Important Information Regarding the Gawler Growth Areas Transport Framework

IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING THE GAWLER GROWTH AREAS TRANSPORT FRAMEWORK

Subsequent to the release of the Gawler Growth Areas Transport Framework – Final Report – May 2009, DPTI undertook a review of the preferred road network option in Gawler East as a result of the release of The 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

Central to the review was the need for the local link road between Potts Road and Tiver Road, given the reduction in area for development in Concordia within The 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide. DPTI revised the transport modelling undertaken for the Gawler Growth Areas Transport Framework (GGATF) incorporating potential high and low density development scenarios for Concordia.

The revised modelling identified that the daily traffic volumes on Potts Road in 2031, if the link road to Tiver Road was not provided, would be in the range of 10,500 to 16,100 depending upon the outcome for Concordia. These volumes are a significant reduction from those identified in the original GGATF, namely 21,720 to 24,620. DPTI considers that the revised volumes are well within the capacity of a two lane road (ie one lane in each direction). As a result the link road between Potts Road and Tiver Road was not included in the Gawler East DPA gazetted in August 2010.

GAWLER GROWTH AREAS TRANSPORT FRAMEWORK FINAL REPORT

May 2009

IN COLLABORATION WITH

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

Current Transport Infrastructure 1

Future Traffic Demands 2

Options Analysed 2

Recommendations 3

INTRODUCTION 6

Purpose of this Transport Framework 6

Previous Work 6

STUDY MANAGEMENT 7

Steering Committee 7

EXISTING CONDITIONS 7

Road Network 7

Public Transport 10

FUTURE GROWTH 10

Future Land Use/Demographics 10

TRANSPORT OPTIONS CONSIDERED 11

Road Alignment Options 12

Future Traffic Volumes 13

ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS 14

Preferred Option 15

Responsibility of Proposed Road Infrastructure 15

Timing of Road Options 16

FURTHER WORK 17

Local Road Network 17

Public Transport 17

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC -

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - Options Map

APPENDIX B - Development Areas

APPENDIX C - Volumes

APPENDIX D - MASTEM Zones & Allotment Numbers

APPENDIX E - Road Classification Guidelines in South Australia

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This framework has been developed in response to the announcement by the Minister for Urban Development and Planning on 20 December 2007 that the State Government has expanded the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) in several areas of Adelaide. This expansion included changes in the vicinity of Gawler, including 320 hectares in Gawler East, 500 hectares in Concordia, and 79 hectares in Evanston Gardens (refer figure 1).

The current level of road access into these areas is limited. In September 2007 it was agreed to undertake a collaborative study between the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI), the Department of Planning and Local Government, the Land Management Corporation (LMC) and the Town of Gawler to identify transport improvement needs to support the proposed urban growth in Gawler. A Steering Committee was established to oversee this study. The Barossa Council requested to be included in this committee and the Light Regional Council were then subsequently invited to join.

Current Transport Infrastructure

The road network is made up of arterial and local roads. The most important component of the arterial road network is the western bypass, which forms part of the National Transport Network. Adelaide Road – Main North Road is currently the major gateway between Gawler and the remainder of Adelaide, however it is anticipated that an increased number of trips will use roads in the west of Gawler to access the Northern Expressway upon its completion.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 1 - Access to the proposed eastern and north eastern developments is limited and is currently only serviced by the local road network.

The broad gauge rail network is utilised to provide passenger train services to Gawler and freight services from the Barossa Valley and Roseworthy to grain export facilities and processing plants on the Le Fevre Peninsula.

State Government run public transport within the study area is provided by rail services to five stations at Evanston, Tambelin, Gawler, Gawler Oval and Gawler Central stations, as shown in Figure 3. The public transport initiatives announced in the June 2008 State Budget are expected to deliver an increase in capacity for the Gawler train line with faster more frequent rail services between Gawler and the City.

Future Traffic Demands

The growth in traffic in the area is likely to be a direct reflection of the UGB expansion and other developments. These developments are expected to occur for 10 -15 years in the east and up to 25 years in the north-east.

Two land development scenarios were used for this study. The first scenario reflects the current UGB (i.e. including the recent expansions). The second scenario considers the potential for an additional larger development in the Concordia area. It should be noted that a larger development in Concordia has not been adopted by the State or Local Government to date. It was nevertheless appropriate to consider the implications of such a development option as part of assessing the potential future transport needs for Gawler.

Options Analysed

The purpose of the analysis was to identify the location and potential nature of major improvement needs to the transport network to facilitate urban growth. This study does not identify the specific improvement concepts at each location, as this would be subject to further more detailed studies. These improvement needs include locations outside of the proposed developments to facilitate the developments.

The following road network options (in addition to the existing road network) were investigated to determine the most appropriate means to provide road access for Gawler East and Concordia.

Scenario 1 – Current UGB  Option 1A – An eastern connector road, linking Calton Road to Potts Road. Connections to Calton Road are at Sunnydale Ave and Cheek Ave..  Option 1B – An eastern connector road, linking Calton Road to Main North Road/Tiver Road (i.e. around Evanston South). Connections to Calton Road are at Sunnydale Ave and Cheek Ave.  Option 1C – A north eastern connector, linking Lyndoch Road to the Sturt Highway.  Option 1D – A combination of Option 1A and Option 1C.  Option 1E - A combination of Option 1B and Option 1C.  Option 1F– Option 1A, except with multiple connections to Calton and Balmoral Roads

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 2 -  Option 1G – Option 1B, except with multiple connections to Calton and Balmoral Roads as per Option 1F  Option 1H – A combination of Option 1F and Option 1C  Option 1I – A combination of Option 1G and Option 1C

Scenario 2 – Potential Additional Larger Concordia Development  Option 2A – A north eastern connector, linking the Barossa Valley Way to the Sturt Highway. This option has two connections to the Barossa Valley Way.  Option 2B - A combination of Option 1A and Option 2A.  Option 2C - A combination of Option 1B and Option 2A.  Option 2D - A combination of Option 1F and a variation of Option 2A.  Option 2E - A combination of Option 1G and a variation of Option 2A.

A potential road link between Main North Road and Angle Vale Road (being considered as part of the proposed Evanston Gardens development) was included in all options. At the beginning of the study a grade separation of the railway line was assumed to form part of this road link, and was adopted for the purposes of the study. The grade separation is, however, no longer being considered as part of the Evanston Gardens development.

The possibility of the extension of the rail services to cater for the urban expansion was also included in all options. The notional change was the extension of services along the Barossa rail line to a new station, 3 to 4 kilometres east of the Gawler Central station, possibly within the Wheatsheaf area.

Recommendations

The analysis indicates that an eastern connector road will be required to service the Gawler East development. The analysis further demonstrated that this road will be a local road to service the development and existing urban areas, and not an arterial road bypass of Gawler. Upgrades of existing local roads will likely be required as part of this road provision, dependant upon the final chosen alignment. This road should be constructed as part of the development of Gawler East.

A potential route for this road can be seen in Figure 2, and connects to the Tiver Road/Main North Road junction to the south, and Calton Road to the north. Multiple connection points to Calton Road are preferred. Cheek Avenue will provide the most direct connection to the Barossa Valley Way. The final alignment of this road will nevertheless be subject to the planning of Gawler East. The community will have the opportunity to provide input into the structure of the Gawler East development, including the road access strategy, as part of the upcoming Development Plan Amendment process.

