getting on and off trains and trams, use by workers at this end of town easily getting from the west side of the city to the East and the South. Huge amounts of time are saved by having this service out the front of the Railway station as people move between offices for example. There are many people who alight a train and jump straight onto the 99c to get to their work destination, in some situations, much quicker than they can walk and of course, I don't need to highlight the bonus of this when people are physically disabled. It's also a fabulous service for people going to the east end of the Mall or the city and of course it can take them directly out the front of the market (the tram goes near the market of course but not out the front, excellent for people with disabilities and or a lot of shopping). It's also safe for people who are not keen to walk in the city, straight off the tram or a train and onto the 99C to get around. I think, from your map, the closest stop is in Hindley Street or further up North Terrace? "

92 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• Extend the route to include the railway station. • "North Terrace: Please bring back the Railway Station stop..." • OK • I am in favour to proposed to locate bus stop 12 on Nth Tce at the existing Adelaide Mero bus stops near Kintore Ave and Gawler Pl (bus stops G1 and T2)) these stops are close to the state library and the Museum, Uni of Adelaide and Rundle Mall • We use this stop regularly each week

Stop 13A • Stop 13A and 12 are so close. Stop 12 should be a bit east. • "If nine regular Torrens Transit bus routes operate in both directions along North Terrace, then how many more, including the new Connector, transverse King William Road and King William Street? For the bulk of the Free Connector service passengers who are visitors to the city whom I observe (at least weekly) seek access to the Railway Station or tram stop. The ability of a driver to instil confidence through well articulated directions to a visitor whose English language skills may not qualify as second language status, when the destination is out of view from either the Rundle Mall or Parliament house stops will be remarkable. And although the Railway station and tram stop is 'downhill', this does not make it any easier for the aged or mobility impaired - in fact highly onerous." • There needs to be a bus stop closer to the river, to allow access to the Oval. • Added to the inconvenience of losing the Hutt St Caltex stop, the proposed route also completely by-passes the Adelaide Railway Station stop. Previously I would go to my volunteer work at Salisbury Meals on Wheels by catching the free connector bus from Hutt St (Caltex) to the railway Station then train to Salisbury • OK but prefer the Kintore Ave current route. • The stop at the Railway Station would be appreciated as in the past. • I am in favour to proposed to locate bus stop 13A on King William at the existing Adelaide Mero bus stops near Nth Tce bus stops A3 and Z1. These stops are close to the Festival Centre, Adelaide Railway Station and Parliament House and Elder Pk these stops should GO • These are necessary stops. We use this stop regularly each week

Stop 13B • Seems an awful long walk to the Adelaide Oval for stops that could be more strategically placed • I think there needs to be another stop along King William St between Victoria Square and stop 13B. It is too far for some people to walk from their bus stop when they come into the city.

93 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• As per 13A above with the addition that a bus service along King William Street adds further to the traffic congestion, and is unnecessary when the strip is serviced by the tram. • Losing the Adelaide Railway Station stop completely is really a ridiculous decision. The Railway Station would have to be considered a major stop. • Unlikely to ever use the CBD City Connector. Irrelevant to the Nth Adelaide Connector • I am in favour to proposed to locate bus stop 13B at the existing Adelaide Metro bus stops on King William close to North Tce Rundle Mall the new connector should be moved from all Adelaide Metro bus stops. • Not a good idea - we prefer our stops as they always have been - and a 1 hourly service each way is ENOUGH - all students and residents agree.

Stop 14 • Seems an awful long walk to the Adelaide Oval for stops that could be more strategically placed • "Should be a non event day stop closer to the oval for visitors to tour the Adelaide Oval and the Bradman museum. Also a great stop for a beautiful walk along the river to the zoo. I understand not stopping on event day but non event day makes a lot of sense" • There needs to be a stop closer to the river on this king William Rd section of the bus route, to allow for visitors to the Oval. • The proposed stops 14 and 15 now becomes the closest stop to the Zoo as the proposed new route completely by-passes the zoo. As a regular user of the Free Connector Bus I meet a lot of people from interstate and overseas who use the service. Often one of their destinations, as a tourist to Adelaide is the zoo. • Prefer the existing Frome Rd and Figure 8 loop. Zoo misses out - Why? • I am in favour to proposed to locate bus stop 14 on Sir Edwin Smith Ave at the existing Adelaide Metro bus stops near Kermode St bus stop 2 these stops are close to the WCH and the new Adelaide connector bus should be moved from all Adelaide Metro bus stops in the CB areas • Great to see this retained, as it is a vital stop for those going to the WCH

