HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-04-12 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Public Works Committee: O-Bahn City Access Project

Adjourned debate on motion of Ms Digance:

That the 533rd report of the committee, entitled O-Bahn City Access Project, be noted.

(Continued from 28 October 2015.)

Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (11:22): I rise to speak on this very important piece of infrastructure. I support public transport and improvements to public transport, and the O-Bahn, being a good Liberal initiative, is a great piece of infrastructure for the greater public good. However, prior to the 2014 election, the government's transport priority was the electrification of the Gawler railway line, which it had already announced twice and abandoned. By cancelling the Gawler electrification project, we lost the commonwealth funding of $76 million and will pay an estimated cost penalty of $70 million to restart the project in the future.

The Auditor-General also wrote down the asset by $40 million—that is, the Gawler line that already had the poles put in—as an underutilised piece of infrastructure. Thus, $70 million, plus $76 million, plus $40 million equates to $186 million being lost by cancelling the Gawler electrification. The reason given for abandoning this project was a lack of funds, yet in the lead-up to the last election the government miraculously found $160 million to put the O-Bahn project on the agenda because there were some marginal seats in the north-eastern suburbs.

The Hon. T.R. Kenyon interjecting:

Ms SANDERSON: Yes, says the member for Newland, who benefits from this. The report claims a cost-benefit ratio of 1.6, but there is no detail on how this is calculated—no assumptions and no explanation. I believe it was Rod Hook who said that these cost benefits are pretty flexible, depending on what you include or do not include. Whether or not you want the project to go ahead, you can actually add in benefits. For example, going through the Parklands could have some health benefits that could be included. It is pretty flexible. Let's just say that it is not an economic rationale-based cost-benefit analysis that you see with government projects.

I question whether a saving of two to four minutes of travel time by spending $160 million was the best use of taxpayers' money, particularly when it meant losing $186 million by not electrifying the Gawler line, which the department spent several years working on, engineering and gearing up ready to implement. Also from Rod Hook's statement, I believe, to the select committee, a project such as an O-Bahn tunnel should have been announced ready for the 2018 election because of the amount of time that the department really needed to do a good job with this.

Having seen the tunnel, they seem to have managed to pull together what looks to be quite an amazing project and, yes, I am sure that people will love the look of the tunnel. I do not think that residents in my electorate and the users of the Parklands will ever be happy with the fact that we lost so many of our beautiful significant trees in the Parklands and that it is not so much a tunnel but more a cut or a gouge that will be like a scar through the Parklands forever.

We also heard at the select committee hearing of many other ideas that would have sped up the time for users of the O-Bahn, which would have cost far less money. One of the ideas that is still very popular with the north-eastern suburbs and the users of the O-Bahn is a park-and-ride facility. I have spoken to some of my colleagues who have caught the O-Bahn to work because they live out that way. To get a car park in the morning, they have said that they have up to a five-minute walk from the car park to get on the bus. So, the two minutes that they just saved by speeding up the tunnel were lost because there is nowhere to park.

It also reduces the amenity to all the residents living in the area. For example, residents in North Adelaide have patients and staff parking in the streets due to the lack of high-rise car park availability at the Women's and Children's Hospital. I know that causes residents some disturbance and a lack of amenity to their area. So, I imagine the same thing happens in the north-eastern suburbs where you have workers parking in your street all day because there is inadequate parking.

It is also unsafe. If you park five to 10 minutes away from your bus, it is dark at 6 o'clock now in winter and it is completely dangerous for people to be walking back to their car. The government could have saved the $160 million, they could have built a park-and-ride, people would have been safer and it would have actually cut more time off their travel time. But, no, the government needed something big and shiny to try to win the marginal seats of the north-eastern suburbs.

Other ideas that could have sped up the O-Bahn that would have been less costly could include having gated stations on Grenfell Street to speed up validation and allow entry via both doors and modifying the buses to travel at 100 km/h on the existing O-Bahn track, as was originally intended. I believe it is only due to a lack of maintaining the track that the buses are reduced in speed to 80 km/h.

Perhaps repairing and maintaining the existing infrastructure—certainly you cannot get a big two-page spread in the paper for doing that as you can for a school or a new tunnel—would be more practical. It would be more valuable to our community to maintain what we have so that we do not have crumbling bridges, as we have seen, and we have several of those.

The government seems more concerned about getting something shiny that it can promote, rather than maintaining and doing the right thing. It could have extended the right-hand turn bus lane on Hackney Road for inbound traffic. It could have added a second left-hand turn lane from North Terrace into Hackney Road. It could also have managed the intersection at North Terrace, near the Botanic Hotel. You could have somebody watching the intersection during the peak hours, which is only two hours in the morning and an hour and a half or a maximum of two hours in the evening.