Irrespective of the ultimate development scenario for Concordia, the analysis determined that a north-eastern link would also be required to service the development. While a number of route options were considered, a decision on a preferred route will be subject to the future development of the area. A single connection to the Sturt Highway, and two connections to the Barossa Valley Way (at Cheek Avenue, and to the east of Sunnydale Avenue) is preferred. Construction of these links should occur as part of the development of the Concordia area.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 3 - The existing network within Gawler, both arterial and local, will be subject to ongoing review as developments occur to determine the potential scale and timing of major improvements/upgrades. Analysis of the arterial network, as part of this study, has nevertheless identified that Main North Road (between Potts Road and the Western Bypass) will likely need to be duplicated. Given the local nature of the Twelfth Street - Ryde Street link to Two Wells Road, there no intention to encourage increased use of this link through any major road upgrading. DTEI will investigate potential traffic calming measures in conjunction with the council. In regards to the local road network, there will be a need to identify improvements required as part of the traffic assessment of the Gawler East development.

Figure 2 below shows the potential major treatment options on the network. The delivery of justified upgrades identified in this report will depend on securing the necessary funds on a case-by-case basis from the Federal, State and Local Governments, as well as the private sector. These potential improvements do not replace the potential smaller scale improvements identified in the draft Road Management Plan for Main North Road and Adelaide Road (prepared by DTEI).

Consideration of improvements to the public transport system will be included as part of the Master Planning for the Future Public Transport Network being undertaken by the State Government. Further investigations into the costs and benefits of extending the public transport services to a new station to the east of Gawler will also be carried out.

Disclaimer: Although every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the statistical information included in this report, the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure, its divisions and employees make no representations, either expressly or implied, that the information is accurate or fit for any purpose and expressly disclaims all liability for loss or damage arising from the reliance upon the information with it.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 4 -

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 5 - INTRODUCTION

Purpose of this Transport Framework

The purpose of this framework is to determine the preferred transport network option to cater for the increased urban development in the Gawler area resulting from the change to the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Specifically this framework considers:

 The need, preferred characteristics/route and timing for a potential new road link to provide increased access for Gawler East;  The need, preferred characteristics/route and timing for a potential north eastern link;  The need and scale of potential improvements to the existing road network (arterial and local) to supplement the above options (including heavy vehicle access);  The need and options for increased public transport infrastructure and/or services to cater for the increased urban development.

This document is not intended to provide comprehensive detail of all potential improvements, but rather focus on identifying potential medium and long term road improvement needs of the network. Short term needs of existing arterial and local roads will be undertaken in documents such as the recently prepared draft Main North Road/Adelaide Road Road Management Plan, or in traffic investigations as part of Development Plan Amendment (DPA) processes. This framework considers the necessity for road(s) to cater for the growth in the UGB, and the associated developments therein, as well as the potential timing for that road. The framework does not, however, detail specific layouts or road concepts, which would be undertaken as part of future studies.

This approach was also taken to the public transport component, with the framework considering the necessity for changes, such as the ability of the existing network to cater for growth, or if there is a requirement to increase stations/services.

Previous Work

A study by the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI) in 1998 concluded that there was insufficient through traffic to justify an arterial Eastern Gawler Bypass. The route considered at the time (through to Potts Road) was also subsequently considered insufficient/inadequately located to function as a useful arterial bypass. Hence the land owned by DTEI immediately adjacent to Potts Road was sold for residential development. DTEI nevertheless currently retains ownership of several parcels of land within the proposed Gawler East UGB expansion area.

In November 2002 the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Urban Development and Planning co-signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Town of Gawler. This MOU commits DTEI to:

“Investigate the feasibility of a North-eastern bypass for heavy through traffic, inclusive of options of integration of road infrastructure with the proposed North Para River flood water detention dam and the potential for private sector contribution to the cost of the North-Eastern By-Pass road infrastructure.”

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 6 -

On 20 December 2007 the Minister for Urban Development and Planning announced that the State Government has expanded the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) in several areas of Adelaide. This expansion included areas in the vicinity of Gawler, including 320 hectares in Gawler East, 500 hectares in Concordia, and 79 hectares in Evanston Gardens.

The Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI), the Department of Planning and Local Government, the Land Management Corporation (LMC), the Town of Gawler, Barossa Council and Light Regional Council agreed to undertake a collaborative study to identify transport improvement needs to support the proposed urban growth in Gawler.

STUDY MANAGEMENT

Steering Committee

A steering committee was set up to oversee the study. This consisted of representatives of State and Local Government bodies. These included the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (Chair), the Department of Planning and Local Government, the Land Management Corporation and the Town of Gawler. The Barossa Council requested to be included in this committee, and the Light Regional Council were then subsequently invited to join.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

Road Network

Figure 3 shows the current transport network in the area. The most important component of the arterial road network is the western bypass, which forms part of the National Transport Network. Adelaide Road – Main North Road is currently the major gateway between Gawler and the remainder of Adelaide, however it is anticipated that an increased number of trips will use roads in the west of Gawler to access the Northern Expressway upon its completion.

Access to the proposed eastern and north eastern developments is limited and is provided mainly by the local road network. The major roads within the township include; Main North Road/Adelaide Road for north-south movements, Lyndoch Road/Barossa Valley Way and Balmoral Road/Calton Road to the east, and Twelfth Street/Ryde Street and Redbanks Road for movements west. Gawler – One Tree Hill Road also provides access to the south.

The main street of Gawler, Murray Street, is the central link from which all other roads in Gawler radiate. The ownership of Murray Street was transferred to the Gawler Town Council in 2004. Since that time, the Council have imposed a load limit and have undertaken further works to improve the amenity and pedestrian access along this road.

The existing road traffic volume data is shown in Figure 4. These values represent the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) as well as the percentage of commercial vehicles, shown in brackets, travelling on these roads.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 7 -

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 8 -

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 9 -

Public Transport

The Gawler Line is currently serviced by 62 trains per day, with an express service in the peak periods providing a train every 15 minutes. A survey undertaken in 2007 showed the daily patronage within the Gawler area to be approximately 3430 boardings and alightings.

The TransAdelaide suburban rail network is a broad gauge rail line that runs from Adelaide to Gawler as double tracks, and then splits at the Gawler hub into two single tracks. These tracks continue onto Balaklava and Burra to the north and Angaston/Penrice to the east. The lines that run beyond Gawler are leased to Genesee Wyoming Australia.

FUTURE GROWTH

Future Land Use/Demographics

The proposed developments resulting form the recent expansion of the UGB are expected to occur for 10 -15 years in the east and up to 25 years in the north-east.

The size and extent of the proposed development in Gawler East is currently being considered, and will be finalised as part of the upcoming Development Plan Amendment process for this area. The ultimate number of dwellings that could occur in Concordia will also be subject to future consideration by the developer. In order to consider the implications for transport in Gawler as part of this study, however, there was the need to adopt a set of demographic characteristics for the future development within Gawler.

The development of Gawler East is essentially bounded by Calton Road to the north, Potts Road to the south and the UGB to the east. For the purposes of this study it has been assumed that the development will occur in two phases. Phase 1 would have 2,700 residences, and would be staged over 10 years. Phase 2 would incorporate 1,200 residences and would be staged over 15 years.

LMC have proposed to develop the Evanston Gardens area, with a possible 2500 residences to be created. Full development of the area is expected to be staged approximately over the next 10 years. This area can be seen in Appendix B.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 10 - The potential development in Concordia within the current UGB is assumed to be 6100 residences. This development could expect to have a development timeline of up to 20 years.

There is also the potential for a much larger urban development to occur in Concordia, extending beyond the recent UGB expansion. It should be noted that this potential larger development in Concordia has not been adopted by the State Government or Local Government to date. It was nevertheless considered appropriate to assess the implications of such a development option as part of determining the potential future transport needs for Gawler.

