Agenda of City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Page 5

21/3/2018

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting (Open Portion) held Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 5:00 pm in the Lady Osborne Room, Town Hall.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Burnet (Chairman)

Deputy Lord Mayor Christie

Reynolds

Denison

Harvey

ALDERMEN

Lord Mayor Hickey

Zucco

Briscoe

Ruzicka

Sexton

Cocker

Thomas

Apologies: Nil.

Leave of Absence: Nil.

1. Co-Option of a Committee Member in the event of a vacancy

2. Confirmation of Minutes

The minutes of the Open Portion of the City Infrastructure Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 21 February 2018, are submitted for confirming as an accurate record.

3. Consideration of Supplementary Items

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(6) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

Recommendation

That the Committee resolve to deal with any supplementary items not appearing on the agenda, as reported by the General Manager.

4. Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(7) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

Aldermen are requested to indicate where they may have any pecuniary or conflict of interest in respect to any matter appearing on the agenda, or any supplementary item to the agenda, which the committee has resolved to deal with.

5. Transfer of Agenda Items

Regulation 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

A committee may close a part of a meeting to the public where a matter to be discussed falls within 15(2) of the above regulations.

In the event that the committee transfer an item to the closed portion, the reasons for doing so should be stated.

Are there any items which should be transferred from this agenda to the closed portion of the agenda, or from the closed to the open portion of the agenda?

Item No. 6.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Page 11

21/3/2018

REPORT TITLE: Landscaping and Food Gardens on Nature Strips

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Program Leader Parks and Reserves

Acting Manager Parks and Recreation

Director Parks and City Amenity

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of the report is to present a proposal for the establishment of a framework where residents can obtain approval to landscape nature strips including their use for the production of food.

2. Report Summary

2.1. From time to time the City receives requests from residents for permission to grow plants (including vegetables and fruit) on their nature strip in front of their property.

2.2. Research was undertaken across the state and interstate and it was noted that rigorous assessment of any applications must be undertaken prior to residents being issued a permit to use nature strips for gardening.

2.3. In line with the research undertaken, it is now proposed that applicants be able to apply for an ‘occupational license’ and to potentially receive conditional approval to landscape their nature strip.

2.4. The process will ensure residents meet a set of requirements to ensure the City is not exposed to unnecessary risk.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. Landscaping of nature strips by residents be permitted via the issue of an occupation licence, subject to conditions and requirements as determined by the General Manager.

2. The General Manager be delegated authority to determine applications.

4. Background

4.1. From time to time the City receives requests from residents for permission to grow plants (including vegetables and fruit) on their nature strips adjoining their property.

4.1.1. Nature strips form part of the City’s road reservation network and accordingly in their management require consideration of traffic (including line of sight etc), pedestrian access and safety (soil run off, slippage on dropped fruit, encroachment onto footpath etc) and may regularly contain underground infrastructure and services.

4.1.2. Local heritage considerations may also impact on whether the plantings (or proposed type of plantings) are suitable for a particular location.

4.2. At times, locations have been identified where residents have turned part of a nature strip into a garden without permission.

4.2.1. In most cases however, after a period, such food gardens are returned to grass due to lack of maintenance by the resident.

4.2.2. Where landscaping on nature strips has occurred the residents see it as an extension of their gardens and continue to maintain it with little or no intervention from the City.

4.3. Research was undertaken with many Councils across Australia with mixed feedback received:

4.3.1. Positive outcomes identified in the research included enhanced community spirit and sense of pride, neighbourhood participation, production of food, helping residents to eat healthy, educational for children.

4.3.2. Some negative outcomes identified included public liability issues for the Council, damage to infrastructure and services, impediments to pedestrian access, loss of clearance zones between kerbs, footpaths and driveways, height of plantings leading to obstruction of view for drivers, poaching of produce, lack of resident maintenance, and subsequent detriment of visual amenity or increased community risk.

4.4. Councils around the country have experienced a wide range of challenges. In response, councils have developed a range of guidelines to suit their particular environment.

4.4.1. Most councils require an application for a permit to be submitted, with some charging a fee to cover costs.

4.4.2. Some councils charge a security bond. This is to cover costs associated with the reinstatement of the nature strip should the resident not comply with the permit or moves property without reinstating the nature strip.

4.4.3. Some councils require permit holders to have their own public liability insurance.

4.4.4. Most councils have minimum clearance zones from the garden bed to the footpath and kerb

4.4.5. In all cases renters require the property owner’s permission.

4.5. The city has an established system where occupation licences can be obtained for the use of footpaths.

It is considered this framework would be suitable to be extended for use of landscaping of nature strips.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that residents wishing to landscape or produce food on their nature strips apply for an occupational licence for the use of the nature strip.

5.2. The application will require residents to provide the following evidence in order for an application to be assessed:

5.2.1. Public liability insurance of $20 million noting the City of Hobart as an interested party and noting the nature strip on the certificate of currency;

5.2.2. Proof of consent from next door neighbours;

5.2.3. The proposed landscape plan of the nature strip with all plantings and landscaping (species selection etc) to be detailed for approval;

5.2.4. A copy of the Dial Before You Dig results to identify any services underground.

5.3. The application process will also need to ensure that any approved plantings maintains:

5.3.1. Traffic safety;

5.3.2. Pedestrian access and safety;

5.3.3. Protection of above and underground assets and services;

5.3.4. Consideration of local heritage requirements;

5.3.5. Does not contravene any by-laws, legislation or regulations; and

5.3.6. Indemnity against the City for any resulting public liability claims.

5.4. If a license is granted for the production of food it is proposed that only raised planter boxes be permitted to ensure:

5.4.1. There is no contamination of existing soil; and

5.4.2. Any set backs are maintained.

5.5. Fruit trees are not permitted as falling fruit may increase the risk to people walking along the footpath.

5.6. It is proposed that delegation to determine applications rest with the General Manager.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. Goal 4 of the City of Hobart Strategic Plan 2015-2025 seeks

Strong, Safe and Healthy Communities

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. Fees and charges applicable to occupation licences will apply.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. Costs may also be incurred if Council is required to remove noncompliant gardens and reinstate the nature strip.

7.3. Asset Related Implications

7.3.1. The introduction of a permit process will provide a mechanism to protect the above and underground assets and services.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. The presence of privately maintained food gardens on the nature strips presents public liability risk to the City.

8.1.1. It is accordingly proposed that applicants attain $20M ($20,000,000) public liability insurance noting the nature strip is included on the policy with the City of Hobart as an interested party.

