5.3 Assessment Breakdown For the purposes of this assessment I have assessed the proposed works in the following sectors: • Sector 1: Park 13 / Park 14 • Sector 2: Remainder

Image 8. Sector Reference Plan I consider the following attributes to the National Heritage significance of the Park Lands and City Grid Layout to be most relevant when considering the potential impacts of the proposed works: • The City Grid Layout; • Views and vistas; • Park lands layout; and • Aesthetic qualities / Landscape / Use. 5.4 Sector 1: Park 13 / Park 14 The proposal seeks to undertake the following works through the Park 13 / 14 sector of the Park Lands: • the realignment of East Terrace between Pirie and Grenfell Streets; • minor changes to Rundle Road (bike lane to outer side of carparking, pedestrian crossing points); • amendments to the Rundle Road and Dequetteville Terrace intersection; 29

• tunnel ‘portal’ exit at East Terrace and Grenfell Street intersection; : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - • underground substation (identified as an unlabeled blue fill along the : Rev Project Bahn City Access proposed tunnel alignment to the north of Rundle Road); • minor kerb realignments to East Terrace; and • “over-run” facility for Clipsal), at the intersection of East Terrace and Bartels Road (which I have been advised by DPTI will likely be bituminised) This latter item (ie the Clipsal “over-run” does not for part of this project, however is ‘envisaged’ work arising from the proposal. C 10.08 .15

Image 9. Sector 1: Park 14 5.4.1 The City Grid Layout Potential impacts to the City Grid layout are primarily limited to the proposed realignment of East Terrace, between Grenfell and Pirie Streets. This section of roadway was originally set out in Light’s 1837 Plan as a straight length between North Terrace and Pirie Streets, where after East Terrace deviated in response to the localised topography. The National Heritage listing noted: The study by City Futures (2007 Vol 1:97) notes that 'the town was surveyed in two stages. The portion of 700 acres south of the river was laid out first. The fretted edge on the eastern side took advantage of the local topography and provided more lots with a parkland outlook…

[Note: the referenced case study was not able to be sourced for this Heritage Impact Assessment] This response to the local topography is intrinsic to the heritage significance of Light’s plan, particularly when considered in the context of the set out of . 30 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

Image 10. 1837 Plan of Adelaide extract: Source: Mapco.net (marker arrow added by author) This section of East Terrace is not, however, in its original configuration, having been realigned in the 1960s to facilitate an easy vehicular passage from Hutt Street into East Terrace10 in response to traffic orientated urban planning principles of the time11.

31 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

10 C Jones D, Op Cit, p233 11 Llewellyn-Smith M, Op Cit, pp63-64 10.08 .15

Image 11. East Terrace looking Southward, c1905: Source: & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p231

32 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 12. 1936 aerial of original alignment of East Terrace. Source: Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p233 (marker arrow added by author). C 10.08 .15

Image 13. 2015 aerial image of East Terrace showing realignment. Source: Google Maps. (marker arrow added by author) This re-alignment of East Terrace is one of the few fundamental alterations to Light’s original Grid Layout of the .

While the 1960s realignment of East Terrace did have an adverse impact on the layout of Light’s Grid Layout for Adelaide (and accordingly its current National 33 Heritage values), it achieved its desired objective of assisting traffic flows from one : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - of the City’s important feeder and mainstreets (Hutt Street) into one the City’s : Rev Project Bahn City Access wider East-West Streets, Grenfell Street. Further, the original Grid Layout remains readily discernable due to the alignment of built form to the original allotment setout, and the retention of the Park Lands use to the areas created between the realignment and the original setout. Had the 1960s realignment included the subdivision and redevelopment of this land, such interpretability of the original setout would have been severely compromised. The proposed O-Bahn City Access Project seeks to once again realign this section of East Terrace in response to traffic management issues, as illustrated by the plan extract below (Image 14). C 10.08 .15

34 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 14. East Terrace realignment as proposed by O-Bahn City Access Project. Extract of drawing DPTI-SKT-7304-99-0804 While I consider the 1960s realignment to have had an adverse impact on Light’s original Grid Layout (and associated Heritage values), the further reconfiguration proposed by this project (and the ‘envisaged’ Clipsal “run-off” area) are not considered to further contribute to, or exacerbate, these previous impacts. As C noted, Light’s original Grid Layout remains readily discernable due to the historic 10.08 .15

set out of buildings to the original allotment pattern, while lands accommodating the current roadway alignment will be transferred back to park lands, and landscaped accordingly. The section of parklands proposed to accommodate the realignment currently accommodates an interpretative plaque, noting the general location of the first mass for the Catholic Community of . This plaque should be relocated within the same general proximity as present as part of the works. Minor East Terrace kerb realignments and amendments to on-street parking north of Grenfell Street maintain the fundamental Grid Layout of the City plan and accordingly are not considered to have any impact on the National Heritage values of the place. 5.4.2 Views and Vistas As noted by the National Heritage listing: The city layout is designed to take full advantage of the topography, an important innovation for the time. The streets were sited and planned to maximise views and vistas through the city and Park Lands and from some locations to the … The judicious siting and wide streets maximised views and vistas through the city and Park Lands and from some locations to the Adelaide Hills. The plan features a hierarchy of road widths with a wide dimension to principal routes and terraces and alternating narrow and wide streets in the east- west direction. Light's planning innovation is supported by substantial historical documentation… The key views potentially affected by the proposed works are those looking eastward down Grenfell Street. The proposed works to Rundle Road are considered sufficiently minor as to not affect views and vistas associated with this roadway.

35 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 15. View 1 down Grenfell Street (near James Place intersection) looking eastward, 2015

C 10.08 .15

Image 16. View 2 down Grenfell Street looking eastward (approaching Frome St), 2015

Image 17. View 3 down Grenfell Street looking eastward (near former East End Market), 2015

Having assessed the key views and vistas down Grenfell Street, I do not consider the proposed O-Bahn City Access project to have any discernable impact on them, nor their associated heritage values. As is illustrated by the above series of photographs (Images 15-17), the primary views from Grenfell Street is to the Adelaide hills beyond, and these vistas are most prevalent when viewed deeper within the Adelaide layout, as the landscaping to the edge of the Park Lands at the 36 intersection of Grenfell Street and East Terrace currently obscures most views of : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - the hills beyond. : Rev Project Bahn City Access For the most part, the proposed works will be contained within the existing ground plane, with the exception of the proposed tunnel exit, and associated tunnel infrastructure (which is discussed in more detail in Section 5.4.3 below). Even in such instances however, the extent of possible visual intrusion is unlikely to impact on the views considered above. For these reasons, I do not consider the proposed O-Bahn City Access project to impact on the National Heritage values associated with the views and vistas

associated with the City Grid layout. C 10.08 .15

5.4.3 Park Lands Layout While the O-Bahn City Access project does not fundamentally change the layout of the outer or inner boundaries of the Park Lands, it does propose changes to the configuration of roadways and public transportation connections through the Park Lands, namely: • minor changes to Rundle Road (bike lane to outer side of carparking, pedestrian crossing points); • amendments to the Rundle Road and Dequetteville Terrace intersection, reducing its footprint through the removal of the wide sweeping turning lanes; and • tunnel ‘portal’ exit at East Terrace and Grenfell Street intersection.

37 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 18. Realignment of roadways through the Park Lands as proposed by O-Bahn City Access

Project. Extract of drawing DPTI-SKT-7304-99-0804 C 10.08 .15

This work also includes the transferring back to landscaped park lands of land associated with the reduction in roadway footprints arising from: • the amendments to the Rundle Road and Dequetteville Terrace intersection; • minor amendments to the East Terrace and Rundle Road intersection; and • the realignment of East Terrace between Grenfell and Pirie Streets. As examined in detail in Section 5.2 above, roadways and transportation connections through the Park Lands were not specifically intrinsic to Light’s City Grid and Park Lands layout. Rather, the primary driver for their provision, location and alignment appears to have been based on need / demand, with many of the City’s major streets simply being extended through to connect with outer lying areas. Over the history of the City (and its Park Lands) these connections have increased in number and size, and at times been realigned in response to the growing demands of an expanding (ie population) and modernising Capital City. While not formally identified in the National Heritage listing, such transportation connections are nonetheless part of the historic context and physical make-up of the place. They are also representative of the ongoing ‘evolution’ of the physical form and cultural values of the Park Lands, as discussed in Section 5.2 of this Report. As noted in Section 5.2, this is not to say that transportation needs and demands have been (or should be) the sole driver of the setout and modification of roadways and connections through the Park Lands. The Adelaide Park Lands have significant social and cultural values as recreational areas, sporting grounds, gardens and public facilities, and spaces for passive and active recreation. These attributes will be considered separately in Section 5.4.4 below. The proposed new O-Bahn tunnel within Park 14, and associated portal exit, aligns closely to the line of the c1908 Kensington Gardens tramway. This tramway remained in operation until the mid-late 1950s with the remnant embankment remaining visible today.

38 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

Image 19. Alignment of Kensington Gardens tramway through park lands, 1929

39 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 20. c1955 Kensington Gardens tramway through Park 14 along embankment. Source: Adelaide Remembers When Facebook page, June 2015 C 10.08 .15

Image 21. Remnant tramway embankment, April 2015 While this tramway embankment is of some historical interest, it does not have any specific formal heritage listing, nor necessarily should it. It remains a remnant of earlier transportation connection through the Park Lands, and illustrative of the continual physical and cultural evolution of the City’s . The majority of the new O-Bahn route though the Park Lands will be underground, and accordingly have negligible impact on the layout of the Park Lands. The proposed new tunnel exit within Park 14 will be a notable physical inclusion within the existing landscape setting. This is not in itself, however, inconsistent with the historic pattern of development of the City Grid and Park Lands, being representative of the ongoing growth and expansion of such connections in response to the evolving demands of an expanding and modernising Capital City. Further, the provision of a transportation connection in this location shares many similarities with the historic pattern of development of the City and Park Lands, having once accommodated the noted Kensington Gardens tramline. While the former tramline and current tunnel proposal have their obvious differences, there are nonetheless historic synergies and associations between the two. Image 6 and 19 show the layout of the Park Land between c1908 and c1957, with Park 14 being dissected by the Kensington Gardens tramway. 40 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - In contrast, the current O-Bahn proposal incorporates a tunnel for the majority of : Rev Project Bahn City Access its length. This approach is markedly different to that of the 1908 tramway, which simply traversed the Park Lands on a raised embankment. The provision of this tunnel is largely in response to the increased social and cultural values of the Park Lands, and the desire to minimise any associated physical and social impacts. In this context, the proposal seeks to balance the needs the growing and evolving City against the social, aesthetic and landscape qualities of the Park Lands, and in doing so demonstrates their evolving cultural values. This approach is consistent with the National Heritage values of the place. C 10.08 .15

5.4.4 Aesthetic / Social Qualities The aesthetic / social qualities of the Adelaide Park Lands are intrinsic to the National Heritage values. The National Heritage listing notes: The Adelaide Plan was the basis for attracting free settlers, offering certainty of land tenure and a high degree of amenity. Being formally laid out prior to settlement, with a grid pattern and wide streets and town squares, the Plan reflected new town planning conventions and contemporary ideas about the provision of common or reserved land for its aesthetic qualities, public health and recreation… The Park Lands act as a buffer to the City Centre, and also provide both passive and active recreational uses to the community. They are the setting for numerous public functions, and serve an aesthetic function in defining the city… The Adelaide Park lands have been valued by many South Australians over time for their aesthetic qualities… As the City grew, and evolved, so did the aesthetic / social qualities of the Park Lands. During the earliest years of the colony, the Park Lands were used for relatively utilitarian (and at times unsympathetic) purposes. Park 13 and Park 14 have historically accommodated a rubbish dump (1850s), and Sewer / Waterworks infrastructure (1879-1929, with the former Valve House remaining today). Notwithstanding this, however, this section of the Park Lands continued to be used for recreational purposes12. Similarly, while most of the original vegetation had been cleared from the Park Lands by 1850, there was a recognition by Council of the importance of the landscape characteristics of the City’s green belt, with planting programmes dating back as early as this era13. This evolving nature of the Park Lands is an integral part of their history, and in many ways not surprising, given their relatively informal and natural characteristics. Today Park 13 and Park 14 stand as a product of multiple phases of re- landscaping. It is difficult to specifically date or interpret any of these phases, with the exception of significant works undertaken by Council in the 1960s, primarily focussed on the provision of recreational spaces.

41 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

12 C Jones D, Op Cit, p218 13 ibid 10.08 .15

Image 22. Extract of lithograph of East Park lands published 10 July 1875. Source: Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p219

Image 23. Photograph from Kent Town Brewery looking westward down Rundle Street, c1876. Source: Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p220

42 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

Image 24. 1880 depiction of planting in east park lands. Source: Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p221

43 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 25. 1936 aerial of eastern park lands, showing landscaping. Source: Adelaide Park Lands &

Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p233 C 10.08 .15

Image 26. Park 14 (Park 14) as constructed or planted 11 July 1962. Source: Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p236

44 Image 27. Park 14 1969. Source: SLSA, B-71906 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

Image 28. Park 13 c1960. Source: SLSA B-70593

Image 29. Park 14, 2015 45 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O

- Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

Image 30. Sign in Park 14 providing interpretative material on the “Changing Face” of this section of park lands Park 13 and Park 14 have evolved to become one of the most utilised sections of the City’s Park Lands. In close proximity to the higher density residential and retail precinct of the East End, the parks regularly host major events (such as the Fringe Festival / Clipsal 500), and formed an integral part of the Adelaide Formula 1 circuit during the years of South Australia’s hosting between 1985 and 1995. The aesthetic / social impacts on the Adelaide Park Lands associated with new O- Bahn City Access Project will be largely limited to the Tunnel exit portal, with the majority of the new busway being accommodated in an underground tunnel. While the proposed works will require trees to be removed, and significant civil works to be undertaken within the Park Lands, these changes, if balanced with appropriate relandscaping, would not be inconsistent with the historic pattern of 46 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O

use, nor in turn the associated National Heritage values. - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access The project is currently in an early stage of conceptual development. Design resolution of infrastructure associated with the tunnel exit will require careful consideration to ensure the aesthetic / social qualities of the Park Lands are not adversely affected. Such infrastructure may include (but not be limited to) the design of: • roadway railings (if any); • details of proposed underground substation (which I have been advised will include landscaping over and a small above ground staircase access);

• signage (if any); and C • the tunnel exit portal. 10.08 .15

While details on these aspects of the project are yet to be developed they have been indicatively represented in the computer generated fly-though of the proposal, from which the following images have been extracted.

Image 31. Proposed tunnel exits within Park 14

Image 32. Proposed tunnel exits within Park 14

47 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C

Image 33. Proposed tunnel exits within Park 14 10.08 .15

The construction of the proposed new O-Bahn tunnel exit, and associated roadway, will have an impact on the aesthetic and social qualities of the Park Lands in the location of the affected areas. Such impacts, however, are not inconsistent with the National Heritage values of the place. Roadways and transportation connections have historically formed part of the aesthetic attributes of the City’s Park Lands, dividing the expansive green belt up into a series of smaller parks that in turn have evolved to develop their own landscape character and social identify. Rundle, Botanic and Bartels Roads are all examples of this. The acceptability (or otherwise) of such impacts on the aesthetic and social qualities of the Park Lands needs to be considered in the context of the evolving (and ever increasing) cultural values of the place. Had the proposal simply been a new busway traversing the parklands (as the historic Kensington Gardens tramway had been in this location) it is likely such impacts would not be representative of the National Heritage values of the place. This is not the case. Instead, the proposal seeks to significantly mitigate any adverse aesthetic and social impacts arising from the growing demands on the City’s transportation infrastructure by undergrounding the vast majority of the proposed new busway. This, in itself, is a clear representation of the high aesthetic and social values of the Park Lands, and accordingly (in principle) consistent with its National Heritage values. The limited design resolution of the tunnel portal exit means it is not possible to undertake a thorough assessment of the final impacts on the aesthetic National Heritage values of the Park Lands. In principle, however, I consider such impacts to be manageable if the recommendations as outlined in Section 5.4.4.1 below are followed. Such ‘in principle’ support is nonetheless conditional on the nature of the final design resolution, and any changes or further details that may arise through the development of the concept. While I have noted conditional support with regards to the potential heritage impacts, projects of this nature, at this early stage of development, risk scope variations as they are developed that may result in increased heritage impacts beyond an acceptable level. Any further development of the concept needs to be highly cognisant of this, and seek ongoing input on the impact of such changes by a suitably qualified heritage expert with detailed understanding of the National Heritage values of the Adelaide Park Lands and City Grid Layout. Inappropriate design resolution of this infrastructure, or ‘scope creep’ beyond that 48 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O currently identified in the documentation provided may result in impacts of an - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access unacceptable nature on the National Heritage listed aesthetic qualities of the Park Lands. 5.4.4.1 Recommendations It should be noted that the scope of this report is to assess the impacts of the proposed O-Bahn City Access project on identified heritage values. Its scope was not intended to provide design guidelines or heritage management policy structure for the development of design concepts or implementation of the works. The current conceptual nature of the project, in particular the level of design resolution of associated infrastructure, means that it is not possible to undertake a C detailed assessment of the potential impacts of all aspects of the works on the 10.08 .15

National Heritage listed aesthetic qualities of the Adelaide park lands. For these reasons, the following guidelines are provided to assist the ongoing development of the proposal. As noted in Section 5.4.4 above, inappropriate design resolution of the infrastructure associated with this project may result in unacceptable impacts on the National Heritage listed aesthetic qualities of the Adelaide park lands. Notwithstanding that roadways and transportation connections form part of the aesthetic makeup of the Park Lands, such impacts need to be balanced against the landscape qualities and social use / values of the affected areas. As a result, the design development of the infrastructure associated with the O- Bahn City Access project should seek to mitigate any visual intrusion through consideration of the following: • the proposed tunnel portal exit should work in with the existing topography to minimise the need for infrastructure above the visual eye plane and minimise its overall length; • the length of barriers (which are assumed to be required for the tunnel portal) should be minimised. The use of the sites natural topography may assist this; • ‘cages’ or ‘entry statements’ over the tunnels portals should be avoided; • large overhead signs within the Park Lands should be avoided; • the overall width of the new roadway should be minimised, while still achieving the necessary traffic functional requirements; • the underground substation should include grassed areas over, and minimise the footprint and visual prominence of any required staircase access; and • the design of infrastructure within the Park Lands should be consciously discrete, rather than a bold urban statement (that may otherwise be appropriate for remaining sections of the project outside of the Park Lands footprint). Finally, it is recommended that any design development of this infrastructure seek input from a suitably qualified heritage expert cognisant with the National Heritage values of the Adelaide Park Lands.

5.5 Sector 2: Hackney Road 49 The proposal seeks to undertake the following works along the Hackney Road : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - environs of the Adelaide park lands: : Rev Project Bahn City Access • the establishment of a designated O-Bahn access way down Hackney Road from the existing Linear Park exit; • new tunnel portal entry adjacent the National wine Centre; • removal of carparking adjacent Botanic Park between Plain Tree and Botanic Drives (off Hackney Road); • expansion of off street carparking adjacent the National Wine Centre and International Rose Garden; • stormwater sump and pumping station (adjacent the National Wine Centre); and C • new pedestrian / cycle footbridge over . 10.08 .15

Image 34. Sector 1 Hackney Road Environs

As the works are confined to the outer perimeter of the Park Lands (ie Hackney Road) the following National Heritage values are not considered relevant to the works proposed in Sector 2: • the City Grid Layout; and • views and vistas. It should also be noted that the majority of the works proposed in Sector 2 are not within the National Heritage listed place (refer Image 1), but rather the adjacent road corridor. Accordingly any potential impacts of these works on the National Heritage values of the Park Lands will be limited to those associated with their setting. Works within this Sector that are located within the National Heritage listed area are limited to:

• removal of carparking adjacent Botanic Park between Plain Tree and Botanic Drives (off Hackney Road); • expansion of off street carparking adjacent the National Wine Centre and International Rose Garden; • stormwater sump and pumping station (adjacent the National Wine Centre); and • new pedestrian / cycle footbridge over River Torrens 5.5.1 Park Lands Layout Since its setout was first illustrated in Light’s Country Section Subdivision Plan of 1839 (Image 3 and 4), the alignment of Hackney Road south of the River Torrens has changed little to its present setout. Exceptions to this included its general formalisation and widening associated with its modernisation, which in 1968 saw 50

the Botanic Gardens relinquish a narrow strip of land to the State Government for : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - road widening. Minor realignments appear to have been undertaken north of the : Rev Project Bahn City Access River Torrens to (I assume) smooth directional transitions for improved traffic flows. C 10.08 .15

Image 35. Ridley’s Steam Mill, 1845, as viewed across the River Torrens, showing Hackney Road to the right (prior to the construction of the original Company Bridge). Source: SLSA, B-2434/16

Image 36. Company Bridge over the River Torrens, showing Hackney Road to right, 1890. Source: SLSA, B-364 51 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

Image 37. 1890 master plan for the Botanic Gardens, showing the alignment of Hackney Road at the time. Source: Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p160

52 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

C Image 38. Hackney Road interface with Botanic Park, date unknown. Source Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p160 10.08 .15

The O-Bahn City Access project does not fundamentally alter the layout of Hackney Road, nor in turn the definition of the outer edge of the City’s park lands in this locality. While the increase in off street carparking in the vicinity of the National Wine Centre and International Rose Garden does impact on the landscaped open space in these locality, such localities are currently characterised by existing carparking, foothpaths and the built form of the National Wine Centre, Goodman Building and the former tram barn. As a result I do not consider there to be any consequential impacts to the layout of the City’s Park Lands. Further, such impacts have been balanced by the removal of off street carparking between Plain Tree and Botanic Drives. Similarly, the formalisation of a new footpath / cycleway is in general accord with the existing park lands layout, and footpath setout. The exception to this is the minor deviation to accommodate the new pedestrian / cycle bridge over the River Torrens, however such variances are again not considered to have any adverse impacts on the Park Lands layout.