The larger Concordia site could be in the order of 2,500 hectares, with 1,000 hectares available for development. There is therefore the potential for anything up to 15,000 dwellings within this area.

This study has therefore adopted two potential future land development scenarios for Gawler. The first scenario reflects the current UGB (i.e. including the recent expansions). The second scenario included the potential additional larger development in the Concordia area. Appendix B shows the development areas.

The Steering Committee subsequently agreed upon a number of allotments for each of the two scenarios, to be used for the sole purposes of this study. Estimated dwelling numbers were developed for 2021 and 2031. These figures ware used to estimate future traffic volumes in Gawler. It is important to note that the agreed numbers may not ultimately represent developments that may occur. Refer Appendix D for the agreed dwelling numbers.

TRANSPORT OPTIONS CONSIDERED

The following road network options (in addition to the existing road network) were considered:

Scenario 1 – Current UGB  Option 1A – An eastern connector road, linking Calton Road to Potts Road. Connections to Calton Road are at Sunnydale Ave and Cheek Ave..  Option 1B – An eastern connector road, linking Calton Road to Main North Road/Tiver Road (i.e. around Evanston South). Connections to Calton Road are at Sunnydale Ave and Cheek Ave.  Option 1C – A north eastern connector, linking Lyndoch Road to the Sturt Highway.  Option 1D – A combination of Option 1A and Option 1C.  Option 1E - A combination of Option 1B and Option 1C.  Option 1F – Option 1A, except with multiple connections to Calton and Balmoral Roads  Option 1G – Option 1B, except with multiple connections to Calton and Balmoral Roads as per Option 1F  Option 1H – A combination of Option 1F and Option 1C  Option 1I – A combination of Option 1G and Option 1C

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 11 - Scenario 2 – Potential Additional Larger Concordia Development  Option 2A – A north eastern connector, linking the Barossa Valley Way to the Sturt Highway. This option has two connections to the Barossa Valley Way.  Option 2B - A combination of Option 1A and Option 2A.  Option 2C - A combination of Option 1B and Option 2A.  Option 2D - A combination of Option 1F and a variation of Option 2A.  Option 2E - A combination of Option1G and a variation of Option 2A.

For the Concordia area, all these options included the ability for traffic to access the town centre via Lyndoch Road. While a north eastern connector would need to cross the North Para River, no other road crossing of the river was considered for any of the options.

For options including a road link between Gawler East and Main North Road/Tiver Road, it was assumed that a connection will be provided from this road to Potts Road (and hence to Main North Road).

While the nature and exact alignment of a proposed road link between Main North Road and Angle Vale Road (as part of the proposed Evanston Gardens development) has yet to be confirmed, this proposed road was included in all options given the ongoing planning for Evanston Gardens. A grade separation of the railway line was assumed to form part of this road link, and adopted for the purposes of assessments in this study.

All options included the ability for traffic from the expansion areas to use Lyndoch Road, Calton Road or the Gawler-One Tree Hill Road to access the town centre.

All options also assumed a possible expansion of the rail network and an additional station located approximately 4km east of Gawler.

The above options are indicatively represented on the maps in Appendix A. The dwelling numbers associated with each option are represented in the table in Appendix D.

Road Alignment Options

In the context of broad road network Options 1 to 14, various alignment options for each link were considered. Note that potential road alignments are indicative, and are subject to future more detailed investigations.

Gawler East connector road alignment options:

 Potts Road Options – These options connect Potts Road to Calton Road. Given the topography of the area, there are relatively few alignment options for this link road in the vicinity of the South Para River. These options will likely involve the need to widen Potts Road, the installation of traffic signals at the Main North Road / Potts Road junction, and duplication of Main North Road between Potts Road and the Western Bypass.

These options will also potentially require improvement needs to local roads linking through to Barossa Valley Way.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 12 -  Tiver Road Options – These options are similar to the Potts Road scheme, in that they would have similar connection point(s) to the Barossa Valley Way. This much longer road link would, however, extend through to Tiver Road, at the southern extremity of the UGB. These options would run adjacent to the proposed Evanston South development, and roughly follow (or be adjacent to) Bentley Road. The alignment of this road is complicated by the need to avoid crossing of significant services (including the Sea Gas Pipeline and the Barossa trunk water-main), and consideration of existing residents along Bentley Road.

These options will also likely involve the need to install traffic signals at the Main North Road / Potts Road junction. Duplication of Main North Road between Potts Road and the Western Bypass will still likely be required, but at a later date than the Potts Road options.

The final alignment and nature of the new road will be subject to consideration by the development of Gawler East, and community consultation associated with the upcoming Development Plan Amendment process for Gawler East.

Preliminary analysis has shown that the Tiver Road option is more costly, however, it is recognised that this option has physical limitations and would also reduce the impact upon the multiple residents along Potts Road.

North Eastern Gawler Link indicative alignment options:

 Options for the current UGB – These options would roughly follow the current UGB line, and is the most direct route between Sturt Highway and Barossa Valley Way. These options have the opportunity to connect with an eastern connector road. Options of this form would most cater for development within the current UGB.

 Options for larger Concordia – These options could encompass two access points onto the Barossa Valley Way/Lyndoch Road, and would be considered if the potential larger development in Concordia was to occur in the future. There are various alignment options these roads could take. The western most access onto the Barossa Valley Way could connect with an eastern connector road.

Both of these possible options would be subject to investigations associated with future urban development in Concordia. A connection to the Barossa Valley Way at Cheek Avenue would require a grade separation of the railway line.

Future Traffic Volumes

The maps shown in Appendix C indicate the expected daily traffic volumes on the road network for each of the 14 options in 2031. These numbers represent full development for the all of the areas in and around Gawler.

The volumes were developed from the Metropolitan Adelaide Strategic Transport Evaluation Model (MASTEM). This model was created to examine the entire Adelaide Metropolitan area and the Gawler zone was divided into smaller sub-zones to enable a more refined view of the travel patterns in and around the Gawler area. The sub-zones can be seen in Appendix D.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 13 - ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS

The work undertaken as part of this study has shown that development of the Gawler East area will create a need for the construction of an Eastern Connector road. In conjunction with existing roads, the Eastern Connector road will provide access for the development between Barossa Valley Way and Adelaide Road/Main North Road. The need for this road is based upon the requirement to ensure traffic volumes within the centre of Gawler do not reach unsustainable levels (refer Table 1, Table 2 and Base Case maps in Appendix C).

Table 1 – Scenario 1 - Daily Volume Comparison

Road Murray St Adelaide Road Ryde St Option (South of Calton Road) (North of Potts Rd) Current Volumes (2007) 27,400 21,900 7,200 Project Base Case (2031) 40,260 25,520 22,550 Option 1A 24,660 10,440 21,620 Option 1B 25,560 10,000 21,770 Option 1C 30,070 21,380 17,840 Option 1D 20,750 8,350 17,960 Option 1E 22,660 10,180 18,010 Option 1F 25,420 14,140 22,280 Option 1G 31,170 21,060 21,880 Option 1H 24,930 14,060 18,850 Option 1I 24,750 16,420 18,590

Table 2 – Scenario 2 - Daily Volume Comparison

Road Murray St Adelaide Road Ryde St Option (South of Calton Road) (Nth of Potts Rd)

Current Volumes (2007) 27,400 21,900 7,200 Project Base Case (2031) 46,690 29,960 29,660 Option 2A 37,690 25,100 23,570 Option 2B 25,650 14,220 23,350 Option 2C 24,750 11,720 22,680 Option 2D 30,760 22,360 22,120 Option 2E 29,510 18,220 22,960

Preliminary design has shown that, to accommodate the modelled volumes, the Eastern Connector roads will typically need to be two lane roads (ie one lane in each direction) between Calton Road and Potts Road or Tiver Road. This work has also shown that options which only connect to Potts Road require the widening of Potts Road to four lanes.