It would be very easy to have someone monitoring the intersection to make sure that the buses have priority and that they can all get through, which would be far cheaper and maybe give someone else a new job. There are also many practical issues. There are hundreds if not thousands of residents along Grenfell Street. There are 10 different residential driveways along Grenfell Street that currently the O-Bahn does not travel along, but it will.

It is 30 extra buses per hour along Grenfell Street. Many of the North Terrace stops will now be redirected to Grenfell Street and there will be far more traffic along Grenfell Street, where we have been encouraging people to move into. We have Garden East, which has been around for 20 years or more. I remember all the plans for that when I was at university in the eighties, so it is coming on to 30 years. There are a lot of people living in that area—

The Hon. T.R. Kenyon: That's not true; it can't be that long.

Ms SANDERSON: It can't be, I know, I feel far too young. A lot of residents who live in that area are very concerned about the safety of getting in and out of their driveways. They have been encouraged to move into the city for the amenity and then suddenly they are living on a busway, basically. Rymill Park is a wonderful park, probably one of the most beautiful parks in the Parklands, and it will now have a gouge right through the middle of it, which is certainly very upsetting to many people.

There are also other concerns; for example, people visiting the Botanic Garden and the Zoo, the new high school, and parking. There are 93 car parks along Hackney Road that have been reduced. I believe some have been reinstated around the National Wine Centre. I am not sure how that will work or what costs will be involved. There are certainly concerns expressed by St Peter's College about their students crossing the road. There will also be concerns about the new high school for many people who live north-east of the city who are now in the school zone; for example, Medindie, Walkerville, St Peters. Many of those will be using Hackney Road to access the school through the Botanic Gardens.

The extra traffic on Hackney Road, and the ability to get across Hackney Road, is a concern. I know that St Peter's College was requesting a footbridge over the road for safety. I guess we will see whether the government will find money for that when another 1,250 students are accessing that area. Lots of businesses along Hackney Road will be disadvantaged during the one or two years that this project will be going for.

There have been so many traffic concerns. It takes so long in the morning if you are trying to use Hackney Road. You wonder sometimes about the two minutes that some people will save. Thousands and thousands of car users and truck drivers will lose a lot of minutes because of the changes to Hackney Road, and I know that Hackney residents are also concerned about access to the city.

The SPEAKER: The member's time has expired. The member for Adelaide's slashing speech in opposition to the O-Bahn tunnel was heard in silence. I will expect the same privilege accorded to the member for Wright.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE (Wright) (11:33): I did restrain myself considerably during the—

Ms Sanderson: No, I could hear you.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: I only spoke once—contribution of the member for Adelaide. I am compelled to stand up and speak as a result of the contribution made by the member for Adelaide. Understandably, she is concerned about her residents. She does not want them disturbed by roadworks so she wants—

An honourable member interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Adelaide is called to order.

An honourable member: She's not here.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: She is not here, sir. She has exited the chamber. She does not want to hear what I have to say.

The SPEAKER: The member for Wright is called to order for drawing attention to the absence of the member for Adelaide from the chamber.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Thank you, sir.

The SPEAKER: It is a convention that we are all here at all times.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Thank you, sir. I am sure she will be listening. The O-Bahn transports into the city from the north-eastern suburbs something like 30,000 people a day, more than the entire train network, and there are about 1,000 bus movements every day through the Hackney Road intersection that the member for Adelaide was so concerned about. Those bus movements in the main will be removed from the Hackney Road intersection, so for the member for Adelaide to assert that there will be more traffic on Hackney Road is simply incorrect. As to the flow of vehicular traffic, cars will have a much easier flow through that part of the city.

Importantly, when the member for Adelaide talks about three to four minutes being saved as a result of a $160 million investment, let me make it very clear: the three to four minutes is the average saving over 24 hours. What will occur during peak hour is those mums and dads, those workers who are coming from Golden Grove, Tea Tree Gully, Wynn Vale and Modbury, will save something like 15 to 20 minutes each way during peak hour. For a family, that may be a mum getting home, a mum who will be saving 40 minutes of a working day over a five-day week. It is a huge amount of time and, as I said, something like 30,000 people are being transported into and out of the city every day.

As to the time taken by the member for Adelaide's constituents, they can walk to work faster than people on the O-Bahn can now travel from Hackney Road into the city. They are concerned about a bit of disruption over a couple of years to have this tunnel.

