Table of Contents A. Overview ...... 3 B. Melbourne’s Growth and Transport Challenges ...... 3 C. Role of Hoddle-Punt Corridor ...... 4 D. Background ...... 5 E. Options Description ...... 6 F. Analysis of Results ...... 7 G. Strategic Context - Buses ...... 17 H. Strategic Context – Transport and Land Use...... 21 I. Recommendation ...... 23

2

A. OVERVIEW

VicRoads, PTV and Transport for Victoria have prepared this memo post Ministerial Advisory Committee (MAC) consideration of the Punt Road Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO), under the umbrella of the Department for Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources (DEDJTR). The purpose of this memo is to help answer queries raised by the Minister for Planning on the MAC’s recommendations and provide a recommendation as to a way forward.

In review of the MAC’s findings, VicRoads has engaged consultants Arup to consider the objectives and design suggestions put forward by the MAC. Accompanying this memo is Arup’s transport assessment report, which details the investigations that have taken place in light of the MAC’s findings.

B. MELBOURNE’S GROWTH AND TRANSPORT CHALLENGES

Melbourne is recognised as one of the most liveable cities in the world to work and play. The transport and planning system has a place in maintaining and lifting this status by delivering on the following outcomes:

 Enable people and business to make trips that underpin economic activity;  Provide reliable travel for individuals, business and goods movement;  Minimise travel time for individuals, business and goods movement;  Drive cost efficient freight and passenger transport; and  Achieve net public benefits through transport investment, policies and programs

The transport system should link people to places by:  Maximising access to residences, employment, markets, services and recreation;  Minimising barriers to access to the transport system;  Providing affordable transport options;  Facilitating seamless travel within and between different transport modes; and  Supporting active transport

Melbourne’s growth challenges

Melbourne is growing at an unprecedented rate. This growth is not just limited to the outer suburbs, the inner and middle suburbs are experiencing the effects of Melbourne’s population boom.

This growth will present a number of challenges which the management of the transport network can help address.

The Transport Integration Act brings together land-use and transport planning and ensures that all decisions affecting the transport system be made within the same integrated decision-making framework and support the same objectives, Plan Melbourne outlines the long term vision for housing, increasing jobs and liveability, integrating public transport and infrastructure and addressing climate change.

3

The transport challenge created by Melbourne’s growth

The transport response to Melbourne’s growth will continue to be a challenge. This exceptional growth will place higher demand on the transport network together with user and community expectations for the system to perform and get people where they need to go safely and reliability. Its performance has a direct relationship with Melbourne’s economic prosperity and liveability and as such transport is critical in enabling growth. To do this there needs to be better long term transport and land use planning, with focus on outcomes and optimisation of existing assets.

C. ROLE OF HODDLE-PUNT CORRIDOR

The transport system, including land use planning plays a pivotal role in ensuring people get on with their lives and does business. The Hoddle-Punt Corridor is a state significant corridor within Melbourne and Victoria as it:

 does the heavy lifting by moving people and providing access to employment, education and services;  is unique as it one of a few arterial roads that provides connection for all transport modes; trains, buses, and trams and facilitates access to cycling corridors;  connects the transport network locally, state-wide and nationally as a conduit to the Central Business District, access to the west, north, eastern and south eastern parts of Melbourne, by linking inner and middle Melbourne via major freeways (Eastern, Monash/Westgate/M1/M80, City-Link, Tullamarine Freeways).

It is the only major north-south arterial that can provide a strategically important bypass of Central Melbourne and encourage through traffic away from local roads and key activity centers such as Victoria Street, Richmond and Chapel Street, South Yarra.

Currently road users can experience significant delays throughout the day both along and across the corridor, not just at peak times. These delays also affect buses, pedestrians and cyclists, increasing their wait times at intersections. For the people who live and work along and across this corridor, the amenity is poor and does little to attract cyclist and pedestrians.

Further, the risk of casualty crashes along the corridor is about 50% higher than for comparable arterial roads. The result is a considerable impact to the economy through lower productivity and reduced amenity for the local community particularly as the population growth becomes more apparent in the near future.

Figure 1 below illustrates Hoddle-Punt Rd as a SmartRoads Preferred Traffic Routes (PTR) and the substantial distances to the next PTR. The rest of the transport network provides for other key priorities & activities such as: public transport priority, local access and strip shopping centers. In Section H of this document, the interdependency of the Hoddle-Punt corridor to a range of current initiatives is that support the transport network plan is discussed.