Image 39. Existing Hackney Road footpath south of the River Torrens, March 2015. 5.5.2 Aesthetic Qualities / Landscaping / Use As noted in Section 5.5 of this assessment, the works contained within the Sector 2 are primarily limited to the Hackney Road corridor. Hackney Road has formed the outer boundary of this section of park lands since the earliest years of Colonial settlement. While its character has undoubtedly changed over time due to its 53 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O

ongoing modernisation, such a process has been historically consistent, and is not - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access at odds with the Nationally recognised heritage values of the Park Lands. That is to say: Hackney Road has always been a transit corridor to the outer edge of the Park Lands, albeit an evolving one. The proposed works do not alter this, as they are all consistent with that anticipated for such a use. On this basis, the majority of the works within Sector 2 are not considered to impact on the aesthetic or landscape qualities of the Adelaide park lands. Works that do encroach within the listed park lands areas (ie not within the road corridor) are essentially limited to the following: C 10.08 .15

5.5.2.1 Carparking adjacent National Wine Centre The proposal seeks to expand the existing carparking adjacent the National Wine Centre as shown in the below illustration. I do not consider these encroachments to fundamentally affect the aesthetic qualities of the Park Lands, nor (in practical terms) reduce or impact on park lands use as these affected areas are currently characterised by existing carparking, foothpaths and the built form of the National Wine Centre, Goodman Building and the former tram barn.

Image 40. Proposed expansion of carparking adjacent National Wine Centre 5.5.2.2 New shared footbridge over the River Torrens Very little detail has been resolved for the proposed new footbridge over the Torrens adjacent the Hackney Bridge. Information is, at this stage, limited to the below basic conceptual layout (refer Image 42).

54 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 41. Proposed River Torrens footbridge. Extract of drawing DPTI-SKT-7304-99-0801 While the Hackney Road bridge is a State Heritage place, potential impacts of these works on these heritage values are assessed separately in Section 6 of this

report. C 10.08 .15

Bridges (both vehicular and pedestrian) over the River Torrens have been occurring since the earliest years of the colony. Their presence provides convenient access to and around the Park Lands for users. The proposed new footbridge is located on the outer peripheral of the Park Lands listing, in very close proximity to a main and heavily utilised vehicular bridge (the Hackney Bridge). Further, the proposed footbridge will unlikely impact on any specifically important vistas or sightlines though the Park Lands in this location.

Image 42. Hackney Bridge as viewed from the west (looking towards the location of the proposed pedestrian bridge) Once again, however, a detailed design concept for the new pedestrian bridge is yet to be developed, and accordingly I am not able to undertake a thorough detailed assessment of its ultimate impacts on the aesthetic National Heritage values of the Park Lands. In principle, however, I consider such impacts as being manageable, if the following recommendation as outlined in Section 5.5.2.3.1 below is followed. . Such ‘in principle’ support, is conditional on the nature of the design resolution, and any changes or further details that may arise through the development of the concept.

Inappropriate design resolution of this infrastructure may result in impacts of an unacceptable nature on the National Heritage listed aesthetic qualities of the Park Lands. 55 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - 5.5.2.2.1 Recommendations : Rev Project Bahn City Access The development of detailed design concepts for the River Torrens footbridge should be to a high standard of design excellence befitting a place of Nationally recognised heritage values. 5.5.2.3 Stormwater Sump and Pumping Station Once again, very little detail has been provided on the proposed Stormwater Sump and Pumping Station proposed to be located adjacent First Creek, and the National Wine Centre. Information at this stage is limited to the following indicative siting. C 10.08 .15

Image 43. Proposed new Sump and Pump Station. Extract of drawing DPTI-SKT-7304-99-0801 While technically sited within the area identified by the National Heritage listing, its proposed location is set well away from open areas of specific aesthetic or landscape qualities. A detailed design concept for the pump station is yet to be developed, and accordingly I am not able to undertake a thorough detailed assessment of its ultimate impacts on the aesthetic National Heritage values of the Park Lands. In principle, however, I consider such impacts as manageable and most likely negligible. Such ‘in principle’ support, however, is conditional on the nature of the design resolution, and any changes or further details that may arise through the development of the concept. Inappropriate design resolution of this infrastructure may result in impacts of an unacceptable nature on the National Heritage listed aesthetic qualities of the Park Lands. 5.5.2.3.1 Recommendations

The development of detailed design concepts for the Stormwater Sump and Pump Station should be to a high standard of design excellence befitting a place of Nationally recognised heritage values. 56 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

6 State Heritage Places State Heritage places within the vicinity of the proposed works are: • Hackney Bridge (former New Company Bridge), ID 14261 • Bicentennial Conservatory, Adelaide Botanic Gardens, ID 20996 • Former Municipal Tramway Trust (MTT) Hackney Tram (later bus) Depot, including Goodman Building and Tram Barn (now the Plant Biodiversity Centre), Adelaide Botanic Gardens, ID 12349 • National Wine Centre of Australia Administration Building [‘Yarrabee House], (former Lunatic Asylum Medical Officer’s Residence) and Front Fence, ID 13642 • Stone Wall, Adelaide Botanic Gardens Botanic Road, Adelaide, ID 17067 • Royal Hotel, 2 North Terrace Kent Town, ID 13116 • Former Romilly House, 1 North Terrace, Hackney, ID 14260 • Former Kent Town Brewery and Malthouse, Rundle St Kent Town, ID 10268 • Marshall and Brougham Offices (former Dwelling), 12 Dequetteville Terrace Kent Town, ID 14111 • Botanic Bar (former Botanic Hotel), 309 North Terrace, Adelaide, ID 10847 • Office, East End Market Buildings, 6-9A East Terrace, Adelaide, ID 13921 • PJ O’Brien (former East End Market Hotel), 10-12 (ka 14) East Terrace, Adelaide, ID 13922 • Office, East End Market Buildings, 14-16 East Terrace, Adelaide, ID 13924 • Stag Hotel, 299 Rundle Street, Adelaide, ID 13380 • 26-36 East Terrace, Former Adelaide Fruit and Produce Exchange Facades and Shops, ID 11722 • Tandanya (former Adelaide Electric Supply Company Power Station, 243- 253 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, IS 10984 • Adelaide Electric Supply Company Converter Station, 48-51 East Terrace, Adelaide, ID 10985 • Former Municipal Tramways Trust (MTT) No.1 Converter Station, 52-60 57 East Terrace, Adelaide, ID 10986. : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Potential impacts to the heritage values of these places are primarily limited to: : Rev Project Bahn City Access • those arising from the nearby construction (ie potential ground vibration); and / or • changes to the context (or setting) of the place. 6.1 Potential Impacts Arising From Nearby Construction DASH Architects is not an expert in either civil construction, the likely resulting ground vibrations resulting from the proposed works, or their potential impacts on nearby structures. Accordingly the below commentary is of a qualitative, high level nature only. C 10.08 .15

The extent of potential impacts arising from ground vibrations cannot be quantified at this stage of the project, however factors influencing risk include: • proximity of heritage places to the works; • condition and construction type of heritage places; and • nature of works being undertaken (ie level of potential ground vibration). Based on this above risk profile, works within the vicinity of the Botanic Road / Hackney Road / North Terrace intersection may require particular attention. This intersection will be subject to extensive construction works associated with the proposed tunnel, and is closely flanked by the following State Heritage places: • National Wine Centre of Australia Administration Building [‘Yarrabee House], (former Lunatic Asylum Medical Officer’s Residence) and Front Fence, ID 13642; • Former Romilly House, 1 North Terrace, Hackney, ID 14260; and • Royal Hotel, 2 North Terrace Kent Town, ID 13116. Notwithstanding this area of particular risk, careful consideration should be given to the potential impacts of all of the works on nearby structures, including heritage places. 6.1.1 Recommendation A Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNVMP) should be prepared by a suitably qualified consultant at an appropriate stage of the concept’s development to identify levels of ground vibration associated with the works, and their potential impacts on nearby heritage structures. This report should be developed in accordance with the Departments of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure’s (DPTI) Operational Instruction 21.7 Management of Noise and Vibration – Construction and Maintenance Activities (OI 21.7) OI 21.7 notes that there is no Australian Standard that provides recommended levels (of vibration) relating to structural damage and accordingly references the German Standard DIN 4150-3 “Structural Vibration Part 3 – Effects of vibrations on structures” This German Standard provides guidance for works in the proximity of heritage listed buildings.

The CNVMP should identify potential risks of damage to nearby heritage places, and establish: • maximum levels of permissible ground vibrations in the proximity of 58 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O

heritage places; and - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access • appropriate vibration monitoring protocols to ensure maximum levels are not exceeded The CNVMP should then be used as a basis for a subsequent assessment of the potential risk of damage to heritage places by a suitably qualified heritage consultant. This subsequent assessment (which may required additional structural input) should assess the condition of the potentially affected heritage places, and provide recommendations regarding appropriate mitigation requirements, or temporary protective measures. C 10.08 .15

6.2 Potential Impacts to the Context / Setting of State Heritage Places The majority of the potentially affected State Heritage places identified above have their primary setting to the existing street frontages, which are not affected by the proposed works. On this basis, I do not consider there to be any material affect to their context, nor accordingly their State Heritage values. The exceptions to this are the following places: 6.2.1 Bicentennial Conservatory, Adelaide Botanic Gardens The Bicentennial Conservatory is located within the Botanic Gardens, set back from Hackney Road approximately 160m. Its setting is not to a primary street frontage, but rather the surrounding park lands and botanic gardens within which it is sited.

Image 44. Bicentennial Conservatory, Botanic Gardens Heritage Places Database provides the following details for the Bicentennial Conservatory, located within the Botanic Gardens: 59 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O -

Significance : Rev Project Bahn City Access The 1989 South Australian Bicentennial Conservatory located in the demonstrates a high degree of creative and technical accomplishment, as a well-executed South Australian example of a glass house of the 'Late Twentieth Century Structuralist' style architecture. The Bicentennial Conservatory stands as an exemplar work of the celebrated local architect Guy Maron, who produced a creative and technically excellent contemporary design solution responding to the problems of designing a tropical glasshouse within a dry, temperate climate.

C

10.08 .15

Section 16 Criteria (d) it is an outstanding representative of a particular class of place of cultural significance; (e) it demonstrates a high degree of creative, aesthetic or technical accomplishment or is an outstanding representative of particular construction techniques or design characteristics14 Works proposed within the vicinity of the Bicentennial Conservatory are fundamentally associated with the upgrade of the existing road corridor. While Hackney Road does provide ‘glimpsing’ views of the Conservatory, neither these views, nor the place’s setting to Hackney Road are intrinsic to its State Heritage values. For these reasons, I do not consider the proposed O-Bahn City Access project to materially affect the context within which this State Heritage place is situated. 6.2.2 Hackney Bridge (former New Company Bridge) The Hackney Bridge is located at Hackney Road’s crossing point of the River Torrens. The South Australian Heritage Places Database provides the following details for the Hackney Bridge: Significance Hackney Bridge is the second oldest iron arch bridge in Australia and one of only three metal truss arch bridges remaining in South Australia. As the third bridge to be built at this flood-prone site, this bridge represents a definitive design solution for this crossing of the River Torrens, providing a high level deck and eliminating the piers that were the undoing of the previous low level bridges. The technical achievement of the bridge is of exceptional significance. For its day, it was the lightest and cheapest wrought iron bridge constructed in the Colony. Its serviceability for modern traffic more than 120 years later is a testament to the durability of the engineering solution. The efficient structural design is also a significant aesthetic achievement. The open web arches are a strong expression of the structural forces they transfer and the cast iron hinges reflect the concentration and transfer of structural forces into the abutments. (Adapted from Hackney Road Bridge Conservation Management Plan, 2003) 15. There are two bridges over the River Torrens at the Hackney Road crossing of the 60 River Torrens: one accommodating the city inward bound lanes (eastern bridge); : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - and one accommodating the outward bound lanes (western bridge). The State : Rev Project Bahn City Access Heritage listing applies to the eastern bridge only.

14 C http://apps.planning.sa.gov.au/HeritageSearch/HeritageItem.aspx?p_heritageno=27071 15 http://apps.planning.sa.gov.au/HeritageSearch/HeritageItem.aspx?p_heritageno=8422 10.08 .15

Image 45. Hackney Bridge, arrow marking showing State Heritage listed portion

61 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 46. Hackney Bridge, 1920. Source: SLSA, PRG-280-1-19-69 C 10.08 .15

Image 47. Hackney Bridge (left) with later “Company Bridge” to the right (named after the original bridge since removed, refer Image 43). March 2015

Image 48. Hackney (rear) and Company Bridge as viewed from the western side within the Park Lands. March 2015

62 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

C Image 49. Hackney Bridge as viewed from underside. March 2015 10.08 .15

At this stage I understand that no physical works are proposed to the State Heritage listed Hackney Bridge by the O-Bahn City Access project. If, however, upgrade works are required as part of project, assessment of potential heritage impacts will be required. In such instances, guidance for future works should also be sought from the Conservation Management Plan (CMP) prepared for the Hackney Bridge (by Habitable Places) 2003. The proposed new footbridge over the Torrens will be located on the western side of the two bridges (refer Image 54), and accordingly consideration of the impacts of this work to the context within which a State Heritage place is situated requires consideration. At present, the (1960s) Company Bridge largely obscures the views (and setting) of the State Heritage listed Hackney Bridge from this western side. Further, the State heritage significance of the Hackney Bridge said to lie in its construction techniques and technical accomplishment. I consider that such attributes will not be materially affected by the proposed new footbridge as indicated in the supplied documentation. While I understand no physical works are proposed to the Hackney Bridge by this project, it is nonetheless an aging piece of infrastructure. As such, consideration should be given to undertaking preventative maintenance at the time of undertaking the project construction works. In doing so, consideration should again be given to the Conservation Policies as provided for in the 2003 CMP. This CMP also recommends that consideration of interpretative material associated with its heritage values be provided as part of any future works to the place. This should be considered as part of this project. 7 Local Heritage Places Local Heritage places within the vicinity of the proposed works are: • Carriageway entrance gates, Hackney Road, Botanic Park; • St Peter’s College, Hackney; • Various dwellings to Hackney Road; • Former Offices, 17-20 East Terrace / 300 Rundle Street, Adelaide; and • War Horse Memorial Trough and , corner of East Terrace and Botanic Park, Rundle Park Adelaide. 63

Under the Development Act, road works are not considered development, with the : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - exception of such works undertaken within the City of Adelaide park lands. : Rev Project Bahn City Access Potential impacts of the proposed works on Local Heritage are therefore limited to those places located within the Park Lands, namely: • Carriageway entrance gates, Hackney Road, Botanic Park; and • War Horse Memorial Trough and Obelisk, corner of East Terrace and Botanic Park, Rundle Park Adelaide. C 10.08 .15

7.1 Carriageway Entrance Gates, Hackney Road, Botanic Park The Carriageway Entrance Gates, located at the northern Hackney Road exit of Botanic Drive, are identified in the City of Adelaide Development Plan as a Local Heritage Place (City Significant). The O-Bahn City Access project does not propose any physical works to the Carriage Entrance Gates, nor any works that would adversely impact on their setting or ongoing use. Rather, the proposal seeks to upgrade the current gravel footpath into a sealed “Off Road Shared Path”.

Image 50. Works proposed within the vicinity of the Carriageway Entrance Gates. Extract of drawing DPTI-SKT-7304-99-0801

64 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 51. Aerial view of Carriageway Entrance Gates, showing gravel footpath proposed for upgrade. Source: Google Maps For this reason, I do not consider the proposed works to adversely impact on the setting of this Local Heritage place. C 10.08 .15

7.2 War Horse Memorial Trough and Obelisk The War Horse Memorial Trough and Obelisk are located on the corner of North and East Terraces, Adelaide, and have been identified in the City of Adelaide Development Plan as a Local Heritage Place (City Significant).

Image 52. Local Heritage Place (City Significant), War Horse Memorial Trough and Obelisk Works within the vicinity of the War Horse Memorial are limited to kerb re- alignments, which in itself is not inconsistent with the setting of this Local Heritage place. While the setout of these realignments is clearly somewhat indicative, they currently show encroachment within very close proximity to the Horse Trough. Such encroachments, if accurate, would also necessitate the relocation of the memorials plaque.

65 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 53. Works proposed within the vicinity of the War Horse Memorial Trough and Obelisk. Extract C of drawing DPTI-SKT-7304-99-0801 10.08 .15

Image 54. Annotated aerial of memorial. Source of base image: Google Maps. NOTE: North reoriented to top of page 7.2.1 Recommendation The extent to which this memorial is locational specific is unclear, due to the limited information available on its Local Heritage values. Ideally, the setout of the kerb realignments this area should be amended to accommodate the current locations of the Obelisk and Horse Trough. Relocation of the plaque, if required to accommodate the new kerb alignment or provide better viewing, is considered to be acceptable. Any kerb realignment should also afford some curtilage around the Obelisk and Horse Trough. The current setback distances should be used as a guide.

8 Archeological Potential The proposed O-Bahn City Access project will involve extensive excavation associated with the proposed tunnel component of the project. This excavation 66 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O will be primarily limited to: - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access • Sections of Hackney Road, and its intersection with Botanic Road / North Terrace; and • Parks 13 and 14. It is unlikely that excavation of Hackney Road will result in any archaeological potential of consequence, due to the historic use of the land as a roadway since the earliest days of settlement. Excavations of Park 13 and 14, however, are a different matter. These sections of Parklands have been used for a wide variety of purposes, particularly during the C 10.08 .15

early years of settlement. Of particular potential archaeological interest are the following previous uses: Rubbish Dump During the 1850s sections of Park 13 or 14 (or both) were used as a rubbish dump. There are conflicting reports as to the location of this dump, however of 16 August 1856 reported: From the east end of Rundle-street to the creek the Park Lands have been the licensed rubbish-yard of the city. Hundreds of cart-loads of every description of refuse have, for a long time past, been ruthlessly scattered about upon the surface. Vegetable matter lies at leisure to decay; broken glass and bottles, mingled with old mattresses and tin-kettles; rags, bones, and dead dogs vary the scene with haps of chemical refuse; alkalies decomposing, and mingling their scents with so many others, that the seventy distinct odours of many others, that the seventy distinct odours of Cologne might be fairly counted over again in Adelaide.16 The extent to which the proposed tunnel through the parklands would interfere with such potential archaeological deposits is unclear, however there is sufficient evidence to suggest caution should be taken, and measures implemented to identify and preserve any findings of significance. Sewer / Waterworks In 1879 a portion of land in the north eastern corner of Park 13 was excised under the Adelaide Sewer and Waterworks Amendment Act 1879. The extent of this compound is illustrated in Image 56 below.

67 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

Image 55. Extract of a ‘Plan of the City of Adelaide’ 1917. Source: Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study, p223 (marker arrow added by author).

C 16 Jones, Op Cit, p218 10.08 .15

This Waterworks Yard was eventually returned for parklands use in December 1984. Currently a stone octagonal valve house remains the only visible feature of this former use. This structure has no formal heritage status.

Image 56. Former Valve House, Park 13.

Image 57. Former Waterworks infrastructure, c1932, with Valve House on left. Source: SLSA B-6220 The proposed O-Bahn Tunnel will traverse a portion of the former Waterworks site. 68 While the extent of potential archaeological deposits again remains unclear, there : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - is sufficient evidence to suggest caution should be taken, and measures : Rev Project Bahn City Access implemented to identify and preserve any findings of significance 8.1 Recommendation Protocols should be established to monitor excavations associated with the proposed works within Parks 13 and 14 to enable the identification and careful retrieval of potential archaeological deposits of significance. These protocols should be prepared with the input of a suitably qualified archaeologist. It should be noted that it is not within the scope of this report to assess indigenous

heritage impacts, however an assessment of such archaeological potential may C warrant consideration. 10.08 .15

9 Summary In many respects, the proposed O-Bahn City Access project continues the historic pattern of development of the City of Adelaide and its park lands. Since the earliest years of colonisation, the City has evolved to accommodate the changing requirements of modernisation and growth. This evolution has for the most part been undertaken in careful measures, resulting in a City today that has been recognised for the National Heritage values associated with its Park Lands and City Grid Layout. In addition to this, the City accommodates places of State and Local Heritage significance, all of which contribute to the tangible and intangible character of the City of Adelaide, and broader State of South Australia. Having considered these diverse heritage values, I find that the O-Bahn City Access proposal as outlined in the documentation provided to me as being consistent with the heritage values of the affected places. Importantly, this support is conditional, as the project remains in a very early stage of design. The size, configuration, location, and to some extent scope of much of the proposed infrastructure remains highly conceptual. Ongoing design development of the project will need to be highly cognisant of the potential impacts on the heritage values and places identified in this report. Inappropriate design resolution may otherwise result in heritage impacts of an unacceptable nature. This assessment report has provided some guidance to managing these heritage risks as the project progresses, however it is recommended any design development seek ongoing and regular input from a suitably qualified heritage expert conversant with the relevant heritage values of the affected areas.