The need for a North Eastern Link between Barossa Valley Way and Sturt Highway is generated by development in the Concordia area. The potential route is dependant upon if a larger development occurs in Concordia in the future or not.

If development only occurs within the current UGB, then these roads would typically only need to be two lane roads (i.e. one lane in each direction) for their entire length. Should the potential larger development proceed, the volumes suggest that the section between the Sturt Highway and the centre of the township would need to have a four lanes (ie two lanes each way). In this case the connections to Barossa Valley Way would only need to be two lane roads.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 14 -

Further work on specific alignment options for the Concordia area will, however, need to be examined once a final development option has been decided upon.

Major upgrading of the Twelfth Street - Ryde Street link will not be considered. This link is local in nature and there is no intention to encourage its use. DTEI will investigate potential traffic calming measures in conjunction with the council.

Preferred Option

The Eastern Connector is required to cater for development in the Gawler East area. In order to disperse the traffic load onto the existing road network at the northern end, multiple connections at Calton Road are preferred. Cheek Avenue is nevertheless preferred as providing the primary connection through to a potential North-Eastern Connector road, and will likely require upgrading. A connection through to Tiver Road is preferred at the southern end due to physical limitations along Potts Road and also to reduce the impact upon to the existing Potts Road residents.

Any form of development in the Concordia area will require a North-Eastern Connector, as the existing road network would not be suitable to cater for potential traffic. A single connection point to the Sturt Highway in the vicinity of Kemp Road is preferred in order to maintain efficient movement along this section of the National Transport Network. The road would connect into Cheek Avenue, to allow direct movement through to the Eastern Connector road. If the larger Concordia development occurs, there would be a second connection to the Barossa Valley Way, to the east of the railway crossing.

Option 2E is therefore the preferred option (subject to the ultimate development of Concordia).

The preferred road structure and associated road improvement needs are shown on Figure 5 – Potential Treatment Options. It should be noted that the Evanston Gardens link shown on Figure 5 does not match that which was modelled, as the preferred option represents recent discussions about road alignments through Evanston Gardens. It is considered that this would have a minimal effect upon the preferred road structure in Gawler East and Concordia.

Responsibility of Proposed Road Infrastructure

To understand the levels of local and through traffic using an eastern connector and/or north eastern road link, the traffic volumes were assessed to determine the amount of ‘through’ traffic that may use these roads. ‘Through’ traffic is the volume of traffic that would use the road, but have an origin and destination beyond the immediate area. For example, traffic originating from Sandy Creek, travelling to Munno Para would be ‘through’ traffic. The key findings of this analysis are as follows:  The volume of ‘through’ traffic that would use an eastern connector road would only be in the order of 1,100 vehicles/day (or 6% of the total traffic on the road).  The volume of ‘through’ traffic that would use a north eastern connector would only be in the order of 750 vehicles/day (or 3% of the total traffic on the road).

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 15 - The ‘Road Classification Guidelines in South Australia’ (recently approved by the Minister for Transport) provides a framework for assessing the classification of the South Australian road network. A copy of this document is provided in Appendix E. Key criteria for defining an urban arterial road include:  Roads that “carry in the order of 15,000 vehicles or more per day (AADT), of which a significant proportion are not local in nature (i.e. through traffic)”; and  Roads that “facilitate A-Double, B-Double or General Access heavy vehicle movements, with volumes in the order of 500 or more vehicles per day, not local in nature (i.e. through traffic)”.

This information shows that neither the eastern link nor the north eastern connector options satisfy these criteria. The assessment of through and local traffic indicates that the main function of the road would be to provide local access and connectivity, and therefore both roads should be classed as local roads.

Timing of Road Options

Eastern Connector This road should be constructed commensurate with the development in the Gawler East area. The precise timing of the new road and associated upgrades of existing roads will be subject to detailed traffic assessments in conjunction with the planning for the development in Gawler East. This may include consideration of staging the provision of improvements.

North Eastern Link This link should be constructed prior to the commencement (or in the early stages) development of the Concordia area. The timing is unknown at this point.

Existing Arterial Road Network Analysis of the expected volumes on Main North Road (between Potts Road and the Western Bypass) identifies that this section of road will likely need to be duplicated. The timing of this duplication will be assessed on an ongoing basis, and will be subject to the provision of funding.

The upgrading of the Main North Road / Potts Road junction could be undertaken in two stages, initially in association with the provision of the Eastern Connector road, with the ultimate layout provided as part of the duplication of Main North Road.

The upgrading of Main North Road / Redbanks Road junction is being considered as part of the Road Management Plan. Implementation of improvements at this location will be subject to the allocation of possible funding.

Upgrading of the Main North Road / Tiver Road intersection is already planned as part of the proposed developments in Evanston Gardens and Evanston South. The Evanston Gardens development includes provision for a new road link between Main North Road and Angle Vale Road.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 16 - FURTHER WORK

Local Road Network

Consideration of any increase in traffic on local roads resulting from the developments should form part of any traffic assessment of the developments in the Gawler East and Concordia areas. This should include roads within the Gawler township, Potts Road, Cheek Ave, as well as those roads forming connections to other areas to the east, such as Balmoral Road and Gawler – One Tree Hill Road.

Public Transport

It was intended for this framework to investigate additional infrastructure and additional service requirements to those announced in the June 2008 budget, to assess if additional rail and bus capacity is required to cater for new housing developments north east of Gawler. This includes exploring an extension of the rail line to the east of Gawler Central and possible increased bus services for the Gawler area.

Rail infrastructure that could be considered includes extension of rail services to a new station some 4kms east of Gawler. The station could provide connection between bus and rail services and also function as a ‘park and ride’ facility.

Consideration of improvements to the public transport system will be included as part of the Master Planning for the Future Public Transport Network being undertaken by the State Government.

Further investigations into the costs and benefits of a new Gawler East station will also be carried out.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 17 - C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 18 -

GAWLER GROWTH AREAS TRANSPORT FRAMEWORK

APPENDIX A Options Maps

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_- _Final_Report.DOC

GAWLER GROWTH AREAS TRANSPORT FRAMEWORK

APPENDIX B Development Areas

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_- _Final_Report.DOC

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC - 1 -

GAWLER GROWTH AREAS TRANSPORT FRAMEWORK

APPENDIX C Volumes

Note: The following maps use the title “Ultimate Concordia Urban” and “Ultimate Concordia Barossa”. These titles reflect volumes relating to the urban growth scenario based upon the current UGB in Concordia, and the potential larger development in Concordia, respectively.

HOW TO READ THESE PLANS

Appendix C contains the volume maps that have been derived from the modelling work undertaken as part of this study. The volumes shown are indicative of what could be expected upon the roads for the various options and various development scenarios. The volumes have been displayed as follows:

This represents the daily volume for that side of the road on which the number is located, with the total volume being the sum of the two numbers. In the example above there would be 2500 travelling in a north easterly direction, 3500 travelling in a south westerly direction, totalling 6000 for the total daily volume of the road.