4

Figure 1 Preferred Traffic Routes Melbourne and other major infrastructure projects

D. BACKGROUND

The Victorian Government committed to review the existing Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) along the east side of Punt Road between Alexandra Avenue in South Yarra and Union Street in Windsor. On 17 February 2015, the Minister for Planning appointed a Ministerial Advisory Committee (MAC), to undertake a review and provide the Minister with recommendations on the future of the PAO. The MAC’s Terms of Reference required VicRoads to prepare a background report (released August 2015) and an Options Report to “expand upon the Background Report by including traffic modelling and projections for various future options along Punt Road” (released October 2015). Arup was engaged by VicRoads to prepare the options report to input into VicRoads response to the panel. Though VicRoads managed the process in responding and submitting to the MAC it was done in conjunction with Public Transport Victoria (PTV), as both authorities shared the same position on retaining the entire PAO for transport purposes into the future. Following the Options Report which included seven options, a public exhibition period and subsequent panel hearing was undertaken. After hearing views of the community and expert witness statements, the MAC in late May 2016 provided a report to the Minister for Planning detailing its long term preference was for a modified version of Option 5, herein known as Option 5a. Option 5a was similar to the previous Option 5 however with an intended greater focus on bus priority and minimising future heritage impacts. The Minister for Planning on the 17th of August 2016 requested that further technical work be undertaken by VicRoads in response to the findings, and assumptions made, by the MAC to help inform the Government's decision about the future of the PAO. Figure 2 (below) provides an illustration of the further work that has been undertaken in reflection of the MAC’s finding. The key elements of consideration from the technical work include:

5

 understand the performance of Option 5a relative to the Punt Road Base Case and the VicRoads/PTV preferred Option 7(which utilised the full PAO);  using the MAC’s premise of limiting future widening of Punt Road to only around the intersections, develop and assess an additional option which provides enhanced bus priority and improved overall transport performance, known as Option 5b;  assessing the MAC’s finding that full length bus lanes along the corridor are not warranted; and  testing the MAC’s assertion that due to constraints at Swan Street and Punt Road, there is no case to upgrade the intersection of Punt Road and Alexandra Avenue.  Re-think Option 7: to provide improved bus priority, improve accessibility, deliver against the governments safe systems approach to road safety and maintain opportunities to reduce traffic volumes on other surrounding streets, such as: St. Kilda Road and Chapel Street

Figure 2 Post-MAC Technical Work & Options Refinement

E. OPTIONS DESCRIPTION

As highlighted above and in Figure 2, six broad options have been refined and tested in more detailed post-MAC findings;

 Base Case: is a ‘Do-minimum’ scenario through to 2031.  Base Case plus SHS: is the base case including the improvements being proposed at Swan Street and Punt Road.

6

 Option 5a MAC: An option put forward by MAC to minimise heritage impacts. Widening would be limited to major intersections.  Option 5b: Using 5a as the basis, provides improved public transport priority by catering for longer bus lanes on the approach and departure of key intersections, allows for widening to improve operations at Alexandra Avenue, and widening of the Hoddle bridge to provide dedicated bus lanes.

 Option 7a: has four traffic lanes midblock and six at major intersections plus dedicated bus lanes (using left turn lane through intersections). It includes widening at Alexandra Avenue and Hoddle Bridge.

 Option 7b: has four traffic lanes only plus dedicated bus lanes and includes widening at Alexandra Avenue and Hoddle bridge.

F. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

A detailed analysis of each option is presented in the Attachment A: VicRoads - Punt Road Public Acquisition Overlay Review – Response to Advisory Committee Report Draft 1 – November 2016 Transport Assessment. The following section will provide the findings for the options with the exception of the Base Case + SHS. Option 5a MAC The main objective of MAC’s Option 5a was to provide greater bus priority and improved traffic capacity along the Punt Road corridor as well as minimising future heritage impacts. The approach was to provide additional lanes at major intersections to reduce bus and traffic delay while maintaining the existing corridor width between major intersections. In doing so, the PAO could be removed between major intersections.