Stop 15 • What on earth are you thinking? Previous services provided by the Connector bus have proven that travel along Melbourne Street is notoriously slow and time wasting, particularly during peak times. Apart from Melbourne Street being congested with other buses and cars, the current route incorporating Jerningham Street and Finniss Street works really well. The stops currently on Finniss (Going into town mostly) and Jerningham street are well frequented. " • The proposed stops 14 and 15 now becomes the closest stop to the Zoo as the proposed new route completely by-passes the zoo.

94 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

As a regular user of the Free Connector Bus I meet a lot of people from interstate and overseas who use the service. Often one of their destinations, as a tourist to Adelaide is the zoo • Not OK. Having left Melbourne St, Why return? • Melbourne St is extremely busy. Finness St resolved this - why drop it? • Melbourne St is choked with traffic now, to introduce further large buses to it will create massive bottle necks especially during peak hours • Melbourne St is blighted by on-street parking and through traffic. Needs 40kph speeds. Yet, the Frome Rd current deserves the zoo. • I am in favour to proposed to locate bus stop 15 on Melbourne St at the existing Adelaide Metro bus stops on Frome Rd stop 2A and 3 car parking spaces will be re-instated on Frome Rd and McKinnon Pde due to the relocation of these stops but don’t put the new connector near the Adelaide metro bus stops. • It is absolutely ridiculous to have buses going down Melbourne St AGAIN - At peak periods it used to take up to 1/2 hr to 3/4 hr to move from this stop to the lights on Jerningham St alone!

Stop 16 • "What on earth are you thinking?

Previous services provided by the Connector bus have proven that travel along Melbourne Street is notoriously slow and time wasting, particularly during peak times. Apart from Melbourne Street being congested with other buses and cars, the current route incorporating Jerningham Street and Finniss Street works really well. The stops currently on Finniss (Going into town mostly) and Jerningham street are well frequented.” • I think you are moving Stop 3A from East of Jerningham to the west so that it will be outside the Lion Hotal. This could cause congestion on a very busy & dangerous corner. It is hard to be sure from the graphics you have shown. It would be good to have a shelter. • Why return to Melbourne St, pointless in my opinion. • Again, prefer/Finness/Jerningham to busy Melbourne St • As stated previously to route the service down busy Melbourne St will create large traffic problems. The route should not be changed and should continue to use Stanley and Finness St which will also be safer. • Busy, Busy street which was the reason for canging the service to Finness St • I am in favour to proposed install a new bus stop 16 on the Southern side of Melbourne St near the intersection with Jerningham St this stop will place the existing Adelaide Metro bus stop (stop 3a and be closer to Jerningham St to proposed to locate the

95 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

northern side existing bus stop 3a) • More large buses in Melbourne St will turn it into a massive traffic jam. This is not necessary as the current route is more practical and efficient. • It is absolutely ridiculous to have buses going down Melbourne St AGAIN - At peak periods it used to take up to 1/2 hr to 3/4 hr to move from this stop to the lights on Jerningham St alone!

Stop 17 • Issue with this Comment Box • "I live in Kingston Terrace East and would like to see the bus stop closer to where I live, i.e. moved closer to Jerningham St. There are people at the east end of Stanley St who would also find this helpful. I think that unless the stop is moved to be closer to Jerningham St then Kingston Tce East is furthest from any bus stop. Bus Stop 17 is very close to Stop 18 in Lefevre Tce. I love the bus and use it often but would like a closer stop to where I live.(I would then use it more often! PS I think there is an error in the information pack! I think you mean that Bus Stop 18 will be on LE FEVRE Terrace not Kingston Terrace"