69 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

Appendix A National Heritage Listing Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout

10 Adelaide Park Lands and City Grid The following extracts have been sourced from the Australian Government Department of the Environment’s Australian Heritage Database:

Summary Statement of Significance The Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout is a significant example of early colonial planning which has retained key elements of its historical layout for over one hundred and seventy years. The 1837 Adelaide Plan attributed to Colonel William Light and the establishment of Adelaide marks a significant turning point in the settlement of Australia. Prior to this, settlement had been in the form of penal colonies or military outposts where the chief labour supply was convicts. The Colony of South Australia was conceived as a commercial enterprise based on ’s theory of systematic colonisation. It was to be established by free settlers who would make a society that would be ‘respectable’ and ‘self-supporting’. The Adelaide Plan was the basis for attracting free settlers, offering certainty of land tenure and a high degree of amenity. Being formally laid out prior to settlement, with a grid pattern and wide streets and town squares, the Plan reflected new town planning conventions and contemporary ideas about the provision of common or reserved land for its aesthetic qualities, public health and recreation. The Plan endures today in the form of the Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout. The key elements of the Plan remain substantially intact, including the layout of the two major city areas, separated by the meandering Torrens River, the encircling Park Lands, the six town squares, the gardens and the grid pattern of major and minor roads. The Park Lands, in particular, are significant for the longevity of protection and conservation and have high social value to South Australians who regard them as fundamental to the character and ambience of the city of Adelaide.

The national significance of the Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout lies in its design excellence. The Adelaide Plan is regarded as a masterwork of urban design, a grand example of colonial urban planning. The city grid and defining park 71 lands were laid over the shallow river valley with its gentle undulations, described : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - by Light as the Adelaide Plains. The city layout is designed to take full advantage : Rev Project Bahn City Access of the topography, an important innovation for the time. The streets were sited and planned to maximise views and vistas through the city and Park Lands and from some locations to the Adelaide Hills. A hierarchy of road widths with a wide dimension to principal routes and terraces and alternating narrow and wide streets in the east-west direction were featured on the historic plan. Features within the Park Lands area included a hospital, Government House, a school, barracks, a store house, a market and a botanic garden and roads. The tree planting designed and implemented since the 1850s and the living plant collection of the Park Lands, particularly within the Adelaide Botanic Gardens are C outstanding features. The encircling Park Lands provide for health and recreation 10.08 .15

for the inhabitants while setting the city limits and preventing speculative land sales on the perimeter. The emphasis on public health, amenity and aesthetic qualities through civic design and provision of public spaces were to have an influence on the Garden City Movement, one of the most significant urban planning initiatives of the twentieth century. Ebenezer Howard, the founder of the Garden City Movement cites the Adelaide Plan as an exemplar in his Garden Cities of Tomorrow. Even before this influence, however, the Adelaide Plan was used as a model for the founding of many towns in Australia and New Zealand. It is regarded by historians and town planners as a major achievement in nineteenth century town planning. The Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout is also significant for its association with Colonel William Light who is credited with the Adelaide Plan and its physical expression in the form of the Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout.

Official Values Criterion A Events, Processes The Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout is the physical expression of the 1837 Adelaide Plan designed and laid out by Colonel William Light. It has endured as a recognisable historical layout for over 170 years retaining the key elements of the plan; encompassing the layout of the two major city areas separated by the Torrens River, the encircling Park Lands, the six town squares, and the grid pattern of major and minor roads. It is substantially intact and reflects Light's design intentions with high integrity. The Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout is of outstanding importance because it signifies a turning point in the settlement of Australia. It was the first place in Australia to be planned and developed by free settlers, not as a penal settlement or military outpost. The colony of South Australia was established by incorporation as a commercial venture supported by the British Government, based on Edward Wakefield's theory of systematic colonisation. To be commercially successful, there needed to be contained settlement to avoid speculative land sales and this settlement needed to be designed and planned to attract free settlers and to provide them with security of land tenure. The city layout with its expedited the process of land survey enabling both rapid settlement of land and certainty of title. The wide streets, public squares and generous open spaces 72 provided amenity and the surrounding park lands ensured a defined town : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - boundary while still allowing for public institutional domains. These elements are : Rev Project Bahn City Access discernable today. The Adelaide Park Lands is also significant for the longevity of its protection and conservation. The Adelaide Municipal Corporation Act (1840) established the city council as the ‘conservators’ of the city and park lands. The establishment of the Park Lands Preservation Society in 1903, along with successive community organisations marks a continuing pattern in community support for safeguarding the significance of the Park Lands for the Adelaide community. The Adelaide Plan was highly influential as a model for planning other towns in C Australia and overseas. It is acknowledged by town planners and historians as a major influence on the Garden City Planning movement, one of the most important 10.08 .15

urban planning initiatives. Criterion B: Rarity The Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout is rare as the most complete example of nineteenth century colonial planning where planning and survey were undertaken prior to settlement. The historical layout as conceived in the 1837 Adelaide Plan remains clearly legible today. The place is also the only Australian capital city to be completely enclosed by park lands and is the most extensive and substantially intact nineteenth century park lands in Australia. Criterion D: Principal characteristics of a class of place The Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout is an exemplar of a nineteenth century planned urban centre. It demonstrates the principal characteristics of a nineteenth century city including a defined boundary, streets in a grid pattern, wide streets, public squares, spacious rectangular blocks and expansive public open space for commons and public domains. The expression of these features with their generous open space reflects the early theories and ideas of the Garden City movement of an urban area set in publicly accessible open space with plantings, gardens, designed areas and open bushland. Criterion F: Creative or technical achievement Adelaide Park Lands and City Layout is regarded throughout Australia and the world as a masterwork of urban design. Elements of the Adelaide Plan that contribute to the design excellence are the use of the encircling park lands to define the boundary of the development of the city and to provide for health, public access, sport, recreation and public institutional domains, thereby meeting both economic and social requirements. Designing the city layout to respond to the topography was highly innovative for its time with the northern sections of the city located and angled to take advantage of the rising ground while retaining the Torrens River as a feature within the Park Lands. The judicious siting and wide streets maximised views and vistas through the city and Park Lands and from some locations to the Adelaide Hills. The plan features a hierarchy of road widths with a wide dimension to principal routes and terraces and alternating narrow and wide streets in the east-west direction. Light's planning innovation is supported by substantial historical documentation. The formal organisation, delineation and dedication of the Park Lands space was a pioneering technical achievement of William Light in the Adelaide Plan. The overall landscape planting design implemented by several successive 73 landscape designers/managers incorporated designed vistas, formal avenues, : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - plantations, gardens, use of specimen trees, botanically important living plant : Rev Project Bahn City Access collections particularly at the Adelaide Botanic Garden and the strategic placement of buildings and statuary in their settings. The creativity of the city and parkland design is clearly legible in the contemporary landscape viewed from the air or from the Adelaide Hills. The civic design of Adelaide was used as a model for founding many other towns in Australia and New Zealand and it is cited in later seminal Garden City planning texts including Garden Cities of Tomorrow by Ebenezer Howard. Criterion G: Social value C The Adelaide Park Lands has outstanding social value to South Australians who see it as fundamental to the character and ambience of the city. The Park Lands 10.08 .15

with their recreation areas, sports grounds, gardens and public facilities provide venues for individual and group activities and events, meetings and passive and active recreation. The Park Lands also have significant social value due to the range of important civic, public, and cultural assets and institutions within it. The present Adelaide Parklands Preservation Society is the latest in a long history of community groups dedicated to protecting the Adelaide Park Lands. These have included the Park Lands Defence Association (1869-87), the Park Lands Preservation League (1903, 1948) and the National Trust of South Australia. The longevity of the involvement of community groups in campaigning for the protection and safeguarding of the Park Lands is exceptional. Criterion H: Significant People Colonel William Light is most famously associated with the plan of Adelaide. He bore the ultimate responsibility, as recorded in his surviving publications and letters. Description The City of Adelaide is divided into two distinct sectors that straddle the River Torrens, the City centre to the south, and suburban North Adelaide. The City has a hierarchical grid street pattern, contains six town squares and is entirely surrounded by Park Lands. The city of Adelaide was originally laid out as 1042 town acres and in some instances the original boundaries are still evident. South Adelaide, the city centre comprises 700 acres while the North Adelaide residential area covers the remaining 342 acres. Six squares were laid out within the City of Adelaide. The city streets are organised into four blocks, with the City centre encompassing one large block, and North Adelaide three smaller blocks. The siting of the blocks reflects the topography of the area, with the main block situated on generally flat ground and the other three blocks, each at an angle with the others, on higher land in North Adelaide. The main block, the City centre, is defined by four major roads: East Terrace, North Terrace, West Terrace and South Terrace. In total, eleven original streets traverse the City east-west and six original streets traverse it north- south. Nine streets which traverse the City east-west culminate in the centre at King William Street which also defines name changes for the streets running east- west. The streets are primarily named after key historical figures: Rundle, Grenfell, Pine, Flinders, Wakefield, Angas, Carrington, Halifax, Gilles, Gilbert, Start, Wright, Gouger, Grote, Franklin, Waymouth, Currie and Hindley Streets. The central streets 74 in this grid, Wakefield and Grote Streets are marginally wider than the others, to : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - illustrate their greater importance. The City also contains numerous minor streets : Rev Project Bahn City Access that were constructed within a few years of survey, but were not part of the original plan. North Adelaide comprises three smaller grids in which the majority of original streets run east-west. The major grid of North Adelaide is defined by Barton Terrace, Lefevre Terrace, Ward Street and Hill Street, with O’Connell Street as the major thoroughfare and Wellington Square in the centre. The streets in both the City centre and North Adelaide are broken up intermittently by six town squares before they culminate at the Park Lands. Five squares, C Victoria, Hurtle, Whitmore, Hindmarsh and Light Squares are located within South 10.08 .15

Adelaide, while Wellington Square is in North Adelaide. Some squares have been altered with the road ways around and through some of the squares changed, both from an urban design perspective and to address traffic management issues. The substantial design of each Square, except Victoria Square, remains intact. These changes reflect changing aesthetic tastes and requirements in the twentieth century. Each square retains a distinct character, with different development on the edges. The form of Victoria Square remains, but its design, driven primarily by traffic changes, has changed markedly. It is no longer a focus for the City for pedestrians. It has retained a primarily public function with and office development around its perimeter. Hurtle and Whitmore Squares are more residential, while Hindmarsh and Light Squares accommodate more commercial uses. Wellington Square, the only square in North Adelaide, is surrounded by primarily single storey development, but of a village character, which includes a former shop, former Church and public house. The squares contribute to the public use of the City, providing open green spaces for residents, workers and visitors who value them highly. The Park Lands comprise over 700 hectares providing a continuous belt which encircle the City and North Adelaide. The Park Lands vary in character from cultural landscapes, to recreational landscapes, and natural landscapes. Some areas are laid out as formal gardens, other areas have a rural character and others are used primarily for sporting uses. The Park Lands act as a buffer to the City Centre, and also provide both passive and active recreational uses to the community. They are the setting for numerous public functions, and serve an aesthetic function in defining the city. The Park Lands are visible from many parts of the City and North Adelaide and form end points for vistas through the City streets. They contribute to views out of the City, together with the distant views of the Adelaide Hills in the background, as well as providing views into the City. The visual character of the Park varies with its many uses - formal gardens and lawns, informal parks of turf and trees, a variety of sports fields, with associated buildings and facilities. The Adelaide Park lands have been valued by many South Australians over time for their aesthetic qualities, and as a place for recreation and other community activities.

The Park Lands are described as a single feature, yet they vary in character greatly from area to area. Some areas are laid out as formal gardens, others have a rural 75 character and others are used primarily for sporting uses. The Park Lands also : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - accommodate many other, mostly public, uses in areas identified as reserves by : Rev Project Bahn City Access Light, such as the and the Governor’s Domain, as well as in other areas alienated from the original Park Lands as defined by Light, such as the civic uses of North Terrace and Victoria Park Racecourse. Many cultural institutions occupying the Park Lands: the Botanic Gardens, Zoo, the State Library, Migration Museum, the Art Gallery, the SA Museum, Government House, Parliament House, the Festival Theatre and Playhouse, the Convention Centre, the Parade Ground, the hospital, Adelaide University and Adelaide High School. Other reserves include the Torrens linear park, Government Walk, the Parade Ground, the Pioneer Women’s Gardens, the and two public golf courses. C Today there is little physical archaeological evidence remaining in the Adelaide 10.08 .15

Parklands of Aboriginal occupation and of the pre-colonial landscape. The South Australian Old and New Parliament Houses is entered into the National Heritage List (Data Base No. 105710). The Adelaide Park Lands and the City of Adelaide Historic Layout and Park Lands are listed in the Register of the National Estate (RNE) (Register Nos: 6442 and 102551). The following places are individually listed within the RNE: the Zoological Gardens (Register Nos: 8593 and 18585), the Botanic Gardens (Register No. 6433), the Bandstand (Register No. 6351), the Women's War Memorial Gardens (Register No. 14568), the Adelaide Oval and Surrounds (Register No.19236), Victoria Park Racecourse (Register No. 18546), Art Gallery of South Australia (Register No. 6396), Barr Smith Library (within the University grounds) (Register No. 6365), Bonython Hall (within the University grounds) (Register No. 6368), Brookman Hall (Register No. 6382), Catholic Chapel, West Terrace Cemetery (Register No. 6357), Cross of Sacrifice/Stone of Remembrance (Register No. 14568), Elder Hall (Register No. 6367), Government House and Grounds (Register No. 6328), Union Building Group, Margaret Graham Nurses Home, Adelaide Oval Scoreboard, Yarrabee, River Torrens (outside Adelaide City), Institute Building (former), Bank of Adelaide (former), Tropical House, Main Gates, Botanic Gardens, Watch House, Catholic Chapel, Chapel to Former Destitute Asylum, Mitchell Building, Albert Bridge (road bridge), Schoolroom to Former Mounted Police Barracks, Historical Museum, Mortlock Library, South Australian Museum, Art Gallery of South Australia, Old Parliament House, Old Mounted Police Barracks, (former), Powder Magazine (former) and Surrounding Walls, North Adelaide Conservation Area, Victoria Square Conservation Area, River Torrens (within Adelaide City), Mitchell Gates and Fencing, , Administration Building and Bays 1 - 6 Running Shed, South African War Memorial, Historic Buildings Group, North Adelaide Railway Station, Old Grandstand, Hartley Building, Torrens Training Depot, University Foot Bridge, Adelaide Bridge, Torrens Lake Weir and Footbridge, Rose Garden Fountain and Botanic Garden Toolshed. Over 70 places in the Adelaide Park Lands are entered in the South Australian Heritage Register. Most notably these include the institutions along North Terrace, including the Adelaide Railway Station, Old and New Parliament Houses, and buildings belonging to the State Library and South Australian Museum, Art Gallery of South Australia, University of Adelaide and Royal Adelaide Hospital (SA Heritage Branch, 2005). History 76 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O -

Background : Rev Project Bahn City Access At the time of settlement, the Adelaide Plains were occupied by people, whose descendants continue to maintain connections with their traditional lands. It is unclear as to how long the Kaurna people have occupied the area, however it would be thousands of years as sites on have been dated to the Pleistocene at 21,000 years (Jones 2007:32). The River Torrens or Karrawirra Parri was an important resource for Aboriginal people that provided the most reliable water source in the area and abundant marine and bird life. It is believed that occupation patterns across the area would have been between the estuary and the hills (Jones 2007:32). C

10.08 .15

The colony of South Australia was founded in 1836, after the colonies of , Western Australia and Tasmania had been established. Unlike the other colonies, South Australia was not established as penal settlement, but rather as a commercial venture. Established fifty years after the colony of New South Wales, the colonisation of South Australia was carefully considered by the British government. Edward Gibbon Wakefield was concerned about the instability that land speculation and social problems had caused in these earlier settlements, and sought to find the right conditions for the success of new colonies. Wakefield developed his theory of systematic colonisation, believing that careful planning would provide a balance between land, capital and labour and thus the conditions for economic and social stability. He promoted the establishment of South Australia as a model colony that would be settled on this basis. In 1834, Wakefield’s ideas were partially realised when legislation was passed that provided for the establishment of South Australia. The colony would be overseen by the British Government through the Colonial Office, but with land, emigration, labour and population matters managed by a Board of Colonisation Commissioners. The was established in 1835 to expedite the sale of land in the colony, and much of the colony of South Australia had been planned, advertised and sold before the colony was settled. The Board of Colonisation Commissioners was formed in May 1835. GS Kingston (1807-1880), civil engineer, architect and later politician, was employed as Deputy Surveyor. The Commissioners appointed Colonel William Light (1786-1839) as Surveyor-General early in 1836. He had experience in ‘infantry, cavalry, navy, surveying, sketching and [an] interest in cities’ and had initially been recommended for the position of Governor of South Australia. BT Finniss (1807-1893) and H Nixon were also employed with Kingston as surveying staff, and they arrived in South Australia in August 1836. The Commissioners gave Light sole responsibility for choosing the site of the colony’s first town and clear instructions about its planning: ‘When you have determined the site of the first town you will proceed to lay it out in accordance with the Regulations…’ and ‘you will make the streets of ample width, and arrange them with reference to the convenience of the inhabitants, and the beauty and salubrity of the town; and you will make the necessary reserves for squares, public walks and quays’ (Johnson 2004:12-13). 77 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O

The Commissioners also directed Light to ‘look to any new town precedent in - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access America and Canada’ for guidance. The grid plan was by then an established planning convention for colonial new towns in the English-speaking world. It probably had its origins in Roman military camps, and was first used by the English for fortified towns or bastides during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the grid pattern making it easy to collect property taxes. The grid plan was later evident in the plans developed for colonial new towns. Many of the new towns established in Upper Canada and in the southern colonies of North America in the eighteenth century had gridded plans and one or more town squares. William Penn’s (1687) was followed by Charleston (1672). In Savannah (1733), and a number of other towns in Georgia, a belt of encircling parkland was also provided. C Savannah was laid out by social reformer Oglethorpe who influenced Granville 10.08 .15