At the major intersections in Option 5a, the Punt Road approach includes a new auxiliary lane to be used for left turning traffic and through movements for buses. Unlike the previous Option 5, the new lanes are not for general traffic through movements. A diagrammatic layout with typical Punt Road cross sections shown in Figure 3.

7

Figure 3 – Option 5a layout

Forecast travel demands using the Victorian Integrated Transport Model (VITM) estimates an increase of traffic by 19% and an increase in bus patronage by 38% by 2031.

This option does reduce the impact on properties and heritage buildings and provide for better bus priority with considerable improvements to travel times in the AM and PM peaks for both buses and cars. The improvements are due to the separation of the left and through movement lanes rather than the short bus lanes.

This option has short term benefits, where the traffic volumes do not exceed those tested for 2031. However when volumes are increased, reliability of travel is poor and the network is under pressure during high demand periods such as major events at the MCG and where there is a peak in growth. This in turn means longer queues on Punt Road, having a direct impact on bus travel times.

Although this option sees some improvement to the intersections, it does not address the congestion issues mid block and along the full corridor from Swan Street to St Kilda Road.

The MAC noted that improvements to the Hoddle bridge and Alexandra Parade was not required as part of this option, as the Swan Street/Punt Road intersection was a constraint to this corridor. This was correct at the time of the Panel hearing in February 2016. However in May 2016 the Victorian Government announced the Streamlining Hoddle Street project to upgrade four key intersections along the Hoddle Street and Punt Road, of which Swan Street/Punt Road is one.

The upgrade of the Swan Street/Punt Rd intersection is expected to be completed by the end of 2018. As a direct result of this improvement, it is expected that the capacity will increase by 50%.

8

This induced demand to the southof the corridor would have a significant impact on the capacity of the Hoddle bridge and Alexandra Avenue intersection. Option 5a does not account for these induced demands. As such Hoddle bridge, Alexandra Ave and Domain Road will need to be upgraded or improved to cater for these demands including buses.

In addition, the opportunity for improved amenity for pedestrians, cyclists and increase to public space is limited, as well as the opportunity to provide a safer environment for vulnerable road users.

In summary, Option 5a:  Makes the intersection of Punt Road and Alexandra Avenue into the weakest link along the entire Hoddle-Punt corridor;  Caters only reasonably well for 2031 demands, but does not cater well for demands beyond 2031;  Impacts bus travel times as the bus lanes provided are too short to be effective during peak hours;  Does not provide opportunities to improve pedestrian, cycling or amenity values; and  Does not provide opportunities to improve the safety of the corridor.

As such Option 5a is not recommended.

Option 5b Optimised This option improves on the MAC’s option 5a by extending the bus lanes to allow better queuing lengths at the approach to intersections, providing longer right turn lanes ensuring no vehicles would block through movement lanes and includes reconfiguration of the Alexandra Avenue intersection by displacing right turn movements to Dobson Street, upgrade of Domain Road and widening of the Hoddle bridge.

A typical cross section on Punt Road in Option 5b is shown in Figure 4. Figure 4 – Option 5b cross-section

9

The widening of the Hoddle bridge and improvements to Alexandra Avenue and Domain Road was needed to address the performance of Punt Road resulting from induced demand following improvements to Swan Street/Punt Road intersection as part of the Streamlining Hoddle Street project.

This option is slightly better than Option 5a, with significantly improved travel times for buses and cars due to the lesser impact on the through movements by turn queues. The inclusion of Alexandra Avenue intersection improvements is the main reason for the additional travel time improvement.

Similar to Option 5a, this option has short term benefits when the traffic volumes do not exceed those tested for 2031. However when volumes are increased, reliability of travel is considerably affected, and the queuing would extend into midblock.

Similar to Option 5a, the impact on properties and heritage buildings is reduced. The opportunity for improved amenity for pedestrians, cyclists and increase to public space however is limited, as well as the opportunity to provide improved safety outcomes for vulnerable road users.

In summary, Option 5b:  Improves performance of the transport network as compared to Option 5a, mainly due to the inclusion of widening and improvements at the intersection of Punt Road and Alexandra Avenue;  Caters only reasonably well for 2031 demands, but does not cater well for demands beyond 2031;  Caters reasonably well for buses to 2031, but does not cater well for buses beyond 2031;  Does not provide opportunities to improve pedestrian, cycling or amenity values; and  Does not provide opportunities to improve the safety of the corridor.