8.2. The provision of a permit application process further ensures the potential risks to the local community and the City are mitigated and controlled.

8.3. Consultation has occurred with the Officers of the City Infrastructure Division who have ‘ownership’ the City’s road reservation network, and with the City Planning Division who administer the City’s occupation licences.

9. Social and Customer Considerations

9.1. Allowing residents to have Food Gardens on Nature strips can give the community a sense of pride and bring the community together. Encourage healthy eating and physical activity.

10. Delegation

10.1. The matter is referred to the Parks and Recreation and City Infrastructure Committees for determination by the Council.

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

Peter Kerstan

Program Leader Parks and Reserves

Shannon Avery

Acting Manager Parks and Recreation

Glenn Doyle

Director Parks and City Amenity

Date: 2 March 2018

File Reference: F18/7292

Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Page 17

21/3/2018

REPORT TITLE: Salamanca Pedestrian Works - Concept Design for Stakeholder Engagement

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Director City Infrastructure

Director City Planning

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. This report introduces a concept plan for upcoming stages of the Salamanca Pedestrian Works Project.

1.2. The purpose of the report is to obtain endorsement from the Council on the concept plan being the subject of public consultation.

1.3. The community benefits of the concept proposal are that:

1.3.1. It would provide a level, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian connection between the footpath on the south side of Salamanca Place and the PW1 forecourt, the Parliamentary Lawns, and Morrison Street.

2. Report Summary

2.1. The first stage of the Inner City Action Plan project to upgrade the Salamanca Place precinct was completed in 2017, with the widening and upgrading of the Salamanca Place southern footpath between Gladstone Street and Montpelier Retreat.

2.2. The next stages of this planned work focuses on connecting the attractors on the southern side of Salamanca Place, to the city and waterfront, and the upgrading of the public spaces in the Salamanca Lawns.

2.3. An initial engagement with key stakeholders has been undertaken. This engagement focused on key users and stakeholders who may be aware of any potential flaws with the initial concept. No significant concerns were identified with the concept, although some modifications have been made as a result of comments received during this initial engagement.

2.4. Based on the work undertaken to date, the overall concept appears feasible, and it is now proposed that the concept plans be made available for public comment, and additional targeted engagement be undertaken with stakeholders.

2.5. A further report, detailing the results of the public consultation, and making recommendations for future staging and implementation of the works is proposed to be provided after a period of public consultation.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The concept plans for Stages 2 and 3 of the Salamanca Pedestrian Works Project, generally shown on the Figure ‘Concept Plan’ dated 6 March 2018 and marked as Attachment A to the report presented to the 21 March 2018 City Infrastructure Committee meeting, be used for community engagement.

2. A further report describing the results of the public consultation and making recommendations for future staging and implementation of the Salamanca Pedestrian Works Project, be prepared and presented to the City Infrastructure Committee.

4. Background

4.1. This report introduces a concept plan for upcoming stages of the Salamanca Pedestrian Works Project, and seeks the Council’s endorsement for this concept being used for community engagement.

4.2. A report on the first stage of the Salamanca Pedestrian Works was reported to the September 2016 City Infrastructure Committee and on 10 October 2016 the Council resolved:

“That 1. Subject to detailed design and planning approval, the footpath widening component first stage of the Salamanca Pedestrian Works, as shown as Stage 1 on Figure 1, Salamanca Pedestrian Works draft 12.09.2016 in Attachment D, be constructed utilising the $500,000 available in the approved works program for the 2016-17 financial year.

2. The alignment of the pedestrian zones and potential areas for outdoor dining on the widened footpath be subject to a workshop and further report that considers:

(i) The implications for traders with outdoor dining, traders without outdoor dining; and

(ii) The implications for pedestrians, including those with disabilities.

3. The Council’s Access Advisory Committee and other relevant stakeholders be consulted in relation to any potential access issues, prior to the workshop being conducted.

4. The design of the Stage 2 works at the intersection of Salamanca Place and Montpelier Retreat, along with the identification of a future funding source for those works, be the subject of a further report.”

4.3. This report addresses Part 4 of the resolution of 10 October 2016, and also introduces a concept plan for the wider reconstruction works in this part of the Salamanca Precinct.

4.4. Parts 1 to 3 inclusive of the 10 October 2016 resolution have been separately completed.

4.5. It should be noted that there has previously been a number of reports / reviews undertaken of the potential reconstruction of the road and footpath network in the subject precinct. A summary of these reports was most recently reported to the City Infrastructure Committee on 24 August 2016.

4.6. That report identified six separate reports / studies that had identified the potential closure of this link, from 1983 to 2015. The report was received and noted.

4.7. Similarly, there have been a number of reviews and reports on the potential upgrading of pedestrian facilities at the crossing of Montpelier Retreat on the Salamanca Place southern footpath.

4.8. The most recent report on that subject, considered by City Infrastructure Committee on 9 December 2015, discussed the feasibility of a number of pedestrian crossing options at this location. The report concluded that the most significant benefits for pedestrians at this crossing point could be obtained by removing the southbound one-way link road through the Salamanca Lawns connecting Morrison Street to Montpellier Retreat, and concluded that the consideration of the detail of the design of this pedestrian crossing would be undertaken as part of the wider Salamanca Pedestrian Works project.

4.9. The number of separate reviews and reports undertaken on these matters over a number of years are indicative that upgrades to the infrastructure in this area is desirable.

4.10. The Hobart Inner City Action Plan, developed after receipt of the Gehl Architects report ‘Hobart 2010 – Public Spaces and Public Life – A City with People in Mind’ identified the upgrading of infrastructure on Salamanca Place and the Morrison / Castray Esplanade connection as one of the priority projects.

4.11. The first stage of this work was completed in 2017, with the widening and upgrading of the Salamanca Place southern footpath between Gladstone Street and Montpelier Retreat.

4.12. The next stages of this planned work focuses on connecting the southern side of Salamanca Place to the city and waterfront, and the upgrading of the public spaces in the Salamanca Lawns.

4.13. The significant drivers of the overall planned project to upgrade pedestrian facilities in the Salamanca precinct are to:

4.13.1. Improve the pedestrian crossing facility on the Salamanca Place southern footpath across Montpelier Retreat;

4.13.2. Simplify the road network in the area connecting Morrison Street – Castray Esplanade – Gladstone Street – Salamanca Place, and provide high quality pedestrian connections linking the southern side of Salamanca Place, the Salamanca Lawns, Princes Wharf and the Hobart Waterfront, the Parliamentary Lawns, and the CBD via Murray Street and Morrison Street.