Sharp, a British anti-slavery campaigner and utopian who attempted to establish model towns for freed slaves in which he promoted the benefits of the grid and greenbelt (The Adelaide Review 2004:2). In around 1789, the Governor-General of Canada, Lord Dorchester, developed a model town plan for use by surveyors in Upper Canada, probably with the assistance of Captain Gother Mann, a commander of the Royal Engineers in Upper Canada. The model for inland sites was one-mile square, with regularly spaced roads and one-acre lots. It was encircled by a belt of reserved land that provided a barrier between the township and surrounding farm lots. In 1788, Mann prepared a plan for , in which the town would be one mile square, with a grid system of streets, five symmetrically positioned squares and a sixth square that opened to the waterfront. As with Dorchester’s model, it was provided with a belt of reserved land. This plan, which was not actually used for Toronto, has been described as ‘a blueprint for successive new towns in Canada, Australia and New Zealand’. In the 1790s, the newly appointed -Governor of Upper Canada, Colonel John Graves Simcoe, promoted the use of Dorchester’s and Mann’s town designs, including the ‘park belt’ idea, as a model for the surveying of Upper Canada. It has been argued that the use of common or reserved land for ‘enclosure and separation’ became an established planning convention during this period. A number of model plans for new towns were also developed in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries with provision for a belt of park lands around the town. In 1794, a model plan was developed by the English social reformer Granville Sharp, outlined in A General Plan for Laying Out Townships on the New Acquired Lands in the , America, or Elsewhere. It had a grid road pattern, a central square and a strip of common land that surrounded the town lots. In 1830, retired English naval officer Allen Gardiner published Friend of Australia under the name of TJ Maslen, outlining his idea of a model town for the Australian colonies. He suggested that ‘a park [should] surround every town, like a belt one mile in width’ and that ‘all entrances to every town should be through a park, that is to say a belt of park of about a mile or two in diameter, should entirely surround every town, save and excepting such sides as are washed by a river or lake’. He included the Park Lands for health, recreation and aesthetic reasons. In 1833 the House of Commons Select Committee considered 'the best means of 78 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O securing Open Spaces in the vicinity of Populous Towns, as Public Walks and - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access Places of exercise' …to study 'the relationship between general health in densely populated towns and the psychological and recreational value of public open spaces' (Johnson 2004). The report found that there was a need for more open spaces in cities, and that ‘during the last half century many enclosures of open spaces in the vicinity of towns have taken place and little or no provision has been made for public walks or open spaces, fitted to afford means of exercise of amusement to the middle and humbler classes’. Reformers like John Arthur Roebuck campaigned against the enclosure of traditional commons and argued that towns should be provided with parks and gardens for ‘health and recreational purposes’. C The Board of Colonisation Commissioners were possibly influenced by the social 10.08 .15

utopian and utilitarian ideas of and . Wakefield and Bentham had collaborated in developing ideas for the colonisation of South Australia, and Bentham advocated a ‘principle of spatial containment and concentration with social and economic control’. Around ten years before the settlement of South Australia, Owen wrote about his ideas for self-supporting cooperative communities or ‘villages of unity and mutual cooperation’. The idea was essentially for a ‘town in a building set in open space’ and was similar to Bentham’s ‘industry-house establishment’. In both instances, spatial elements would shape and control the social relations within the town. The Adelaide Park Lands may have been provided as a form of enclosure that would concentrate the population in the City and control the supply and value of land, ideas that could have been derived from the work of Wakefield and Bentham. It has also been argued that South Australia’s planners sought to control social relations by utilising a town layout that maximised the visibility of the population and encouraged people to form small social groups within well-defined areas. Possibly it was used as a form of concentric that was intended to shape economic and social relationships. Providing democratic access to public lands for health and recreation were other reasons. It has also been suggested that the park belt was intended to provide protection from a perceived threat of attack by Aborigines. Social and economic context The study by City Futures Research Centre (2007 Vol 2:183) notes that the design of Adelaide was a crucial part of British planning for the new colony of South Australia as a self-supporting land settlement, and the city’s plan forms the most enduring and tangible evidence of that colonial experiment. South Australia was the last of the colonies to be settled and was intended as a free settlement. British intentions for establishing South Australia were different to those for New South Wales and Western Australia. The colony was founded by British legislation in 1834. Control of all the land was delegated to a Board of Colonization Commissioners with proceeds from the sale of land to be put towards an Emigration Fund. This new approach to planting a colony applied the Wakefield principles of systematic colonisation, concerning land, labour and capital. Instead of granting free land to settlers, land was to be sold, and the proceeds used to fund the emigration of free settlers (labourers) to the colony. The scheme involved advanced planning, and controlled land survey before settlement. The new city (named by royal request after Queen Adelaide) 79 was planned as ‘bait’ to attract capitalist investors by purchase of cheap city : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - sections, while the generous layout also reflected the aspirations of British : Rev Project Bahn City Access reformers, and their hopes of developing a new, more civilized, social order in Australia (City Futures 2007 Vol 2:183). In 1836, the Commissioners appointed Colonel William Light as Surveyor General, and instructed him to select the site and plan the new capital. Light’s plan of 1837 included nine ‘Government Reserves’, and indicated the likely future routes of roads through an encircling belt of park lands to the port and country lands. Other areas of the Park Lands have also since been alienated for uses including new street alignments, railways and public and recreational buildings, but most of these functions have played significant roles in the historical development of South C Australia, and in terms of the Adelaide Plan, they have maintained, or increased, 10.08 .15

the intended public use of the Park Lands and squares (City Futures 2007 Vol 2:183). Planning history The Garden City Movement had a profound effect on town planning in the early twentieth century. Social reformer Ebenezer Howard had referred to the Adelaide Park Lands in his influential book Garden Cities of Tomorrow (1902). Mumford believed that Howard had introduced the Greek concept of colonisation by fully equipped communities, in line with the views of social reformers like Robert Owen and Edward Wakefield (Mumford 1961:586). The based Garden City Association advanced Howard’s ideas as a model for city planning and organisation. The City Beautiful movement promoted the creation of new parks, boulevards and street beautification by linking aesthetics with growth. The Garden City movement endorsed garden suburbs with generous open spaces amongst other characteristics. Influenced by Howard, the ideology of civic beautification started to develop at the start of the twentieth century in Australia (Sulman 1919). Reflecting the significance of the Adelaide Plan, there has been intense debate both about the plan’s origins, and its planners. The principal role of South Australia’s first Surveyor General, Colonel William Light, has been affirmed, with acknowledgement of major contributions by George Strickland Kingston. Light, as instructed, looked at other examples of the planting of towns of this kind for ideas about its layout, and several sources can be identified. The South Australian Colonization Commission in London appointed Kingston Assistant Surveyor in 1835, and he supervised preparation of a preliminary ‘Plan of Town’ by other surveying staff, Boyle Travers Finniss and Edward O’Brien. This notional plan was used to raise funds for the new colony through ‘preliminary purchases’ of town acres (City Futures 2007 Vol 2: 183-184). Light was appointed Surveyor General in 1836, and departed in that year with a group of surveyors, including Kingston and Finniss. They were sent ahead of the first settlers to locate and lay out the new capital and survey the surrounding country lands in advance of other development. Light was given clear responsibility for selecting the site, but little was said in his instructions about the plan except that it was to be spacious, with wide streets, squares and public reserves, and in accordance with ‘Regulations for the preliminary sales of colonial lands in the country’. These included the requirement of creating a town of 1,000 one-acre lots (the final total, including the squares and places, was 1,042), and these Town Acres are still recognized by the city’s planners (City Futures 2007 Vol 2:184). 80 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O

The choice of site was critical, and was done only after careful reconnaissance. - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access Light’s selection of the site of the capital city and seat of government was decided in December 1836, and the city was laid out in January-March 1837 with opportunism informing the placement of the layout on the landscape. Light reserved encircling ‘Park Lands’ on his Map of ‘The Port And Town of Adelaide’ (1837) which also delineated nine Government Reserves on the park lands. Two of these, the Government Domain (including the present site of Government House), and the (West Terrace) Cemetery were used as designated, and remain in those locations today, forming significant elements of the surviving Adelaide Plan. Another Government Reserve was indicated for a Botanic Gardens. Although these were established elsewhere in the park lands, they represent another feature of the C original Adelaide Plan, as well as a significant designed element in their own right, 10.08 .15

dating from the preparation of the first botanic gardens plan (1850s) for Australia (City Futures 2007 Vol 2:184). With a grid street pattern, systemic provision of town squares, and defining parkland, the 1837 city plan of Adelaide combined numerous physical planning ideas and innovations of the colonial era. Many influences have been identified, from ancient Roman camps to ideal city plans such as William Penn’s Philadelphia and James Oglethorpe’s Savannah, as well as more abstract models including Granville Sharp’s ideal township of 1794 and T.J. Maslen’s ideal town in his The Friend of Australia (1830). Most of the Adelaide Plan’s elements were not novel but their arrangement on the ground was an inspired response to site and opportunity, and represented the culmination of the whole colonial planning movement of the time (City Futures 2007 Vol 2:184). The Adelaide plan, with its three layers of town land, parkland and suburban land, was later used as a model for many of the towns surveyed in South Australia, such as Gawler, Mylor and Alawoona, and the Northern Territory, particularly between 1864 and 1919. The government had a substantial role in creating and planning South Australia’s towns, unlike the other Australian colonies where speculative development led to more varied results. South Australia’s surveyors provided some parkland in around half of the towns established prior to 1864, probably in imitation of the Adelaide plan. In 1864, Surveyor-General G W Goyder provided instructions to his staff that all new towns should have encircling park lands, and that town land should be laid out in the form of a square, with the roads at right angles to each other, and with five public squares. The parkland town remained popular until 1919, when South Australia’s newly appointed town planner, Charles Reade, recommended that it no longer be used. The study by City Futures (2007 Vol 1:97) notes that 'the town was surveyed in two stages. The major portion of 700 acres south of the river was laid out first. The fretted edge on the eastern side took advantage of the local topography and provided more lots with a parkland outlook. The northern section was broken into three parts to reflect the land form and address the river: a small section of 32 lots closest to the river, a larger section with a western edge serrated by steep slopes, and a third eastern section whose layout secures the required number of lots ‘in a triumphant coda in the north-east where the last three lots turn west with a final flourish’. North Adelaide was destined to be predominantly residential and South Adelaide commercial. The rectangular grid plan oriented to the cardinal directions is distinguished by the encircling parklands and six town squares, five in South 81

Adelaide. Government offices and other civic buildings were to be grouped around : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - the largest, central square. The street layout features an alternating system of : Rev Project Bahn City Access narrow and wide streets in the east-west direction, with the two principal routes and the terraces being made wider still. Few north-south streets were inserted apparently due to Light’s concern with the effect of hot northerly summer winds'. The Adelaide Plan displayed all of the key elements that made up the ‘grand modell’ of the era, including: a policy of deliberate urbanisation, or town planning, in preference to dispersed settlement; land rights allocated in a combination of town, suburban and country lots; the town planned and laid out in advance of settlement; wide streets laid out in geometric, form, usually on an area of one square mile; public square; spacious, standard–sized rectangular plots; plots C reserved for public purposes; and a physical distinction between town and 10.08 .15

country, by common land or an encircling green belt (City Futures 2007 Vol 2:184). The Adelaide Plan has provided a robust framework for the development of the central city and has been an important influence on its attractive and scenic character. Whilst the Plan was essentially a one-off morphological design rather than a comprehensive urban plan, it was also lauded from the nineteenth century onwards within modern town planning circles. The 1893 meeting of the Australian Association for the Advancement of Science recorded universal credit to Light for his selection of the site and for the design of Adelaide. The early Australian planning movement celebrated its originality. The leading architect-planning advocate John Sulman singled out Adelaide as an exception to the usual prosaic planning of Australian towns, and A.J. Brown and H.M. Sherrard made the same assessment in their 1951 textbook for a later generation of planners (City Futures 2007 Vol2:184). The Adelaide Plan was interconnected with the international and post-colonial planning movement when used in Ebenezer Howard’s manifesto, Garden Cities of Tomorrow (1902) to illustrate ‘the correct principle of a city’s growth’. The plan also influenced the Garden City movement that developed at the turn of the century. In Garden Cities of Tomorrow, Ebenezer Howard cited Adelaide as an example of an existing city that conformed to the Garden City idea, ‘Consider for a moment the case of a city in Australia which in some measure illustrates the principle for which I am contending. The city of Adelaide, as the accompanying sketch map shows, is surrounded by its ‘Park Lands’. The city is built up. How does it grow? It grows by leaping over the ‘park-lands’ and establishing North Adelaide. And this is the principle which it is intended to follow, but improve upon, in Garden City. Based on ideas of cellular and constrained expansion, Howard’s garden city movement had an international impact. The plan of Adelaide was an undoubted influence on Howard’s thinking, and the connection underpins its planning heritage significance (City Futures 2007 Vol 2:184). A number of towns in New Zealand were also based on the Adelaide plan, including Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin, Invercargill, Wanganui, Hamilton, Alexandra, Clyde, Cromwell, Gore, Port Chalmers and New Plymouth. In Wellington, a crescent-shaped town belt was provided, and in conjunction with the harbour it encloses the city and separates it from the surrounding land. It remains substantially intact. 82 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - History of the Adelaide Park Lands : Rev Project Bahn City Access The Park Lands and the layout of the City of Adelaide remain substantially intact and still recognisable as the 1837 Plan. The original plan is evident in the boundaries of the City, the width and layout of the main streets, the belt of Park Lands, the squares and remnant town acres. The alienation of the Park Lands from general public access has been occurring since they were laid out, primarily for public uses. Approximately one third of the original area has now been alienated for other purposes. The Adelaide City Council has the ‘care, control and management’ of approximately 74 percent of the originally designated Adelaide Park Lands, which is around 1700 acres, and these C areas are generally well maintained (RNE No.102551: June 2001). New road 10.08 .15

routes, primarily through the Park Lands link the City and North Adelaide with the suburbs. The City and North Adelaide were originally divided into one-acre blocks. Few entire one acre blocks remain although it is possible to discern the original boundaries of the town acres in some instances (particularly in North Adelaide where the town acres were often subdivided into four blocks). These sites tend to primarily be in the ownership of government and church, including use by schools and hospitals. The area now known as the cultural and institutional precinct along North Terrace contains institutions such as the University of Adelaide and the Art Gallery of South Australia which form a visual barrier between the northern and southern parts of the Light Plan. These institutions have also acquired heritage significance. The Railway Station, a hotel and convention centre adjoining it were alienated from Park Lands in the western part of North Terrace. The City contains numerous minor north-south streets constructed within a few years of survey, that were not part of the original plan. In addition, Frome Road was cut through the western part of the City in the 1960s, and runs from Angas Street to North Terrace. In other instances, streets were realigned or extended through the Park Lands to link Adelaide with the surrounding suburbs. For example, King William Street was realigned in the early twentieth century to link North Adelaide and the City, Kintore Avenue was extended from North Terrace down to the River Torrens and the alignment of which leads to Light’s Vision, an outlook point at North Adelaide over the City, was changed to create a major thoroughfare from Morphett Street to Jeffcott Street. Numerous roads were built through the Park Lands to connect with the suburbs, including Glover Avenue, Burbridge Road, Goodwood Road, Sir Lewis Cohen Avenue, Peacock Road, Unley Road, Hutt Road, Wakefield Street and Rundle Road. War Memorial Drive was built as a war memorial along the River Torrens. Medindie Road, Lefevre Road, Main North Road, Prospect Road and Jeffcott Street were all extended from North Adelaide through the Park Lands to link with the suburbs. Of the six squares, the changes to Victoria Square, the central and largest Square, are the most noticeable. Victoria Square was planned to be a focal point for the City but it has become surrounded by office development around its perimeter. The Square has been encroached upon by King William Street, which has had an impact on views through the square. Hindmarsh, Light and have also been subdivided by roads. and Wellington Square are the 83 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O most intact of the squares. - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access

C 10.08 .15

Appendix B Bibliography

Australian Government Department of the Environment, http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/places/national/adelaide-parklands, 17 April 2015. Jones, D 2007, Adelaide Park Lands & Squares Cultural Landscape Assessment Study volumes 1-6. Report prepared for the Corporation of the City of Adelaide. Llewellyn-Smith, M 2012, Behind the Scenes The Politics of Planning Adelaide, University of Adelaide Press. Mapco Map and Plan Collection Online, http://mapco.net/aust.htm, 17 March 2015-05-11

84 : DA153127 : Assmt Impact Heritage Aboriginal Non O - Bahn City Access Project : Rev : Rev Project Bahn City Access C 10.08 .15

AECOM O-Bahn City Access Project

Appendix H

Urban Design Report

01-Oct-2015 Prepared for – Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure – ABN: 92366288135 J O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy | PIR Report Bundeys Road to Rundle Road

DPTI | Taylor Cullity Lethlean June 2015

O-Bahn HackneyTaylor Cullity Road Lethlean Strategy // JUNEJune 2015 Contents

Introduction...... 1 The O Bahn Project Objectives Report Overview

1.0 Guiding Principles...... 2 2.1 Connect precincts 2.2 Celebrate site 2.3 Curate collections 2.4 Create links 2.5 Incorporate best practices 2.6 Consolidated vision

2.0 Analysis of DPTI Base Design...... 4

3.0 Overall Designs for Discussion Design Option A ...... 6 Design Option B2...... 8

4.0 Design Elements 4.1 OBahn Portal - Hackney Road...... 10 4.2 Soft Landscape Requirements...... 17 4.3 Material Palette...... 18

Report No: A1509 OBahn Redevelopment - River Torrens to Rundle Road

Rev Description Date By Checked Approved P1 DRAFT 07.04.15 RK DS DS P2 DRAFT 09.04.15 RK DS DS P3 DRAFT 13.04.15 RK DS DS P4 DRAFT 17.04.15 RK DS DS P5 DRAFT 13.05.15 DH DS DS P6 DRAFT 20.05.15 DH DS DS P7 DRAFT 25.05.15 DH DS DS P8 DRAFT 27.05.15 RK DS DS P9 DRAFT 28.05.15 DH DS DS P10 PIR DRAFT 29.05.15 DH DS DS P11 PIR DRAFT 04.06.15 DH DS DS P12 PIR DRAFT 16.06.15 DH DS DS P13 PIR DRAFT 17.06.15 DH DS DS P14 PIR DRAFT 25.06.15 DH DS DS O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 Introduction

The O-Bahn Report Overview This report is divided into a number of sections as listed below: Project Objectives The following report was commissioned by DPTI to investigate the development of urban design Section One: The O-Bahn City Access Project is a significant outcomes associated with the extension of the A description of Project Guiding Principles and project for Adelaide that delivers important public dedicated O-Bahn bus lanes along Hackney Outcomes transport improvements to the city. Road. Documentation of options contained within The primary objective of the O-Bahn City Access has come about following a series of workshops Section Two: Project is to; organised by TCL to coordinate and table design Analysis of the DPTI Base Design objectives from major stakeholders associated • Improve travel times and reliability, and with the project and included representatives from: Section Three: reduce on-road delays for users of the Overall designs (complete study area) for O-Bahn service between the end of the • DPTI, Department for Planning, Transport discussion. busway at Gilberton and Grenfell Street over and Infrastructure • Complete Design Option A: the next 30 years. • DEWNR, Department for Environment • Complete Design Option B 2: and Heritage Other key objectives of the project are to: Section Four: Other contributors include; Design Elements including: • Improve safety and travel time, and reduce congestion for traffic on the City • National Wine Centre • O-Bahn portal Ring Route; • Soft landscaping requirements • Allow for potential long term transport TCL have been asked to investigate and suggest • Material palette initiatives; best practice urban design solutions and • Minimise impacts to the travelling public, principles in review of the Hackney Road traffic business operations and the wider and streetscape designs provided by DPTI from community during construction; Bundeys Road to Rundle Road. The scope of this • Minimise impacts upon the environment study also extends to the configuration of parking and heritage, including the Park Lands; adjacent the Adelaide Botanic Gardens entrance and and a proposed footbridge connection east-west • Complete the project within the $160 adjacent to Plane Tree Drive. million allocated budget by the second The primray objective of this report is to provide half of 2017. strategic urban design guidelines for the future redevelopment of Hackney Road and it’s Additionally, Adelaide City Council has developed associated projects. These guidelines will then the following overarching project objectives; form the basis of design development moving forward towards eventual construction. • Developing better and integrated Public Transport in Adelaide For the purpose of the report, Hackney Road has • Ensuring people are the Focus been divided into 4 key sections as per the plan • Respecting the Adelaide Park Lands and on pages 4 & 5. Making better places • Ensuring economic viability for the East End

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 1 1.0 Guiding Principles

The following principles have been identified to summarise the ideals of the O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy.

The six principles aim to represent the interests of O-Bahn and road users, pedestrians and stakeholders present in and around the roadway. Their intention is to form an over-arching philosophy and guide decision-making for future design work along Hackney Road.

CONNECT precincts CELEBRATE site CURATE collections

Connect the experience of the Adelaide Botanic Selection of hard and soft materials that are Utilise the Hackney Road re-development to Garden and parklands precincts through a sympathetic to the site context and celebrate the promote the Adelaide Botanic Gardens scientific continuous connective pedestrian link that runs city plan of Colonel William Light and its unique and social vision through the design and curation 1 from North Terrace through to Bundey’s Road. 2 interface on site between city civic edge, parkland 3 of a collection that integrates places for people and suburb. with places for plants.

CREATE links INCORPORATE best practice CONSOLIDATED vision Create infrastructures that celebrate thresholds Incorporate best practice in design through the utilisation De-clutter the available space with well- and provide connection between the east of Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD), Crime coordinated, efficient use of engineering and west sides of Hackney Road to promote Prevemtion through Environmental Design (CPTED) infrastructure to reflect the aesthetic values of the connectedness and inclusivity, whilst providing an principles and plant species selection that acknowledge 4 5 6 Gardens. non stop route for the OBahn. the role of climate and context in establishing place.

2 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 3 2.0 DPTI Base Design Analysis - OBahn Strategy

As part of this study, TCL have undertaken analysis of the DPTI infrastructure and streetscape strategy for Hackney Road in coordination with the Adelaide Botanic Gardens and National Wine Centre.

The below notes identified by Botanic Gardens Staff summarise the potential issues identified with respect to parking, access, amenity, safety and aesthetics.

Richmond Street Bertram Street Oxford Street Cambridge Street

Vailima Court

Park Terrace

Bundeys Road

Zone 1 - Bundeys Road to Cambridge Street Zone 2 - Cambridge Street to Plane Tree Drive

IPotential Issues raised by Adelaide Botanic Gardens and National Wine Centre

• Loss of (off-peak) bus stop - O-Bahn 2 pedestrian and bike users of shared path • Trade vehicle parking . • Parking Numbers - Revenue loss of 70 car stops. (north and south Plane Tree Drive). • Bus entry from south only. parks (existing total of 141). • Outcomes to be consistent with values • Lack of pedestrian crossing on Hackney • Removal of public transport provisions • National Wine Centre concerns and parking paper, Connor Holmes. Road. affects visitation. allocations and location. • Visual values and landscape character to • East Entry: Implications; • Service vehicle, access & egress: • Planted Entry to Goodman Building and be consistent with Botanic Gardens. • Car parks on roads. • Botanic Drive Tram Barn. • Ensure amenity and safety provided for • Bus drop off. • Plane Tree Drive (events). • Trees in median of road required.

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 4 Little King William Street

King William Street Rundle Road Botanic Street North Terrace

Athelney Avenue Wyandra Lane Westbury Street

Plane Tree Drive

Zone 3 - Plane Tree Drive to North Terrace Zone 4 - North Terrace to Rundle Road

Potential Issues cont. Southern Carpark Considerations

• Portal design of OBahn and heritage of • Wine Centre entry not supportive of • Tour groups and taxi pick up / drop off Goodman building / Tram barn. functions • Staff car park distance to cars after functions • Relocation of Botanic Park gates to cater • Lighting and night time use and safety • 50 car park spaces leased for vehicle widths associated with events across Botanic Gardens and Wine Centre • Shortage of car parking in parklands • Right turn access to plane tree drive. entrances • Reduced access to Southern car park Scale 1:20000 @ A3

4 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 5 3.0 Overall Designs for Discussion

Richmond Street Bertram Street Oxford Street Cambridge Street

Vailima Court

Park Terrace

Tainmundilla | Complete design option A Botanic Park

226 Car Parks at 90 degree parking. m2 ifootprint. 70 retained parkland parks from DPTI option, pedestrian bridge across HackneyBundeys Road Road, Plaza (no traffic) and a dedicated U-turn facility.