As such Option 5b is not recommended.

Option 7a Option 7a is similar to the previous Option 7 except with changes to Alexandra Avenue intersection and bus stop locations on the departure side of intersections. Alexandra Avenue intersection improvements are similar those of Option 5b, but there is an additional traffic lane in each direction along Punt Road and Hoddle Bridge widened.

Option 7a involves acquisition of properties on the east side for the majority of the length of Punt Road in order to provide a six lane dual carriageway comprising two traffic lanes and a bus lane in each direction. This option also incorporates widening on the intersection approaches to provide further capacity enhancements and 100m parking clearways on High Street, Commercial Road, Toorak Road and Alexandra Avenue intersections.

Similar to previous Option 5, the operation of key right turn movements is modified in order to simplify traffic signal operations and better align with the network strategy. A typical cross section on Punt Road in Option 7a is shown in Figure 5.

10

Figure 5 – Option 7a cross section

This option has a considerable increase in traffic volumes as a result of a wider cross section, in comparison to Options 5a and 5b. With the dedicated bus lanes, there is an increase in daily bus patronage by approximately 62%, with considerable improvements to travel times.

This option does however notably increase car travel times in the AM and PM peaks as a direct result of turn queues extending into through lanes. This generates congestion and poor reliability for travel along Punt Rd, worse than Option 5a and 5b particularly during peak demand and increased traffic volumes.

Although the model results indicate that the option produces the second lowest travel time for buses, the additional traffic generated overtime impedes on northbound bus movement more than option 5a, 5b and 7b.

Unlike Options 5a and 5b, this option provides more opportunity to improve amenity for pedestrians and cyclists by creating wider off street paths, shared cycling lane with bus lanes, a buffer between residential properties and the roadway, and opportunity to design a safer environment for vulnerable road users. There is also more scope to reduce visual, noise and cultural heritage impacts.

This option however has the greatest impact on properties and heritage buildings.

In summary, Option 7a:  Induces too much traffic to the corridor, such that it actually makes the corridor perform worse than other options at 2031 and beyond.

As such Option 7a is not recommended.

11

Option 7b Option 7b is the same geometric layout as Option 7a however with four main differences. These differences include:

 only having two through traffic lanes along Punt Road at the intersection with High Street, Commercial Road, Toorak Road and Alexandra Avenue, (unlike Option 7a which has three);  allowing right turns at intersections as per the existing situation (unlike Option 7a which displaced right turns via a U-turn facility west of Commercial Road and Toorak Road intersections);  separating left turning traffic and bus lanes at the Punt Road intersections at High Street, Commercial Road and Toorak Road (unlike Option 7a which has a shared left turn / bus lane); and  widening of Hoodle bridge to allow for dedicated bus lanes (unlike Option 7a which does not).

A comparative cross-section and layout of Toorak Road intersection is shown in Figure 6. The comparative layout below can also be applied to Commercial Road and High Street intersections.

Figure 6 – Layout comparison of Toorak Road intersection in Option 7a and Option 7b

12

Unlike options 5a, 5b and 7a, this option has significant improvements to travel times for cars and buses, and similar to Option 7a, provides for increased daily bus patronage of approximately 62%. The cross section for this option allows for dedicated bus lanes, left and right turn lanes at the major intersection, providing appropriate queue lengths so as to no impede on priority of bus lanes or through lanes.

Modelling results show this option has the best results for buses overall. It has the lowest travel times in all times periods except for the northbound AM peak, which is second lowest. This is likely due to signal coordination rather than dedicated bus lanes. The reliability of bus travel times will provide greater opportunity for mode shift from cars to buses and thus the opportunity to further increase people-moving capacity with operational changes such as Higher Occupancy Bus lanes.

Where traffic volumes exceed those tested for 2031, the network copes well with minimal impact on congestion and reliability of travel.

Like Option 7a, this option provides more opportunity to improve amenity for pedestrians and cyclists by creating wider off street paths, shared cycling lane with bus lanes, a buffer between residential properties and the roadway, and opportunity to design a safer environment for vulnerable road users. There is also more scope to reduce visual, noise and cultural heritage impacts.

This option, like Option 7a, has the greatest impact on properties and heritage buildings.