4.13.3. Improve access to and through this area for people with disabilities.

4.13.4. Improve operational safety and efficiency for the Salamanca Market, by reducing the number of level changes and providing additional flexible areas that can be utilised by the Salamanca Market and other festivals.

4.13.5. Improve operational safety and efficiency for events such as the Taste of Tasmania that incorporate the use of this area.

4.14. After considering these matters, a concept plan has been developed. The concept plan forms Attachment A to this report.

4.15. In summary, the proposed concept includes:

4.15.1. Closure of the existing southbound one-way road connecting Morrison Street to Montpelier Retreat, and the reconstruction of that space connecting the Tasman Fountain area to the Salamanca Lawns with a flat hardstand area that can be used for multiple future purposes, including car parking, Salamanca Market space and special event space;

4.15.2. The 2010 Gehl Architects report identified about 80,000 weekly pedestrian movements across these intersections. This number is likely to have significantly increased over the last 8 years since that work was undertaken;

4.15.3. Conversion of the existing two lane northbound one-way road connecting Gladstone Street to Morrison Street, to a two-way road;

4.15.4. Reconstruction of the intersection of Salamanca Place / Montpelier Retreat, and the southern footpath on Salamanca Place between Montpelier Retreat and Kennedy Lane, in the same style as has been recently installed on Salamanca Place between Gladstone Street and Montpelier Retreat, to provide a high quality trip free and accessible space for pedestrians;

4.15.5. Reconstruction and re-alignment of Castray Esplanade to form a conventional ‘t-intersection’ with Morrison Street;

4.15.6. Installation of five step free ‘zebra’ style pedestrian priority crossings at the following locations:

(i) Across Castray Esplanade, east of Morrison Street;

(ii) Across Salamanca Place east of Montpelier Retreat;

(iii) Across Salamanca Place west of Montpelier Retreat;

(iv) Across Montpelier Retreat south of Salamanca Place;

(v) Across Salamanca Place east of Gladstone Street; and

4.15.7. Reconstruction of surfaces to eliminate level changes between footpaths and road surfaces in large parts of the area, resulting in a largely step free environment for the Salamanca Market and other special events.

4.16. Details of the matters considered during the development of the concept design are detailed in the ‘User Review – Salamanca Pedestrian Works – Stage 2 and 3 Footpath – February 2018’ that forms Attachment B to this report.

4.17. Initial engagement with key stakeholders has been undertaken. This engagement focused on key users and stakeholders who may be aware of any potential flaws with the proposed concept. The initial engagement with stakeholders and the feedback received is documented and summarised in the Stakeholder Feedback Report that forms Attachment C to this report. No significant issues were identified with the concept, although some modifications have been made as a result of comments received during this initial engagement.

4.18. Based on the work undertaken to date, the overall concept appears feasible, and importantly can meet the increasing need for improved pedestrian movement across the Cove.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that the concept plans be made available for public comment, and additional targeted engagement be undertaken with stakeholders.

5.2. It is proposed that the results of this engagement process would be the subject of a further report to Committee seeking endorsement for a final concept plan following the engagement process. The report would also include detail on the proposed installation of street trees, surface materials, and street furniture (seating, bicycle parking, drinking fountain, landscaping features and barrier systems for preventing vehicular intrusion etc.).

5.3. Once the Committee has endorsed the final concept plan, a development application for the works would be lodged and the detailed design of the project undertaken.

5.4. A total of $3.5 million funding has been identified for the project as follows:

5.4.1. $500k in the 2018/19 financial year Capital Works Program for construction of Stage 2 works.

5.4.2. $500k in the 2018/19 financial year Capital Works Program for construction of Stage 3 works.

5.4.3. $1,000k in the 2019/20 financial year Capital Works Program for construction of Stage 3 works.

5.4.4. $1,500k in the 2020/21 financial year Capital Works Program funding request for construction of Stage 3 works.

5.5. It is proposed that a more detailed construction estimate be included in the report following the proposed engagement process.

5.6. This discussion of potential staging would also identify other potential future upgrade works in the precinct, including:

5.6.1. Upgrading the Salamanca Place southern footpath between Kennedy Lane and Wooby’s Lane;

5.6.2. Upgrading the pedestrian connection on the northern side of Salamanca Place between Montpelier Retreat and ‘The Silo’s’;

5.6.3. Upgrading the footpaths on Montpelier Retreat between Salamanca Place and Kirksway Place; and

5.6.4. Upgrading street lighting.

5.7. Construction of the project utilising the funds identified is planned to commence in February 2019.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. Strategic objective 2.2 from the Capital City Strategic Plan is relevant in considering this proposal:

“A people focused city with well designed and well managed urban and recreational spaces.”

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. There is funding available in the current financial year Capital Works Program for the design and planning work for the project.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. There is $1,000k allocated in the Capital Works Program for the 2018/19 financial year for the Stage 2 and Stage 3 components of the project.

7.2.2. There is $1,000k allocated in the Capital Works Program for the 2019/20 financial year for the Stage 3 components of the project.

7.2.3. Currently there is $1,500k allocated in the Capital Works Program funding request for the 2020/21 financial year for the Stage 2 and Stage 3 components of the project.

7.3. Asset Related Implications

7.3.1. The project would result in a significand asset write-off. This will be documented in a further report.

8. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

8.1. There has been initial engagement with key stakeholders during the preparation of the concept plans for the proposed work. This is discussed in the Stakeholder Feedback Report forming Attachment C to this report.

8.2. The recommendation of this report is that the proposed concept plan be the subject of further community and stakeholder engagement.

9. Delegation

9.1. This report responds to a resolution of the Council and as such, it is appropriate that the matter be considered by the Council.

Mark Painter

Director City Infrastructure

Neil Noye Signature

Neil Noye

Director City Planning

Date: 16 March 2018

File Reference: F18/19399; R0817

Attachment a: Concept Plan - Salamanca Pedestrian Works ⇩

Attachment b: User Review - Salamanca Pedestrian Works - Stage 2 & 3 Footpath - February 2018 ⇩

Attachment c: External Stakeholder Feedback Report ⇩

Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Page 73

21/3/2018

REPORT TITLE: Hill Street, West Hobart - Consideration of Representations regarding the Proposed Road Hump

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Traffic Engineering

Director City Infrastructure

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to provide the Council with the results of advertising a proposal to install a road hump north of Pine Street in Hill Street, West Hobart. The road hump forms part of a pedestrian (wombat) crossing to be trialled in this location.