Revised car park layout

Design Option A

Total car park capacity 196 + 70 = 266 spaces.

Footprint 5,061 m2

Net soft landscaping loss 1,411 m2

This whole of corridor Design Option ‘A’ consists of; • Reconfigured car park includes 23 new parks with 30, 45, 60 and 90 degree (DPTI) Option One in Zone 1 parking, inc. 70 retained parkland parks (DPTI) Option One in Zone 2 from DPTI option. Design Option Six in Zone 3. • Pedestrian bridge across Hackney Road (DPTI) Option One in Zone Four. (currently unfunded) • ABG Entrance Plaza (no traffic) and dedicated U-turn facility.

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 6 Little King William Street

King William Street Rundle Road Botanic Street North Terrace

Athelney Avenue Wyandra Lane Westbury Street

National Kadlitpina | Wine Centre Rundle Park

National Rose ABG First Trial Garden Creek Wetland

Plane Tree Drive

Existing Adelaide Botanic National Wine Centre entrance U-Turn Garden boundary fence plaza to be further developed

Adelaide Botanic Gardens Realigned Boundary Fence frontage plaza to be further developed

Pros Cons

• Plaza with no traffic to front of Goodman • Encroachment of 1,411 m2 of Botanic Building and historic Tram Shed Gardens / Parklands soft landscaping • Upgrade to Wine Centre Entrance • Carpark at Botanic Park does not meet • Optimised car park numbers matching Adelaide Botanic Garden landscape values existing provisions • Weaving path / shared path • Carpark has inconsistent arrangement and Scale 1:20000 @ A3 poor wayfinding legibility

6 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 7 3.0 Overall Designs for Discussion (Adelaide Botanic Gardens Preferred Configuration)

Richmond Street Bertram Street Oxford Street Cambridge Street

Vailima Court

Park Terrace

Tainmundilla | Botanic Park

Bundeys Road

Shared Path within treed avenue (Botanic Park frontage) Design Option B 2

Total car park capacity 198 spaces.

60 degree parking

Footprint 4,739 m2

Net soft landscaping gains 1,825 m2

The preferred whole of corridor Design Option ‘B 2’ consists of;

Option Two in Zone 1 Option Two in Zone 2 Design Option Seven (60° parallel parking) in Zone 3. (DPTI) Option One in Zone Four.

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 8 Little King William Street

King William Street Rundle Road Botanic Street North Terrace

Athelney Avenue Wyandra Lane Westbury Street

National Kadlitpina | Wine Centre Rundle Park

National Rose ABG First Trial Garden Creek Wetland

Plane Tree Drive

Frontage to Botanic Gardens Existing Adelaide Botanic National Wine Centre entrance U-Turn currently being developed Garden boundary fence plaza to be further developed

Possible ‘Kiss and Drop’ Bus Zone Adelaide Botanic Gardens Realigned Boundary Fence frontage plaza to be further developed

Pros Cons

• Zone 3 Option 7 car parking arrangement • Need to determine extent of works for • Upgrade to Wine Centre Entrance O-Bahn Project to Adelaide • Shared path / parklands trail Botanic Gardens frontage • Net gain of 1,825 m2 to Botanic Gardens / Parklands for soft landscaping • Preferred Zone 3 Car Park option of the Scale 1:20000 @ A3 Adelaide Botanic Gardens

8 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 9 4.1 OBahn Portal - Hackney Road

Concept design render for the Hackney Road Portal

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 10 Hackney Road Portal

Design Rationale Concept Inspiration

A concept design for the Hackney Road O-Bahn tunnel portal has been developed by TCL to be further refined during the detailed design phase of the project.

Structure / Form

The siting of the O-Bahn tunnel portal in proximity to the Adelaide Botanic Gardens and National Wine Centre invites abstracted inspiration from the architectural forms present that define the local built character. These include the Goodman Building, Tram Barn and curved form of the National Wine Centre and Bicentennial Conservatory. The undulating nature of the Portal design is derived from the Adelaide Hills that are visually ever-present when travelling towards the city along Hackney Road.

Materiality

The proposed Portal ribs are steel bands painted in a warm brass tone which exudes quality and excellence; virtues of the Botanic Gardens and a fitting entry to the City Precinct. This colour is also complimentary to the heritage Goodman Building and Tram Barn in close proximity.

Steel sheets inscribed with microscopic cellular plant patterning clad the inside of the ribs to soften the transition to and from the O-Bahn tunnel and further reinforce the link to the Botanic Gardens.

10 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 11 Overall Site Plan ‘ The Parklands are the lungs of the city - they provide a space for the community to breathe. ’

O-Bahn Tunnel Dequetteville Terrace

Current culverts undersized for catchment and in Hackney Road conflict with O-Bahn tunnel. Rectify and upgrade as part of O-Bahn works. Rundle Road

Botanic Road

Coordinate pump station with upgrade of culvert and ABG / Wine Centre interface masterplan

Hackney Road O-Bahn tunnel entry and portal

Greening of streets along Hackney Road

East Terrace Carparking under seperate review

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 12 H A C K N E Y R O A D

National Wine Centre

Goodman Building

Upgrade to Wine Centre Entry part of another investigation

Repeated curves and pattern of Wine Centre (skeletal form)

Provide verge planting to “green” Hackney Road

Sculptural O-Bahn Tunnel Entry responding to the repetitous elements of the Wine Centre

Avenue of trees along Hackney Road

Future upgrade of ABG / Wine Centre car park as part of ABG Masterplan

Upgrade to ABG Entry part of another investigation Precedent Examples

12 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 13 8.0 Design Elements

8.2 OBahn Portal Hackney Road Tunnel Entry Elevation 1:500

Tunnel entry Throw mesh barrier Concrete barrier

Hackney Road Tunnel Entry Elevation 1:100

Throw mesh barrier

Concrete barrier

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 14 Hackney Road O-Bahn Tunnel Entry - Looking North

Hackney Road O-Bahn Tunnel Entry - Looking South

14 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 15 4.2 Soft Landscape Requirements

Indicative Tree and Vegetation Lists

Trees (Plaza and Parks) Ulmus parvifolia ‘Todd’ Chinese Elm Pyrus calleryana ‘Aristocrat’ Callery Pear Lagerstroemia fauriei ‘Fantasy’ Crepe Myrtle Lagerstroemia ‘Natchez’ Crepe Myrtle Platanus x acerifolia Plane Tree Corymbia maculata Spotted Gum

Shrubs (Plaza and Parks)

Dianella caerulea ‘Cassa Blue’ Ulmus parvifolia ‘Todd’ Pyrus calleryana ‘Aristocrat’ Lagerstroemia fauriei ‘Fantasy’ Dianella caerulea ‘Little Jess’ Dianella caerulea ‘Breeze’ Dianella revoluta ‘Little Rev’ Lomandra ‘Tanika’ Poa labillardierei v. labillardierei Common Tussock-grass Westringia fruticosa ‘Zena’ Lomandra longifolia ‘Tanika’ Lomandra confertifolia ‘Seascape’ Cotoneaster dammeri Bearberry Cotoneaster Westringia fruticosa ‘Jervis Jem’

Westringia fruticosa ‘Zena’ Lomandra longifolia ‘Tanika’ Rosemarinus officinalis ‘Blue Lagoon’ Trees Planting (Inner Avenue) Corymbia ficifolia Red flowering gum Tristaniopsis laurina Water Gum Eucalyptus torquata Coral Gum

Tree Planting (Outer Avenue) Platanus x acerifolia Plane Tree Corymbia maculata Spotted Gum

Corymbia ficifolia Tristaniopsis laurina Platanus acerifolia

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 16 4.3 Material Palette

Materiality Pre-Cast Elements Cast in-Situ Elements

Material tones and palette’s to use elegant earth tones that recede in the landscape setting of the Botanic Park and greater Adelaide Parkland’s.

Grey precast concrete panels with Ashphalt Charcoal cast in situ Kerb Hanson Autumn Gold with varied, integrally coloured & textured Light Washback finish precast concrete finish to O Bahn tunnel walls Perforated Elements Stone and Timber

Kanmantoo Bluestone Anston stone - Riviera pavers Cypress Pine Decking Outer treatment: Inner treatment: Laser cut and painted steel panel featuring Perforated steel panel, with small aperture botanic prints to announce parkland / Botanic Gardens threshold

Painted Elements / Finishes

Bronze or Charcoal Lightpoles Dulux Namadji Dulux Luck Cololourbond Monument

16 O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 17 www.tcl.net.au

O-Bahn Hackney Road Strategy / June 2015 18 September 2015

O-BAHN EXTENSION ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Stages 1, 2 and 3 Contamination Investigation

Submitted to: Department of Planning Transport and Infrastructure 77 Grenfell Street ADELAIDE SA 5000

Report Number. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 Distribution:

REPORT 1 Bound Copy - DPTI 2 Unbound Copies - DPTI 1 eCopy - DPTI 1 eCopy - Golder Associates Pty Ltd O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Record of Issue

Company Client Contact Version Date Issued Method of Delivery

DPTI Dariusz Fanok Draft – RevA 28/07/2015 Electronic

1 Bound Copy DPTI Dariusz Fanok Final – Rev0 22/09/2015 2 Unbound Copies 1 Electronic Copy

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1

1.1 Overview...... 1

1.2 Objectives...... 1

2.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION...... 1

2.1 Soil...... 1

2.1.1 Methodology ...... 1

2.1.2 Chemical analysis ...... 2

2.1.3 Assessment criteria...... 3

2.2 Groundwater...... 4

2.2.1 Methodology ...... 4

2.2.2 Laboratory analysis...... 7

2.2.3 Assessment criteria...... 7

3.0 RESULTS ...... 7

3.1 Site description ...... 7

3.2 Subsurface conditions ...... 8

3.3 Soil results ...... 9

3.3.1 Fill ...... 9

3.3.2 Natural soil ...... 9

3.3.3 Leachability results...... 14

3.4 Waste Classification ...... 15

3.5 Groundwater...... 16

3.5.1 Groundwater levels ...... 16

3.5.2 Field measurements...... 18

3.5.3 Groundwater quality...... 18

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL...... 19

4.1 Laboratory analyses ...... 19

4.2 Soil...... 19

4.2.1 Internal laboratory QA/QC procedures...... 19

4.2.2 Sampling density...... 19

4.2.3 Holding time ...... 19

4.2.4 Rates of field duplicate testing ...... 19

4.2.5 RPD results for duplicates...... 19

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 i O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

4.2.6 Rinsate and trip blank results...... 20

4.3 Groundwater...... 20

4.3.1 Internal laboratory QA/QC procedures...... 20

4.3.2 Rates of field duplicate testing ...... 20

4.3.3 RPD results for duplicates...... 21

4.3.4 Rinsate and Trip blank results...... 21

5.0 CONCLUSIONS...... 21

5.1 Soil...... 21

5.1.1 Fill ...... 21

5.1.2 Natural ...... 22

5.2 Groundwater...... 22

6.0 LIMITATIONS ...... 23

7.0 CLOSURE...... 23

TABLES Table 1: Stage 1 Summary of Chemical Analyses ...... 2 Table 2: Stage 2 Summary of Chemical Analysis ...... 3 Table 3: Stage 3 Summary of Chemical Analysis ...... 3 Table 4: Monitoring Well Installation Details...... 5 Table 5 : Summary of Waste Criteria Exceedances – Fill Material...... 9 Table 6: Summary of ASC NEPM Guideline Exceedances – Fill Material...... 12 Table 7: Summary of Waste Criteria Exceedances – Natural Material...... 14 Table 8: Summary of ASC NEPM Guideline Exceedances - Natural Material ...... 14 Table 9: Summary of Statistics – Domain A (Parklands) Fill Material ...... 16 Table 10: Summary of Statistics - Domain A (Parklands) Natural Soil ...... 16 Table 11: Summary of Statistics – Domain B (Road Corridor) Fill Material...... 16 Table 12: Summary of Statistics - Domain B (Road Corridor) Natural Soil...... 16 Table 13: Summary of Standing Water Levels...... 17 Table 14: Summary of Groundwater Field Parameters ...... 18 Table 15: Summary of Rinsate Results >LOR ...... 20

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 ii O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

APPENDICES FIGURES Figure 1: Borehole and Groundwater Well Location Plans Figure 2: Waste Fill Criteria Exceedance Location Figure – Fill Figure 3: Waste Fill Criteria Exceedance Location Figure – Natural Soil APPENDIX A Reports of Boreholes and Groundwater Well Construction Details APPENDIX B Laboratory Certificates APPENDIX C Tabulated Soil Results APPENDIX D Quality Assurance/Quality Control Results APPENDIX E Well Permits APPENDIX F Groundwater Sampling Sheets APPENDIX G DPTI Figures APPENDIX H Tabulated Groundwater Results APPENDIX I Important Information

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 iii O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview Golder Associates Pty Ltd (Golder) was engaged by the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure to undertake a two stage combined geotechnical investigation and environmental site assessment for the proposed O-Bahn Extension Project, Adelaide, South Australia (the site). The investigations were carried out in general accordance with the services outlined in our proposals, Stage – 1 Golder reference: P47662204-001-P-Rev0, dated 24 June 2014, Stage 2 (Golder Ref: 147662112-012-L-Rev1), dated 6 March 2015 and Stage 3 (Golder Ref: 147662122-019-xls- Rev1), dated 19 June 2015.

This report includes the findings of the Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 environmental investigations extending along Hackney Road, Dequetteville Terrace, and Rundle and Rymill Parks. A locality plan showing the regional location of the site and the borehole locations is presented as Figure 1. The report for the geotechnical investigation undertaken in conjunction with this investigation is provided to DPTI under separate cover (Golder Ref: 147662122-021-R-Rev0). The combined Stage 1 and Stage 2 Contamination Investigations were previously reported to DPTI in our report (Golder Ref: 147662122-016-R-Rev0, dated June 2015). This report provides an update of that report to include Stage 3 of the environmental investigations. 1.2 Objectives The primary objective of the work completed was to provide DPTI with a factual assessment of the contamination status of soil likely to be excavated during construction of the O-Bahn extension, and to provide a comparison of the chemical results with current South Australian Environment Protection Authority (SA EPA) criteria for disposal and/or re-use of soils.

The secondary objective was to provide a preliminary factual assessment of groundwater quality within the project area, undertaken in conjunction with the soil contamination investigation. 2.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION 2.1 Soil 2.1.1 Methodology The Stage 1 soil investigation was undertaken between 21 July and 11 August 2014, the Stage 2 soil investigation was undertaken between 18 and 26 March 2015 and the Stage 3 soil investigation was undertaken between 22 and 30 June 2015. The scope of work for the contamination field investigations included the following:

ƒ Preparation of a site-specific Health and Safety Environment Plan (HaSEP) for the works. ƒ Review of available underground service plans for the site (via a Dial-Before-You-Dig search). Engagement of a professional cable locator to assess proposed investigation locations for the potential ƒ presence of below ground services.

ƒ For Stage 1 drilling 19 boreholes (BH01 to BH19) to target depths of 6 m (BH01), 10 m (BH02 to BH05 and BH19), 15 m (BH09, BH12, BH13 and BH18), 20 m (BH06, BH11, BH15 to BH17) and 25 m (BH07, BH08 and BH10) using hollow auger drilling techniques.

ƒ For Stage 2 drilling 21 boreholes (BH20, BH22 to BH28, BH31, BH34, BH35, BH37 to BH40, and BH42 to BH47) to target depths of 4 m (BH45 and BH46), 6 m (BH42 to BH44), 9 m (BH47), 10 m (BH28, BH39 and BH40), 11 m (BH20), 15 m (BH23, BH26, BH27, BH31, BH34, BH35 and BH38) and 20 m (BH22, BH24, BH25 and BH37) using hollow auger drilling techniques.

ƒ For Stage 3 drilling 10 boreholes (B48, BH49, BH51, BH53 to BH59) to target depths of 4 m (BH59), 6 m (BH53, BH57 and BH58), 15 m (BH54 to BH56), 30 m (BH48 and BH49) and 35 m (BH51) using solid and hollow auger drilling techniques.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 1 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

ƒ Collection of soil samples for contamination testing, using split spoon sampling techniques, at changes in stratigraphy or where apparent chemical impact was observed. Details of the soil samples collected are included in the borehole logs within Appendix A. Laboratory certificates of analysis are included in Appendix B. Tabulated soil results are provided in Appendix C.

Screening of soil samples in the field for the presence of ionisable volatile organic compounds (VOCs) ƒ using a photo ionisation detector (PID), to aid in the selection of samples for laboratory analysis.

ƒ Collection of inter-laboratory and/or intra-laboratory duplicate samples for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) purposes. Details of duplicate analysis are included in Appendix D.

Collection of rinsate and trip blank samples to assess for cross-contamination during sampling and ƒ transport of samples. Details of rinsate and trip blank analyses are included in Appendix D.

ƒ Transport of samples in a chilled coolbox, under appropriate chain of custody documentation, to National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accredited analytical laboratories for the required analysis.

ƒ Logging the materials encountered using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). ƒ Backfilling of boreholes not converted into groundwater wells using grout. For the wells in the roads, cold mix bitumen was used at the surface. Details of the groundwater well installation program are provided in Section 2.2.

Borehole locations were surveyed for Eastings and Northings (Map Grid of Australia (MGA94)) and elevation (Australian Height Datum (AHD)) subsequent to the drilling program.

The borehole locations are illustrated on Figure 1. The Reports of Boreholes are provided in Appendix A, together with Notes and Abbreviations used in their preparation. 2.1.2 Chemical analysis The chemical analysis undertaken on the soil samples is summarised in Table 1 (Stage 1), Table 2 (Stage 2) and Table 3 (Stage 3) below. Table 1: Stage 1 Summary of Chemical Analyses Primary Primary Blind Split Analysis FILL NATURAL Duplicate Duplicate Samples Samples Samples Samples SA EPA Waste Classification (Basic) 3 3 - - 8 Metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn) - 31 - 2 TRH/TPH/BTEX/PAH/OCPs, 8 Metals 32 - - - TRH/OCPs - 10 - - TRH/BTEX/8 Metals - - 8 - Total 35 44 8 2

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 2 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Table 2: Stage 2 Summary of Chemical Analysis Primary Primary Blind Split Analysis FILL NATURAL Duplicate Duplicate Samples Samples Samples Samples SA EPA Waste Screen (Basic) 6 3 1 1 8 Metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn) 38 42 11 11 TRH/TPH 25 18 7 7 BTEX 19 0 6 6 PAH 29 23 7 7 OCP 19 17 7 7 Total 136 103 39 39

Table 3: Stage 3 Summary of Chemical Analysis Primary Primary Blind Split Analysis FILL NATURAL Duplicate Duplicate Samples Samples Samples Samples SA EPA Waste Screen (Basic) 7 0 1 1 8 Metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn) 3 1 0 0 TRH/TPH 3 1 0 0 BTEX 0 0 0 0 PAH 3 1 0 0 OCP 3 1 0 0 Total 19 4 1 1 TRH = total recoverable hydrocarbons TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons BTEX = benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes PAH = polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons OCP = organochlorine pesticides

The SA EPA Waste Classification Screen is a comprehensive screen of chemicals, typically used when the history of the soil being tested is uncertain, or when a broad range of contaminants may be expected in the soil. The following chemicals are included in the SA EPA Waste Classification Screen: TRH/BTEXN, PAH, phenols, OCPs, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), metals ((As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn, Ba, Be, Co, Fe, Mn, Ag, Cr 6+ ) and total cyanide. 2.1.3 Assessment criteria The results of the chemical analyses were compared with the following published guidelines, in consideration of DPTI’s options for off-site re-use /disposal of excavated soil during construction of the O-Bahn:

ƒ SA EPA Guideline: Standard for the production and use of Waste Derived Fill (2013), ‘the Standard’: This standard describes the information and processes that are required by the SA EPA in order to support the beneficial reuse of wastes specifically recovered for use off-site as fill. The protocol takes a risk-based approach and aims to provide clarity to industry and the broader community on the issues that need to be addressed to demonstrate the suitability of the use of fill. This includes the need for quality assurance measures, demonstration of beneficial properties and minimising the risk of harm.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 3 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

ƒ Waste Disposal Information Sheet: Current criteria for the classification of waste – including Industrial and Commercial Waste (Listed) and Waste Soil (SA EPA, March 2010) . This document provides concentrations of chemical substances and physical characteristics for classification of waste for landfill disposal. For landfill disposal purposes, material not complying with the Waste Fill disposal criteria must be considered against Intermediate Waste Soil (IWS) or Low Level Contaminated Waste (LLCW) criteria. Material which contains chemical concentrations exceeding the LLCW criteria (>LLCW) is not addressed by the Information Sheet.