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC

GAWLER GROWTH AREAS TRANSPORT FRAMEWORK

APPENDIX D MASTEM Zones & Allotment Numbers

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC

GAWLER GROWTH AREAS TRANSPORT FRAMEWORK

APPENDIX E Road Classification Guidelines in South Australia

C:\Users\winklere\Documents\DOCS_AND_FILES-#2533731-v13-Gawler_Growth_Areas_Transport_Framework_-_Final_Report.DOC

Road Classification Guidelines in South Australia

Guidelines prepared by the Local Roads Advisory Committee for the Determination of Road Classification in South Australia - July 2008

local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 2 The New Guidelines 3 three Key Themes 4 rural Roads 5 local Roads 8 Urban/Rural Interface 10 Road Classification Assessment Process 11 Map of South Australia 14 The Original Guidelines 15

July 2008

This publication has been produced with the support of the Local Government Association of South Australia. local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

INTRODUCTION

In the mid 1980’s, the complete South Australian road network was comprehensively assessed to determine the classification and responsibility of all the state’s roads.

To perform this assessment, the ‘Guide to the Given the need to consider the current Classification of Roads in South Australia’ was classification of some roads on the network, and produced based largely on a system created that the original guidelines have now become by the National Association of Australian State somewhat dated, the LRAC considered it would Road Authorities (NAASRA). The NAASRA system be timely to review the current approach and proposed a process for the classification of roads produce an updated and more robust method predominantly based on their role within the of assessment. Approval from the Minister for overall road network. Transport was subsequently sought and gained to undertake this review. While this process provided road classifications that have remained appropriate for many years, It was not intended for the review to be a trends in the use of the road network have now wholesale overhaul of road responsibilities, or changed, raising the need to re-assess some even initiate an assessment of all roads, as was roads. Observations indicate that some state the case in the 1980’s where extensive lengths of roads have become more characteristic of local road were transferred to local government. The roads, while other local roads have become purpose of assessing and updating the guidelines more typical of state roads. was to provide greater assistance in decisions regarding road reclassification proposals as they Assessment of the alteration of road arise on a case-by-case basis. Hence, the review classification rests with the Local Roads Advisory was based upon a principle of ‘no net gain or loss’ Committee (LRAC). The LRAC determine, of either arterial or local roads across the state. with the assistance of the guidelines, if the classification of a road should be altered or In light of the above, this document has been remain the same and make a recommendation produced. The result is an updated method of to the Minister for Transport. assessment, using the original guidelines as a base, and incorporating appropriate elements from an extensive quantitative investigation of existing roads. The LRAC believes this document will provide an effective method of assessing, and maintaining, the future classification of the South Australian page 2 road network. local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

the new GUIDELINES FOR THE DETERMINATION OF ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA

For the purpose of these guidelines, the classification of roads will be based purely on whether the road is arterial or local. That is, the LRAC’s intended focus is to determine if a road is the responsibility of state or local government. Any subsequent hierarchy (such as the functional classes or other categorisation) would be up to each road authority (eg council) to apply to their roads, to the extent they consider appropriate. These subsequent hierarchies would not involve a change in road responsibility. These guidelines are based considerably on the original guidelines from the mid 1980’s. For reference, a summary of the original guidelines can be found at the end of this document.

page 3 local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

For the purpose of this exercise, through traffic THREE KEY THEMES should be defined as vehicles travelling from one existing arterial road to another, without The original guidelines considered three an origin or destination in between. Local traffic themes in particular as being useful for should constitute all other traffic movements. consideration when developing road classification guidelines. Road Purpose These themes are generally consistent amongst Attempts have been made in the past to classify various road classification theories and are ‘Road roads by the purpose for which they are used. Function’, ‘Through Traffic and Local Traffic’, This has led at various times to such concepts as and ‘Road Purpose’. They are still considered tourist roads, forest roads etc. relevant and were therefore considered useful in development of these guidelines. Grouping of roads by purpose may have some application in determining the degree of responsibility, standards or priority for Road Function improvement, but it is not in itself a fundamental criterion upon which a broad road classification Roads have a number of functions that can be system can be based. conveniently grouped into: For instance, a tourist road can be a minor local Movement function (traffic) road leading to a particular tourist attraction Access function (abutting land use) or it can be the Prince’s Highway, vital to the tourism in the State as a whole. Grouping of The general notion is that arterial roads primarily these two roads into one class is not meaningful provide for the movement function and local or useful in the broadest sense of management roads primarily provide for the access function. and administration of roads. Within each broad All roads, however, (with the possible exceptions group (arterial and local) there will be roads that of a freeway and urban cul-de-sac) provide for a cater predominantly for some specific purpose, mixture of movement and access functions. but such considerations should be a second order refinement for each group. Any division of a road network into arterial and local roads therefore requires judgment as to the In recent times, the State Government has degree to which movement and access functions developed a new means of determining the predominate in each group. Neither group is hierarchy of its arterial roads by the formation exclusively for one function. of ‘Role and Function’ maps. These maps assist in general future planning of the arterial road network and detail the following: Through Traffic and Local Strategic Routes; Traffic Primary and Secondary Freight Routes; It is conventional to talk about arterial roads Commuter Routes; as carriers of through traffic and local roads Tourism Routes; as carriers of local traffic. There is, however, great difficulty not only in quantifying these Regional Bus Routes; components, but also in the perception as Public Transport Routes; to what constitutes through and local traffic. For example, through traffic to a householder Cycle Routes, and might be all traffic passing their driveway, while Pedestrian Zones. through traffic to Local Government might only be the component of traffic that does not As mentioned above, this role and function originate within their own area. designation does not directly influence or form the basis for road classification. It is simply a The majority of roads provide for a mixture of means of defining the hierarchy of roads within through and local traffic and to a degree which is the state for planning purposes. The role and dependent upon the perceiver’s point of view. As function information should, however, be used for Road Function, any division of a road network indirectly when considering the classification of into arterial and local roads therefore requires roads. judgment as to the degree to which movement and access functions predominate in each group. page 4 local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

RURAL ROADS

Rural roads are defined as those outside the Adelaide metropolitan area. The exception being those located in some regional cities, or large country towns, which are in certain circumstances deemed to be of an urban nature and defined under that category. These are detailed below in the ‘Urban Roads’ section.

Rural Arterial Road Definition

Rural Arterial Roads are defined as those roads: That have a main function of forming the principal avenue of connection for movements: Between major regions in Australia, including direct connections between Capital Cities; Between Capital Cities and Key Towns; Between Key Towns; Between Key Towns and Important Centres; Between Key Towns / Important Centres and: The AusLink National Network; Strategic Routes, or Primary or Secondary Freight Routes. Between Key Towns / Important Centres and those roads currently classified as Class 1 and Class 2 roads; Between Important Centres, or To major tourist locations. That facilitate A-Double, B-Double or General Access heavy vehicle movements, with volumes in the order of 50 or more vehicles per day, not local in nature (ie, through traffic). That carry in the order of 300 vehicles or more per day (Annual Average Daily Traffic)*, of which a significant proportion are not local in nature (ie, through traffic).