1.2. Approval is sought to write to the Transport Commission seeking approval of a road hump on Hill Street, West Hobart.

2. Report Summary

2.1. The Council has previously considered reports on pedestrian improvements in Hill Street, West Hobart at its meetings of 7 September 2015, 7 March 2016, 3 April 2017 and 2 October 2017.

2.2. The community engagement and statutory advertising has been undertaken for the proposed pedestrian (wombat) crossing trial, including the road hump associated with this type of crossing.

2.3. The road hump was also advertised in the Mercury newspaper on Saturday 20 January 2018 and Saturday 3 February 2018. The closing date for receipt of representations was Monday 19 February 2018.

2.4. Eleven (11) representations were received in response to the advertised proposal. These included two representations objecting to the proposed road hump, and nine representations in support of the road hump (and associated pedestrian (wombat) crossing).

2.4.1. The emergency services (including Tasmania Police, Tasmanian Ambulance Service, Tasmania Fire Service and the State Emergency Services) and Metro Tasmania have been contacted directly to provide feedback on the proposed road hump. Responses were received from Tasmania Police, the State Emergency Services and Metro Tasmania – they were generally supportive of the proposal.

2.5. It is proposed that an application be made to the Transport Commission for permission to install one road hump (as part of a pedestrian (wombat) crossing) in Hill Street on the northern side of the Pine Street roundabout in West Hobart.

2.6. If the Transport Commission approves the application then the trial of a pedestrian (wombat) crossing would be implemented in Hill Street, in accordance with the Council’s resolution of 2 October 2017 at a cost of $65,000. These works are proposed to commence towards the end of the 2017-2018 financial year.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. An application be made to the Transport Commission requesting approval for the installation of one road hump in Hill Street on the northern side of the Pine Street roundabout, as part of the trial of a new pedestrian (wombat) crossing.

2. Subject to receiving permission from the Transport Commission to install a road hump, the pedestrian (wombat) crossing trial proceed in the 2017-2018 financial year.

3. Those people who made representations in relation to the proposed road hump be advised of the Council’s decision.

4. Background

4.1. The Council has previously considered reports on pedestrian improvements in Hill Street, West Hobart at its meetings of 7 September 2015, 7 March 2016, 3 April 2017 and 2 October 2017. A copy of the resolutions of these four meetings is included as Attachment A to this report.

4.2. The results of the community engagement and a report investigating the feasibility of a wombat crossing in Hill Street were presented to the City Infrastructure Committee at its meeting held on 20 September 2017 and then considered by the Council at its meeting held on 2 October 2017, where it was resolved, inter alia, that:

“The findings of the Midson Traffic Report (marked as Attachment C to item 6.6 of the Open City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 20 September 2017) be endorsed and the following recommendations be adopted:

(i) A trial implementation of a wombat crossing across Hill Street (on the northern side of the Pine Street roundabout) be undertaken, subject to further consultation with directly impacted property owners, residents and businesses and all statutory advertising and approvals.”

4.3. In relation to resolution (i) above, the community engagement and statutory advertising has been undertaken for the proposed pedestrian (wombat) crossing trial, including the road hump associated with this type of crossing.

4.4. The road hump was also advertised in the Mercury newspaper on Saturday 20 January 2018 and Saturday 3 February 2018. The closing date for receipt of representations was Monday 19 February 2018.

4.5. On 2 February 2018, letters about the proposed pedestrian (wombat) crossing trial including the road hump were delivered to all residents, businesses and property owners of Hill Street (between Hamilton Street and Pine Street) and all properties adjacent to the Pine Street roundabout. The letter included a copy of the advertisement. A copy of the letter is included at Attachment B to this report.

4.6. Eleven (11) representations were received in response to the advertised proposal. These included two representations objecting to the proposed road hump, and nine representations in support of the road hump (and associated pedestrian (wombat) crossing). A copy of the representations are included as Attachment C to this report.

4.7. Representations Objecting to the Proposal

4.7.1. Two representations were received against the proposal to install a road hump in Hill Street. The following table outlines the concerns raised in those representations.

It is not acceptable for either a road hump or a zebra crossing to be installed at an intersection, within a roundabout traffic control and on a street carrying over 10,000 veh/day.

The Transport Commission standard that road humps not be installed on a road carrying more than around 4,000 veh/day.

It is not acceptable for road humps to be installed in isolation; they are installed as part of an overall traffic management plan extending over a street length, not just in one spot.

Road humps and wombat crossings are also not to be installed at intersections; their appropriate location is away from any intersection.

A road hump at an intersection with a roundabout control complicates the decision making required by drivers, particularly when also needing to give way to pedestrians, it would impose more vehicle stop / starting and increase potential for rear end collisions with drivers who are not alert to the situation.

There would have been more pedestrians in this area a few years ago therefore, I would question the need to now reverse the priority to pedestrians, and whether there really is such a high pedestrian movement to require a change.

If pedestrian numbers are sufficiently high to justify a higher order crossing facility based on Transport Commission warrants, there are other more appropriate measures available to address the situation which do not adversely impact on safety and efficiency.

The wombat crossing is completely wrong for the proposed location so much so that even a trial could not be justified.

It is not necessary to have a raised zebra crossing. The pedestrian traffic islands in the centre of the road which allow people to cross first one lane of traffic and then another are sufficient and could be retrofitted with a painted crossing on both side if deemed necessary.

It is not necessary to eventually introduce a 40 km/h speed limit in West Hobart.

Requests further evaluation of the Mellifont Street / Arthur Street / Hill Street intersection and access into and out of the Hill Street Grocer car park.

4.7.2. These technical concerns were all addressed in the feasibility assessment undertaken by Midson Traffic and considered by the Council at its meeting on 2 October 2017. The Midson Traffic report recognised many of these limitations and that the location of a pedestrian (wombat) crossing in close proximity to a roundabout. The Midson Traffic report stated:

“Zebra crossings and wombat crossings are a relatively unusual pedestrian crossing facilities in Tasmania compared with other States. The majority of zebra crossings in the Hobart municipality are located within car parking areas (i.e. shopping centre car parks, University of Tasmania, etc), or slip lanes (Brooker Avenue). There is therefore a road safety risk associated with the installation of new zebra or wombat crossing facilities in Hobart’s urban road network due to a lack of driver awareness and unfamiliarity. Any installation of zebra crossings, particularly wombat crossings at a roundabout (as there are no comparable installations in Tasmania), should therefore be considered with a degree of caution.