The results have also been compared with health based investigation guidelines published in the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (NEPC, 2013) [the ASC NEPM]. The ASC NEPM provides health based investigation and screening levels (HILs and HSLs) for various land use settings for a wide range of potential soil contaminants. Comparison with these guidelines has been undertaken to allow a preliminary assessment of potential health risks to construction workers and also allow assessment of possible management options for materials left in-situ or re-used on site. A preliminary assessment of results against the Ecological Investigation Levels (EILs) and Ecological Screening levels (ESLs) published in the ASC NEPM has also be undertaken to assist with assessment of materials for on- site re-use. The following guidelines within the ASC NEPM have been considered:

ƒ Health Investigation Levels for Commercial Industrial land Use (HIL-D). ƒ Management Limits for TPH fractions F1 to F4 for commercial and industrial land use. Ecological Investigation Levels (EILs) for commercial and industrial land use (based on conservative ƒ assumptions of likely soil geochemical properties and background concentrations).

Ecological Screening Levels (ESLs) for commercial and industrial land use based on a conservative ƒ assumption of coarse grained soil.

HSLs have not been considered due to the lack of significant volatile petroleum hydrocarbons identified in site soil. 2.2 Groundwater 2.2.1 Methodology Purging and sampling of the newly installed wells was undertaken in Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 on 12 August 2014, 9 April 2015 and 15 and 16 July 2015 respectively. Prior to purging, the standing water levels (SWLs) and total well depths were recorded. Further gauging using a dipper and/or dataloggers of all Stage 1 and 2 wells has been undertaken approximately monthly since installation with the results provided on a regular basis to DPTI. Following installation of the Stage 2 wells gauging of both the Stage 1 and Stage 2 wells was undertaken on 23 April 2015 and 29 April 2015 and has continued approximately monthly since.

In Stage 1 groundwater wells were installed in eight boreholes (BH02, BH04, BH07, BH09, BH13, BH16, BH17 and BH18), in Stage 2 groundwater wells were installed in nine boreholes (BH20, BH22, BH23, BH24, BH26, BH27, BH28, BH34 and BH47) and in Stage 3 groundwater wells were installed in four boreholes (BH49, BH51, BH54 and BH55). Groundwater wells were installed to monitor groundwater levels at the site and to provide DPTI with preliminary factual information on the quality of groundwater at the site.

A summary of the groundwater well installation details is presented with the borehole logs in Appendix A and in Table 4 below. Groundwater Well Permits are presented in Appendix E.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 4 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Table 4: Monitoring Well Installation Details Stage 1

BH02 BH04 BH07 BH09 BH13 BH16 BH17 BH18 Installation details Depth (mbgl) Backfill to near- 0.1 - 1.3 0.1 - 1.6 0.1 - 1.0 0.1 - 0.5 0.1 - 3.0 0.1 - 3.6 0.1 - 3.2 0.1 - 0.5 surface, cement grout Bentonite Seal 1.3 - 1.8 1.6 - 2.1 1.0 - 1.5 0.5 - 2.25 3.0 - 4.5 3.6 - 4.6 3.2 - 5.2 0.5 - 2.5 Filter pack, washed 1.8 - 8.3 2.1 - 7.1 1.5 - 5.0 2.25 - 9.75 4.5 - 14.7 4.6 - 11.35 5.2 - 12.0 2.5 - 11.1 gravel (8/16) Slotted casing, 50 mm 2.3 - 8.3 2.6 - 7.1 2.0 - 5.0 2.75-9.75 5.7 - 14.7 5.35-11.35 6.0-12.0 3.1-11.1 PVC Backfill below monitoring well, 8.3 - 10.0 7.1 - 9.0 5.0 - 25.0 9.75 - 15.0 14.7 - 15.0 11.35 - 20.0 12.0 - 20.0 11.1 - 15.0 bentonite grout Stage 2

BH20 BH22 BH23 BH24 BH26 BH27 BH28 BH34 BH47 Installation details Depth (mbgl) Backfill to near- 0.10 - 2.20 0.10 - 2.50 0.10 - 6.50 0.10 - 6.50 0.10 - 2.50 0.10 - 4.50 0.10 - 2.50 0.10 - 0.50 0.10 - 0.50 surface, cement grout Bentonite Seal 2.20 - 3.00 2.50 - 3.50 6.50 - 7.50 6.50 - 7.50 2.50 - 3.50 4.50 - 5.50 2.50 - 3.50 0.50 - 3.50 0.50 - 1.50 Filter pack, washed 3.00 - 10.00 3.50 - 10.00 7.50 - 14.00 7.50 - 14.00 3.50 - 10.00 5.50 - 12.00 3.50 - 10.00 3.50 - 10.00 1.50 - 8.00 gravel (8/16) Slotted casing, 50 mm 4.00 - 10.00 4.00 - 10.00 8.00 - 14.00 8.00 - 14.00 4.00 - 10.00 6.00 - 12.00 4.00 - 10.00 4.00 -10.00 2.00 - 8.00 PVC Backfill below monitoring well, 10.00 - 11.00 10.00 - 20.00 14.00 - 15.00 14.00 - 20.00 10.00 - 15.00 12.00 - 15.00 - 10.00 - 15.00 8.00 - 9.00 bentonite grout

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 5 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Stage 3

BH49 BH51 BH54 BH55 Installation details Depth (mbgl) Backfill to near- 0.10 - 20.20 0.10 - 2.50 0.10 – 0.40 0.10 – 0.40 surface, cement grout Bentonite Seal 20.20 - 21.20 2.50 - 3.00 0.40 – 0.90 0.40 – 0.90 Filter pack, washed 21.20 - 23.50 3.00 - 11.00 0.90 – 8.30 0.90 - 8.30 gravel (8/16) Slotted casing, 50 mm 21.80 - 23.50 4.00 - 11.00 1.90 – 8.00 2.20 - 8.20 PVC Notes: Wells constructed using 50 mm PVC casing and slotted PVC screen. Wells finished with flush mounted gatic covers at the ground surface.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 6 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Monitoring well installation reports are presented in Appendix A.

The scope of work for the groundwater investigation included the following:

Converting eight boreholes in Stage 1, nine boreholes in Stage 2 and four boreholes in Stage 3 into ƒ groundwater monitoring wells.

ƒ Development of the wells using a steel bailer, in general accordance with Golders standard procedures. ƒ Measurement of the standing water levels (SWLs) within each well using an interface probe. ƒ Purging of the wells using a peristaltic pump until field parameters had stabilised to within acceptable criteria over three consecutive readings (Refer to sampling sheets in Appendix F). The purging process was in general accordance with the requirements of the ASC NEPM. Designated tubing was used for groundwater sampling for each of the wells to prevent cross-contamination. Additionally, between wells the Interface Probe and the Water Quality Meter were decontaminated using Decon 90.

ƒ Collection of samples after completion of well purging. ƒ Collection of QA/QC samples (duplicate samples and a trip blank). Transportation of samples to NATA accredited laboratories for the required analysis. The COCs and ƒ laboratory certificates are presented in Appendix B. 2.2.2 Laboratory analysis The primary and intra-laboratory duplicate groundwater samples were analysed for the following parameters:

Those chemicals included in an IWRG Soil Hazard Categorisation and Management Screen (formerly a ƒ Victorian Environment Protection Authority (VIC EPA) Screen) – for groundwater.

ƒ pH, chloride, sulphate and total dissolved solids (TDS). In Stage 1, a rinsate sample was analysed for metals, in both Stage 1 and Stage 2 a trip blank analysed for TRH (C 6-C10 ) and BTEX and in Stage 3 a rinsate sample was analysed for TRH/BTEX. 2.2.3 Assessment criteria The assessment criteria adopted for this investigation were drawn from the Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003 [EPP(WQ)] document, which are derived from the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality: Volume 1 - The guidelines (2000) - ‘ANZECC Guidelines’

For the purposes of this report, the potentially applicable assessment criteria are considered to include those established for the protection of freshwater and marine aquatic ecosystems, in anticipation that these are the most likely receptors of water removed during future construction de-watering activities and potentially directed to sewer or stormwater under permit. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Site description The majority of the boreholes are positioned in the park lands (Rundle and Rymill Parks), Hackney Road (opposite the National Wine Centre), Dequetteville Terrace (between North Terrace and Rundle Road) and Rundle Road (between East Terrace and Dequetteville Terrace).

Five boreholes were offset from the actual site of the proposed O-Bahn extensions on side-streets, including Westbury Street (BH04 and BH20) and North Terrace (BH25), Botanic Road (BH09) and King William Street (BH13). Borehole 49 was offset into the Adelaide Botanical Gardens.

BH01 (the northern-most borehole) is located approximately 600 m to the southeast of the Torrens River (which flows approximately northeast to southwest); and while the topography of the site is generally flat,

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 7 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Hackney Road and Dequetteville Terrace slope towards the Torrens River from the intersection with Rundle Road at approximately 43 m AHD to approximately 35 m AHD at the location of BH01.

First Creek, a tributary to the Torrens River, crosses Hackney Road near to BH07, BH24, BH23 and BH47. Botanic Creek flows through Rundle Park crossing under Rundle Road into near BH19 and BH39 where it discharges into a man-made pond.

Rundle Road slopes from the intersection with Dequetteville Terrace (approximately 43 m AHD) to the location of BH19 (approximately 38 m AHD) before rising to the intersection with East Terrace.

The parklands undulate gently between BH31 (approximately 41 m AHD) in the east, BH39 (approximately 37 m AHD) and BH43 (approximately 43 m AHD) at the western extent of the investigation area. The parklands are characterised by grassed areas with trees reaching up to 30 m in height; a man-made pond is also present within Rymill Park (BH40, BH42 and BH43 are positioned near this). 3.2 Subsurface conditions The subsurface materials encountered during the site investigations were generally consistent with the published geological information and are described below.

Boreholes BH01 to BH15, BH17 to BH20, BH22 to BH28, BH47 and BH48 were located in roadways. BH31, BH34, BH35, BH37 to BH40, BH42 to BH46, BH49, BH51 and BH53 to BH59 were located in the Parklands. BH16 was located in a sealed traffic island at the intersection of Rundle Road and Dequetteville Terrace.

In boreholes BH48, BH49 and BH51 the upper 13 m was not recovered or logged during the investigation.

Inferred fill material was encountered in nearly all of the boreholes drilled at the site as part of this investigation, (BH37, BH48 BH49 and BH51 did not intersect fill). The fill at the borehole locations extended to depths ranging from 0.15 m (BH34 and BH39) to 5.00 mbgl (BH24). The observed fill was deepest near the First Creek alignment (i.e. in the vicinity of BH23, BH24 and BH47) and near the man-made pond in Rymill Park (i.e. BH40, BH42 and BH43) and is inferred to comprise reworked natural soils as well as imported materials.

Interbedded lenses of sands, clays and gravels, inferred to be the Red-Brown Earth variants and alluvial deposits of the Torrens River and First Creek were encountered underlying the fill in all the boreholes (excluding boreholes BH48 and BH49) to depths ranging between 1.70 mbgl (BH45) and 15.00 mbgl (BH34). These materials were generally observed to comprise fine to coarse quartz sandstone gravel and cobbles in a red-brown clayey sand/sandy clay matrix. The thickness of the gravel layers was generally observed to be greater towards the north of the site (i.e. in the boreholes located on Hackney Road and nearer to the Torrens River).

Clay, inferred to be Hindmarsh Clay, was encountered underlying the red-brown earth and gravel layers in boreholes BH02, BH03, BH05, BH09, BH11 to BH19, BH031, BH45 to BH47 and BH51 to depths ranging between 4.00 m (termination depth, BH46) and 15.80 mbgl (BH51). The Hindmarsh Clay typically comprised red-brown high plasticity clay.

Sands and clayey sands, inferred to be the basal sand unit of the Port Willunga Formation, were encountered underlying the inferred Hindmarsh Clay in boreholes BH03 to BH18, BH20, BH22, BH23 to BH27, BH37 to BH40, BH48, BH49 and BH51 to depths ranging between 10.00 mbgl (termination depth, BH03 to BH05) and 26.60 mbgl (BH51). These materials generally comprised pale grey brown sand with a low percentage of clay and were not encountered in BH01, BH02, BH12, BH13, BH19, BH28, BH31, BH34, BH35, BH42 to BH47 and BH53 to BH59.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 8 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

3.3 Soil results The concentrations of the analytes tested within soil samples are tabulated in Appendix C, and described in the following sub-sections. 3.3.1 Fill Exceedances of the waste classification criteria for samples collected from fill material in Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 are summarised in Table 5 below and Figure 2 in the Appendices.

Exceedances of the ASC NEPM HIL-D, EILs and ESLs for samples collected from fill material in Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 are summarised in Table 6 below. 3.3.2 Natural soil Exceedances of the waste classification criteria for samples collected from natural soil in Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 are summarised in Table 7 below and Figure 3 in the Appendices.

Exceedances of the ASC NEPM HIL-D, EILs and ESLs for samples collected from natural material in Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 are summarised in Table 8 below. Table 5 : Summary of Waste Criteria Exceedances – Fill Material Min conc. Max conc. Sample Results Exceeding Disposal Criteria – Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Fill Material Waste Fill (20 mg/kg) BH25-E-05: 40 mg/kg BH31-E-01: 57 mg/kg BH31-E-04: 31 mg/kg Arsenic <5 142 BH31-E-05: 142 mg/kg BH56-E-01: 27 mg/kg BH56-E-04: 26 mg/kg BH56-E-05: 21 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 62 mg/kg Waste Fill (300 mg/kg) Barium 40 1,310 BH25-E-05: 1,310 mg/kg Waste Fill (3 mg/kg) Cadmium <1 6 BH25-E-05: 6 mg/kg Waste Fill (60 mg/kg) BH01-E-01: 65 mg/kg BH22-E-01: 63 mg/kg BH24-E-02: 173 mg/kg BH31-E-01: 78 mg/kg BH47-E-01: 75 mg/kg BH56-E-01: 121 mg/kg Copper <5 3,120 BH56-E-04: 86 mg/kg BH56-E-05: 95 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 869 mg/kg

Waste Fill (60 mg/kg), IWS (2,000 mg/kg) and LLCW (7,500 mg/kg) BH25-E-05: 3,120 mg/kg Waste Fill (300 mg/kg) BH24-E-02: 1,200 mg/kg

Lead <5 17,500 Waste Fill (300 mg/kg) ,IWS (1,200 mg/kg) and LLCW (5,000 mg/kg) BH25-E-05: 17,500 mg/kg

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 9 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Min conc. Max conc. Sample Results Exceeding Disposal Criteria – Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Fill Material Waste Fill (1 mg/kg) BH25-E-05: 13.6 mg/kg Mercury <0.1 13.6 BH31-E-01: 1.2 mg/kg BH31-E-06: 1.1 mg/kg BH57-E-01: 1.4 mg/kg Waste Fill (60 mg/kg) Nickel <2 63 BH25-E-05: 63 mg/kg Waste Fill (200 mg/kg) BH22-E-01: 320 mg/kg Zinc <5 3,830 BH24-E-02: 453 mg/kg BH25-E-05: 3,830 mg/kg BH47-E-01: 75 mg/kg Waste Fill (1,000 mg/kg) and IWS (1,000 mg/kg) BH01-E-01: 3,010 mg/kg BH02-E-01: 1,700 mg/kg BH03-E-01: 2,500 mg/kg BH03-E-02: 2,400 mg/kg BH05-E-01: 2,360 mg/kg BH06-E-01: 1,050 mg/kg BH07-E-01: 3,040 mg/kg BH08-E-02: 3,420 mg/kg BH09-E-01: 2,640 mg/kg BH11-E-01: 1,160 mg/kg BH13-E-01: 2,500 mg/kg BH15-E-01: 2,190 mg/kg TRH C 10 -C40 <100 3,620 BH18-E-02: 1,250 mg/kg BH19-E-01: 1,430 mg/kg BH22-E-01: 3,020 mg/kg BH24-E-01: 3,510 mg/kg BH24-E-02: 2,970 mg/kg BH25-E-01: 3,620 mg/kg BH25-E-05: 2,470 mg/kg BH26-E-02: 1,810 mg/kg BH42-E-01: 1,500 mg/kg BH47-E-01: 1,890 mg/kg BH56-E-01: 1,220 mg/kg BH56-E-04: 2,410 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 3,190 mg/kg BH59-E-03: 1,150 mg/kg Waste Fill (1 mg/kg) BH23-E-01: 1.2 mg/kg BH23-E-04: 1.9 mg/kg BH25-E-01: 1.6 mg/kg BH38-E-01: 1.4 mg/kg BH43-E-05: 1.1 mg/kg BH43-E-06: 1.7 mg/kg BH46-E-01: 2 mg/kg BH47-E-02: 1.9 mg/kg BH53-E-01: 1.5 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene <0.5 53.6 BH54-E-01: 1.1 mg/kg BH55-E-01: 2 mg/kg BH58-E-03: 2 mg/kg BH58-E-04: 1.5 mg/kg

Waste Fill (1 mg/kg) and IWS (2 mg/kg) BH31-E-06: 2.6 mg/kg BH40-E-05: 4.9 mg/kg BH43-E-01: 4.5 mg/kg BH47-E-01: 2.3 mg/kg BH59-E-01: 4.2 mg/kg

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 10 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Min conc. Max conc. Sample Results Exceeding Disposal Criteria – Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Fill Material

Waste Fill (1 mg/kg), IWS (2 mg/kg) and LLCW (5 mg/kg) BH24-E-02: 29.6 mg/kg BH26-E-02: 17.8 mg/kg BH40-E-01: 17.2 mg/kg BH40-E-04: 53.6 mg/kg BH42-E-01: 28.6 mg/kg BH42-E-02: 19.5 mg/kg BH42-E-03: 20.1 mg/kg BH44-E-01: 5.7 mg/kg BH44-E-02: 13.4 mg/kg BH44-E-05: 23.4 mg/kg BH44-E-06: 29.1 mg/kg BH55-E-05: 13 mg/kg BH56-E-01: 19.5 mg/kg BH56-E-04: 50.6 mg/kg BH56-E-05: 13.7 mg/kg BH56-E-06: 7.1 mg/kg BH57-E-01: 8.9 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 38 mg/kg BH59-E-03: 29 mg/kg Waste Fill (5 mg/kg) BH03-E-02: 35.3 mg/kg BH07-E-01: 23.7 mg/kg BH13-E-01: 12.7 mg/kg BH16-E-02: 32 mg/kg BH18-E-01: 21.5 mg/kg BH22-E-01: 9.6 mg/kg BH23-E-01: 12.3 mg/kg BH23-E-04: 19 mg/kg BH25-E-01: 14.7 mg/kg BH25-E-05: 8.8 mg/kg BH31-E-04: 8.7 mg/kg BH31-E-06: 25.4 mg/kg BH38-E-01: 17.8 mg/kg BH40-E-05: 39.6 mg/kg BH43-E-05: 9.8 mg/kg BH43-E-06: 12.3 mg/kg BH46-E-01: 17.6 mg/kg BH47-E-01: 23.2 mg/kg BH47-E-02: 26.9 mg/kg Total PAH <0.5 790 BH53-E-01: 12.9 mg/kg BH54-E-01: 11.5 mg/kg BH55-E-01: 17.4 mg/kg BH58-E-03: 22.1 mg/kg

Waste Fill (5 mg/kg) and IWS (40 mg/kg) BH03-E-01: 70.3 mg/kg BH05-E-01: 60.9 mg/kg BH06-E-01: 85.2 mg/kg BH07-E-01: 71.6 mg/kg BH08-E-02: 80.6 mg/kg BH19-E-01: 74.7 mg/kg BH40-E-01: 161 mg/kg BH42-E-02: 162 mg/kg BH42-E-03: 183 mg/kg BH43-E-01: 41.1 mg/kg BH44-E-01: 46 mg/kg BH44-E-02: 126 mg/kg BH56-E-01: 194 mg/kg BH57-E-01: 76.1 mg/kg

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 11 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Min conc. Max conc. Sample Results Exceeding Disposal Criteria – Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Fill Material BH59-E-01: 43.2 mg/kg

Waste Fill (5 mg/kg), IWS (40 mg/kg) and LLCW (200 mg/kg) BH24-E-02: 520 mg/kg BH26-E-02: 205 mg/kg BH40-E-04: 790 mg/kg BH42-E-01: 280 mg/kg BH44-E-05: 240 mg/kg BH44-E-06: 511 mg/kg BH56-E-04: 742 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 386 mg/kg BH59-E-03: 226 mg/kg

Table 6: Summary of ASC NEPM Guideline Exceedances – Fill Material Min conc. Max conc. Sample Results Exceeding ASC NEPM Criteria – Fill Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Material EIL – Commercial and Industrial (310 mg/kg) Copper <5 3,120 BH25-E-05: 3,120 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 869 mg/kg EIL – Commercial and Industrial (1,800 mg/kg) BH25-E-05: 17,500 mg/kg Lead <5 17,500 HIL – Commercial/Industrial D Soil (1,500 mg/kg) BH25-E-05: 17,500 mg/kg EIL – Commercial and Industrial (720 mg/kg) Zinc <5 3,830 BH25-E-05: 3,830 mg/kg ESL – Coarse Soil – Commercial and Industrial (170 F2-Naphthalene <50 180 mg/kg) BH24-E-02: 180 mg/kg ESL – Coarse Soil – Commercial and Industrial (1,700 mg/kg) BH24-E-01: 1,940 mg/kg BH24-E-02: 2,240 mg/kg TRH C -C <100 2,240 16 34 BH25-E-01: 2,080 mg/kg BH25-E-05: 1,850 mg/kg BH56-E-04: 2050 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 2,460 mg/kg