* Annual Average Daily Traffic on State Maintained Roads are available at: www.transport.sa.gov.au/transport_network/facts_figures/traffic_volumes.asp page 5 local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

That have minimal access points, providing Key Towns and Important more for through movements than property access. Centres Definition That are sealed to a high standard to cater In the original guidelines, Key Towns for larger traffic movements. were originally defined by considering the That are generally not spaced closer together characteristics of the state’s major towns and than 20km. their influence, investigated in considerable detail, while Important Centres were generally Tend to cater for movements through towns, viewed as towns with a population greater than or provide a bypass role. 200 persons. The State Government is currently preparing a For the these guidelines, it is appropriate to base Town Bypass Policy. This policy will consider the the definitions on the ‘Planning Strategy for merits of bypasses around towns replacing main Regional South Australia’. This strategy generally streets as the arterial link, with the main streets defines towns into Main and Smaller Country becoming local. The above criteria, however, Centres, which are defined by population and can still be subsequently applied to consider are divided into the following ranges: whether the main streets should remain arterial in addition to such arterial bypasses. Population >30,000 eg Adelaide Rural Local Road Definition 20,000 – 30,000 eg Whyalla

Rural Local Roads are defined as those roads: 10,000 – 20,000 eg Port Augusta 3,000 – 10,000 eg Goolwa That have a main function to provide access to abutting property (including property 1,000 – 3,000 eg Ceduna within a town in a rural area). It is therefore considered appropriate to That provide for local area movements designate Key Towns as those with a population including travel between two Important greater than 3000, with Important Centres those Centres (Note: that local area is not with a population greater than or equal to 1000 necessarily synonymous with Council area). persons, but less than 3000. That lead to Important Centres or towns It should be stressed that the terms Key Town situated a short distance off the main by- and Important Centre have been used solely to passing arterial road. determine the road hierarchy and network and is That facilitate A-Double, B-Double or General based on population only. It does not necessarily Access heavy vehicle movements, with reflect the general importance of towns in the volumes in the order of less than 50 vehicles State. per day, or have no Heavy Vehicle Access. That carry in the order of less than 300 vehicles per day (Annual Average Daily Traffic). That have multiple access points, providing more for property access than through movements. That might be sealed to a lower standard or unsealed as they cater for lower traffic movements. That are generally spaced closer together than 20km, providing convenient local access. Tend to cater for local movements within towns, or provide a local bypass role. That do not conform to any of the other criteria listed for arterial or local roads. page 6 local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

Based on the ‘ABS 2006 Census of Population and Housing’ data (currently latest available), this has resulted in designation of the following towns as Key Towns and Important Centres:

Key Town Population Important Centre Population Mount Gambier 23 276 Wallaroo 2 982 Whyalla 21 300 McLaren Vale 2 841 Gawler 19 765 Bordertown 2 550 Murray Bridge 13 761 Kapunda 2 422 Port Augusta 13 426 Ceduna 2 388 Port Pirie 13 073 Willunga 2 058 Crafers – Bridgewater 13 003 Mannum 2 000 Port Lincoln 12 880 Barmera 1 912 Mount Barker 11 326 Coober Pedy 1 868 Victor Harbor 10 005 Angaston 1 807 Goolwa 5 628 Lobethal 1 776 Naracoorte 4 816 Woodside 1 754 Millicent 4 641 Waikerie 1 742 Renmark 4 482 Hahndorf 1 738 Nuriootpa 4 362 Port Elliot 1 719 Tanunda 4 108 Kingscote 1 704 Berri 4 049 Peterborough 1 675 Roxby Downs 4 036 Balaklava 1 595 Kadina 3 881 Sellicks Beach 1 569 Strathalbyn 3 790 Kingston S.E. 1 546 Loxton 3 442 Tailem Bend 1 436 Nairne 3 390 Williamstown 1 418 Moonta 3 346 Jamestown 1 374 Clare 3 027 Lyndoch 1 359 Tumby Bay 1 328 Angle Vale 1 320 Freeling 1 288 Robe 1 286 Penola 1 266 Crystal Brook 1 164 Keith 1 125 Streaky Bay 1 098 Ardrossan 1 097 Quorn 1 047 Maitland 1 026 Cowell 1 004

page 7 local roads advisory committee ROADlocal CLASSI roadsFICATIO advisoryN IN SO committeeUTH AUSTRALI ROADa CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

URBAN ROADS

Urban roads are defined as those inside the Adelaide metropolitan area. The exception being those located in some regional cities, or large country towns, which are considered to be of an urban nature. It is proposed that roads within those towns outside of Adelaide with 10 000 people or more be treated as urban.

This results in the following towns using urban Urban Arterial Road criteria: Definition Town Population Mount Gambier 23 276 Urban Arterial Roads are defined as those roads: Whyalla 21 300 That have a main function of forming the principal avenue of connection for large Murray Bridge 13 761 traffic movements, and distribute traffic to Port Augusta 13 426 local street systems. Port Pirie 13 073 That provide long distance connections Port Lincoln 12 880 between: Victor Harbor 10 005 Adelaide Central Area and Regional Centres; Regional Centres; Regional Centres and District Centres; Transport Terminals, or Regional Centres / Important Centres / Transport Terminals and: The AusLink National Network; Strategic Routes, or Primary or Secondary Freight Routes. That have controls or restrictions potentially imposed on the following: Side road access to facilitate traffic movement; Turning movements and parking of vehicles, or Land development abutting the road to ensure free flow of traffic. That facilitate A-Double, B-Double or General Access heavy vehicle movements, with volumes in the order of 500 or more vehicles per day, not local in nature (ie, through traffic). page 8 local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

That carry in the order of 15 000 vehicles or Regional Centres, District more per day (Annual Average Daily Traffic), of which a significant portion are not local in Centres and Transport nature (ie, through traffic). Terminals Definition That have minimal access points, providing more for through movements than property When defining rural roads, the original access. guidelines utilised Key Towns and Important Centres as key criteria. This has subsequently That are generally built to a high standard to been maintained for these guidelines, with the cater for larger traffic movements. criteria redefined to complement the ‘Planning That are generally not spaced closer together Strategy for Regional South Australia’. than 1km. In the original guidelines, the urban component That may facilitate Express Buses or Go did not contain this type of criteria. It was Zones. considered that it could prove useful, however, to do so in these guidelines. As the ‘Planning Strategy for Regional South Australia’ had been Urban Local Road Definition used to update the rural criteria, the ‘Planning Strategy for Metropolitan Adelaide’ was Urban Local Roads are defined as those roads: consulted for determination of the urban criteria. Not being arterial, whose main function is to This resulted in the use of ‘Regional Centres‘, provide access to abutting property or access ‘District Centres’ and ‘Transport Terminals’ to into a local area (ie, not through traffic). assist in the definition of urban arterial roads. These are as follows: That facilitate A-Double, B-Double or General Access heavy vehicle movements, with Regional Centres volumes in the order of less than 500 vehicles per day, or have no Heavy Vehicle Access. Northern Elizabeth, Modbury Central Port Adelaide, Marion That carry in the order of less than 15 000 vehicles per day (Annual Average Daily Southern Noarlunga Traffic). District Centres That have multiple access points, providing more for property access than through Northern Gawler, Munno Para, movements. Salisbury, Hollywood Plaza, Golden Grove, St Agnes, That might be built to a lower standard as Ingle Farm, Clovercrest they cater for lower traffic movements. Central Newton, West Lakes, Are generally spaced close together to Kilkenny, Marden, Woodville, provide convenient local access. Firle, Stepney, Fulham That may facilitate Feeder Buses, Regular Gardens, Norwood, Mile End, Buses or Local Buses. Burnside, Unley, Kurralta Park, Mitcham, Glenelg, That provide almost exclusively for one Edwardstown, Brighton, activity or function and which do not meet Blackwood any of the above criteria. Southern Aberfoyle Park, Reynella, Seaford, Aldinga

Transport Terminals Air Adelaide Airport Sea Port Adelaide Rail Dry Creek, Islington Road Wingfield, Regency Park, Gillman

page 9 local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

URBAN/RURAL INTERFACE

For most purposes the boundary between urban and rural areas (and hence roads) is the Adelaide metropolitan area.