It is recommended that any installation of a new zebra or wombat crossing facility in the Hobart urban area should be initially undertaken with a trial in a mid-block road location that has high pedestrian crossing volumes and low vehicle speeds. The installation of wombat crossings at the leg of a roundabout (i.e. a relatively complex environment) would not normally be considered an appropriate location for such a trial.”

4.7.2.1. Following the submission of their report Midson Traffic advised that a trial of a wombat crossing at the Hill Street / Pine Street / Lansdowne Crescent roundabout is feasible and that the site contains a number of attributes that provide a level of safety.

4.7.3. It is also recognised that the trial pedestrian (wombat) crossing location in Hill Street (north of the Pine Street roundabout) is one of three sites to be considered – and that subject to the trial being successful, two additional pedestrian (wombat) crossings will be implemented on the Hill Street corridor and would therefore provide a traffic calming scheme in line with normal local area traffic management considerations.

4.7.4. A number of traffic surveys have been completed and the VicRoads warrants for the installation of a pedestrian (zebra) crossing are met in the Hill Street location north of the Pine Street roundabout.

4.8. Representations Supporting the Proposal

4.8.1. Nine representations were received in support of the proposal to install a road hump in Hill Street. These representations provide the following comments in support of the road hump (and associated wombat crossing). The following table outlines the concerns raised in those representations.

The wombat crossing (in association with the other changes being made) will moderate traffic flow along Hill Street, will assist in the slowing down of traffic on this busy street and will support the eventual introduction of a 40 km/hr speed limit in this residential area.

The wombat crossing will give legal priority to pedestrians crossing the street and this will help children and older residents to cross.

This improvement, and the other changes included in this package, is long overdue. A number of businesses, schools and aged care facilities wrote to the Council on 5 August 2016 requesting “the Hobart City Council consider the most appropriate placement of non-signalised crossings that allow for right of way to pedestrians along Hill Street in the context of providing the necessary traffic infrastructure to implement the new 40 km/h zone”.

As a parent of children who’ve attended Lansdowne Crescent Primary School for the past eight years and I am looking forward to the new crossing enabling them to walk to school safely every day.

Members of the Hobart City Council City Infrastructure team joined the West Hobart community and Lansdowne Crescent Primary School parents and friends in a count of students crossing Hill Street on 16 March 2017. These numbers of vehicles and pedestrians more than satisfy the minimum requirement accepted by the Department of State Growth for installation of a proper pedestrian crossing (i.e. zebra crossing).

Through traffic on Hill Street can seem aggressive and relentless, and to some degree forms a barrier cutting the suburb in half. Giving priority to pedestrians over cars will make it much easier for athletic and alert people to cross the road. For elderly people wanting to cross the road (e.g. to access the pharmacy) or children on the way to school, a wombat crossing would greatly increase their safety and comfort.

The Lansdowne Crescent footpath provides long unbroken stretches of safe walking for school children, dog walkers and elderly, but is virtually unreachable from east of Hill Street during rush hour.

Already it is hard to imagine 60 km/h traffic in West Hobart streets (although I do remember it because 3 kids were killed when their car hit a tree on Lansdowne Crescent when I first moved to the suburb). In future years it will seem bizarre and negligent of Council if they fail to proceed with traffic calming actions now.

The installation of this crossing, along with other changes being made at this time will improve the safety and usability of the street for pedestrians and make it easier for children, the elderly and less mobile to cross Hill Street. This is most important close to the school and residential facilities for the elderly, now that the street has become so busy.

As someone who walks and cycles most places, I've seen and experienced the myriad challenges faced by pedestrians and cyclists around Hobart. It is plainly obvious that we prioritise cars over other transport modes. This gives car drivers an undeserved sense of entitlement and regularly leads to dangerous treatment of other road users. Non-drivers have just as much a right to a safe and comfortable trip around Hobart as do car drivers. If the streets were friendlier to other road users, you'd have fewer people driving and more people walking. This would lead to reduced vehicle flow on our clogged roads and improved health outcomes.

Enforced zebra crossings are great because, at busy roundabouts, most car drivers don’t give way. You sometimes have to wait for minutes to cross and typically, when you can, you have to run.

Whilst I am 100% in support of making it safer for pedestrians, I have concerns with humps and their impact on bike riders. Riders feel holes and bumps more than car drivers. What is needed is a flat bike lane on each side of the hump (between the footpath and the hump). It would be great if that could be considered as part of this trial.

This is a really good move for the health and safety of our city.

4.8.2. There continues to be good community support for improved pedestrian crossings across Hill Street in West Hobart.

4.9. Feedback from Emergency Services and Metro Tasmania

4.9.1. The emergency services (including Tasmania Police, Tasmanian Ambulance Service, Tasmania Fire Service, the State Emergency Services) and Metro Tasmania have been contacted directly to provide feedback on the proposed road hump. Responses were received from Tasmania Police, the State Emergency Services and Metro Tasmania – they were generally supportive of the proposal. Copies of the letters from these stakeholders are included in Attachment D to this report.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. Section 31 of the Local Government (Highways) Act 1982, requires the Council to submit copies of any representations together with the Council’s comments to the Transport Commissioner, in order to seek approval for the road humps.

5.2. It is proposed that an application be made to the Transport Commission for permission to install one road hump (as part of a pedestrian (wombat) crossing) in Hill Street on the northern side of the Pine Street roundabout in West Hobart.

5.3. If the Transport Commission approves the application then the trial of a pedestrian (wombat) crossing would be implemented in Hill Street, in accordance with the Council resolution of 2 October 2018 at a cost of $65,000. These works are proposed to commence towards the end of the 2017-2018 financial year.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. The review of Local Area Traffic Management in Hill Street, West Hobart supports the Council’s Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 through Goal 2 – Urban Management.

6.2. In particular, reference is made to its support through Strategic Objective 2.1 and its underpinning strategies, that is:

“2.1 A fully accessible and connected city environment.

2.1.2 Enhance transport connections within Hobart.

2.1.3 Identify and implement infrastructure improvements to enhance road safety.”

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. As resolved by the Council on 2 October 2017, the trial of a wombat crossing in Hill Street on the northern side of the Pine Street roundabout will be funded to $65,000 from funds allocated within the current Annual Plan.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. None are foreseen.

7.3. Asset Related Implications

7.3.1. None are foreseen.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. Section 31 of the Local Government (Highways) Act 1982 the approval of the Transport Commission must be obtained before road humps can be installed in Hill Street, West Hobart.