• "PROBLEMS Kingston Terrace is a narrow street with only one lane each way for traffic. Most of the car park spaces are occupied by 9am as there is a 10 hour limit in a 10 hour zoned space. This is quite ridiculous as in effect it means cars can be parked indefinitely for weeks on end. These spaces should be 6 hours maximum (in the 10 hour zone) to discourage cars to be permanently parked on the street. The proposed new bus stop is very close to the traffic light intersection which crosses Le Fevre Terrace. Passengers embarking and boarding buses will be tempted to cross Kingston Terrace before the crossings causing traffic hazards. SOLUTIONS There are no commercial reasons for a bus stop on Kingston Terrace and it would be more sensible to move the stop to LeFevre Terrace instead, as passengers would be closer to Tynte and O'Connell St. • QUESTION With the Botanical Gardens and the (financially struggling) Adelaide Zoo on Frome Road and the Wine Centre close by, why has the route been changed to avoid these tourist spots which are also frequented by locals??" • "The new service is a bad idea - and Stop 17 probably the worst aspect of this bad idea. This stop is very close to a busy intersection with multiple traffic paths and a multi-sequence traffic light. The intersection is already something of a ""black spot"". Stop 17 will inevitably interfere with traffic flow on Kingston Terrace in both directions, as well as flow through the intersection, will and increase the level of traffic hazard in the vicinity.

96 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

Furthermore, in the exact location of Stop 17 there are rear-access vehicle entries for three properties that front Stanley Street, accessing via easements off Kingston Terrace, making this a particularly inappropriate location for a bus stop because of extra traffic from these driveways. In addition, the bus stop is quite close to Stop 18 (Lefevre Terrace), and these two stops could easily be combined at a safer location on Lefevre Terrace. There is minimal user demand for a Stop on Kingston Terrace which has low density housing on one side only of the street, and the service should not be routed down Kingston Terrace at all." • This will not be very much used by residents of lower North Adelaide. This 10 hour parking is used by staff of local hospitals & other workers who come early in the day. It had to be reinstated after protests when the area was converted to 3 hours at the request of the residents. • How much utilisation will result • OK • This stop should continue to be in Stanley St. You're proposed stop close to the narrow Kingston Tce/Lefevre Tce intersection will create chaos as buses pull in and out of the proposed stops causing traffic to bank up on each side of the intersection. If there has to be a stop in Kingston Tce it should be much further to the east nearer to Jerningham St. Your reason for siting this stop in Kingston Tce because buses will have difficulty negotiating the Stanley St/Lefevre Tce intersection is unsustainable. • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Kingston Tce near the intersection of Ward St these stops will be close to residential precinct in the area the new connector bus is a great for the area • Should be in Stanley St. To be in Kingston St it should be further east thus avoiding the traffic problems that it will cause at the Kingston Tce/Lefevre intersection. • We prefer Stanley St stop - perfect as it is

Stop 18 • Thank you for your presentation and interest in my suggestion regarding the new Stop 18 (Lefevre Terrace) at the Council on Wednesday 16 October. The proposal is for the current Stop 12 (North Adelaide Primary School - Tynte Street) to be eliminated due to inadequate room in its current location and Stop 18 (LeFevre Terrace) be expanded absorbing four more on street car parks. I propose that a relocated North Adelaide Primary School (Tynte Street) stop be retained on the western side of Beviss/Tynte Street intersection and Stop 18 (LeFevre Terrace) be eliminated instead. Matters for consideration are – Current Stop 11 (new Stop 18) is a low use site of 56 people per week as no catchment comes from the parklands. The Tynte Street site would have greater residential catchment as well as better service the school. The distance from the new Stop 17 to 18 is short and the Beviss/Tynte Street location is more evenly spaced between the new Stops 17 and 19.

97 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

The Beviss/Tynte Street location will absorb four existing parallel on street carparks and return an additional eight carparks to LeFevre Terrace being four from the existing service stops and four not required for the expanded service. Bus stops close to traffic light regulated intersections such as the Tynte/LeFevre Terrace corner are undesirable. • "1 The proposed expansion of the bus zone on LeFevre Terrace will take up further car parks utilised mainly by visitors to the Glover Playground. This playground is a popular meeting spot for families celebrating children's birthdays etc and people come from far and wide to use this facility. Taking away further parks will exacerbate an already limited parking area and with the bus zone where it is, it creates a real danger to the children etc as it is placed at an intersection, ie, Tynte Street and LeFevre Terrace.