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 12 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

ESL – Coarse Soil – Commercial and Industrial (1.4 mg/kg) BH03-E-01: 7.5 mg/kg BH03-E-02: 3.8 mg/kg BH05-E-01: 5.9 mg/kg BH06-E-01: 7.2 mg/kg BH07-E-01: 7.4 mg/kg BH08-E-02: 9.2 mg/kg BH16-E-02: 3.7 mg/kg BH18-E-01: 1.8 mg/kg BH19-E-01: 9 mg/kg BH23-E-04: 1.9 mg/kg BH24-E-02: 29.6 mg/kg BH25-E-01: 1.6 mg/kg BH26-E-02: 17.8 mg/kg BH31-E-06: 2.6 mg/kg BH40-E-01: 17.2 mg/kg BH40-E-04: 53.6 mg/kg BH40-E-05: 4.9 mg/kg BH42-E-01: 28.6 mg/kg BH42-E-02: 19.5 mg/kg BH42-E-03: 20.1 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene <0.5 53.6 BH43-E-01: 4.5 mg/kg BH43-E-06: 1.7 mg/kg BH44-E-01: 5.7 mg/kg BH44-E-02: 13.4 mg/kg BH44-E-05: 23.4 mg/kg BH44-E-06: 29.1 mg/kg BH46-E-01: 2 mg/kg BH47-E-01: 2.3 mg/kg BH47-E-02: 1.9 mg/kg BH53-E-01: 1.5 mg/kg BH55-E-01: 2 mg/kg BH55-E-05: 13 mg/kg BH56-E-01: 19.5 mg/kg BH56-E-04: 50.6 mg/kg BH56-E-05: 13.7 mg/kg BH56-E-06: 7.1 mg/kg BH57-E-01: 8.9 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 38 mg/kg BH58-E-03: 2 mg/kg BH58-E-04: 1.5 mg/kg BH59-E-01: 4.2 mg/kg BH59-E-03: 29 mg/kg HIL – Commercial/Industrial D Soil (40 mg/kg) BH24-E-02: 44.8 mg/kg BH40-E-04: 84.3 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene BH42-E-01: 43.1 mg/kg <0.5 84.3 (TEQs) BH44-E-06: 44.1 mg/kg BH56-E-04: 74.9 mg/kg BH58-E-02: 58.4 mg/kg BH59-E-03: 43.1 mg/kg

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 13 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Table 7: Summary of Waste Criteria Exceedances – Natural Material Min conc. Max conc. Sample Results Exceeding Disposal Criteria – Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Natural Material Waste Fill (1 mg/kg) BH23-E-05: 1.1 mg/kg

Waste Fill (1 mg/kg) and IWS (2 mg/kg) BH08-E-02: 3.2 mg/kg BH37-E-01: 4.4 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene <0.5 21.9 Waste Fill (1 mg/kg), IWS (2 mg/kg) and LLCW (5 mg/kg) BH43-E-07: 21.9 mg/kg BH55-E-04: 8.7 mg/kg BH56-E-01: 50.6 mg/kg Waste Fill (5 mg/kg) BH08-E-02: 30.9 mg/kg BH23-E-05: 9.8 mg/kg BH34-E-02: 9.5 mg/kg Total PAH <0.5 171 BH37-E-01: 38.1 mg/kg BH39-E-04: 5.6 mg/kg

Waste Fill (5 mg/kg) and IWS (40 mg/kg) BH43-E-07: 171 mg/kg BH55-E-02: 88.2 mg/kg

Table 8: Summary of ASC NEPM Guideline Exceedances - Natural Material Min conc. Max conc. Sample Results Exceeding ASC NEPM Criteria – Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Natural Material ESL – Coarse Soil – Commercial and Industrial (1,700 TRH C 16 -C34 <100 2,050 mg/kg) BH56-E-04: 2,050 mg/kg ESL – Coarse Soil – Commercial and Industrial (1.4 mg/kg) BH08-E-02: 3.2 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene <0.5 53.6 BH37-E-01: 4.4 mg/kg BH43-E-07: 21.9 mg/kg BH55-E-04: 8.7 mg/kg

3.3.3 Leachability results On the basis of the chemical results, selected samples were submitted for leachability testing in accordance with AS4439.3 (ASLP). The following samples were analysed:

Stage 1: ƒ BH01-E-01: Cu ƒ BH03-E-01: Benzo(a)pyrene ƒ BH05-E-01: Benzo(a)pyrene ƒ BH08-E-02: Benzo(a)pyrene ƒ BH16-E-02: Benzo(a)pyrene ƒ BH19-E-01: Benzo(a)pyrene.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 14 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Stage 2:

ƒ BH23-E-01: Benzo(a)pyrene ƒ BH23-E-02: Benzo(a)pyrene ƒ BH24-E-02: Cu, Pb, Zn and PAHs ƒ BH25-E-01: PAHs ƒ BH25-E-05: Ba, Cu, Pb, Hg, Ni and Zn ƒ BH26-E-02: PAHs ƒ BH31-E-02: As, Cu, Pb, Hg and Zn ƒ BH31-E-06: PAHs ƒ BH37-E-01: PAHs ƒ BH40-E-01: PAHs ƒ BH43-E-01: PAHs ƒ BH44-E-01: PAHs ƒ BH47-E-01: Cu, Zn and Benzo(a)pyrene. The results reported for each of the leachability tests (Appendix C) were less than the assessment criteria adopted for the testing (SA EPA waste disposal criteria for leachability testing and both SA EPA waste disposal criteria for IWS and LLCW with the following exceptions:

BH24-E-02 – Lead exceeded the SA EPA waste disposal criteria for leachability testing (5 mg/L) and ƒ both SA EPA waste disposal criteria for IWS (5 mg/L) and LLCW (5 mg/L) – 5.8 mg/L.

BH25-E-05: - Lead exceeded the SA EPA waste disposal criteria for leachability testing (5 mg/L) and ƒ both SA EPA waste disposal criteria for IWS (5 mg/L) and LLCW (5 mg/L) – 177 mg/L.

In addition, Multiple Extraction Procedure (MEP) leach testing for PAHs was requested on one sample from Stage 2 (BH42-E-0). The MEP leach results are presented in Appendix C. For both naphthalene and total PAH leachable concentrations were above the LOR for the EP leach (4.2 and 4 µg/L respectively) and the first MEP leach (1.4 and 1 µg/L respectively), however concentrations were below the LOR for the subsequent 8 leaches.

No leachability tests were undertaken for the Stage 3 samples. 3.4 Waste Classification An assessment of the waste classification for the fill and natural soil at each borehole location is summarised on Figures 2 and 3. In addition, an assessment of overall material classification for material proposed to be excavated as part of the project, as presented in DPTI’s Figures 1 to 4 (Appendix G) has been undertaken by performing a statistical analysis of the analytical data from within the proposed project footprint using ProUCL software. Due to the differing characteristics of material beneath the parkland areas to beneath the road corridor, the statistical analysis has been considered separately for each of these domains, and only chemicals which exceed Waste Fill criteria in at least one sample in that domain have been considered in the analysis. These domains are described as follows:

1) Domain A – Parklands area. This includes boreholes BH31 to BH44 and BH53 to BH59. The soil profile through this Domain is discussed in detail in Section 3.0. This section of the proposed project corridor follows a historic tram route and contains significant depth of fill in some areas, up to 0.15 m in

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 15 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

boreholes BH34 and BH39 to 3.8 m in BH43 adjacent to the man-made pond in Rymill Park. Borehole BH37 is the only location in this area that did not record fill material.

2) Domain B – Road Corridor Area. This includes BH01-BH03, BH05-BH12, BH22-BH24, BH26-BH28 and BH47-BH48. The soil profile through this Domain is also discussed in detail in Section 3.0. All locations in Domain B contain fill, varying from 0.4 m in BH02 to 5.0 m in BH24. Table 9: Summary of Statistics – Domain A (Parklands) Fill Material TRH Benzo(a) Total Contaminant Arsenic Copper Mercury C10-C40 pyrene PAH No. Samples 31 30 28 23 34 34 Maximum Concentration 142 869 1.4 3,190 53.6 790 95% Upper Confidence Limit of Mean 25.77 186.5 0.44 977 23.26 281.6 Classification IWS IWS Waste Fill Waste Fill >LLCW >LLCW

Table 10: Summary of Statistics - Domain A (Parklands) Natural Soil Benzo(a) Contaminant Total PAH pyrene No. Samples 19 19 Maximum Concentration 21.9 171 95% Upper Confidence Limit of Mean 4.929 41.68 Classification LLCW LLCW

Table 11: Summary of Statistics – Domain B (Road Corridor) Fill Material TRH Benzo(a) Total Contaminant Copper Lead Zinc C10-C40 pyrene PAH No. Samples 35 35 35 35 36 36 Maximum Concentration 173 1,200 453 3,510 29.6 520 95% Upper Confidence Limit of Mean 48.1 281.9 156.5 1,473 5.27 64.48 Classification Waste Fill Waste Fill Waste Fill LLCW >LLCW LLCW

Table 12: Summary of Statistics - Domain B (Road Corridor) Natural Soil TRH Benzo(a) Contaminant Total PAH C10-C40 pyrene No. Samples 20 17 17 Maximum Concentration 3,420 3.2 30.9 95% Upper Confidence Limit of Mean 957.2 1.52 14.01 Classification Waste Fill IWS IWS

3.5 Groundwater 3.5.1 Groundwater levels In Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 purging and sampling of the newly installed wells was undertaken on 12 August 2014, 9 April 2015 and 15 and 16 July 2015 respectively. Following purging, the standing water levels (SWLs) and total well depths were recorded. Further gauging/logging of all Stage 1 wells has been undertaken approximately monthly since installation with the results provided on a regular basis to DPTI. Following installation of the Stage 2 wells gauging of both the Stage 1 and Stage 2 wells was undertaken on 23 April 2015 and 29 April 2015 and has continued approximately monthly since. The results for the SWLs are presented in Table 13 and both the gauging and sampling results are presented in Appendix F.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 16 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Table 13: Summary of Standing Water Levels Total RL of 12 29 28 15 16-17 Date of 9 April depth top of August April May June July Borehole Measurement 2015 of casing 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 ID bore (m (m) AHD) Standing Water Level m bTOC 2.823 - 3.670 3.444 3.456 - BH02 6.690 34.886 m AHD 32.063 - 31.216 31.442 31.430 - m bTOC 2.710 - 3.504 3.325 3.334 - BH04 6.290 35.381 m AHD 32.671 - 31.877 32.056 32.047 - m bTOC 3.448 - 3.845 3.734 3.733 - BH07 5.230 36.319 m AHD 32.871 - 32.474 32.585 32.586 - m bTOC 4.270 - 4.828 4.565 4.660 - BH09 9.730 37.470 m AHD 33.200 - 32.642 32.905 32.81 - m bTOC 5.770 - 6.295 6.145 6.133 - BH13 13.950 40.084 m AHD 34.314 - 33.789 33.939 33.951 - m bTOC 8.088 - 8.615 8.457 8.435 - BH16 9.520 42.939 m AHD 34.851 - 34.324 34.482 34.504 - m bTOC 6.004 - 6.535 6.395 6.375 - BH17 11.900 40.411 m AHD 34.407 - 33.876 34.016 34.036 - m bTOC 4.800 - 5.270 5.137 5.112 - BH18 10.600 39.245 m AHD 34.445 - 33.975 34.108 34.113 - m bTOC - 3.510 - 3.275 3.282 - BH20 10.105 35.331 m AHD - 31.821 - 32.056 32.049 - m bTOC - 4.050 - 3.857 3.860 - BH22 10.145 36.587 m AHD - 32.537 - 32.730 32.727 - m bTOC - 4.160 4.100 3.934 3.932 - BH23 13.300 36.093 M AHD - 31.933 31.993 32.159 32.161 - m bTOC - 4.150 - 3.925 3.924 - BH24 11.634 36.087 M AHD - 31.937 - 32.162 32.163 - m bTOC - 4.000 - 3.796 3.793 - BH26 9.930 36.596 m AHD - 32.596 - 32.800 32.803 - m bTOC - 5.615 - 5.378 5.375 - BH27 11.785 38.731 m AHD - 33.116 - 33.353 33.356 - m bTOC - 5.485 - 5.247 5.223 - BH28 9.942 38.589 M AHD - 33.104 - 33.342 33.366 - m bTOC - 8.015 - 7.750 7.738 - BH34 9.33 41.385 M AHD - 33.370 - 33.635 33.647 - m bTOC - 4.060 - 3.838 3.837 - BH47 7.895 35.968 M AHD - 31.908 - 32.130 32.131 - m bTOC - - - - - 2.859 BH49 22.65 35.137 M AHD - - - - - 32.278 m bTOC - - - - - 7.715 BH51 10.04 39.637 M AHD - - - - - 31.922 m bTOC - - - - - 3.656 BH54 7.43 38.191 M AHD - - - - - 34.535 m bTOC - - - - - 1.309 BH55 7.77 35.775 M AHD - - - - - 34.466 NA – BH51 was not available at the time of reporting

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 17 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

3.5.2 Field measurements During groundwater purging, field parameters including EC, pH, temperature, DO and redox potential were measured and recorded (Appendix F). The data are summarised in Table 14. The data presented are those measured immediately following purging, prior to sampling on 12 August 2014 (Stage 1 boreholes), 9 April 2015 (Stage 2 boreholes) and 15 and 16 July (Stage 3 boreholes).

Table 14: Summary of Groundwater Field Parameters pH Conductivity Redox DO Temperature Borehole ID (pH units) (µS/cm) (mV) (mg/L) (°C) BH02 6.89 1,508 78.4 1.01 18.8 BH04 7.33 1,359 -33.3 0.57 18.2 BH07 7.01 1,326 99.3 1.96 18.9 BH09 6.89 1,385 -101.3 0.28 20.0 BH13 6.88 2,261 117.8 0.92 20.1 BH16 7.05 4,021 94.0 0.68 20.4 BH17 7.00 2,301 119.5 0.61 20.0 BH18 6.93 2,262 77.2 0.23 19.8 BH20 6.88 1,774 171.9 0.37 20.7 BH22 6.64 1,129 163.3 0.43 22.5 BH23 10.78 245.8 123.8 5.67 20.4 BH24 7.16 1,108 156.6 0.20 19.6 BH26 6.76 1,058 162.4 1.81 21.6 BH27 7.07 1,926 159.9 0.8 21.9 BH28 6.81 2,452 165.5 0.25 22.2 BH34 7.00 2,857 199.7 0.99 19.4 BH47 6.77 1,268 167.5 0.25 21.6 BH23 (29 April 2014) 11.15 400.0 44.5 1.24 20.0 BH49 8.42 530 48.7 2.77 19.8 BH51 6.12 2,820 158.3 0.44 18.2 BH54 6.24 3,300 144.1 0.43 18.0 BH55 6.37 2,140 141.7 0.17 18.0

3.5.3 Groundwater quality Chemical concentrations in samples collected and analysed from groundwater are presented in Appendix H. Groundwater results were reported less than the SA EPA EPP(WQ) criteria for aquatic and fresh water marine ecosystems for all analytes tested, with the following exceptions:

BH16, which had a reported concentration of lead (0.033 mg/L) exceeding the EPP(WQ) for aquatic ƒ freshwater and marine ecosystems (0.005 mg/L).

ƒ BH17, which had a reported concentration of lead (0.007 mg/L) exceeding the EPP(WQ) for aquatic freshwater and marine ecosystems (0.005 mg/L).

ƒ BH23, which recorded TRH fractions C10 -C16 and C 16 -C34 of 100 µg/L and 490 µg/L respectively. No criteria are available in the EPP(WQ) for these analytes. Based on these results BH23 was sampled again on the 29 April 2014, with a concentration of TRH C 16 -C34 of 410 µg/L recorded.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 18 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL 4.1 Laboratory analyses The primary laboratory analysis was performed by ALS and the secondary laboratory analysis was performed by Eurofins, for both soil and groundwater chemical analysis for both Stages. Both laboratories have NATA accreditation for the analyses conducted. The methods of analysis and results are presented in the laboratory certificates in Appendix B. 4.2 Soil 4.2.1 Internal laboratory QA/QC procedures Internal laboratory QA/QC reports are included in Appendix B. Internal laboratory QA/QC procedures included analysis of internal laboratory ‘duplicate’ samples, ‘method blank samples’, samples with an added ‘surrogate spike’, ‘matrix spike’ samples and ‘laboratory control spike’ samples. The results of internal laboratory QA/QC procedures were reviewed by Golder and are considered acceptable for the purpose of this report, as they are generally within acceptable laboratory QA/QC limits (as stipulated by the laboratory).

4.2.2 Sampling density Our approach for conducting the soil investigation was in general accordance with guidance outlined in the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (1999, amended 2013) and methodologies and procedures from AS 4482.1 (2005) (Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Soil: Parts 1 - 2). 4.2.3 Holding time The majority of soil samples were analysed by the primary and secondary testing laboratories within the prescribed sample holding times (as set by the laboratories). The laboratory quality assurance/quality control results are presented in Appendix B. 4.2.4 Rates of field duplicate testing For Stage 1 Golder selected eight intra-laboratory duplicate samples and two inter-laboratory duplicate samples for analysis as part of the soil investigation. The total number of duplicates analysed (10 duplicates for 79 primary samples) satisfies the recommendations of AS 4482.1 (2005) and the NEPM for the main contaminants of concern, which is one in ten primary samples.

For Stage 2 Golder selected thirty-nine intra-laboratory duplicate samples and thirty-nine inter-laboratory duplicate samples for analysis as part of the soil investigation. The total number of duplicates analysed (78 duplicates for 239 primary samples) satisfies the recommendations of AS 4482.1 (2005) and the NEPM for the main contaminants of concern, which is one in ten primary samples.

For Stage 3 Golder selected one intra-laboratory duplicate sample and one inter-laboratory duplicate sample for analysis as part of the soil investigation. The total number of duplicates analysed (2 duplicates for 17 primary samples) satisfies the recommendations of AS 4482.1 (2005) and the NEPM for the main contaminants of concern, which is one in ten primary samples. 4.2.5 RPD results for duplicates To assess the reproducibility of the analytical results, the relative percent difference (RPD) was calculated for the duplicate samples analysed. The RPD is the difference between each set of duplicate results and their mean, with the results expressed as a percentage of the mean.

The RPD percentage was not calculated and was considered to be ‘non-applicable’ if one or both results were less than the laboratory limit of reporting (LOR). Additionally, the RPD result was only considered further if both concentrations were more than five times the laboratory LOR and the RPD was >30%. Acceptable RPDs were those that were <30%.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 19 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

The RPD results were generally less than 30%, with the exceptions presented in Appendix D for the primary and respective duplicate samples.

The duplicate results are considered to be generally acceptable for the purpose of this report, and to provide sufficient confidence in the primary data set for key contaminants of interest for interpretative purposes. 4.2.6 Rinsate and trip blank results During Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 a total of 17 equipment rinsates were collected from drilling equipment and analysed for TRH (nine from Stage 1 and seven from Stage 2) and metals (one from Stage 3) to assess the potential for cross-contamination during soil sampling. A total of eight trip blanks (five from Stage 1 and three from Stage 2) were also included in sample cool boxes and scheduled for analysis to assess the potential for cross-contamination of soil samples in transit to the laboratory. Equipment rinsate samples reported no concentrations above the laboratory LOR, with the exception of BH18-R-01, BH06-R-01, BH26- R-01, BH27-R-01 and BH47-R-01which reported TRH concentrations above the LOR. These results are summarised in Table 15. Table 15: Summary of Rinsate Results >LOR Location TRH fraction ( µg/L)

TRH C 16 -C34 TRH C 34 -C40 TRH C 10 -C40 BH06-R-01 660 150 810 BH18-R-1 480 - 480 BH26-R-01 130 - 130 BH27-R-01 1,760 160 1,920 BH47-R-01 1,450 220 1,670

TRH C16-C34 and C10-C40 concentrations were reported greater than the assessment criteria in several of the fill samples, however it is noted that the TRH concentrations recorded in soil in BH27 (where the highest TRH was recorded in the equipment rinsate) were not significantly elevated, suggesting that any influence from the drilling equipment on the reported TRH concentrations in soil is likely to be minor.

The trip blank samples for both Stage 1 and Stage 2 reported chemical concentrations below the LOR for the analytes tested (TRH fraction C 6-C10, BTEX and naphthalene). The rinsate and trip blank results (Appendix D) are considered to be generally acceptable for the purpose of this report. 4.3 Groundwater 4.3.1 Internal laboratory QA/QC procedures Internal laboratory QA/QC reports are included in Appendix B. Similar to the soil batches, internal laboratory QC procedures for groundwater analyses included analysis of internal laboratory ‘duplicate’ samples, ‘method blank samples’, samples with an added ‘surrogate spike’, ‘matrix spike’ samples and ‘laboratory control spike’ samples. The results of internal laboratory QA/QC procedures for the groundwater analysis were reviewed by Golder and are considered acceptable for the purpose of this report, as they are generally within acceptable laboratory QA/QC limits (as stipulated by the laboratory).