However, on both sides of this boundary there Classification of roads in this area therefore are roads that are neither typically urban nor requires simultaneous application of both typically rural. rural and urban roads classification criteria with the over-riding principle that the arterial The situation is further complicated by hilly road network should be continuous across the terrain (and hence limited choice for road boundary. development), existence of large number of tourist attractions and distribution of population that is neither concentrated in towns (as typically in rural area) nor spread (as typically in the inner metropolitan area).

page 10 Road Classification Assessment Process

The following pages contain the assessment process to assist the determination of road classification based on the new guidelines for South Australia. local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa n o A pplicant to justify why ye s exchange not appropriate. n o E xisting R oad C lassification remains. ye s A pplicant to undertake discussions and reapply. road/s for exchange. Negotiation of financial compensation or required improvements. A pplicant to provide potential n o n o n o n o ye s ye s ye s ye s seal condition, width etc. to the M inister for T ransport. authority proposed to take responsibility. A ustralia’ to determine if change potentially required. C onsider if the A pplicant has offered road/s for exchange. Use ‘Guidelines for the D etermination of R oad C lassification in S outh C onsider if the roads to potentially be exchanged are similar ie length, Application for change in Road Classification O n agreement of all parties, recommend a change in R oad C lassification C onsider if the A pplicant has undertaken preliminary discussions with

page 12 ROAD CLASSI F ICATIO N ASSESSME T P ROCESS T his process is used by the L ocal R oads A dvisory C ommittee ( LRAC ) to determine merits of an application for change in oad C lassification. A pplicants should therefore consider these steps carefully in conjunction with the commentary on page opposite to ensure all requirements are met. local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

ROAD CLASSIFICATION ASSESSMENT PROCESS COMMENTARY

This commentary has been produced may subsequently choose to continue with the potential to assist in the understanding of change in classification of a road based on other factors, such as agreement between the authorities. the ‘Road Classification Assessment Process’, as used by the Local Roads Consider if the Applicant has offered road/s for Advisory Committee (LRAC) in making exchange recommendations on road classification. It is considered that for the road classification process Each of the headings below correlates to work most effectively, and be fair to each authority, it will be preferable for there to be a road exchange directly to a step within this process. wherever possible. Application for change in Road Classification It is understood that this will not always be easily achievable, however there are a couple of options to The application for a change in road classification consider. is made by either Local or State Government and is directed to the LRAC, which has the responsibility for For Councils, there might be the option of considering advising the Minister for Transport on the classification a road in another Council area for exchanging. That is, of roads. Such a request should generally consist of rather than a straight exchange between one Council a letter to the LRAC detailing the road in question, and DTEI, there might be the opportunity for another including a map or map reference, and also details as Council to become involved in the process. It is per the sections below. understood that such a proposal would have its own challenges and may require significant negotiation Consider if Applicant has undertaken preliminary between Councils, and most likely assistance from the discussions with the authority proposed to take ‘Local Government Association’ and the ‘Office for responsibility Local Government’. This step relates to the applicant having already In some cases an exchange road will simply not be spoken to the authority that they propose to take appropriate or available. In these instances the road over their road, prior to approaching the LRAC. For can still progress through the assessment, however example, if it is Local Government who are proposing justification will be required on why an alternative has to reclassify a local road to an arterial road, they not been provided. need to have discussed the proposal with the State Government (that being the appropriate regional Consider if the roads to potentially be exchanged office of the Department for Transport, Energy and are similar, ie, length, seal condition, width etc. Infrastructure (DTEI)) before applying. DTEI regional If potential exchange road/s have been provided, the areas are shown in the map on page 10. next step is to determine whether they are similar Where the State Government is applying for an in characteristics (ie length, width, condition, etc), arterial road to become local, DTEI will be required to and thus provide an equitable exchange. If they are approach the appropriate Council. similar, then there may not be any consideration of compensation required. If, however, the roads are of As part of the assessment process, it is essential that vastly different conditions, there may be a need for this prior discussion occur, as a change in classification compensation between parties to be considered. This will not be considered unless this step has been will require some negotiation and may include financial completed. It should be noted that the result of compensation, or the need to upgrade the road in these preliminary discussions does not conclusively question to an agreed level prior to reclassification. determine the likelihood of success through the overall assessment process. Should no exchange road/s be available (as detailed in the above step), the negotiation process will still Use ‘Guidelines for the Determination of Road need to be considered to allow the parties to reach an Classification in South Australia’ to determine if agreement on any compensation for the reclassification. change potentially required On agreement of all parties, recommend a change This step involves considering the merit of the in Road Classification to the Minister for Transport application based on how the road is assessed under the ‘Guidelines for the Determination of Road Any change in road classification needs to be Classification in South Australia. If the road clearly approved by the Minister for Transport. Therefore, does not meet the criteria for change, it is likely that should all the above steps be successfully achieved its existing classification will remain. Should it rate and all parties are in agreement for a change in road as having the potential for change, then it should classification, the LRAC can decide to recommend continue through the process. the change to the Minister for Transport. It should be noted that no matter how the road rates through the It should be noted that not meeting the criteria in the assessment process, the LRAC reserves the right to guidelines does not prevent a road from continuing make the final decision on recommendation. through the process. It is a guide for the LRAC, and they page 13 local roads advisory committee ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

Local Government Areas South Australliia

FLINDERS RANGES Ceduna CEDUNA

Porrtt Augustta PORT AUGU●STA ORROROO/CARRIETON MOUNT STREAKY REMARKABLE BAY

PETERBOROUGH LE HUNTE WHYALL●A ● KIMBA Whyalllla Porrtt Pirie P●irie NORTHE●RN PORT AREAS PIRIE● FRANKLIN Freeling HARBOUR ELLISTON CLEVE G●OYDER BARUNGA WEST Clare ●Clare Wallaroo ●Wallaroo LOWER Kadiina ● COPPER EYRE Moontta ●COAST CLARE AND UIA PENINSULA TUMBY GILBERT RIVERLAND ● VALLEYS BAY WAKEFIELD ● Renmarrk BERRI R●ENMARK ● BARMER●A PARINGA MALLALA ● Crystal Brook LOXTON Berrrrii ● ● WAIKERIE Loxtton LIGHT Nurriioottpa MID ● Porrtt ● MURRAY Gawlerr BAROSSA PORT ● Liincolln ● LINCOLN ●

ADELAIDE Adelaide ● Mannum YORKE Adelaide ● HILLS ● KAROONDA Crrafferrs ● PENINSULA ●MOUNT MURRAY BRIDGE MounttB●ARKER EAST Barrkerr ● MURRAY LIGHT Gawller Murrrray MALLALA ●! Sttrratthallbyn ● Brriid●ge ● ALEXANDRINA BAROSSA SOUTHERN GAWLER VICTOR Goollwa HARBOR ● YANKALILLA ● MALLEE ● Viicttorr THE Harrborr COORONG !t KANGAROO PLAYFORD ISLAND

●

TATIARA ● SALISBURY Borrderrttown TEA TREE KINGSTON GULLY PORT ADELAIDE ● ENFIELD NARACOORTE

CAMPBELLTOWN LUCINDALE● CHARLES PROSPECT Narracoorrtte STURT ADELAIDE ●! ROBE Lobethal WEST ADELAIDE● Norwood HILLS Lobethal TORRENS BURNSIDE ● TEA TREE WATTLE UNLEY GULLY