8.2. This approval can only be gained if the corporation advertises its intention to make an application under Section 31, and seeks written representations on the matter, which it then considers and comments on.

9. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

9.1. The intention to install a road hump in Hill Street has been advertised in the Mercury newspaper. A letter has also been delivered to nearby residents and businesses advising them of the proposal. A total of eleven (11) representations have been received as detailed in Section 3 of this report.

9.2. Emergency services and Metro Tasmania have also been contacted about the proposed road hump and they are generally supportive of the project.

10. Delegation

10.1. This is a matter for the Council to determine.

Angela Moore

Manager Traffic Engineering

Mark Painter

Director City Infrastructure

Date: 15 March 2018

File Reference: F18/21732

Attachment a: Summary of Hill Street Council Resolutions ⇩

Attachment b: Letter to Hill Street Residents ⇩

Attachment c: Representations (Contact Details Redacted for Privacy Reasons) ⇩

Attachment d: Correspondence from Emergency Services and Metro Tasmania ⇩

Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting - 21/3/2018

Page 81

ATTACHMENT a

Council Meeting, 7 September 2015
Item 14, Hill Street/Arthur Street, West Hobart – Traffic Issues

“That: 1. A review of the traffic issues identified in the report attached to Supplementary item 13 of the City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 26 August 2015, in relation to the new ‘Hill Street Grocer’ store in Hill Street, West Hobart, be conducted in six months time.

2. A report be prepared on options for safer pedestrian crossings in Hill Street, West Hobart.

3. The Council investigate a 40 km per hour speed limit for all residential areas within the Hobart municipal area.

4. The following notes of discussion arising from the West Hobart Residents’ Traffic Committee, meeting conducted on 19 August 2015 be received and noted:-

(i) Recognising that pedestrian safety is the priority, the West Hobart Local Area Traffic Committee (LATC) ask Council, as a matter of urgency, to develop a safe traffic plan for West Hobart based on the “West Hobart safe traffic zone” map produced by the West Hobart Environment Network, as tabled at the LATC meeting, including:

(a) A suite of traffic calming measures that include defined and safe pedestrian crossings (such as wombat and zebra designs); and

(b) A reduction in speeds to 40 km per hour for Lansdowne Crescent, Hill Street and Arthur Street.

(ii) The LATC also requests that such a plan be developed in consultation with relevant community groups, including on-site consultation with residents at Lawrenny Court. The LATC also recognises that the development and implementation of such a plan within a reasonable timeframe, will require additional Council resourcing.”

Council Meeting, 7 March 2016
Item 13, West Hobart Local Area Traffic Investigation

“That: 1. The recommendations of the consultant report titled West Hobart Local Area Traffic Investigation – Final Report, marked as Attachment A to item 5 of the Open City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 24 February 2016, be supported in-principle and the following actions be undertaken:

(i) A workshop be convened with stakeholders in relation to the West Hobart pedestrian environment.

(ii) The Department of State Growth be requested to establish Statewide warrants for the installation of pedestrian crossings within Tasmania.

(iii) The Council write to the Department of State Growth requesting that consideration be given to the installation of an unsupervised children’s crossing in Hill Street in the 40km/h zone near Caldew Park.

(iv) Median lanes and median islands be installed in Hill Street between Allison Street and Patrick Street and between Hamilton Street and Warwick Street, in 2016/2017 following the development of concept designs and community engagement.

(v) A review be undertaken following the installation of the median islands and pedestrian crossings in Hill Street.

(vi) Concept design development and consultation be undertaken with directly affected residents in 2016/2017 to provide more generous pedestrian crossings in Hill Street where refuge islands are already provided.

2. The West Hobart Resident Traffic Committee, Lansdowne Crescent Primary School, The Friends School, Taroona High School, Lawrenny Court, businesses along Hill Street and those people who participated in the consultation conducted by MRCagney, be advised of the Council’s decision.

Council Meeting, 3 April 2017
Item 27, Pedestrian Crossings in Hill Street, West Hobart - Concept Design

“That: 1. Community engagement be undertaken based on the concept design marked as Attachment A to item 6.3 of the Open City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 29 March 2017.

2. The General Manager work with the schools and interested businesses to lobby the Transport Commissioner for the provision of adult crossing guards at the Hill Street / Lansdowne Crescent / Patrick Street and the Hill Street / Lansdowne Crescent / Pine Street intersections.

3. Further investigation, including advice from the Transport Commissioner be undertaken to install improved pedestrian crossings at the Hill Street / Lansdowne Crescent / Patrick Street and Hill Street / Lansdowne Crescent / Pine Street intersections taking into consideration sight distance, bus turning and property constraints and in accordance with the Australian Standard. Options to be investigated include:

(i) Wombat crossings at the above roundabouts; and/or

(ii) Replacing the Hill Street / Lansdowne Crescent / Patrick Street roundabout with traffic signals.

(iii) Lobbying DIER for a 40 km per hour speed limit from the Hill Street/Arthur Street intersection, through to Patrick Street.

(iv) Taking note of the need for implementing safe bicycle infrastructure.

4. A further report be provided, detailing the results of the community engagement and recommending a design to be implemented in Hill Street, incorporating consideration of the consultation and the feedback from MRCagney and Victoria Walks.

5. A further report be provided to the Council’s Community, Culture and Events Committee in relation to a possible event and community art project for West Hobart.

6. The line markings at the Hill Street roundabouts be painted as a matter of urgency.”

Council Meeting, 2 October 2017
Item 20, Hill Street Pedestrian Improvement Project

“That: 1. The revised concept design for pedestrian crossing points, median lane and bicycle lanes (marked as Attachment D to item 6.6 of the Open City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 20 September 2017) be implemented.

2. The Transport Commissioner be requested to consider a 40 km/h speed limit for Hill Street (between Molle Street and Arthur Street) following the implementation of this project.

3. The findings of the Midson Traffic Report (marked as Attachment C to item 6.6 of the Open City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 20 September 2017) be endorsed and the following recommendations be adopted:

(ii) Results of the trial, including recommendations on the installation of two additional wombat crossing in Hill Street (at both Warwick Street and Patrick Street), be the subject of a further report.

(iii) Further surveys of pedestrians and pedestrian types over a longer period (i.e. one school week) be done at the Patrick Street roundabout and the results forwarded to the Transport Commissioner for consideration of a children’s crossing and adult crossing guard.

(iv) Traffic signals not be implemented at the Arthur Street / Hill Street or Patrick Street / Lansdowne Crescent / Hill Street intersections at this time.