Mr Whetstone interjecting:

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: It is going to be opened this year. That's right, just like the Torrens to Torrens. We have the member for Chaffey—

The SPEAKER: The member for Wright will not respond to the member for Chaffey's—

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Whining in the corner, sir?

The SPEAKER: —interjections.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: I apologise, sir.

The SPEAKER: He is called to order.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: This O-Bahn tunnel is going to be just like the Adelaide Oval development, people in the city having a big whinge while it is under construction, but it is actually going to benefit something like 30,000 people every working day—

The Hon. T.R. Kenyon: Twice a day.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Twice a day—living in the north-eastern suburbs. I have had the opportunity to have a walk-through of the tunnel. It is an absolute engineering marvel. It is going to be like when the O-Bahn opened. I was riding the O-Bahn on its very first day; I suggest the member for Adelaide actually have a go at riding the O-Bahn. I am sure she has not ever needed to hop on the O-Bahn and ride a bus. Like her constituents, she can walk into work. There was great excitement on that very first day, and there is going to be great excitement when this tunnel opens.

We are working, the government is working, to make the lives of working people in South Australia better. We are trying to keep South Australia moving. You see it, sir, in your electorate with the Torrens to Torrens, and I know you watch every little improvement with great detail. It is the same with members in the north-eastern suburbs—the member for Newland, the member for Torrens, myself, the member for Florey—who are all very keen to see the completion of this tunnel which I understand is on time and likely to be opened a little later this year. It is a fantastic initiative that will benefit 30,000 people twice a day in the northern suburbs when it opens.

We also heard the member for Adelaide provide a range of other options that the government could have spent this money on, and I am sure the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure will look carefully at her speech and be most appreciative of her engineering expertise about what should have been provided instead of this O-Bahn tunnel. It was quite an interesting little contribution, I have to say. She refers to the O-Bahn tunnel as providing South Australians with something shiny. Well, goodness gracious me! What it is doing is providing an opportunity for a busy traffic area in the city to be freed up so that cars can flow more freely, buses can get into the city more easily—and shock, horror, if someone should sell up, move into the city and have buses going past their apartment buildings.

The next thing the member for Adelaide is going to want is not only Barton Terrace to remain closed but buses removed from the city streets so that her constituents do not have the inconvenience of a bus going past their front door. It was a ridiculous contribution. As I said, 30,000 people will be welcoming this initiative of the South Australian government. We are building South Australia.

The SPEAKER: I do seem to recall that Councillor Anne Moran said that the railways were constructed on parkland. The member for Finniss.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (11:40): Thank you, sir. I do not intend to sit here and castigate the member for Wright as she castigated the member for Adelaide. It is interesting that, in the decaying last days of the Corcoran government, the prospect of a transport plan for the Liberal Party was put together by Michael Wilson and Dean Brown predominantly. I have heard the story on several occasions. When David Tonkin won government, he came in largely as a result of a bus strike on the Friday before the election, as I recall, sir, and I am sure you do as well—

The SPEAKER: Yes.

Mr PENGILLY: —and of course the O-Bahn grew out of it. The O-Bahn was very much a Liberal Party in government initiative. It has been highly successful for decades now. It continues to be highly successful. I think the pity of it is that it has not been replicated in other parts of Adelaide, because it was wonderful. I have actually called for an O-Bahn-like system to be put in place from Seaford or Aldinga down through to the South Coast. I think that would be a terrific outcome that would solve a lot of problems and take a lot of people off the road.

It is important to remember, particularly for the member for Wright's benefit, that the Liberal Party actually supported this O-Bahn extension project in the Public Works Committee. We did not refuse it: we supported it. Indeed, only a couple of weeks ago, the Public Works Committee did a site inspection on the new part of the project, walked through the tunnel and will be pleased when it comes into being. I say that just for the record because I am well aware of the concerns that were raised by residents, schools and whatnot in the lead-up to the project.

They were justified in raising those concerns, and the member for Adelaide was most justified in putting those views on her constituents' behalf. That is our job. That is what she is there for, that is what I am here for and that is what we are all here for, quite frankly. When South Australians have concerns about something that is going to be instigated, sometimes it is the fear of the unknown, but the place to raise those concerns is in this place where we have the benefit of being able to talk about these things and put them well and truly on the record.

I found the walk-through a couple of weeks ago most interesting. It is a significant tunnel. I was highly impressed with the skill of the workforce and the people who are working on it, in particular, the project managers, the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure and the DPTI officers who are assigned to it—people like Mr Jon Whelan and Co. who take great pride in their work. The upshot is that when it does open, and when it is serviceable, it will be beneficial to those who use it. There is no question about that. I know it is a bit of an attempt to save the member for Newland next March. Be that as it may, we will live with that, because it will be put in place.