D RA●NGE R

D Miilllliicentt

D PORT ADELAIDE

Crafers R

●! Crafers A

HOLDFAST E

H R RD

T MULLE ENFIELD BAY T REGENCY RD S MOUNT

R D D

MITCHAM P D R ●

O GAMBIER

R T M

N S

L A

C GRANT

Hahndorf I

! Hahndorf I H

H T

● A

P R C

M O

S N CAMPBELLTOWN R O O A T U S MARION Mount R

Mount H O PROSPECT C G R P

C O R R E T N D Ba! rker S A ● R V D WALKERVILLE CHARLES RD RO M BE A STURT E TC H D P C E MOUNT O T PA E R R R N T K Y H R K BARKER R A A T P D P R U ST D O ADAM

S NORWOOD D

PAYNEHAM AND ST R

ONKAPARINGA MAGILL RD R

PETERS U

D L

WEST THE PARADE R G

ADELAIDE H

D S

TORRENS O

R U D ●

R RD

G KENSINGTON

N T O O R

C T

O R

S P E A ! M L Strathallbyn ● L A

J U F GREENHILL RD Selllliicks ALEXANDRINA G RICHMOND RD L D E N BURNSIDE Beach Y R

!Beach O

● Y S W M H E O C UNLEY L N

N D ZA N U R YANKALILLA A D

Legend 0 10 20 30 40 50 31°S BROKEN HIILL Murray Bridge - DTEI Eastern Regional Office 32°S ! Local Government Area ● km WHYALLA 33°S ! DTEI Maintained Road ● Norwood - DTEI Metropolitan Regional Office 34°S The information has been collected for internal use by the Department for Transport, Energy ADELAIDE Port Augusta - DTEI Northern & Western Regional Office ADELAIDE Council Maintained Road ● and Infrastructure, and is provided herein as an information resource only. It is not a substitute 35°S ! for independent professional advice and users should exercise their own skill, care and judgement 36°S DTEI Region ● Crystal Brook - DTEI Northern & Western Sub-Office with respect to the use of this material. Whilst all reasonable care has been taken in its preparation, the State of South Australia does not guarantee, and accepts no legal liability arising from or 37°S Metropolitan ● Freeling - DTEI Metropolitan Sub-Office connected to, the accuracy, reliability, currency, suitability or completeness of the material. MOUNT GAMBIIER 38°S ! Map Projection: Lamberts Conformal Conic Naracoorte - DTEI Eastern Sub-Office o o Eastern ● Standard Parallels: 28 S & 36 S 39°S o Northern & Western ● Port Lincoln - DTEI Northern & Western Sub-Office Central Meridian: 135 E Datum: GDA 94 132°E 135°E 138°E 141°E H:\standardmaps\misc\apr\lga_a3.mxd

The above map identifies the Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure’s regional offices as they relate to Local Government in South Australia. page 14 local roads advisory committee ROADlocal CLASSI roadsFICATIO advisoryN IN SO committeeUTH AUSTRALI ROADa CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

SUMMARY OF THE RURAL ROADS ORIGINAL GUIDELINES Rural Arterial Road Definition In the original guidelines, rural roads were The guidelines for road classification generally defined as those outside the Adelaide that were developed in the mid 1980’s metropolitan area. Rural Arterial Roads were comprised of two documents: generally viewed as providing a highly connective strategic network of roads carrying significant Guide to the Classification of Roads in traffic volumes, including heavy vehicles, over South Australia long distances on a continuous basis (as distinct Review of Road Classifications and from seasonal traffic). Such roads included: Financial Responsibilities for Roads, Roads between States and their capital cities; South Australia, Explanatory Notes Roads between broad geographic regions of These two documents were often the State and between Key Towns in these regions; simply referred to under the ‘Guide to the Classification of Roads in South Roads connecting Important Centres to Australia’ title, and are now generally Adelaide either directly (where the Important Centre is situated on the arterial road) or referred to as the ‘original guidelines’. indirectly (where the Important Centre is In the original guidelines, the NAASRA situated a short distance off the arterial road); functional classes (Classes 1 to 9) Roads connecting Important Centres to were utilised to classify the South Melbourne and Mount Gambier in the South Australian road network. This allowed East and to Port Lincoln on Eyre Peninsula responsibility of the network to be (these centres were deemed to play a surrogate “capital city” role in those areas); distributed between Federal, State and Local Governments by defining National Roads connecting Important Centres to each Highways, Arterial Roads and Local other where such links in association with other arterial roads are of state-wide or major Roads. Details on the criteria that was regional significance. utilised is provided. The original guidelines made specific reference to the NAASRA classifications. These are detailed for Rural Arterial Roads as below: Class 1 Those roads which form the principal avenue for communication between major regions of the Commonwealth, including direct connections between capital cities. Class 2 Those roads, not being Class 1, whose main function is to form the principal avenue of communication for movements: Between a capital city and adjoining States and their capital cities; Between a capital city and Key Towns, and Between Key Towns. Class 3 Those roads, not being Class 1 or 2, whose main function is to form an avenue of communication for movements: Between Important Centres and the Class 1 and Class 2 roads and/or Key Towns; Between Important Centres, and Of an arterial nature within a town in a rural area. page 15 local roads advisory committee ROADlocal CLASSI roadsFICATIO advisoryN IN SO committeeUTH AUSTRALI ROADa CLASSIFICATION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIa

URBAN ROADS

Urban Arterial Road Definition In the original guidelines, urban roads were generally defined as those inside the Adelaide metropolitan area. Urban Arterial Roads were generally viewed as the principal roads carrying high volumes of long distance traffic, including commercial vehicles in either peak or off-peak periods (or both), with controls or restrictions potentially imposed on the following: Side road access to facilitate traffic movement; Turning movements and parking of vehicles, and Land development abutting the road to ensure free flow of traffic. Rural Local Road Definition With regard to the NAASRA classifications, these Rural Local Roads were perceived to be of three are detailed for Urban Arterial Roads as below: kinds: Class 6 Those roads whose main function is to Roads that are obviously local access form the principal avenue of communication roads leading to groups of farms or small for massive traffic movements. settlements; Class 7 Those roads, not being Class 6, Roads that provide for local area movements whose main function is to supplement including travel between two Important the Class 6 roads in providing for traffic Centres (Note: that local area is not movements or which distribute traffic to local necessarily synonymous with Council area), street systems. and Roads leading to Important Centres or Urban Local Road Definition towns situated a short distance off the main Urban Local Roads were viewed as those bypassing arterial road. providing access to abutting properties and/or With regard to the NAASRA classifications, these for traffic movements between arterial roads are detailed for Rural Local Roads as below: and local streets within a local area bounded by arterial roads. Such roads would potentially Class 4 Those roads, not being Class 1, 2 carry small components of intra-suburban traffic, or 3, whose main function is to provide particularly during peak periods. access to abutting property (including property within a town in a rural area). With regard to the NAASRA classifications, these are detailed for Urban Local Roads as below: Class 5 Those roads which provide almost exclusively for one activity or function and Class 8 Those roads, not being Class 6 or 7, which cannot be assigned to Classes 1, 2, 3 whose main function is to provide access to or 4. abutting property. Class 9 Those roads which provide almost exclusively for one activity or function and which cannot be assigned to Classes 6, 7 and 8. The NAASRA guidelines indicated that Class 7 roads by definition include both the arterial roads and those roads “which distribute traffic to local street system”. The latter group could be extremely limited or very large depending on one’s interpretation of the intent.

page 16

For more information visit www.dtei.sa.gov.au/lrac

Government of South Australia

Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure

Local Government Association of South Australia