In summary, Option 7b:  Provides the best overall outcome for the transport network in 2031;  Provides the best outcome for bus performance, particularly beyond 2031;  Fits the broader strategic planning currently underway on adjacent corridors such as St.Kilda Road, Hoddle Street, Nepean Highway; and  Provides opportunities to improve the safety of the corridor, via provision of a median, space for wider footpaths and potential space for cyclists.

13

As such it is recommended that planning move forward on the basis of Option 7b and therefore the PAO be maintained as is.

Traffic Modelling outcomes - Options comparison for vehicle movements

Figure 7 and Figure 8 illustrate the average modelled traffic travel times in 2031 for the AM peak for either direction of travel. Option 7b performs the best, closely followed by Option 5b, with both performing significantly better than the MAC’s Option 5a.

Figure 7 -Average modelled northbound travel times for traffic in the AM peak hour

14

Figure 8 - Average modelled southbound travel times for traffic in the AM peak hour

Options comparison for bus performance

Figure 9 below highlights the significant travel time savings in the AM Peak period (PM Peak similar results) achieved by extending the bus lanes along the corridor. Although the MAC’s Option 5a was not taken forward for testing under the high demand scenario, it can be comfortably assumed it would continue to perform worse than option 5b which provides advanced priority.

Under the 2031 scenario, it can be seen that Option 7b is the best performing option for buses, performing 6% better than Option 5b and 22% better than Option 5a.

Figure 9 - AM Peak Bus Travel Times - Northbound

15

The difficulty in long term planning is foreseeing planned network changes and road user growth. Only Option 7b preserves the ability to maintain network reliability and resilience in the longer term. Both options 5b and 7b were tested with 15% additional traffic demand beyond 2031, to stimulate high demand period, such as major events (MCG) and to determine what would happen if restrictions to traffic were put in place on parallel roads (e.g. Chapel Street, St. Kilda Road). Figure 10 below illustrates the impact to bus services along the corridor under high demand scenarios.

In Figure 10 it can be seen that beyond 2031 buses perform better under Option 7b;  33% better than Option 5b in the AM Peak (Northbound);  19% better than Option 5b in the PM Peak (Northbound);  15% better than Option 5b in the AM Peak (Southbound); and  14% better than Option 5b in the PM Peak (Southbound).

Figure 10 - High Demand Scenario Impact to Buses

Impact of improvements to the Swan Street/Punt Road intersection

Modelling has been sourced from the Streamlining Hoddle Street (SHS) initiative to understand the interaction between Punt Road south of Alexandra Avenue and the corridor to the north. The modelled results highlight that the network is expected to get substantially worse without the proposed works on Hoddle Street and Punt Road as part of the SHS initiative. It also shows the substantial improvements to travel times in completing improvements along Punt Road, especially at Alexandra Avenue (Options 5b & 7b).

The Streamlining Hoddle Street project has been modelled to improve the performance of the Swan Street intersection by 50%, meaning that it would no longer be the constraint on the corridor.

16

Options comparison for people capacity

Using global case studies set out in the Global Street Design Guide (October 2016), the people capacity of different street types is assessed. Figure 11 shows the approximate capacity of people of different modes. While this is indicative, it can provide an estimate on the potential change in people capacity for the various Punt Road options.

Figure 11 Total people capacity for Punt Road options

G. STRATEGIC CONTEXT - BUSES

Future demand for Bus services

Bus route 246, which operates along Punt Road and Hoddle Street, already provides a an attractive level of service along the corridor, with a service frequency of 10 minutes during the peak periods and weekdays , with operating hours extending from 5am to midnight. This service level is better than existing Smartbus services.

As part of the Concept Option Report in 2015, ARUP has undertaken VITIM demand modeling to forecast bus patronage on route 246. The forecasts for a service with a 5 minute frequency is as follows :

Table 1 Daily Bus Patronage

Location Daily Patronage 2011 VITM 2031 VITM 2031 VITM ‘Do Nothing’ Previous Option 7 Punt Road (South of 3,680 5,080 (38%) 5950 (62%) Toorak Rd)

A bus lane along Punt Road will provide an opportunity to significantly increase the people- moving capacity of the corridor with high frequency bus services. A bus lane also provides flexibility for how the road is operated, providing an opportunity to allow other particular road users to use the bus lane to further increase the number of people moved along the corridor if desired. The number of vehicles permitted to use the bus lane should be limited so that it does not adversely affect bus travel time. Permitted vehicles could include:  coaches, including scheduled public transport and private hire  high occupancy vehicles eg. cars carrying 3 people or more  taxis  VHA cars  ride share vehicles eg. Uber  emergency vehicles (eg. going to Alfred Hospital).