2 It seems to me a stop in Tynte Street to the west of Beviss Street would be more practicable and much safer and would serve the North Adelaide Primary School in a meaningful way. From observation this could be easily achieved with minimal loss of car parking and would also take people to Perryman's Bakery, a very popular and well known bakery, the Tynte Street Butcher and Cafe Teca. 3 The distance between the stops on Tynte Street could be aided by the stop near the Library and Post Office being situated further west than where indicated thereby utilising the area outside the Medical Centre which has off street parking of its own. The above points would greatly aid traffic flow, particularly around the Tynte Street and LeFevre Terrace intersection would have better catchment and in all likelihood not take up as many car parks." • OK • OK • These stops on busy and narrow Lefevre Tce should be moved around the corner into Tynte St which is wider. This will make it much safer for families to access the playground and causing less interference to traffic. • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Kingston Tce at the existing Adelaide Connector stop near the intersection with Tynte St these stops will be close to residential precinct in the area and Glover Playground. • Lefevre is narrow and busy. These stops should be moved around the corner into the wider and less busy Tynte St. • This is a necessary stop, good to see it retained.

Stop 19 • "I strongly object to the taking of 12 car parking spaces in the vicinity of Bus stop 19 in Tynte Street. As a business owner and with family members who live in the vicinity I strongly object to the taking of car spaces in Tynte Street.

I have owned property, lived, shopped, spent leisure hours, used restaurants in North Adelaide for more than 45 years. Parking is at a premium and if you want to encourage people to stay in the North Adelaide precinct DON'T TAKE AWAY car spaces. As the owner of a property right at the bus stop I am outraged that you would consider this as I am sure all the other small business owners in that section of Tynte Street are too. The current bus stops have catered very well for those who use the bus for many years now."

98 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• This is CRAZY - A busy area for people visiting the library and post office. On the Eastbound route there is a full sized bus stop on Wellington Sq • OK • Stops okay but big buses impact parking • To remove 12 parking spaces from this area is a disaster. They are required to service the very busy post office, Library, Community Hall, Hotel and medical rooms, apart from inconveniencing a large number of people particularly those attending the Kindergarten. • This will have a serious impact on users of the facilities and services provided in Tynte St - mainly the NACC and Library. People attending programs run at the centre are already being impacted by the lack of parking and the 2hr restrictions. SUGGESTION - Continue using current stops & explore opening up some controlled parking spots at the rear of the post office (currently gates locked!) • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Tynte St near O'Connell St these stops will be close to the Nth Adelaide library and community centre and the O'Connell St precinct but don’t put the new connector near the Adelaide metro bus stops • This is a very busy area at all times with many people accessing the Community Hall, Library, Post office, Hotel and Kindergarten. To remove 12 car parks will create havoc and safety problems. • Not a good idea - as trucks go down Tower St nth for the IGA Foodland deliveries, and it would be so DANGEROUS to put a stop here! Leave it at the Daniel O'Connell - it is so much SAFER! VERY DANGEROUS IDEA THIS STOP.

Stop 20 • There are two existing bus stops on Wellington square that could be used instead. • "Do not even consider foe a single moment re-routing the bus through Moleswoth Street. We already have enough problems associated with council ineptitude re institutional and commuter parking. As ratepayers in a prestigious street, we do not deserve another invasion of more traffic , noise and pollution. • A lot of elderly people currently use the Buxton Street stop. Many are not able to walk very far, thus making a change to Molesworth Street awkward and inaccessible. There should not be any issues Re: turning right onto Jeffcott Street if the drivers are worth their licences. Re think this please.

"a] The bus should never be re-routed down a normal residential street which would then attract noise, pollution, litter and potentially large numbers of people some of whom would have no regard for the serenity, privacy and quality lifestyle. b] The proposed bus stop is very close to our residence and the above objections apply specifically to us. Litter, possible undesirable people and noise etc would impinge on our privacyy and North Adelaide quality living. There is abslutely no logic in relocating the route or stops from it's present position. In addition, house property values would be