4. The required funding for the installation of wombat crossings at Warwick Street and Patrick Street (if not trialled) be listed for consideration in the 2018-19 Annual Plan, with installation contingent on a successful trial and future resolution of Council.

5. The Transport Commissioner be requested to provide assistance as may be required with the implementation of an awareness and education campaign regarding the use of wombat crossings.

6. Midson Traffic be requested to provide a briefing to the community on the outcomes of its report.

7. A media release be issued by the Lord Mayor and the Chairman of the City Infrastructure Committee.

Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Page 110

21/3/2018

Memorandum: City Infrastructure Committee

Hobart Central Bus Interchange Planning Project - Elizabeth Street Bus Mall Improvement Project

Purpose

The purpose of this memo is to advise the Committee of a proposal, developed by the Department of State Growth and Metro Tasmania in consultation with officers from the City of Hobart, to reconfigure the Elizabeth Street Bus Interchange.

The proposed configuration would provide the scope to ultimately renew and expand the waiting and shelter areas for bus passengers, better locate regional services and allow for the redevelopment and improvement of the Elizabeth Street pedestrian corridor.

Background

Planning for the refurbishment of the Elizabeth Street Bus Interchange has been a long term strategic objective of the Council, identified in the Council’s 2009 Sustainable Transport Strategy, the 2010 Gehl Report and the Transforming Hobart Capital Works program.

The Council resolved on 21 December 2015 to give in-principle support to “the further development of a one-way Elizabeth Street Bus Mall, with contra flow bus lanes and displaced bus stops relocated to Collins Street".

Work has continued between all parties to address the current Council resolution with Metro Tasmania and the Department of State Growth expressing some concerns about the proposed Collins Street bus departure points. As such work has continued to identify an improved solution.

In the interim the Council has continued to work to improve the current public transport passenger facilities, completely rebuilding the Macquarie Street (Franklin Square) bus shelters in 2016 to provide high quality waiting facilities for bus services to the southern suburbs.

In order to permit the construction of the Hyatt Centric (Palace Hotel) at 28‑32 Elizabeth Street, temporary relocation of Metro Tasmania bus departure points were made in late 2017 at the request of the Department of State Growth to facilitate the initial demolition activities.

Proposal by the Department of State Growth

Further work has now been completed by the Department of State Growth and Metro Tasmania in consultation with officers from the City of Hobart to identify an arrangement for the Hobart Central Bus Interchange for the medium term (up to 10 years).

The Department of State Growth has written to the City of Hobart indicating that they have a proposed arrangement for bus departure points for the Hobart Central Bus Interchange. The correspondence received from the Department of State Growth is marked as Attachment A to this memorandum.

The proposed configuration would provide the scope to ultimately renew and expand the waiting and shelter areas for bus passengers, better locate regional services and allow for redevelopment and improvement of the Elizabeth Street pedestrian corridor, linking between the waterfront and the city centre.

The proposed configuration is shown in Attachment B to this memorandum, and includes:

(i) Regional services (provided by Tassielink and O’Driscolls coaches) would be relocated from outside 103 Macquarie Street to a new bus departure point on Elizabeth Street adjacent to the Town Hall.

(ii) The Airporter bus service (currently using a ¼ P, taxi and permit vehicle zone outside 21-27 Elizabeth Street in the existing bus mall) would also relocate to a new bus departure point on Elizabeth Street adjacent to the Town Hall.

(iii) Metro Tasmania services would occupy the current ¼ P, taxi and permit vehicle zone outside 21-27 Elizabeth Street.

(iv) The bus stop at 103 Macquarie Street would be used by Metro Tasmania services. A section of the existing short term parking and loading zone outside the Colonial Mutual Life Building would be converted to a kerb bulbing to allow for seating and shelter to be provided whilst maintaining an adequate footpath width.

(v) The Mount Stuart via West Hobart service would continue to circulate through Collins Street, continuing to use the new Liverpool Street bus stop and shelter at the end of the Elizabeth Street Mall. These services would no longer enter the Elizabeth Street bus interchange. A new passenger set-down area would be required in Collins Street.

(vi) Metro Tasmania services and layover would continue to operate (as existing) on the Macquarie Street and Elizabeth Street edges of Franklin Square.

(vii) A new short‑stay bus layover point would be established on Davey Street adjacent to the Town Hall (between the Council’s underground car park access point and Elizabeth Street).

(viii) Buses would no longer stop on Macquarie Street adjacent to the old Mercury building.

The Department of State Growth has provided a Traffic Impact Statement for the proposal. This is provided as Attachment C to this memorandum.

The Department of State Growth has indicated it will pay for a range of capital works associated with the proposed bus stop arrangements (refer Attachment A).

The Department of State Growth has accepted responsibility for all stakeholder consultation in relation to the proposal.

The Department of State Growth has the ability to direct, through the Transport Commission, the City of Hobart to change or alter parking arrangements should it desire.

Further Details of the Proposal

Elizabeth Street (Town Hall)

Regional bus services (provided by Tassielink and O’Driscolls coaches) would be relocated from outside 103 Macquarie Street to a new bus departure point located on Elizabeth Street adjacent to the Town Hall.

(i) Regional services provided by Tassielink travel to Cambridge-Dulcot-Richmond-Campania-Colebrook (one service).

(ii) Regional services provided by O’Driscolls travel to New Norfolk, Ellendale and Bothwell (several services).

The Airporter bus service (currently using a ¼ P, taxi and permit vehicle zone outside 21-27 Elizabeth Street in the existing bus mall) would also relocate to the new bus departure point on Elizabeth Street adjacent to the Town Hall.

The new bus stop adjacent to the Town Hall in Elizabeth Street would include a new bus shelter and seating for waiting passengers. Initial discussions with Heritage and Planning officers at the City of Hobart indicate that a shelter and seating could be provided between the Town Hall building and the City of Hobart parking deck entrance.

The new bus stop would remove the remaining three ¼ P car parking spaces in Elizabeth Street (between Macquarie Street and Davey Street).

103 Macquarie Street

With the regional bus services relocating to Elizabeth Street, the bus stop at 103 Macquarie Street would be used by Metro Tasmania services. The bus stop would need to be extended to allow for use by 19m long buses.

A section of the existing short term parking and loading zone outside the Colonial Mutual Life Building would be converted to kerb bulbing to allow for seating and potentially a shelter to be provided whilst maintaining an adequate footpath width.

The proposal in this location would remove parking to allow for the passenger waiting facilities. However, one long ¼ P parking / loading zone space could be retained.