17

In order to ensure the bus lane is not used illegally by ineligible vehicles, full time enforcement will be required using automated vehicle occupancy detection technology. This technology has been implemented along high occupancy vehicle lanes in the USA.

Demonstrated benefits of permanent bus lanes - Victoria Parade Case Study

In 2015, new full time bus lanes in each direction were installed on Victoria Parade, along with changes to traffic lane and parking configurations.

Bus operational performance data collected following the implementation of the bus lanes shows that both journey times and journey time variability have been reduced. The improvement in bus operational performance has been reflected in substantial patronage growth over the same period. The average increase in monthly patronage for the 11 bus routes using Victoria Parade has been 22.65% from an average 340,000 passengers to 420,000 passengers, based on myki touch-on data collected before (2014) and post (2016) implementation of the new lanes. This could be attributed to the removal of on road car parking spaces on Victorian Parade, more reliable bus services and changes to myki zone pricing, leading to mode shift.

Reducing crowding for city-oriented services

Route 246 provides a key alternative transport service for people travelling north-south across the eastern fringe of the city without having to travel into the city centre. For this cross-town service to be effective, it should be faster than and just as reliable as the option of going into and coming out of the city.

Attracting more public transport users to Route 246 will help to provide crowding relief to those train, tram and bus services heading both to and from the city for a given level of service, as people head into town on one service and then use another service to come out of the city to reach their destination. This is because services going into the city tend to be most heavily loaded with passengers on the approach to the fringe of the city. Providing an attractive cross-town option will result in some passengers disembarking their city-orientated services just before they are at their most heavily loaded for a given capacity.

Parallel north-south public transport services

Whilst Punt Road and Chapel Street are parallel corridors, Route 246 presents a cross-town option for a wider market as it serves different destinations and has more interchange opportunities than the tram service on Chapel Street (Route 78). The key differences include:

 The Punt Road bus service has a rail interchange at Richmond Station, while the Chapel Street tram interchanges at East Richmond. Belgrave, Lilydale, Glen Waverly and Alamein services stop at Richmond. Only the Glen Waverly and Alamein services stop at East Richmond where there is an interchange with the Chapel Street tram.

 As Route 246 extends further north than Chapel Street, it also interchanges with the South Morang and Hurstbridge lines, as well as Route 86 (tram), bus services to Latrobe University/Northland via the Clifton Hill Interchange, and DART and Johnston Street bus services to Kew and beyond in Abbotsford.

 As Route 246 is closer to the city and it also interchanges with Route 96 (tram) at Acland Street, St Kilda.

18

 The St Kilda Road tram and bus services provide connectivity into CBD, rather than providing a cross-town option.

A key public transport route linking major destinations across the inner city

Bus route 246 links the high density residential communities with major employment, commercial, educational, tourist and sporting precincts. Growth in the intensity of these land uses is expected to continue, which will result in greater demand to travel along the Punt Road corridor. A fast, frequent and reliable public transport service along this corridor will be crucial to support this growth to ensure that a congested transport network is not seen as a barrier to participation by the community.

The Route 246 bus service which operates along the Hoddle Street-Punt Road corridor is an important public transport service which connects between Elsternwick Station and Clifton Hill bus and tram interchange.

The service currently provides interchange opportunities with 101 train lines at Clifton Hill, Richmond and Elsternwick stations, 15 tram routes and 27 bus routes including DART routes that intersect this key cross-town corridor, as shown in Figure 12 with the interchange locations highlighted. It is estimated that about half of Melbourne’s population living in the north-east, east and south-east of the metropolitan area have access to radial public transport services that cross Route 246.

The Punt Road section of the route itself intersects with several tram routes which feed into the St Kilda Road-Swanston Street tram corridor. Tram routes on these cross streets (High Street and Toorak, Commercial and Dandenong Roads) operate at high frequencies and are well patronised throughout the day.