The Hon. T.R. Kenyon interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: It has come at enormous cost. Time will tell how that is all going to be paid back, if at all. I am not sure where this government is coming from on their solutions to public transport.

I came in by bus this morning, as I do quite often, from down Glenelg way. Along Anzac Highway, which has become a complete jungle of cars in the morning, bogged down, restricted now around Ashford Hospital onwards to two lanes, it is a nightmare. In the bus this morning, it was not so bad—it was quite good actually because we just sailed merrily up the road—but not for those commuters who, through no fault of their own, have to come in by car.

Not everybody can come in on a bus or a tram, it just does not work that way; if they are farther away, they can come in on the train. I am not going to comment on members who have electorates that go up there, but I can tell the house that at the moment there are thousands and thousands of dissatisfied motorists tearing their hair out about how to get into the city by Anzac Highway each weekday to come to work. It is ridiculous. Getting back to the subject of the day, which is the O-Bahn, if that works—

The Hon. T.R. Kenyon: Are you saying you want an O-Bahn from Glenelg?

Mr PENGILLY: Now, Tom. If it works, which we hope it does, it will be beneficial, but I make the point again that it was always a Liberal initiative, the O-Bahn system; the light rail, or whatever they call it, was a Liberal initiative. To this date it has been highly successful and it will be successful into the future. With those few words, I support the motion.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (11:46): I rise to speak on the 533rd report of the Public Works Committee relating to the O-Bahn City Access Project. It has taken a long time to get this debate to the house. It has been on the agenda for quite some time. It was at a time when I was on the Public Works Committee, which was an absolute pleasure. It is a very hardworking committee and a very interesting committee with a great group of members to work with.

Some of the brief summary of this project, when it went through the Public Works Committee, was that the Adelaide O-Bahn is a 12-kilometre network in length, and we were told it is the most highly patronised metropolitan public transport corridor in Adelaide, with 30,000 people utilising the service daily. It was built in the mid-1980s and was a great Liberal initiative. The O-Bahn busway consists of three interchanges along the length of the corridor and connects the north-eastern suburbs of metropolitan Adelaide to the central business district.

The committee was advised that between Hackney Road and Grenfell Street the efficiency of the bus services is significantly compromised by the heavily congested traffic conditions which impact on bus services by increasing travel time, and it can take almost twice as long as necessary. We have been told that average bus speeds along the on-road section of the journey can be as low as 20 km/h, and that 25 per cent of the travel time can be due to delays at intersections.

The Hackney Road/Botanic Road/Rundle Road/Dequetteville Terrace intersections on the inner ring route are currently at or approaching capacity, with approximately 79,000 vehicle movements on average each weekday. During the hearing, we were told that greater than 60 per cent of crashes recorded along Hackney Road have involved vehicles attempting a right turn manoeuvre. The cost of the project started at $160 million. I am sure it has gone a little above and beyond that but we will see, once the project is completed.

During the hearing I did raise a couple of concerns, one being the reduction in car parks. I was told by one of the witnesses that, based on the scheme we have been working on with the Botanic Garden to offset parking between Plane Tree Drive and Botanic Drive to relocate them closer to the wine centre and the Goodman Building, at the conceptual level there are approximately 70 fewer car parks. So there will be an inconvenience for people using those carparks.

We were later advised that the project would result in a total net loss of approximately 93 parking spaces along the western side of Hackney Road between North Terrace and Bundeys Road. It is obviously an area of concern for businesses and customers requiring parking during those busy times.

We also asked whether there was any record of Australian steel being used in this project. We undertook an FOI process, but there is no record. I managed to go out to a holding yard up the road from the Barossa Fine Foods manufacturing plant to the north of Adelaide. I had a look at the store yard and the sheet pile and it definitely was not made in Australia. There was no indication that any of the reinforcing steel had come from Australia, so that raised my blood pressure.

There were safety concerns about the O-Bahn tunnel, and that there was no footbridge was a contentious issue for quite some time; that is, there was no provision for a footbridge for people crossing over. We asked the minister whether he would consider a footbridge and he said no. We all know that it was the Treasurer's pet project. We all know that, potentially, the minister had gone to the Treasurer to ask him for more money for a footbridge and he was obviously told no.