76 Liverpool Street (Elizabeth Street junction)

The Mount Stuart via West Hobart service would continue to circulate through Collins Street, continuing to use the recently upgraded bus stop and shelter at 76 Liverpool Street (near the end of the Elizabeth Street Mall). These services would no longer need to enter the Elizabeth Street bus interchange.

A new passenger set-down area would be required in Collins Street.

Elizabeth Street and Macquarie Street (Franklin Square)

Metro Tasmania services and layover would continue to operate on the Macquarie Street and Elizabeth Street edges of Franklin Square.

Elizabeth Street Bus Interchange (between Macquarie Street and Collins Street)

All Metro Tasmania services in Elizabeth Street between Macquarie Street and Collins Street would operate from the north-eastern edge (GPO side).

There would be no scheduled Metro Tasmania bus services operating from the south-western edge of Elizabeth Street.

Metro Tasmania services would occupy the current ¼ P, taxi and permit vehicle zone outside 21-27 Elizabeth Street.

The removal of the “saw tooth” and relocation of the kerb line on the GPO side of Elizabeth Street would provide additional space for new high quality passenger waiting facilities. It is noted, however, that since the receipt of this proposal the Department is reassessing the need for the short term removal of the saw tooth kerb.

An opportunity would also be available to remove the existing indented parking bay adjacent to the “Quest Savoy”. A mid‑block taxi drop off and pick up location could be accommodated to service both the Quest and the Palace (Hyatt Centric) Hotel.

The ability to then also provide a wide, clear pedestrian corridor along the south-western edge of Elizabeth Street will assist in associated Council plans to improve the connection between the City and the Sullivan’s Cove area.

Other related impacts

A new short‑stay layover point for Metro Tasmania buses would be established on Davey Street adjacent to the Town Hall (between the Council’s underground car park access point and Elizabeth Street).

This layover area would remove three on-street 1P metered parking spaces.

Reconsideration of the current “No Entry” restrictions for Elizabeth Street northbound at Davey Street is also flagged by the GHD report. This could allow access into the Council parking deck from Davey Street and Macquarie Street.

1. Recommendation

That:

1. The Committee receive and note the Department of State Growth’s proposal to reconfigure the Elizabeth Street Bus interchange as generally shown in Attachment B.

2. The General Manager be authorised to undertake further discussions with the Department of State Growth, Metro Tasmania and private bus operators to resolve any residual issues and concerns.

Mark Painter

Director City Infrastructure

Angela Moore

Manager Traffic Engineering

Date: 16 March 2018

File Reference: F18/24149; 36-20-3

Attachment a: Letter from Department of State Growth - Bus Interchange Arrangements ⇩

Attachment b: Plan of Proposed Bus Stop Arrangements ⇩

Attachment c: Traffic Impact Statement for Proposed Bus Interchange Arrangements ⇩

Item No. 6.6

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting - 21/3/2018

Page 148

ATTACHMENT a

PDF Creator

Item No. 8.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Infrastructure Committee Meeting

Page 230

21/3/2018

Memorandum: Lord Mayor

Deputy Lord Mayor

Aldermen

Response to Question Without Notice

Enviropods

Meeting: City Infrastructure Committee

Meeting date: 22 November 2017

Raised by: Alderman Harvey

Question:

Could the Director please advise if there is a standard size of Enviropods in use and do other Councils for example, Clarence City Council, Glenorchy City Council, Brighton Council, Kingborough Council and the Derwent Valley Council, use and/or should be using the same size and type of Enviropod and have they made any impact of decreasing pollution into the River Derwent?

Response:

The City of Hobart has approximately 480 stormwater pit litter traps installed in stormwater gully pits throughout the City.

Enviropod is a proprietory brand name for one type of stormwater gully pit litter trap and whilst the majority of the City’s installations are Enviropod units, there are other types of gully pit litter traps utilised by the City at a few locations. Our existing records do not distinguish the type of the installation at each individual location.

In the mid to late 2000s a significant project was undertaken to install gully pit litter traps at various locations throughout the City. The Enviropod units were supplied in standard sizes, however most of the stormwater gully pits (particularly in the older areas of the City) vary in size as they were built as poured in-situ structures, that resulted in dimensional variations in each pit. This meant that many of the Enviropods had to be custom modified to fit a large range of pit size which was a significant cost in this project.

As requested, information was sought from the other Councils about their use of Enviropods (or equivalent). Responses were received from Kingborough, Glenorchy and Derwent Valley Councils advising that these Councils generally do not install the Enviropod type systems as part of their stormwater treatment systems.

It is noted that some of these Councils have inherited a small number of the Enviropod units that were installed by developers, and have now been transferred to the Councils as gifted assets. However, these Councils are not pursuing the installation of the Enviropod type units as part of their own stormwater quality improvement strategies.

The City of Hobart does not maintain records concerning the weight and/or volume of litter, debris and other pollutants that are captured by the Enviropod units. Hence there is no quantitative data available concerning the effectiveness or otherwise of these units towards decreasing pollutant levels entering the River Derwent.

The Enviropod type units require regular maintenance in order to ensure that litter, debris and other pollutants are removed from the units. If this maintenance regime is not maintained the units will block and operate in by-pass mode and may result in the gully pits overflowing. This results in significant operational costs for the Enviropod units.

Generally it has been found that the most cost effective and low maintenance solutions for stormwater treatment is some form of “end of line” capture, which can include floating litter trash racks, gross pollutant traps (GPTs), and where feasible, bio-retention swales etc. GPT systems are generally designed to remove gross pollutants and coarse sediments, and achieve some minor capture of oil pollutants.

The City currently has floating boom litter traps installed at the end of the Sandy Bay, Hobart, and New Town Rivulets, whilst there are GPT installations at the end of the Red Chapel Avenue and Wayne Avenue catchments. Also, a current project is underway to install a GPT in the lower end of the Providence Rivulet catchment in North Hobart.

Notwithstanding the above, there will still be some localised small catchments where Enviropod units represent the most cost effective stormwater treatment method for specific areas. For example, this could include the Salamanca precinct where there are limited, if any, opportunities to install “end of line” systems.

Mark Painter

Director City Infrastructure

Date: 15 March 2018

File Reference: F17/155218; 13-1-10

about people	We value people – our community, our customers and colleagues.
professional	We take pride in our work.
enterprising	We look for ways to create value.
responsive	We’re accessible and focused on service.
inclusive	We respect diversity in people and ideas.
making a difference	We recognise that everything we do shapes Hobart’s future.