19

Figure 12: Place and Interchanges Served by Bus Route 246

Source: Public Transport Victoria (2016) Journey Planner Map Route 246 serves a number of key employment and education destinations that people living across the Melbourne metropolitan area seek to access. These include the Alfred and Epworth (Richmond) Hospitals, St Kilda Road, Cremorne, East Melbourne (Victoria Parade precinct) and La Trobe University (via the Clifton Hill interchange). In future, it will also provide access to a redeveloped area to the west of Hoddle Street, Collingwood to Smith Street, and the North Richmond to Victoria Park corridor identified in Plan Melbourne as being a site for urban renewal.

Close access to a diversity of places within short and reliable travel time is an important part of making an area liveable for a growing population without having to drive, including for the communities living near the corridor in the Cities of Stonnington, Melbourne, Port Phillip and Yarra. Route 246 provides Melburnians with access to some of the city’s more popular shopping and recreation destinations. These include Elwood and St Kilda Beaches; Acland and Fitzroy Streets in St Kilda; Chapel and Greville Streets and Toorak Road in Stonnington, the Botanic Gardens, Melbourne Sports Precinct (MCG and Tennis Centre) and Swan Street, Bridge Road and Victoria Street in Richmond. Reduced usage of cars to these locations also helps improve amenity at these places.

20

If Route 246 can be made an even more attractive service, these train, tram and bus connections can make public transport as a whole a more attractive and genuine option for a wider number of transport trips, not just those destined for the city.

Road Network

Bus Route 246 is included in the Principal Public Transport Network (PPTN). The PPTN is intended to support integrated land use and transport planning by providing certainty to land use planners and the community about locations that are or will be served by high-quality public transport. More diverse and dense land use is encouraged on the PPTN to help support public transport usage. As this land use change occurs, demand will grow for public transport services. As demand increases, improvements can be made to services to make them more reliable, efficient, frequent and a more convenient option for people to use.

Plan Melbourne is currently being refreshed, with an update soon to be released. The Plan Melbourne Refresh Discussion Paper (October 2015) highlighted the inclusion of the PPTN as an option for Plan Melbourne to support integrated transport and land use outcomes along key public transport corridors. During the Plan Melbourne refresh consultation process the PPTN concept was widely supported, including its incorporation into the Victorian Planning Provisions. Of the 111 responses to this item in the discussion paper, 94% either strongly agreed or agreed with the option (Summary of Submissions, May 2016).

H. STRATEGIC CONTEXT – TRANSPORT AND LAND USE

Long term approach

As Melbourne grows it is likely that demand for the vehicular movements will increase, retaining the PAO will help ensure that the transport network can caters for key strategic movements.

Integrating with and supporting land use

The Punt Road-Hoddle Street corridor is lined with important community services such as schools, hospitals, places of worship, sporting facilities and aged care facilities. Improvements to public transport and better facilities for walking and cycling can help to counter the effects of traffic congestion along Punt Road and the surrounding local roads.

The existing level of traffic and congestion along the corridor reduces the attractiveness for land use change. Appropriate and integrated improvements to transport operation would enable land use to change, the extent to which would be dependent on the level of compatibility of the transport change with land use integration. However, land use change would also bring additional local access requirements, from an increased need for walking and cycling, to public transport and business and private vehicle travel. This would result in increasing travel demand on the road corridor and any transport solution would need to consider that demand.

Any future development along this corridor would have an implication for transport servicing and passing through Punt Road. To varying degrees, new developments would add pressure for car parking, pedestrian and bicycle access along and across the corridor, additional public transport demand and further general traffic demand. Early planning of the transport system will be key to address these changes and there is real opportunity to enable this as part of the Punt Rd PAO review.

21

Private Vehicle

The Hoddle-Punt corridor is the only inter-regional continuous north-south route in the area. The corridor provides a major north-south arterial connection to various highways and freeways, an eastern bypass of the Melbourne CBD, and a key access to the Melbourne CBD and nearby suburbs and attractions (including employment areas and sporting grounds) and is a Preferred Traffic Route under the SmartRoads Road Use Hierarchy.

Freight

The freight function of the Punt Road – Hoddle Street corridor is not for cross-metropolitan heavy vehicle movements as this is generally performed by Melbourne's freeway network which more directly links Melbourne's key freight generating nodes in outer northern, western and south eastern Melbourne.