99 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

significantly down graded. Any councillor who supported such a move would never ever receive our voting support again. • This should be moved further east closer to the letter box to take it as far away as possible from residential areas of Molesworth St. The larger buses will be quite intrusive on residential life and it seems more appropriate to locate the bus stop outside the administration area of Helping Hand. • This proposed new proximity to the Helping Hand centre is too far for the aged and frail - thus excluding those who benefit the most and is no longer a community service at all. • The Elderly people do not use the Helping Hand administration enterance on Molesworth St, they use the Buxton St enterances & exits and also they have the advantage of a pedestrian crossing with lights on Buxton St • The elderly come and go by car/taxi at Helping Hand + staff park here on Wellington Sq causing problems now. Reducing spaces will make the existing problem worse. Also Buxton St is better for Helping Hand residents, many of whom live on Buxton St. • Not OK. As a resident of Buxton St , this will be a downgrade of service (currently we have a 1/2 hourly service either way to Gawler Pl and Nth Tce) • Strongly oppose - Keep existing Buxton St route and stops. • I strongly oppose routing along Molesworth St. The route should replicate existing Metro bus routes i.e. Hill or Jeffcott St. • Even though it can be argued that these stops would still service the H.H. clientele, I believe it will seriously impact on the majority of users who mainly come Frome the units/houses in Buxton St. Stats already collected should prove that Buxton St is one of the most popular stops - relocating it to what I would call the rear of H.H. would not be good for many. The removal of so many parks in front of private residences in Molesworth St is CRAZY! SUGGESTION - Keep existing route down Buxton St. • Molesworth is the office address for Helping Hand, but not the access for residents of the main building or the independent living which is in Buxton St (the corner through building is locked about 7pm). BUS SIZES - Regular STA buses are for long runs and peak hour. Between Regency Rd and Cross Rd, and around the city smaller, more nimble buses like Tindo is best. To encourage inner city living what is needed is frequency of small buses. I do not myself use a car in this area. As to existing 99C service, I think it is not frequent enough and is very little known. • Absolutely disgusted with this proposed change. Most Helping Hand residents live in Buxton St and will have quite a distance to walk to Molesworth St. A lot of students and Buxton and near streets use this stop. It's a pity you haven't listened to the voices of the people who use this service. • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Molesworth St near Wellington Sq thses stops will be close to the Helping Hand Centre and North Adelaide residential precinct it will be great to see the new connector bus • No-No-No BAD IDEA! Helping Hand residents cannot use Molesworth St to access connector due to the mobility issues; internal layout of the centre; and distances to go through the centre to get to Molesworth - Buxton St is safer, closer and better for them

100 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

and us

Stop 21 • Need to retain the stop outside of St Dominics as students shouldn't be walking alone to catch the bus to the city. my daughter is a student at St Dominics and uses this bus service. I would feel more comfortable if she was able to stay near the school whilst waiting for the bus • These stops ok but long distance between 20 & 21, why not stop at existing Hill St sites opp St. Dommies • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Hill St for the anticlockwise direction service on Strangways Tce both stops are (bus stop 5) but don’t put the new connector bus near stop 5 because this stop belong to Adelaide Metro. • These are reasonable - but the old stops were excellent - WHY MEDDLE AND CHANGE THEM

Stop 22 • Seems an awful long walk to the Adelaide Oval for stops that could be more strategically placed • OK • I am not in favour to proposed to locate new stops on Jeffcott St at the existing Adelaide metro bus stops (bus stop 3) this stop is close to Pennington Tce and lights vision and the new connector should not stop at stop 3 because it still belongs to Adelaide Metro. • Reasonable - but the old stop was fine - why change it. This is not necessary - a waste of time and money!

Stop 23 • I predict this will be the most underutilised stop in the entire circuit - except on game days at Adelaide Oval. • "There needs to be another Montefiore Rd stop on the far side of the river for closer pedestrian access to the city council golf course. Not all golfers have cars to drive to the course." • Apart from quick and direct route from Nth Adelaide to Central Market why use Montefiore Rd. No one is likely to use this stop. • I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Montefiore Rd bus stops 1J these stops are close to the Convention Centre, river Torrens, city west tram stop and North Tce It will be great to see the new connector bus in this area. • No-No-No! We would not be able to get to Nth Tce/King William St with the Blue Route - we would be only able to catch the Red Route at any time. WE DO NOT want the connector to go down Montefiore Rd etc. NOT necessary - we need the buses to go back to FROME Rd, for better RAH access and Adelaide uni access.

Stop 24 • There will now be restricted access to the Adelaide TAFE, and the Mercury cinema, art precinct., and train station • OK

101 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council

• I am in favour to proposed to install bus stops on Morphett St near Hindley St and West End precincts, light Sq and the UniSA city west campus. • No-No-No-NO! We need this service to go through the city NOT down Montefiore RD etc. The WHOLE PURPOSE of this connector was to go THROUGH THE CITY for residents, students etc. Helping Hand residents to be able to get to the zoo, Adel Uni, RAH and the city - Nth Tce near Gawler Pl.

102 City Connector – Consultation Summary Report Adelaide City Council