4.3.2 Rates of field duplicate testing The SA EPA Guideline entitled Regulatory Monitoring and Testing – Groundwater Sampling (June 2007), states that the ‘minimum requirement if monitoring as condition of authorisation’ for duplicate samples is one duplicate per year or one duplicate per 20 primary samples (whichever is greater), for each blind and split duplicate type. Although this Guideline is for regulatory monitoring, it is considered applicable in the absence of similar guidance within the NEPM.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 20 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

For the Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 groundwater investigations, one intra-laboratory and one inter- laboratory duplicate sample were collected with the groundwater samples BH18 (QA01A and QA01B), BH34 (QC1 and QC2) and BH51 (QAQC1 and QAQC2). This equates to a duplicate frequency of 25% for Stage 1 (two duplicates for eight primary samples), 22% for Stage 2 (two duplicates for nine primary samples) and 50% for Stage 3 (two duplicates for four primary samples), which meets the SA EPA minimum requirements. 4.3.3 RPD results for duplicates RPDs were not calculated for the majority of the groundwater duplicate analyses, as one or both concentrations were less than the laboratory LOR. The RPDs that were calculated were generally less than the acceptable threshold of 20% (as presented in the SA EPA Guideline referenced above), with the exception of zinc and fluoride in the inter-laboratory sample in Stage 2.

The groundwater QA/QC results for Stage 1,Stage 2 and Stage 3 were considered acceptable for the purpose of the Stage 1,Stage 2 and Stage 3 combined contamination report, and were considered suitable to provide sufficient confidence in the primary data set for interpretative purposes. 4.3.4 Rinsate and Trip blank results For Stage 1 and Stage 3 rinsate samples were used to assess whether there were potential contaminants present on the groundwater pump used for purging and sampling, which may have cross-contaminated the groundwater samples.

For Stage 1, one trip blank samples and for Stage 2, two trip blank samples, provided by the laboratory and sent with primary samples, were used to evaluate potential cross-contamination of samples during transport to the laboratory.

The rinsate sample and trip blank samples (Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3) reported chemical concentrations below the LOR for the analytes tested (metals (Stage 1 and Stage 3), TRH fraction C 6-C10, BTEX and naphthalene (Stage 2 and Stage 3)). These results indicate that the primary groundwater results have not been influenced by cross-contamination during transport to the laboratories (trip blank).

Rinsate and trip blank results are provided in Appendix D. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Soil 5.1.1 Fill The results of the soil testing indicate that a significant proportion of fill material across the project area cannot be classified as Waste Fill due to the following:

ƒ Benzo(a)pyrene concentrations in ten boreholes exceeded the LLCW Criteria, in five boreholes exceeded the IWS Criteria and in ten boreholes exceeded the Waste Fill Criteria. Based on statistical analysis the 95% UCL for benzo(a)pyrene in Domain A (Parklands) and Domain B (Road Corridor) both exceed the criteria for disposal as LLCW.

ƒ PAH concentrations in eight boreholes exceeded the LLCW criteria, in thirteen boreholes exceeded the IWS Criteria and in eighteen boreholes exceeded the Waste Fill Criteria. The 95% UCL for total PAH in Domain A (Parklands) exceeds the criteria for disposal as LLCW and in Domain B (Road Corridor) meets the criteria for LLCW.

ƒ In twenty-two boreholes, the concentrations of TRH C10 -C40 exceeded the IWS Criteria. The 95% UCL of the TRH C 10 -C40 concentration in Domain A (Parklands) meets the criteria for Waste Fill and in Domain B (Roads) meets the criteria for disposal as LLCW.

ƒ Fill material in various locations recorded arsenic (BH25, BH31, BH56 and BH58), barium (BH25), cadmium (BH25), copper (BH01, BH22, BH24, BH31, BH47, BH56, BH58) nickel (BH25), lead (BH24), mercury (BH25, BH31 and BH57) and zinc (BH22, BH24, BH25, BH47), concentrations exceeding the

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 21 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Waste Fill Criteria. In addition the copper and lead concentrations at BH25 also exceeded the IWS and LLCW criteria respectively.

On this basis, the fill material across the project area would be classified as exceeding Low Level Contaminated Waste based on the benzo(a)pyrene and total PAH concentrations across the site.

No sample results exceeded the ASC NEPM HIL-D health based guidelines for commercial/industrial land use with the exception of Lead in BH25 and Benzo(a)pyrene(TEQ) in BH24, BH40, BH42, BH44, BH56, BH58 and BH59. Concentrations of Benzo(a)pyrene also exceeded ESLs for commercial/industrial land use within fill in numerous boreholes throughout the project area and TRH exceeded the ESL within fill material from BH24, BH25, BH56 and BH58. The fill material in BH25 also recorded copper, lead and zinc concentrations exceeding the adopted EIL, as did BH58 for copper. 5.1.2 Natural The results of the soil testing indicate that the chemical quality of the samples of natural soil collected from the boreholes generally meet the Waste Fill criteria. Notwithstanding this, maximum concentrations of some chemicals exceeded the Waste Fill criteria in isolated samples, as follows:

ƒ Benzo(a)pyrene concentrations in three boreholes (BH43 (parklands), BH55 (parklands) and BH56 (parklands)) exceeded the LLCW Criteria, in two boreholes (BH08 (road) and BH37(parklands)) exceeded the IWS Criteria and in one borehole (BH23 (road)) exceeded the Waste Fill Criteria. Based on statistical analysis the 95% UCL for benzo(a)pyrene in Domain A (Parklands) meets the criteria for disposal as LLCW and Domain B (Road Corridor) meet the criteria for disposal as IWS.

ƒ PAH concentrations in two boreholes (BH43 (parklands) and BH55 (parklands)) exceeded the IWS Criteria and in five boreholes (BH08 (road), BH23 (road), BH34 (parklands), BH37 (parklands) and BH39 (parklands)) exceeded the Waste Fill Criteria. The 95% UCL for total PAH in Domain A (Parklands) meets the criteria for disposal as LLCW and in Domain B (Road Corridor) meets the criteria for IWS.

ƒ In one borehole, the concentration of TRH C 10 -C40 exceeded the LLCW Criteria. The 95% UCL of the TRH C 10 -C40 concentration in Domain A (Parklands) meets the criteria for disposal as waste fill and in Domain B (Roads) meets the criteria for disposal as IWS.

The exceedances of benzo(a)pyrene, total PAH and TRH C 10 -C40 were detected in localised areas within differing parts of the project area and are within the upper natural soil only. Based on the statistical interpretation of results the natural soil in Domain A (Parklands) would be classified as exceeding Low Level Contaminated Waste due to the elevated concentrations of Benzo(a)pyrene and total PAHs. However, given the localised areas and limited depth of impact it is anticipated that the impacted material could be segregated for disposal, allowing remaining natural soil to be classified as Waste Fill.

The natural soil in Domain B (Road Corridor) would be classified as IWS based due to the elevated concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene, total PAH and TRH C 10 -C40 . However, as with the fill material above, given the localised areas and limited depth of impact it is anticipated that the impacted material could be segregated for disposal, allowing remaining natural soil to be classified as waste fill.

No sample results exceeded the ASC NEPM HIL-D health based guidelines for commercial/industrial land use. However, four samples (BH08, BH37, BH43 and BH55) exceeded the ecological screening levels for benzo(a)pyrene adopted from the ASC NEPM for commercial/industrial land use. 5.2 Groundwater Results of groundwater testing for the Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 wells indicate that the chemical quality of groundwater meets the EPP(WQ) criteria from the protection of freshwater and marine ecosystems, with the exception of TRH in BH23.

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 22 O-BAHN EXTENSION - CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

Based on these TRH results an additional sampling round was undertaken for BH23 on 29 April 2014 which confirmed the presence of elevated concentrations of TRH (C 16 -C34 ) in groundwater. As this contaminant is not naturally present in background groundwater and there is no guideline for TRH within the EPP(WQ), it was necessary to report this occurrence to the SA EPA under Section 83A of the Environment Protection Act. 6.0 LIMITATIONS Your attention is drawn to the document – ‘Limitations’, which is attached to this report (Appendix I). The statements presented in this document are intended to advise you of what your realistic expectations of this report should be. The document is not intended to reduce the level of responsibility accepted by Golder, but rather to ensure that all parties who may rely on this report are aware of the responsibilities each assumes in so doing. 7.0 CLOSURE If you have any questions regarding the content of this report, or require additional information, please contact the undersigned on 8213 2100.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD

Naomi Cooper Drew Gowling Environmental Toxicologist Senior Environmental Scientist/Project Manager

NC:DSG/IK/hh

A.B.N. 64 006 107 857

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation.

i:\geo\2014\147662122 - dpti o'bahn\correspondence out\147662122-022-stage 3 environmental report\rev0\147662122-022-r-rev0 - environmental report.docx

September 2015 Report No. 147662122-022-R-Rev0 23 28

PLANTING PALETTE

DESCRIPTION ACC STANDARD TREE GUIDELINES ACC STANDARD TREE GUIDELINES Planting provides colour, interest, structure, shade and gives life and character to the Street Tree Group 1 Street Tree Group 1 landscape. Planting is used to: Standard Standard Pilot Standard Standard Standard

Jacaranda mimosifolia Zelkova serrata Quercus palustris Platanus x acerifolia Angophora costata Quercus ilex

Jacaranda Sawleaf Zelkova Pin Oak London Plane Tree Smooth Barked Apple Holm Oak >> define entry points; Height 12m x Width 10m Height 14m x Width 10m Height 20m x Width 10m Height 20m x Width 15m Height 15m x Width 20m Height 20m x Width 10m Medium to large sized tree Medium sized tree formal shape Reliable urban tree with consistent form Provides generous shade and wide Provides generous shade and wide Provides generous shade and wide canopy canopy canopy Potential use for median plantings where Very adaptable to a variety of conditions Provides generous shade and wide adequate space provided. canopy Large scale structured tree - need to Large scale structured tree Attractive tree with distinctively grey Very tough once established provide adequate space for growth foliage >> organise spaces; Apadatable to a variety of conditions Highly structured tree Adapts well in urbanised environments Requires well drained sites Consistent performer that adapts well in Large scale structured tree Display of colour late spring early Requires large soil volumes to sustain Fast growing Moderate to fast growth rate urbanised environments summer tree growth. Grow in heavy and moist Requires large soil volumes to sustain Evergreen Clear canopy soils Fast growing tree growth. Slow growing Fast growing Requires large soil volumes Deciduous Requires summer irrigation supply Deciduous Adapts well in urbanised environments - Shallow rooted >> enhance amenity; Form can be variable. Provenance subject to provision of adequate soil and Deciduous, holds on to brown leaves for Large amount of leaf litter which does not Well drained soil preferred to be checked and confirmed prior to water supply a long time easily break down procurement Exotic native to Brazil Deciduous Asthma and pollen issues Jacaranda Sawleaf Zelcova Pin Oak London Plane Tree Smooth Barked Apple Holm Oak >> enhance biodiversity; Quercus cerris Quercus coccinea Sophora japonica Eucalyptus sideroxylon Ulmus procera Turkey Oak Scarlet Oak Japanese Pagoda Tree Red Ironbark English Elm Height 20m x Width 10m Height 12m x Width 8m Height 20m x Width 10m Height 15m x Width 10m Height 15m x Width 15m

Broad canopy Provides generous shade and wide Provides generous shade and wide Provides generous shade and wide Provides generous shade and wide canopy canopy canopy canopy >> assist stormwater management; and Large scale structured tree Large attractive highly structured tree Reliable, compact medium scale Large scale structured tree large scale structured tree Adapts well in urbanised environments structured tree Vivid displays of autumn colour Adapts well in urbanised environments Adapts well in urbanised environments Slow growing Adapts well in urbanised environments - subject to provision of adequate soil Requires large soil volumes to sustain Black fissured bark provides contrast Deciduous volume and a decicated water supply. tree growth. Fast growing Evergreen Requires large soil volumes and water for Subject to infestation from Elm Leaf >> provide shade, comfort and seasonal change. Requires irrigation in summer Deciduous establishment Requires large soil volumes Beetle Deciduous Use semi-advanced stock to ensure good Once established, drought tolerant Requires ongoing formative pruning Deciduous branch structure Early formative pruning necessary to achieve road and pedestrian clearance Turkey Oak Scarlet Oak Japanese Pagoda Tree Red Ironbark English Elm Planting beds provide an ornamental appearance that enhances the city edge and parkland setting. Native and exotic species are selected appropriate to the site conditions, suitability UDF Green Infrastructure Street Tree Types Attachment B B2 UDF Green Infrastructure Street Tree Types Attachment B B1 of form and their limited ongoing maintenance and watering requirements. Tree planting City West and East Plants selected as part of this palette should be: Civic and Varied in their form, texture and colour and arrangements to provide contrast and visual interest to people; design and plant selection is compliant with: Contemporary Urban Parks Other elements such as seasonal colour should assist in providing variety to landscaped areas; as identified in Adelaide Park Lands Masterplan Suited to harsh urban enviromnents such as road corridors; City West and East Highly resilient and drought tolerant. Markets North and South >> CPTED [crime prevention through environmental design] principles; Historic Gardens Squares Planting Themes and palettes of appropriate species will be Juncus Agapanthus Angiozanthus Chives Leucophyta >> local site conditions; developed as part of the masterplan process for each square. Notes on Planting Themes and strategic guidance The Planting Themes have been developed as a strategic guide to assist with the further development of distinctive local character and a unique >> high pedestrian traffic and use; and sense of place to the broad spatial zones identified. The planting themes identify a broad range of different planting species that can be used in these areas. The images and species that Dietes Berberis Brachyscome Mentha Enchylaena are identified are not definitive and are illustrated to demonstrate the characteristics of the plant types that should be used such as form of >> the character of the area. the plant, foliage type and colour to assist Council staff, developers and the community in selecting the appropriate species to use. Generic names for plant species have been identified. For further information on other suitable species to use. The Adelaide Botanic Gardens Plant Selector+ http://plantselector.botanicgardens.sa.gov.au Lomandra species Roses Correa Rosemary Fescue The Plant Selector + is a website designed to help choose the right plants for the right places in South Australia. Plants include Australian native and exotic species. They are carefully screened to suit the soils and other conditions of the areas for which they are recommended. Plant selections are linked with both soil and landscape types.

Dianella species Syzygium Westringia Thyme Loropetalum UDF Green Infrastructure Planting Themes Strategic Guidance Attachment B C1 UDF Green Infrastructure Planting Themes Strategic Guidance Attachment B C3

OXIGEN // O-BAHN CITY ACCESS // URBAN DESIGN - CONTRACT SCOPE + PROVISIONAL WORK DRAWING NO. CLIENT PROJECT NO. REVISION DATE MATERIALS + FURNITURE 14.053 SKA 0 28 MCD 14.053 FINAL 01.09.15

DRAFT Dewatering method The dewatering system will be installed progressively after installation of the sheet pile walls, as shown on the attached sheets.

 Install western sheet pile wall  Drill and install dewatering spears (from GL surface) inside western wall  Install eastern sheet pile wall  Drill and install dewatering spears (from GL surface) inside eastern wall  Connect dewatering system after excavation down to 3.5m below existing road surface.

Figure 3 – Stage 1 Dewatering installation western tunnel structure

Figure 4 – Stage 2 Dewatering installation eastern tunnel structure

Figure 5 – general layout dewatering

Figure 6 – Long section dewatering

Operation of the dewatering system will be monitored on a 24 hour basis. Initial drawdown of the water will result in higher inflows than the long term steady state. Groundwater Management

• Temporary groundwater management strategies

• Sheetpile walls driven to impervious clay layer

• Transverse sheetpile cut-off walls at Ch 1250 and 1580

• Grouting of service penetration through sheetpile wall

• Dewatering spears pumped to settling tanks and disposed as trade waste

• Temporary shot-crete arch construction at service penetrations

• sacrificial blinding concrete base O-BAHN CITY ACCESS PROJECT Project No 2711 DAC STAGED APPROVAL

*IF If Applicable * Each work package to include all of the applicable CSTR parts in the works

WBS No. WSB GROUP WSB PACKAGE * DAC STAGE 3 DESIGN 3.1 Reporting 3.1.1 Reporting Design Basis Report (all disciplines) As required 3.1.2 Reporting Design Report (all disciplines) As required 3.1.3 Reporting Durability Report As required 3.1.4 Reporting Safety in Design Report As required 3.1.5 Reporting Geotechnical Design Report ( EW 100) As required 3.1.6 Reporting Fire Engineering Brief As required 3.1.7 Reporting Fire Engineering Report As required 3.1.8 Reporting 3D Road Visualization As required 3.1.9 Reporting System assurance As required 3.1.10 Reporting Construction Specification & Methodology As required 3.1.10 Reporting Traffic Signal Report As required 3.2 Geometric Road and Tunnel 3.2.1 Geometric Road and Tunnel Tunnel Ramps & Portal Area Stage 1 3.2.3 Geometric Road and Tunnel Hackney Rd & Dequetteville ,Tce Stage 2 3.2.3 Geometric Road and Tunnel Botanic Carpark & Shared path Stage 2 3.2.4 Geometric Road and Tunnel Rundle Road & East Terrace Road Works Stage 3 3.2.5 Geometric Road and Tunnel East terrace roadwork / Grenfell Extension Stage 3 3.2.6 Geometric Road and Tunnel Parklands Bulk Earthworks & Finished Surface Stage 4 3.3 Bridge Works 3.2.1 Bridge Works Shared Path Bridge Over River Torrens Stage 1 3.4 Structural Tunnel 3.4.1 Structural Tunnel Sheet Piles Stage 1 3.4.2 Structural Tunnel Frist Creek Culvert Stage 2 3.4.3 Structural Tunnel Tunnel - Hackney Rd / Dequetteville Tce - Precast Roof & Corbels Stage 1 3.4.4 Structural Tunnel Tunnel - Hackney Rd / Dequetteville Tce - Base Slab Stage 1 3.4.5 Structural Tunnel Tunnel - Parklands - Base Slab, Walls & Roof Stage 2 3.4.6 Structural Tunnel Tunnel - Parklands - Pre Cast Roof Stage 2 3.4.7 Structural Tunnel Tunnel - Guideway Concrete - Pre Cast Roof Stage 2 3.4.8 Structural Tunnel Tunnel - Egress & Services Corridor Stage 2 3.4.9 Structural Tunnel Sign Support & Gantry's (non standard) Stage 3 3.5 Civil Tunnel & Roads 3.5.1 Civil Tunnel & Roads Drainage Roads & Carpark Stage 1 3.5.2 Civil Tunnel & Roads Drainage Botanic Creek & Rymill Park Stage 2 3.5.3 Civil Tunnel & Roads Drainage Tunnel & Pump Station Stage 3 3.5.4 Civil Tunnel & Roads Road Furniture Stage 3 3.5.5 Civil Tunnel & Roads Guideways Approaches Stage 3 3.5.6 Civil Tunnel & Roads Road Pavements Stage 3 3.5.7 Civil Tunnel & Roads Road Lighting Stage 3 3.5.8 Civil Tunnel & Roads Vegetation Removal Stage 1 3.6 Services Relocation *IF 3.6.1 Services Relocation *IF SA Water - Water Stage 1 3.6.2 Services Relocation *IF Telecommunications Stage 1 3.6.3 Services Relocation *IF Sapn 66kv And Sapn 11kv / LV Stage 1 3.6.4 Services Relocation *IF DPTI / Council Services Stage 1 3.7 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building 3.7.1 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Architectural Stage 1 3.7.2 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Structural Building Stage 1 3.7.3 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Building Services ( water, Sewer, Lighting, Havc) Stage 3 3.7.4 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Its Controls And Equipment Stage 3 3.7.5 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Communication Controls And Equipment Stage 3 3.7.6 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Power Systems Stage 4 3.7.7 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Ventilation System / Egress Pressurisation Stage 4 3.6.8 Tunnel Services & Tunnel Services Building Fire Protection Systems Stage 3 3.8 Urban Design and Landscaping 3.8.1 Urban Design and Landscaping Tunnel Portal Canopy Stage 2 3.8.2 Urban Design and Landscaping Shared Path Bridge Over River Torrens Stage 2 3.8.3 Urban Design and Landscaping Hackney Road & Dequettaville Tce Stage 4 3.8.4 Urban Design and Landscaping Parklands Stage 4 3.8.5 Urban Design and Landscaping East Terrace / Stage 4 3.8.5 Urban Design and Landscaping East Terrace /Rundle Road Stage 4 3.8.5 Urban Design and Landscaping East Terrace Extension Stage 1 3.8.6 Urban Design and Landscaping Tunnel Services Building Stage 2 3.8.7 Urban Design and Landscaping Urban Design Visualisation Stage 3 3.9 Traffic management 3.9.1 Traffic management Traffic Control And Line Marking Stage 2 3.9.2 Traffic management Intersection Traffic Signals Stage 2 3.9.3 Traffic management Directional Advisory Signage Stage 4 3.9.4 Traffic management Road Safety Audit / Response Report Stage 4 3.9.5 Traffic management Traffic Modelling Stage 3 3.1.0 Temporary Works MCD