Depending on exact location, in the south east of Melbourne, the Monash Freeway and Nepean Highway-Queens Road-Kings Way corridors provide the primary heavy vehicle movements routes connecting to the West Gate Freeway and freight generating nodes in the west and north (via City Link and the Western Ring Road). Whilst the Nepean Highway freight corridor connects to both the Punt Road and Queens Road-Kings Way routes, unlike Kings Way, Punt Road does not directly connect to the M1 corridor to and from the west.

Whilst the Hoddle-Punt corridor can provide network resilience by allowing heavy vehicles to move between the freeways if major incidents or delays occur, the key freight function of the corridor relates to its heavy use by light commercial, trade vehicles and smaller trucks servicing the many activity centres throughout the inner suburbs, As such, congestion on the corridor can have a significant impact on the subregional economy.

Other transport projects

Consideration should be given to a number of major transport projects which are already underway. These projects are at various stages in their life cycle, they are either under construction, in review or are in the planning phases. Projects in the region of the corridor include: the Swan Street Bridge upgrade project, Victoria Parade bus lanes, The City Road Master Plan, Frankston Rail Level Crossing Removal and Melbourne Metro Tunnel.

There is a need to take a long term region wide holistic view of the road network in this area. To review the overall value of the Hoddle-Punt corridor consideration should be given to the impact of these projects on network outcomes, this will help to understand the potential future strategic use and development of the corridor. Network investments can be planned to align with this vision.

Punt Road from the Yarra River to St Kilda Road has a significant role in connecting people from the north to the south east as an alternate city bypass. It is also the only state significant road corridor where there are currently no immediate plans for development or network improvements.

Consideration should be given to how future development of Punt Road could constrain movement in the near future as a result of induced demand from other projects that will improve the transport system.

22

However, discussion around the transport network in the area provides a significant opportunity for Government to review the long term role of the Hoddle-Punt corridor to lift its strategic importance. This will help the corridor to act as a primary bus and private vehicle movement corridor which will bypass the Central City and facilitate access the Central City and Melbourne’s premier Sports and leisure precinct.

A modally agnostic region wide approach to planning for the future development of the road network could also present opportunities to assess the role of other major roads such as Queens Road and St Kilda Road. This may mean, potentially defining Queens Road and Punt Road as the primary state significant movement corridors to/from and to bypass the CBD. This will enable road use on St Kilda Road to be transformed to a principal tram and cycling corridor, which will help to identify innovative opportunities for transport and land use integration, to activate and enable a sense of place through developing sustainable, vibrant and accessible community precincts.

I. RECOMMENDATION

The outcomes which Options 5a and 5b would deliver would provide only short term benefits, particularly for private vehicles and buses. However they do not provide the opportunity to improve on amenity for pedestrians, cyclists and other vulnerable road users. For these reasons as noted in the body of this report and supporting report, these options are not recommended.

Similarly Option 7a is not recommended as it actually induces too much traffic that the corridor further north along Hoddle Street cannot cater for.

Option 7b however provides for increased capacity without reducing the reliability of travel for private vehicles and buses. The dedicated bus lanes will provide further opportunity to increase bus services along the route and encourage mode shift for those travelling from the north to the south of Melbourne. This option presents opportunities to lift the amenity south of Swan Street for pedestrians, cyclists and provides an increased sense of place and safety. With the improvements to other intersections along the corridor as part of Streamlining Hoddle Street, Option 7b allows for these improvements to continue south of the Swan Street. This option presents the best transport and amenity outcomes. Therefore it is recommended that this is adopted as the preferred option.

Assessing the longer term, and wider network impacts of transport investments is critical for ensuring that in the long term the Hoddle-Punt corridor delivers desired transport outcomes to Melbourne. Given the rapidly evolving external environment our network is operating in, planning decisions should allow for an agile and adaptable approach to transport planning required to respond to the high levels of population growth which Melbourne is expected to experience in the coming years. The decisions we make for Punt Road today will have a significant impact on how people choose to travel to employment, education and services for many years to come.

It is therefore recommended that the full Public Acquisition Overlay be retained to allow decision makers of the future with an opportunity to consider a wider range of transport interventions across a range of modes. This will help to ensure that Melbourne remains a prosperous and liveable city for years to come.

23