The digging up of the Parklands was also an issue that every person around Adelaide and the Parklands community was very alarmed about. There were other questions about the impact of the project on the 400 homes. One of the department witnesses said the following:

I think one has to look at this on balance. We are empathetic with the 400 residents who live there regarding issues. What we need to look at are options that are safe. On balance, we have 45,000 to 50,000 vehicles a day and we have 1,000 buses a day travelling an important part of this network so we have to balance that in terms of you indicating what else you can do adding lights. You can introduce lights all over the city, but we know the frustration that causes.

To August 2015, almost $7 million of the $160 million budget had been spent on planning, investigations, approvals, reports, design work, site investigation, service investigation, design of service relocations, estimating, surveying, contracts, project management and procurement. It is also interesting to note that at the time approximately $11,000 had been spent on printing and distributing flyers. Again, the government are masters at self-promotion and they are masters at spending taxpayers' money to justify their spend.

I also note that this project passed the Public Works Committee and that it was endorsed by all its members, so I welcome the report to the house. When witnesses came to the Public Works Committee, I took note and went out and spoke to some of the local residents and local businesses that were going to be impacted. I spoke to the owners of the Royal Hotel, and they had noticed a significant impact on their business and on patronage.

It really alarmed me that, when they came some mornings, they had glasses and bottles that had rattled off the shelf, hit the ground and were broken. What really concerns me today is that that hotel has closed and is no longer in existence. It is all very well for the member for Wright to rattle on about what the member for Adelaide is concerned about for her constituents, but this has caused damage to a longstanding business in South Australia and in Adelaide, and that hotel has now gone.

They were impacted with regard to patronage. They were worried about how people were going to utilise their car park because of the lack of 92 car parks the tunnel was going to create, and it painted a very concerning picture. Upon speaking to the owners of the Royal Hotel, that business has gone, sadly. The Leader of the Opposition, the member for Dunstan, spoke about the ongoing burden to approaching or getting on to Hackney Road coming down North Terrace as the continuation of Magill Road. It means that people have to turn left at Dequetteville Terrace and then crack a U-turn onto Hackney Road so that they can progress north on Hackney Road.

Where is the common sense there? A couple of issues were never addressed, but the government was hell-bent on pushing this project through for all the reasons we have heard from previous speakers. However, all in all, the Public Works Committee approved the project and I welcome the 533rd report to the house.

The Hon. T.R. KENYON (Newland) (11:54): I rise to support the report, of course, and to welcome the O-Bahn project. It is an excellent project and will be an excellent improvement to public transport services for people in my electorate and in the electorates of other members to the north-east—Wright, Florey, Torrens, Dunstan even, I think, with Klemzig, and also Hartley. A number of those of us whose electorates are on that north-eastern corridor know that our constituents will be much better off as a result of this project.

I agree with the member for Wright that it is four minutes on average when taken over a 24-hour period, but anybody who has caught that bus in peak hour in the morning knows that it can take as long to get from Hackney to Grenfell Street as it takes to get from Tea Tree Plaza to Hackney. That wonderful trip along the river valley is beautiful, especially in the morning. You come in at a very good speed, then you suddenly hit Hackney and life gets a lot slower and a lot more frustrating. That will be eliminated.

Of course, the effect of that is that you will have buses circulating a lot more quickly and it will in fact bring a de facto increase in capacity into the system because of the way the buses will be able to circulate and the speed with which the buses will be able to circulate between the city and Tea Tree Plaza. I am looking forward to that extra capacity and, hopefully, seeing increased usage of what is already the most popular public transport system in South Australia.

I have toured the tunnel. As the members for Finniss and Wright have said, it is a very impressive engineering feat. I am looking forward to the rehabilitation of the surface. Imagine, in a few years' time, with the skill of the Adelaide City Council gardeners, no-one will know it is there until a bus pops up almost right in front of them in a couple of parts. I am sure it will be rehabilitated well and I am looking forward to that. I see that, even in the midst of the construction, the Garden of Unearthly Delights was able to function.

I acknowledge the inconvenience to those people in the City of Adelaide and other seats that are affected by it and I thank them for their patience. Most people are sensible and know that it is inconvenience for a short time for a long-term public good, and they welcome it. I am very much looking forward to making that trip on one of the first buses, if not on the very first bus, and seeing just how much quicker it is, how much more convenient it is and how much better it is for those residents in the north-east who use that public transport every day. I commend the motion to the house.

Motion carried.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (11:57): Before we move on to the next item, I would like to add a few comments. I have done this at the end, so as not to influence the debate. Having listened to the contributions, of course, the project is a marvellous and welcome addition to our transport system for the residents in the north-east. However, I do hope it will not be at the expense of paying attention to the parking needs that are ongoing at various stations and to the other items of concourse safety. I, too, commend the motion to the house.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT