GREATER CANBERRA

CITY AREA
(Haig Park to Lake Burley Griffin)

COORDINATED ACTION PLAN

2010 - 2016

Draft for public consultation

)HEUXDU\ 2010
FOREWORD

The draft Greater Canberra City Area Coordinated Action Plan 2010 - 2016
(Action Plan) has been prepared to help advance the Canberra Plan goal for
Canberra City, to be the dynamic heart of the region. This draft Action Plan
adopts explicit targets that focus on outcomes that enhance Canberra City as
a place for people - a place where innovative businesses can add to the
quality and diversity of the city; a place where people from around the world
can live, learn and unwind; and a place where people’s working days are
enriched through the variety and interests that a modern city can provide.

The Action Plan contributes to broader discussions about clear priorities and
common goals. This shared direction will help determine the appropriate level
of future public investment in the Greater Canberra City area over coming
years. At this stage, project funding remains subject to further consideration in
the context of future Government priorities, and the formulation of the
Territory’s annual budgets.

Your input is necessary to help finalise the Action Plan. The ideas and
opportunities described in the Plan are open for discussion and refinement
over the consultation period that ends on Tuesday  March 2010.
Your comments will be considered, and appropriate suggestions will be
incorporated into the final plan that is expected to be prepared before the end
of June 2010.

Please look at the draft Action Plan and provide your comments and feedback to.

Strategic Project Facilitation

ACT Department of Land and Property Services
GPO Box 158
Canberra City ACT 2601

Email: rod.baxter@act.gov.au

Jon Stanhope MLA

Chief Minister

12 February 2010
© Australian Capital Territory, Canberra 2010
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced
by any process without written permission from the Territory Records Office, Community and Infrastructure
Services, Territory and Municipal Services, ACT Government.
GPO Box 158, Canberra City ACT 2601.
Produced by Publishing Services for:
Department of Land and Property Services

Enquiries about this publication should be directed to:

GPO Box 158 Canberra City, ACT 2601
Telephone: Canberra Connect 132 281

Publication No 10/0066
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive summary i
1.0 Purpose 1
2.0 The study area 1
3.0 Goal and development principles 2
4.0 Targets: Actions that achieve the goal 2
5.0 Nine targets for a more sustainable and diverse City 3
Target 1: Residential 3
Target 2: Employment 5
Target 3: Journey to work 7
Target 4: Active street frontages 9
Target 5: Public parking 11
Target 6: Short stay convenience parking 13
Target 7: The public realm 15
Target 8: The road network 17
Target 9: Cycle and pedestrian networks 19
6.0 Summary of projected development to 2016 2
7.0 The business case for road network changes 23
7.1 Proposed network changes 23
7.2 Performance of options 23
7.3 Benefit cost analysis 30
7.3.1 Selected network for economic analysis 30
7.3.2 Components of economic analysis 31
7.3.3 Summary of economic indicators 31
7.4 London Circuit and future bus priority measures 32
7.4.1 Background 32
7.4.2 Functions of London Circuit 32
7.4.3 Design options 32
7.5 Vernon Circle and City Hill 36
7.5.1 City Hill’s symbolic role 36
7.5.2 1950’s interpretation of Griffin’s plan 36
8.0 The business case for public realm investment 37
8.1 Proposed public realm enhancements 37
8.2 Priorities and sequencing 37
9.0 Mixed use outcomes 53
9.1 The advantages of mixed use development 53
9.2 Incentives that support mixed use development 53
10.0 Achieving long term results 55
10.1 Stakeholders and decision making 55
10.2 Leadership and public investment 55
10.3 Implementation 55
Bibliography 57
 i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Canberra Plan identifies City (Civic) as the dynamic heart of Canberra. The
policy to build a stronger City heart in the context of the ACT’s town centre structure
is promoted in Territory and Commonwealth planning statutes and in more
comprehensive commentaries through The Canberra Plan ACT Government (2002)
and Canberra: A sustainable future. OECD, Paris (2002).

Recent progress towards strengthening the role of Civic has been driven by
Commonwealth Government policies around renewal of its departmental office
accommodation, significant retail and entertainment expansion around the Canberra
Centre, market demand for inner city apartments and an extension of the Australian
National University’s (ANU) activities into non campus land in City West.
Planning policies and land release programs of both the Commonwealth and
ACT Governments have supported significant development activity over the
past five years. By mid 2009 the development cycle levelled out to more
normal levels but, even at a reduced rate of growth, significant changes to the
Greater City Area must be anticipated over the next seven years to 2016.
To better understand the implications of future development, nine explicit targets
for the seven years from 2010 and 2016 are described. The targets are entirely
consistent with Territory and Commonwealth planning statutes, and are
supported by the best available data. The targets are integrated, and together
they work to:
 Optimise utilisation of existing transport and other infrastructure;
 Maintain City’s existing high level of accessibility and functionality;
 Help improve Canberra’s environmental footprint;
 Enhance City’s vitality and urban lifestyle by fostering growth in
employment, retail, entertainment and residential development;
 Steadily achieve cohesive and robust urban design and public realm
improvements; and
 Underpin continued land releases and new development to support the
growth and changing needs of Canberra’s ‘vital heart’.

The range of issues considered in the Plan includes:

 Traffic management through the study area, and particularly through Vernon
Circle, Northbourne Avenue and London Circuit;
 Parking supply and management to meet demand for both short stay and all
day parking, and to address access and egress traffic issues;
 Pedestrian ‘safe routes’ supported by street level activity, lighting,
furniture and verge upgrades;
 Public transport, particularly the City bus interchange, improved services
through City West and bus priority measures;
 Off road cycle access particularly in City East, from Haig Park to the Parkes
Way overpass, and east west linkages across Northbourne Avenue;
 ii

 Street tree planting, including the adoption of water sensitive urban

design and pavement protection measures;
 Heritage management of Sydney and Melbourne Buildings and
surrounds;
 Public lighting consistent with Australian Standards; and
 Territory leadership and public investment.

Through natural growth alone the Greater City Area will, over the next seven
years, attract private sector investment in the order of $1,500 million
(Canberra Construction Snapshot September 2009). To support this growth,
and to enhance Civic as a modern and attractive city, options for public
capital investment in roads and public realm improvements have been
considered. Projects with relatively low cost and high benefits have been
prioritised into an action plan that incrementally achieves Commonwealth and
Territory planning objectives.

The business case for road network enhancements concentrates on eight road
improvement projects ranging in value from $0.5m to $5m. The probable order
of cost in 2009 dollars of Territory funded road improvements over the next
seven years is about $25.5m. An economic analysis of vehicle operating
costs, time costs and accident costs was undertaken, along with the financial
impacts of enhanced land release opportunities. The economic benefit of this
package of work at 7% discount rate over 30 years is more than seven times
the estimated $25.5m cost.

26 public realm enhancement projects have also been considered. In the

main, sequencing of priorities is linked to off site works being carried out as
part of private sector investment where the aim is to incrementally and cost
effectively upgrade verge footpaths, parklands, public lighting and pedestrian
malls. There are several exceptions to this approach, such as the verges of
London Circuit adjacent to Civic Square and Ainslie Place that are significant
‘place making’ undertakings that could be considered in the context of
landmark projects marking Canberra’s 2013 Centenary.

The Action Plan contributes to broader discussions that will lead to clearer
priorities and common goals. This shared direction will help determine the
level of public investment that is appropriate for the Greater Canberra City
area over coming years. At this stage, commitment to fund individual or
groups of projects remains subject to further consideration and decisions in
the context of future budgets.
 1

GREATER AREA OF CANBERRA CITY –

COORDINATED ACTION PLAN

1.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of this plan is to synthesise infrastructure and development issues
for the Greater City Area into a coordinated action plan that directs short, medium
and long term projects. The Plan’s objectives are to:
 Optimise the utilisation of existing transport and other infrastructure;
 Maintain existing high level of accessibility and functionality;
 Steadily achieve cohesive and robust urban design and public realm
improvements; and
 Underpin continued land releases and new development to support the
growth and changing needs of Canberra’s ‘vital heart’.

2.0 THE STUDY AREA

The study area is bounded to the north by Haig Park and to the south by Lake Burley
Griffin. Described in this Plan as the Greater City Area, it extends either side of
Northbourne Avenue, and includes the following parts of Inner North Canberra:
 Braddon Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 28, 29, 30, 52, 53 & 57
 City All sections
 Parkes north Sections 3 & 49
 Reid Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 & 33
 Turner Sections 24, 35, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45

Figure 1: Extent of study area

 2

3.0 GOAL AND DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES

A goal of the Canberra Plan is for Canberra City to become the dynamic heart
of the region. A preeminent and vibrant regional centre is fundamental to the
ACT's competitiveness, and to its ability to encourage investment, attract and
retain a skilled and diverse workforce, and promote cultural enrichment. As
the social and economic heart of the region it is important that the growth and
evolving urban form of Canberra City achieve fundamental urban design
principles of:

 Functional efficiency;
 Commercial viability and economic sustainability;
 Improved environmental health, particularly in regard to reducing the
ACT's overall carbon emissions;
 Visual coherency and meaning; and
 Social cohesion.

The principles are a standard part of the broad dialogue on city form and
urban design. To have any effect, more specific targets are needed that help
direct decisions, particularly in relation to land use, investment in transport
infrastructure and commitments to public realm improvements. This
Coordinated Action Plan is primarily concerned with integrating public
infrastructure enhancements with private sector investment in ways that
improve outcomes for the Territory as a whole.

4.0 TARGETS AND ACTIONS THAT ACHIEVE THE GOAL

Before discussion can progress to the detail of benefit cost outcomes and the
appropriateness of public investment, clear and measurable targets need to
be defined. While broadly considering capacity issues projected out to 2031
the plan specifically focuses on nine explicit targets for the seven years from
2010 to 2016.

The best available data has been used to establish trends, describe existing
conditions and create baselines from which specific targets can be monitored.
By building on the analysis of the current situation, targets for 2016 have been
determined through relevant studies and interpretations of development
outcomes that are likely to result from anticipated economic growth over the
next seven years.

As with the whole of the Greater Canberra City Coordinated Action Plan, the
targets are open for discussion and refinement through the period of public
consultation. Further, over the period of the Action Plan targets may be
added to respond to emerging issues.
 3

5.0 NINE TARGETS FOR A MORE SUSTAINABLE AND DIVERSE CITY

Target 1: By 2016 the number of people living in the Greater City Area
will double to about 10,400

Current Estimate
The estimate of residential population as at April 2008 is 5,200 people (refer
Table 1). Source: ABS Estimated Resident Population (ERP) Catalogue
number 3218.0.

The existing residential developments are shown in Figure 2.

Possible strategies
Covenants on land sales requiring development for residential uses,
conversion of under utilised office sites to residential, addition of student
housing at ANU and Reid CIT, and redeveloping and upgrading existing
Territory owned housing stock.

Residential development opportunities, which include hotel and serviced

apartments, that may possibly be achieved by 2016 are shown in Figure 2.
Projected impacts to 2016 on the study area’s residential population are
shown in Table 1.

Monitoring
ABS annual updates of the ABS ERP.

Table 1: Greater area of Canberra City - Residential populations

SUBURB SECTIONS RESIDENTS
2008 ABS Projection 2016
Braddon 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 28, 29, 2,050 3,000
30, 52, 53 & 57 (4050-2,000)

City All 1,000 4,400

Parkes north 3 & 49 0 300
Reid 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 & 33 850 1,000
(1650 – 800)
Turner 24, 35, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42, 1,300 1,700
43, 44, 45 (3,450-2,150)

Total 5,200 10,400

 4

Figure 2: Existing residential uses and possible 2016 additions

 5

Target 2: By 2016, total employment in the Greater Canberra City Area will
exceed 45,000.

Current Estimate
June 2006 employment estimate is 36,400 people. Refer Table 2. ABS 2006 Census.

Existing office locations are shown in Figure 3.

Possible strategies
Program land releases to meet the needs of Commonwealth departments, create
an ACT Government office complex, facilitate refurbishment / renewal of existing
office stock to achieve contemporary tenancy requirements and accommodate
growth with appropriate parking and access policies.

Possible future office locations generating more than 300,000m² of new office
space are shown in Figure 3. Projected impacts to 2016 on the study area’s
workforce are shown in Table 1.

Monitoring
ABS five yearly census. Three monthly real estate activity reports.

Table 2: Greater area of Canberra City - Employment

SUBURB SECTIONS EMPLOYMENT
2006 Projection 2016
Braddon 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 28, 29, 4,200 4,500
30, 52, 53 & 57

City All 29,800 37,800

Parkes north 3 & 49 30 1,000
Reid 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 & 33 670 750
Turner 24, 35, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42, 1,700 1,750
43, 44, 45

Total 36,400 45,800

 6

Figure 3: Existing office uses and possible 2016 additions

 7

Target 3: By 2016 the majority of people will get to work in Canberra

City by walking, riding, public transport or as a car passenger.

Current Estimate
Of people attending work the estimated mode split as at June 2006 is car driver, 56%
and all other modes, including car passengers, 44% (Source: ABS 2006 Census*). .
Refer Table 3 and Figures 4 and 5.

Possible strategies
Observe trend line in five years 2001 to 2006 where, for ACT residents, car by
driver has declined from 63% to 56%. This significant shift of 12% (of the
2006 base) will continue to be supported by increasing residential densities
within two kilometres of employment, continuing improvement to bus
frequency along higher density corridors, investment in bike paths and end of
trip facilities and improvements to the pedestrian path network.

Monitoring
Journey to work data from the five yearly ABS Census.

Table 3: Canberra City - Journey to work (ABS 2006 Census)

TRAVEL MODE 2006 2006 2001 2001
% %
Bus 3,549 14.1 1,538 9.0
Taxi 67 54
Car, as driver 12,429 49.5 9,552 55.7
Car, as passenger 2,956 11.8 2,240 13.1
Motorbike/scooter 334 184
Bicycle 677 2.7 421 2.5
Bus, car as passenger 177 178
Car as driver, car as passenger 62 106
Walked only 1,317 5.2 541 3.2
Did not go to work 2,785 11.1 1,940 11.3
All Other Methods 770 384
Sub total 25,123 17,138
Less people not at work 2,785 1,940
Total attending work 22,338 15,198
Car as driver 12,429 55.6 9,552 62.8

* Employed people not attending work are excluded in the graphical representations at
Figures 4 and 5. Note also that the data collection area is for Canberra City only, and not the
Greater Canberra City area.
 8

4% 3%
11%
4%

15%

63%

Bus Car as driver Car as passenger Walked only All other methods Bicycle

Figure 4: Journey to work 2001 (excludes ‘did not go to work’)

3%
5%
17%
6%

13%

56%

Bus Car as driver Car as passenger Walked only All other methods Bicycle

Figure 5: Journey to work 2006 (excludes ‘did not go to work’)

 9

Target 4: By 2016 external active frontages visible from the public realm
will increase by 50%

Current Estimate
At present active frontages (building entrances in view) are mainly located
around the retail area and in City Walk and the southern end of Northbourne
Avenue as depicted in Figure 6. Source Intelligent Space Partnership Ltd
(December 2006) Canberra Central Movement Study – movement economy
model and forecasting.

Possible strategies
Create a more robust planning and compliance framework that sets and achieves
outcomes that include:
 Shops, cafes and showroom displays that extend activity from the building to
the street;
 Clear glazing of street level windows;
 Multiple entrances serving smaller tenancies;
 Borrowed light from the shopfronts to illuminate the pedestrian verge; and
 Signs that are consistent, and that complement the architectural design.

Monitoring
Five yearly update of the 2006 Canberra Central Movement Study.
 10

Figure 6: External active frontages visible from the public realm (2006)
Intelligent Space Partnership (December 2006). Canberra central (pedestrian) movement
study. ACTPLA, Canberra
 11

Target 5: By 2016 17,500 publicly accessible parking spaces are

available in Greater Canberra City area 7 days a week.

Current Estimate
Table 4 describes the existing parking supply. Currently the total number of parking
spaces in Central Canberra is 24,467, consisting of 14,186 public spaces, and
10,281 tenant only spaces. Source: Integral Services Group Pty Ltd (May 2009).
2009 Parking Survey.
Sites that currently accommodate the bulk of the study area’s public parking
are shown in Figure 7.
Possible strategies
Finalise the long term locations for public parking and prepare indicative urban
design guidelines that address pedestrian movement, vehicle entry and
egress and future built form. Include these requirements as conditions for
future land sales.
Focus on key locations that generate day and night time use, and that are
economically viable.

Possible sites for integrated public parking are shown in Figure 7.

Monitoring
Annual parking surveys.

Table 4: Central Canberra parking supply and utilisation June 2009

SUBURB SECTIONS PUBLIC ON STREET PUBLIC OFF STREET TENANT OFF
STREET
Supply Vacant Occ. Supply Vac. Occ. Supply Vac. Occ.

Braddon 18, 19, 20, 329 66 79.9% 1,164 296 74.6% 1,609 554 65.6%
21, 22, 28,
30, 52,

City East 19 & 5 478 110 76.9% 5,767 2,119 63.3% 5,595 2,336 58.2%
City West All 755 172 77.2% 3,114 358 88.5% 1,887 517 72.6%
Parkes 3 & 49 140 135 3.5% 1,443 484 66.5% 29 21 27.6%
north
Reid 7, 8, 9, 10, 185 150 18.9% 317 32 89.9% 313 63 79.9%
11, 14 & 33

Turner 24, 35, 36, 364 57 84.3% 148 20 86.5% 848 333 60.7%
37, 39 41,42,
43, 44, 45
Total 24,467 2,251 690 74.8% 11,935 3,309 70.0% 10,281 3,818 62.8%

% of total 100% 8.3% 51.0% 40.7%

Source: Integral Services Group Pty Ltd (May 2009). 2009 Parking Survey
 12

Figure 7: Existing and possible 2016 additions to public parking

 13

Target 6: By 2016 a minimum 10% spare capacity in short stay (<3 hours)
public parking is evenly distributed across the Greater City Area between
12.00 noon – 2.00 pm on an ‘average traffic’ day.
Current Estimate
Current demand for short stay parking is summarised in Table 5. Existing
parking is illustrated in Figure 9.
Possible strategies
Finalise the long term locations for short stay public parking.
Focus on key locations that generate day and night time use, and adjust
parking charges as necessary in order to maintain the targeted vacancy rates.
Establish an integrated real time parking information system that better directs
people to available parking spaces.

Monitoring
Annual parking surveys.

Table 5: Supply and utilisation of short stay parking spaces (<3 hours)
SUBURB SECTIONS SUPPLY VACANT OCCUPANCY

Braddon 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 306 97 68.3%

28, 30, 52,
City East All 276 87 68.5%
City West All 447 98 78.1%
Parkes north 3 & 49 48 35 27.1%
Reid 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 73 36 50.7%
& 33
Turner 167 29 82.6%

Total 1,317 382 73.4%

Note: The 2009 survey of short stay spaces was conducted between 10.00am – 12.00 noon.

Figure 8: Example of real time

parking information signage that
assists with the efficient
utilisation of short stay parking.
 14

Figure 9: Possible 2016 additions to short stay public parking

 15

Target 7: By 2016 at least half the study area’s public realm is upgraded
to higher standards of safety, serviceability and appearance.

Current Estimate
The total extent of pedestrian pavement within the study area is currently 22.1
hectares (Intelligent Space Partnership Ltd 2006). Approximately 4.6
hectares, or 21% of this area, includes paving, lighting and furniture that is
constructed to standards described in the Canberra Central Design Manual.

Areas that have recently been refurbished through both Territory and private
sector projects are shown in Figure 10.
Possible strategies
Review and update the Canberra Central Design Manual to ensure that latest
standards are readily available to government agencies and private
practitioners involved in public realm development.

Prepare necessary master plans to ensure that off site works for all
developments and redevelopments are accurately scoped, and adequate
allowance for construction costs is included at the time of Development
Approval. A rolling capital works program should operate in parallel with
privately funded off site works to inject Territory investment into public realm
improvements that are critical in achieving completion within precincts, and
that can’t be addressed by other means.

Participate in cooperative projects with the private sector, including Canberra

CBD Ltd*.

An inventory of the design and construction status of City’s public realm is

shown in Figure 10.

Monitoring
Two yearly condition audits and public realm inventory.

* Canberra CBD Limited administers the Canberra City Centre Marketing and Improvements
Grant, raised through a levy on property owners in the City Centre. It is a not-for-profit
company limited by guarantee, charged with improving and marketing the City Centre as a
pre-eminent retail, lifestyle and commercial precinct in the ACT.
 16

Figure 10: Public realm inventory

 17

Target 8: By 2016 investment in road network improvements has

achieved the predicted traffic performance and resultant economic and
qualitative benefits.

Current Estimate
The 2009 performance criteria and 2016 projections extracted from the
Greater Civic Paramics micro simulation model are shown in Table 6.
(Source: SMEC Oct 2009).
Possible strategies
Progressively implement road network improvements that focus on new
connections and intersections, and aim to redistribute traffic more evenly
through the existing network. Seek to avoid creating additional traffic lanes at
the expense of the pedestrian environment.
Monitoring
Maintain the Paramics model and re calibrate and verify predictions against
actual network performance.

Table 6: Summary of Paramics traffic modelling (Source: SMEC Oct 2009)

Current Projections
Vehicle Description of global measurement
Class extracted from the Greater Civic 2009 Base 2016 do 2016 with
Paramics micro simulation model nothing network
improvements

Average delay per vehicle (sec) 568 987 718

CARS

Average speed [km/h] 19.5 10.1 15.43

Variance in average speed (improvements vs do nothing) +50%

Average delay per vehicle (sec) 816 1,450 998

BUSES

Average speed [km/h] 15.3 6.6 12.7

Variance in average speed (improvements vs do nothing) +93%

 18

Figure 11: Existing and possible 2016 road network changes

 19

Target 9: By 2016 two kilometres of new and upgraded shared use path is
constructed to improve bicycle and pedestrian access through areas east of
Northbourne Avenue, and to improve connections between City East and City
West.

Current Estimate
The existing path and cycle network is shown in Figure 12.

Possible strategies
In consultation with Pedal Power and other interested groups finalise a cycle path
master plan for areas east of Northbourne Avenue, and improve connections
between City East and City West. Include master plan requirements as off site
works associated with new development, and supplement with capital investment as
required.

Opportunities for improved cycle links are shown in Figure 12.

Monitoring
Two yearly condition audits and updated inventory. Annual cycle counts to monitor
changing demand and responses to improved facilities.
 20

Figure 12: Existing and possible 2016 additions and upgrades to pedestrian and
cycle links
 21

6.0 SUMMARY OF PROJECTED INVESTMENT TO 2016

Over the next seven years, through natural growth alone, the Greater City Area may
attract private sector investment in the order of $1,500 million (Canberra Construction
Snapshot September 2009). The location of this projected development is shown in
Figure 13.

To support this growth, and to enhance a modern and attractive city, options for
public capital investment in road network and public realm upgrading are proposed.

The business case for road network enhancements is described in Section 7. It

concentrates on 8 road improvement projects ranging in value from $0.5m to $5m.
The probable order of cost in 2009 dollars of Territory funded road improvements
over the next seven years is about $25.5m. An economic analysis of vehicle
operating costs, time costs and accident costs was undertaken, along with the
financial impacts of enhanced land release opportunities. The economic benefit of
this package of work at 7% discount rate over 30 years is more than seven times the
estimated $25.5m cost.

26 public realm enhancement projects have also been considered. The total value
of these projects in 2009 is about $70m. In the main, sequencing of priorities is
linked to off site works being carried out as part of private sector investment where
the aim is to incrementally and cost effectively upgrade road verges footpaths,
parklands, public lighting and pedestrian malls. There are several exceptions to this
approach, such as the verges of London Circuit adjacent to Civic Square and Ainslie
Place where more significant ‘place making’ undertakings could be considered in the
context of landmark projects marking Canberra’s 2013 Centenary.
 22

Figure 13: Projected investment to 2016

 23

7.0 THE BUSINESS CASE FOR ROAD NETWORK CHANGES

7.1 Proposed network changes

Consideration of road network changes is a response to developments anticipated to
occur in City over the coming years, and to the urban design aspirations of the
Commonwealth’s Griffin Legacy.

A total of 11 projects are described in Figure 14 and are summarised in Table 7.

Time critical decisions now affect seven projects where interdependencies exist with
the designs of significant private sector investment. These seven projects are:
Project 2: The extension of Edinburgh Avenue to Vernon Circle needs to be
resolved before City West Holdings finalises its designs for development on
Section 63. Given the importance of the connection, Edinburgh Avenue should be
constructed to the best possible gradient, to accommodate the needs of
pedestrians, buses and general traffic.
Project 4: Realign Watson Street to create a four way intersection with Barry Drive
and Kingsley Street. A decision about this proposal will influence the design of the
priority bus route into City from Belconnen.
Project 5: Resolution of the design of the busway. This investment decision is being
driven by the ANU’s development proposals for sites bounded by Kingsley, Hutton
and Childers Streets and Barry Drive.
Project 6: Optimise traffic performance within the existing 30m easement of
London Circuit.
Project 7: In association with the bus priority measures (Project 5) reconfigure Marcus
Clarke Street to four traffic lanes between Alinga Street and Barry Drive.
Project 8: The acceptability of left turns between Northbourne Avenue and Knowles
Place to be confirmed prior to the sale of the site as a hotel and public parking.
Project 9: Signalised intersection of Moore and Alinga Streets.

7.2 Performance of options

Tables 8 and 9 summarise the 2016 and 2031 Q-Paramics micro simulation
modelling results for the following scenarios:
Scenario 1: Increased destination based and through traffic but with no investment
in, nor changes to, the existing road network.
Scenario 2: Increased destination based and through traffic with the range of road
network modifications described as items 1 to 11 in Table 7. This represents the
incremental improvement option that maintains Vernon Circle as an arterial road.
Scenario 2a: As for Scenario 2 but substantial realignment of London Circuit.
Scenario 2b: As for Scenario 2a except that Edinburgh Avenue extension
terminates at Knowles Place and does not continue through to Vernon Circle.
Scenario 3: Increased destination based and through traffic with the range of road
network modifications described as the Griffin Legacy option that reduces Vernon
Circle to a local road.
 24

Figure 14: Summary of road network changes. Note that numbers correspond
to the numbering in Table 7.
Table 7: Possible road network changes
Item Description
1. Upgrade Constitution Avenue in line with
National Capital Plan Amendment 60. The
design utilises the 45m road easement
which currently poses a significant
impediment to the orderly development of
both Territory and Commonwealth land.
2. Create a protected left turn from Vernon
Circle into an extension of Edinburgh
Avenue. Similarly, allow a free left turn
from Edinburgh Avenue to Vernon Circle.
Modify London Cirt road camber on
approaches to Edinburgh Ave intersection
and address downstream drainage issues.
Remove the existing Commonwealth Ave /
London Cirt eastbound down ramp.
3. Left turns through the intersection of
Knowles Place with Edinburgh Ave.
Included as a development requirement for
Section 63.
4. Realign Watson Street to create a 4 way
signalised intersection with Barry Drive and
Kingsley Street.
Benefits Interdependencies Funding
 Completes the avenue of national  Construction of ASIO headquarters C’wealth
capital significance. and its off site works.
 Avoids the increasing constraints of  Traffic management during
encroaching development. construction.
 Avoids ad hoc and abortive work
 Removal of Territory owned parking
associated with adjacent new
on the alignment of the westbound
development.
carriageway.
 Much needed improvements to the
cycle and pedestrian connections
between City and Russell.
 Improves Sect 63 entry / egress.  Construction by City West Holdings of Territory
 Creates a drop off for north bound public parking within the Edinburgh
buses in City West. Ave easement.
 Creates development opportunity for
Block 20 Sect 63
25
 Assists with distributing traffic off  Edinburgh Ave construction over Developer
London Cirt. public car park. Sect 63
 Assists with entry egress at peak times.  Sect 63 development.
 Allows Turner traffic to turn right into  Resolution of busway. Territory
Barry Drive providing more direct  Resolution of parking and access to
connections to Belconnen. ANU’s Section 21 projects.
 Avoids attracting traffic into to
Northbourne / Barry Drive intersection.
Table 7: Possible road network changes (continued)
Item Description
5. Bus priority measures between Barry Drive
and City Interchange. Direct inbound and
outbound buses along the busway corridor
to Barry Drive. Alternative routes of Rudd
Street vs Alinga Streets to be tested as part
of the next design phase.
6*. Optimise lane capacity and verge conditions
within London Cirt based on the existing
30m road easement and proposed 40m
building face to building face for land
releases. For example, coordinating
signals, restrict kerbside parking in peak
times, bus signal priority and remove left
turn lanes to and from Northbourne Ave
north of City Hill.
7. Marcus Clarke Street upgraded to four
lanes.
8. Left turn in and left out to north eastern
intersection of Knowles Pace extension with
Northbourne.
* Plus verge works – refer to Items 17, 23 and 24 in Table 11: Possible public realm improvements.
Benefits
 Belconnen bus services get priority
between the arterial road and the
interchange.
 Four travel lanes in Marcus Clarke
Street created for general traffic.
 Improves bus priority.
 Improves traffic general flow.
 Improves verges and pedestrian
amenity and tree planting, particularly
adjacent to proposed land sales.
 Preserves kerb side parking for
convenient pick up and drop off.
 Improves traffic efficiency on the main
City West distributor road.
 Improves the dispersal of traffic to the
arterial road network.
 Provides direct access to future parking
and hotel from Northbourne Ave.
 Spreads traffic to ease congestion at
the intersection of London Cirt and
Northbourne Ave
Interdependencies and possible Funding
timing source
 Construction by ANU on the balance Territory
of Section 21 between the existing
student housing and Barry Drive.
 ACT Government office building on Territory
Block 24 Section 19 (south of
Assembly Building).
 Proposed hotel on eastern side of
Northbourne Avenue and residential
development on the western side.
 2010 program to reconstruct road
pavement.
26
 Construction of a dedicated bus Territory
priority route between the bus
interchange and Barry Drive as per
item 5 above.
 Development of hotel, serviced Sect 19 off
apartments and public parking on site works
Block 23 Section 19 that will be
released for sale in early 2010.
Table 7: Possible road network changes (continued)
Item Description
9. Additional bus stops for future City West
bus operations.
10. Redistribute traffic to Moore Street / West
Row between Barry Drive and London
Circuit by removing unrestricted pedestrian
priority adjacent to Alinga Street. Replace
with bus activated priority signals. Consider
signals at West Row intersection with
London Circuit.
11. Further investigation of left turn in and left
Benefits
 Improves bus services between the
interchange and City West.
 Improve pedestrian amenity adjacent to
proposed new development.
 Higher utilisation of existing roads
running parallel with Northbourne Ave
on the western side of City.
 Spread traffic to more intersections,
reducing congestion at the intersection
of Northbourne Ave / London Cirt.
 Improves access from the arterial roads
Interdependencies and possible Funding
timing source
 Review bus timetabling. Territory
 Sale of corner sites on Sections 19
and 63.
 City West Holdings development on
Section 63 and construction of
Edinburgh Ave extension.
 Maintenance of existing bus priority. Territory
 Management of kerb side parking.
 Release of the balance of Section 63. Territory
27

out to south western intersection of Knowles into City West.

Pace extension with Commonwealth  Settle long term traffic conditions for
 Subdivides the block to achieve its full
Avenue as part of future land release. development potential. Vernon Circle ie traffic calming vs
arterial road function.
 Longer term signalised intersection
where traffic is diverted from Vernon
Circle.
Table 8: 2016 traffic projections - Summary of Paramics micro simulation modelling
Current Projections
Vehicle Description of global measurement
Class extracted from the Greater Civic 2009 Base Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 2a Scenario 2b Scenario 3
Paramics micro simulation model 2009 demand 2016 Increased Incremental Scenario 2 but with Scenario 2 without Increase demand
and capacity. demand with 2009 improvements value major changes to Edinburgh Ave / and full Griffin
capacity. $25.5m London Cirt. Vernon Circ Legacy changes.
connection. Cost $100m.

Cars in the network at simulation close 8,580 14,903 11,046 11,093 10,605 17,044

Vehicles completing journey 37,713 32,237 37,777 37,458 36,406 26,516

Total path distance [km] 150,100 101,211 142,016 137,746 134,493 72,356

CARS
Total travel time [hr] 7,715 10,012 9,204 9,366 9,236 12,850

Average speed [km/hr] 19.5 10.1 15.4 14.7 14.6 5.6

Average delay per vehicle [s] 568 987 718 745 783 1,637
28

Vehicles completing journey 259 199 255 246 252 177

Total path distance [km] 749 449 754 732 781 327

Total travel time [hr] 49.1 67.8 59.4 57.2 54.7 75.3

BUSES
Average speed [km/hr] 15.3 6.6 12.7 12.8 14.3 8.3

Average delay per vehicle [s] 816 1,450 998 969 969 1,855
Table 9: 2031 traffic projections - Summary of Paramics micro simulation modelling
Current Projections
Vehicle Description of global measurement
Class extracted from the Greater Civic 2009 Base Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 2a Scenario 2b Scenario 3
Paramics micro simulation model 2009 demand 2031 Increased Incremental Scenario 2 but with Scenario 2 without Increase demand
and capacity. demand with 2009 improvements value major changes to Edinburgh Ave / and full Griffin
capacity. $25.5m London Cirt. Vernon Circ Legacy changes.
connection. Cost $100m.

Cars in the network at simulation close 8,580 15,581 15,617 14,379 12,329 17,220

Vehicles completing journey 37,713 30,849 37032 36606 37,528 26,126

Total path distance [km] 150,100 93,381 121,172 123,086 131,799 73,339

CARS
Total travel time [hr] 7,715 11,026 11,543 10,819 10,245 13,339

Average speed [km/hr] 19.5 8.5 10.5 11.4 12.9 5.4

Average delay per vehicle [s] 568 1,163 986 924 978 1,749
29

Vehicles completing journey 259 184 206 218 229 181

Total path distance [km] 749 391 564 607 672 411

Total travel time [hr] 49.1 74.8 71.5 65.5 61.3 84.5

BUSES
Average speed [km/hr] 15.3 5.2 7.9 9.3 11.0 4.9

Average delay per vehicle [s] 816 1,779 1,328 1,228 1,247 1,957
 30

7.3 Cost benefit analysis

7.3.1 Selected network for economic analysis
The network performance summarised in Tables 8 and 9 shows system wide
improvements in traffic operations for Scenarios 2, 2a and 2b. For economic
analysis, the links were limited to a smaller area to capture the direct effects
immediately adjacent to the interventions. The selected links for analysis
under Scenarios 1 and 2 are highlighted in Figures 15 and 16 respectively.

Figure 15: Selected links for economic analysis of Scenario 1 (growth and no
investment in road network)

Figure 16: Selected links for economic analysis of Scenario 2 (growth with
investment of $25.5m to optimise operation of the road network)
 31

7.3.2 Components of the economic analysis

The economic analysis was conducted over a 30 year evaluation period and
takes into account the following costs and benefits:
Construction and maintenance costs
The initial estimate of construction costs is $25.5m with expenditure spread
over the three years beginning in July 2010. Cyclic and annual maintenance
costs based on standard benchmarks are included in the model.
Vehicle operating cost
Vehicle operating cost (VOC) is a function of kilometres travelled, model
coefficients for vehicle types, all day average link speed and travel time savings.

Accident cost
Accident cost (AC) increases with the number of kilometres travelled. An
average crash cost per million kilometres travelled by road type is included in
the model.

Environmental cost (EC)

The NSW RTA Economic Analysis Manual includes monetary values for
environmental externalities and these are mainly shown as functions of
vehicle kilometres travelled.

Estimation of benefits
The expected benefits achieved from implementing Scenario 2 is estimated by
calculating the cost savings gained with the projects in place compared to the
operation of the network without the optimisation projects.

7.3.3 Summary of economic indicators

To take account of the change in monetary values over time, the estimated
annual costs and benefits have been discounted to 2010, the base year of the
evaluation. Discount rates of 4%, 7% and 10% were used to calculate the
economic indicators that are used to determine project feasibility. These
indicators are Net Present Value (NPV) and Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR).

The results of the economic assessment of Scenario 2 are summarised in

Table 10. The estimated present value of benefits greatly outweighs the
present value of costs in any of the assumed discount rates. This results in
high NPV’s and BCR’s with estimated results of $158.5m and 7.63,
respectively, using a 7% discount rate.

Table 10: Economic indicators for Scenario 2

Discount Present value of Present value of Net present Benefit
rate costs benefits value cost
($,000) ($,000) ($,000) ratio
4% $25,346 $240,245 $214,899 9.48
7% $23,937 $182,520 $158,583 7.63
10% $22,775 $142,899 $120,124 6.27
 32

7.4 London Circuit and future bus priority measures

7.4.1 Background
Currently London Circuit has a minimum reservation width of 30 metres. The
outside kerb line is essentially set by adjacent leases and privately owned
buildings. Adjustments to the inside kerb are controlled by the existence of
the following buildings and engineering structures:
 City Police Station
 Reserve Bank Building
 North Building
 South Building
 Commonwealth Avenue overpass of the southern section of London Cirt.

There have been suggestions that London Circuit road easement should be widened
from 30 to 40 metres, to accommodate additional lanes that would take a portion of
through traffic resulting from downgrading Vernon Circle. Proposals to widen London
Circuit to substantially increase its capacity to carry through traffic result in high
financial and economic costs, adverse impacts on heritage listed buildings, loss of
existing trees, deleterious effects on road network performance and reductions in
pedestrian amenity.

A more modest scheme that supports setbacks for new buildings to generally
widen London Circuit’s outside verge is included in this Action Plan. An
asymmetrical road cross section with an outside verge width of about 10m
allows a stronger tree planting theme to be established, and adds flexibility in
accommodating off road cycling.

7.4.2 Functions of London Circuit

Functions that must be accommodated in any future design options for London
Circuit include the following:
 Urban distributor road connecting the arterial roads to long and short stay
car parking destinations;
 Urban distributor road linking local roads to the arterial road system;
 The main north south bus route connecting City Interchange to
Commonwealth Avenue (the eastern sector between East Row and
Edinburgh Avenue);
 Incoming and outgoing bus stops between Commonwealth Avenue and the
bus interchange;
 Pedestrian connections and convenient pedestrian crossing points;
 The space between Ainslie Avenue and Civic Square, that connects
Canberra’s cultural attractions to the city’s retail and commercial hub; and
 Short stay parking and loading zones to support ‘front loading’ businesses
that address London Circuit.

7.4.3 Design options

The following three design options have been considered and modelled using
Paramics Micro Simulation Modelling. The description of the road cross
section refers generally to the configuration of the northern segment running
clockwise between Edinburgh Avenue and Constitution Avenue.
 33

Design Option 1: The existing situation

 Generally two lanes in each direction
 Narrow median island with separate right turn lanes to:
- Constitution Avenue.
- Akuna Street.
- Northbourne Avenue from both directions.
- Gordon Street and the car park entry opposite.
- East Row (bus only).
 Left turn lanes to:
- Commonwealth Avenue.
- Constitution Avenue and the opposing car park access.
- Northbourne Avenue southbound.
- East Row (bus only).
- Akuna Street.
 Left turn lanes from:
- Commonwealth Avenue.
- Northbourne Avenue.
 Indented / additional kerbside bus stops adjacent to:
- Youth Hostel (clockwise).
- Waldorf Apartments (clockwise).
- Hobart Place (clockwise).
- ACT Legislative Assembly Building (anti clockwise).
- Reserve Bank Building (anti clockwise).
 Indented parking adjacent to:
- Baileys Corner.
- Between Petrie Plaza and Akuna Street (clockwise).
- Ausaid Building.
- NICTA Building between Gordon Street and Farrell Place.
 Inside lane becomes right turn only into Edinburgh Avenue with single anti
clockwise through lane.
 Reduces to single lane in each direction on the western side of
Commonwealth Avenue bridge to merge with off ramps.
 Narrowest verge width of three metres (adjacent to Sydney and Melbourne
Buildings) with a general width in excess of six metres.
 No dedicated cycle lanes.
Advantages
 Provides reasonable bus priority and bus stops between the City
Interchange clockwise to Constitution Avenue.
 Reasonable pedestrian amenity and safe crossing to median refuge.
 Opportunities for active building frontages with access to kerb side parking.
 Adequate verge widths for future pedestrian volumes.
Challenges
 Maintaining bus priority as traffic volumes increase over time.
 Correcting the frontages of the North and South Buildings and establishing
more consistent street tree planting.
 Accommodating on and off road cycling.
 34

Design Option 2: As for Option 1 but with enhanced bus priority on

approaches to signalised intersections and removal of left turn lanes to
and from Northbourne Avenue.
 Bus signals and approach lanes at:
- Akuna Street
- Constitution Avenue
- Edinburgh Avenue
 Bike path in the outside verge between Constitution and University Avenues.
Advantages
 Secure long term bus priority between the City Interchange and City West.
 Connects proposed Constitution Avenue cycle path with City West.
Challenges
 Achieving real improvements in bus operations.

Design Option 3: Equivalent five lanes – three clockwise / two anti clockwise
 Three lanes in clockwise direction with kerb side bus lane.
 Two lanes anti clockwise.
 No median island with right turns made from inside travel lanes.
 Narrowest verge width of three metres (Sydney and Melbourne Buildings).
 No dedicated cycle lanes.
Advantages
 Future bus operating arrangements are secured.
Challenges
 Achieving real improvements in bus operations.
 Reduction in pedestrian safety other than at signalised intersections.

Design Option 4: Two lanes in each direction with five metre wide
median with right turn lanes and pedestrian refuge
 Two lanes in each direction
 Five metre wide median island with right turn lanes as per Option 1.
 Left turn lanes as per Option 1.
 Narrowest verge width of three metres (adjacent to Sydney and Melbourne
Buildings) with a general width in excess of four metres.
 No dedicated cycle lanes.
Advantages
 More formal expression of an ‘urban boulevard’ as proposed in the
Commonwealth’s Griffin Legacy.
Challenges
 Cost
 Achieving acceptable service time for bus operations.
 Maintaining reasonable levels of road network functionality for general traffic.
 35

Figure 17: Existing configuration of London Circuit and surrounding roads

Figure 18: Schematic design of London Circuit and surrounding roads

 36

7.5 Vernon Circle and City Hill

7.5.1 City Hill’s symbolic role

From 2003 to 2007 the National Capital Authority’s (NCA) Griffin Legacy program.
culminated in National Capital Plan Amendment 59 (Nov 2006). The objective for
City Hill as described in Amendment 59 is:
The precinct should take its rightful place as the municipal heart of central
Canberra. City Hill Precinct will be reclaimed as Griffin’s symbolic and
geographical centre for City – a corner completing the National Triangle as a
gateway to the Central National Area and a hub connecting significant main
avenues and vistas.
The practical effect of implementing Amendment 59 is to create a built edge to
a traffic calmed Vernon Circle, with building frontages addressing City Hill.
Downgrading Vernon Circle’s role as the main north south arterial road raises
obvious questions about impacts on traffic, and the environmental and social
costs of inducing quite severe traffic congestion in order that people will gain
better pedestrian access to City Hill.

The tension between east west pedestrian movement and efficient north south
traffic movement has been at the centre of discussions about Central
Canberra since the 1950’s, as is briefly described in the following section.

7.5.2 1950’s modifications to Griffin’s plan

In 1957 a British planning expert, Professor Sir William Holford, was invited
to Canberra to give his views on the future development of the city. In his
report Observations on the future development of Canberra Holford raised
concerns with Griffin’s proposal to terminate Northbourne and
Commonwealth Avenues at London Circuit, and require that through traffic
contend with the additional intersections and travel distance through
London Circuit in order to move between areas now commonly known as
Canberra’s inner south and inner north.

Holford argued that Northbourne Avenue was the ‘….natural line for the city’s
main thoroughfare’ and that London Circuit made it ‘….difficult for traffic, and
altogether unsuitable for through traffic.’ Holford’s amended plan for Canberra
connected Northbourne Avenue to Commonwealth Avenue via Vernon Circle.
A parallel decision reduced Griffin’s 200 foot (approx 60m) London Circuit
road easement (matching that of Northbourne Avenue) to a road reservation
of 100 feet (approx 30m).

Within a year of his report, and under the governance of the newly created
National Capital Development Commission (NCDC), Holford’s
recommended road infrastructure was being constructed. The 60,000
vehicles a day that currently travel along the Northbourne / Commonwealth
Avenue corridor suggest that Holford was prescient in his concern.
 37

THE BUSINESS CASE FOR PUBLIC REALM INVESTMENT

8.1 Proposed public realm enhancements
26 public realm enhancement projects have also been considered. The total value
of these projects in 2010 is about $70m. The projects are summarised in Figure 20
and Table 11. A number of inter dependencies with private sector development are
identified and recommended funding priority and sequencing is generally linked to
off-site works being carried out as part of private sector investment.

The aim is to incrementally and cost effectively upgrade verges, footpaths,

parklands, public lighting and pedestrian malls to achieve consistency and
safety, and to assist with ongoing maintenance. This integrated approach will
be assisted if the Territory is proactive in preparing its master plans ahead of
development pressures. While the Canberra Central Design Manual provides
some level of guidance, more detailed master plans are necessary to properly
resolve the range of interface issues that arise with the integration of multiple
development stakeholders and project delivery methods.

For the most part, the success of the public realm enhancements relies on
replicating consistent outcomes, and properly resolving interfaces between
one project and another. Such projects are illustrated in Figures 21 to 23.

Several projects have the potential to deliver more than standard solutions,
and present opportunities to create unique and high quality civic spaces.
Foremost amongst these is the precinct extending from the Legislative
Assembly Building, along both sides of London Circuit and across
Northbourne Avenue to the Melbourne Building. Opportunities for this precinct
are illustrated in Figures 24 – 26.

A clear vision for the precinct, investment in hotels and office building on either
side of the North and South Buildings respectively, and an appropriate
development budget would attract significant interest in a major urban design
competition to transform this area.

8.2 Priorities and sequencing of public realm improvements

Optimising existing investment is the goal of the public realm improvements.
Objectives considered in prioritising projects include:
1. Rectifying immediate safety concerns such as trip hazards, narrow and
poorly aligned kerb crossings and poor lighting. Include low cost / high
return improvements such as removing extraneous bollards and signs,
and eliminating unnecessary obstructions to pedestrian movement.
2. Linking projects with significant adjacent upgrading to complete a
‘precinct’ to a uniform standard as suggested in Figure 19.
3. Robust ‘future proofing’ that avoids premature demolition to retro fit
services. Aim to fulfil the design life of the improvements.
4. Stakeholder needs and strategies to manage potential negative impacts
such as disturbance to existing businesses during construction.
5. Linking to a city wide ‘safe routes’ strategy where increasing pedestrian
demand is supported by new activity and public realm improvements.
 38

Figure 19: Conceptual plan of coordinated implementation

Unlike proposed road works that have well established protocols for economic
analysis, investment in public realm improvements has benefits that are
difficult to quantify. These outcomes include:
 Environmental improvements;
 Enhanced business opportunities;
 Increased land values and rates revenues;
 Improved public safety;
 Achievement of the Territory’s land release program;
 Facilitation of possible land mark project(s) as a contribution to Canberra’s
centenary;
 Enhancement of civic pride and social wellbeing; and
 Improved inter-city competitiveness to attract new investment.
 39

Figure 20: Summary of public realm improvements. Note that numbers

correspond to the numbering in Table 12.
Table 11: Possible public realm improvements
Item Description Benefits Interdependencies Funding Evaluation*
1. Bunda Street from Northbourne Ave  Upgrade City’s main retail and  Possible redevelopment of Territory 1 ■■■
to Petrie Plaza. Match the materials entertainment street to a modern and Centrepoint Building. 09/10 2 ■■■
and finish with work on the eastern uniform standard. 3 ■■■
 Possible improvements to Design &
verge, previously completed as part  Improve pedestrian access. 4 ■■■
of Canberra Centre redevelopment. Veterans Park associated construction
 Standardise furniture in line with the with adjacent office 5 ■■■
agreed design manual. redevelopment. High
 Eliminate public safety issues caused by
irregular western verge paving levels.
 Upgrade carriageway and verge lighting
to Australian Standards.

2. Glebe Park pavement replacement.  Improve public safety and presentation of Nil Territory 1 ■■■
City’s premier park. 09/10. 2 ■■
 Achieve required slip resistance of paving 3 ■■■
Design &
to improve public safety. construction 4 ■■
 Support service vehicle access and 5 ■■
reduce maintenance costs.
40

Medium
 Rectify drainage problems.
3. Upgrade surrounds of Sydney  Better presentation of the historic Sydney  Resolution with lessees of Territory 1 ■■■
Building. Building to East Row, City Walk and to building downpipes and 09/10 2 ■■
Northbourne Avenue. . stormwater connections. Design only 3 ■■
 Repairs and interfaces to 4 ■
columns and edge pavers 5 ■■■
that sit within private leases.
Medium
 Agree a Conservation
Management Plan.
*Explanation of numbered criteria and evaluation matrix
Evaluation criteria Criteria ranking method
1. Rectify immediate safety concerns such as trip hazards. ■■■ Fully achieves evaluation criterion.
2. Link projects with a significant adjacent upgrading to complete a ‘precinct’. ■■ Partly achieves evaluation criterion.
3. Robust ‘future proofing’ that avoids premature demolition to retro fit services. ■ Is capable of achieving evaluation criterion.
4. Stakeholder need, and strategies to manage potential negative impacts. X Fails to address criteria.
5. Link to a city wide pedestrian ‘safe routes’ strategy.
Table 11 (continued): Possible public realm improvements
Item Description Benefits Interdependencies Funding Evaluation*
4. Upgrade surrounds of Melbourne  Better presentation of the historic As for 3 above. Territory 1 ■■■
Building. Melbourne Building to West Row, Alinga 09/10 2 ■■
Street and to Northbourne Avenue. Design only 3 ■■
4 ■■■
5 ■■■
High
5. Upgrade City Walk between Ainslie  Improve pedestrian amenity.  Possible changes to the Territory 1 ■■■
Avenue and Akuna Street.  Improve access to business frontages. existing David Jones 10/11 2 ■■
frontage. Design only 3 ■■
 Eliminate a significant ongoing
maintenance liability. 4 ■■■
5 ■■■
High

6 Mort Street between London Cirt and  Establish the long term design of the  Off site works by Territory 1 ■■
Bunda Street, excluding the western street given the changing land uses. developers. 2 ■■
verge of East Row adjacent to Design only 3 ■■
 Pedestrian and cycle infrastructure  Vehicle verge crossings and
Sydney Building. 4 ■■
41

review. parking.
5 ■■
 Better coordinate developer’s off site
works. Medium
7. Upgrade City West Park  Improve pedestrian amenity.  Resolve cross section of Canberra 1 ■■■
 Improve access to Canberra House London Cct. CBD Ltd. 2 ■■
shopping arcade.  Future upgrading of 09/10 3 ■■
 Eliminate a significant ongoing Canberra House. Design & 4 ■■■
maintenance liability. construction 5 ■■■
High
*Explanation of numbered criteria and evaluation matrix
Evaluation criteria Criteria ranking method
1. Rectify immediate safety concerns such as trip hazards. ■■■ Fully achieves evaluation criterion.
2. Link projects with a significant adjacent upgrading to complete a ‘precinct’. ■■ Partly achieves evaluation criterion.
3. Robust ‘future proofing’ that avoids premature demolition to retro fit services. ■ Is capable of achieving evaluation criterion.
4. Stakeholder need, and strategies to manage potential negative impacts. X Fails to address criteria.
5. Link to a city wide pedestrian ‘safe routes’ strategy.
Table 11 (continued): Possible public realm improvements
Item Description Benefits Interdependencies Funding Evaluation*
8. Alinga Street between Marcus Clarke  Improve the pedestrian environment,  Resolve traffic management Territory 1 ■■■
Street and West Row / Moore Street. particularly along southern verge. between Barry Drive and Determine 2 ■■■
 Eliminate a significant ongoing London Cct along Moore St funding 3 ■■
maintenance liability with removal of the and West Row. priority. 4 ■■■
overhead pedestrian bridge.  Alternative fire access for 5 ■■■
 Upgrade carriageway and pedestrian the ACT Health building to
lighting to Australian Standards. allow removal of the level 1 High
pedestrian bridge that is
 Complete the pedestrian and cycle
currently in disrepair.
connection between Childers Street
(ANU) and Northbourne Ave
9. Marcus Clarke Street verge on south  Complete lighting and pedestrian  Extension of parking Territory 1 ■■
eastern side of car park structure. improvements along Marcus Clarke structure. Determine 2 ■■■
Street between Rudd and Allsop Streets.  Resolve levels adjacent to funding 3 ■■
 Eliminate a significant ongoing outdoor café. priority. 4 ■■
maintenance liability.  Integrate with design of 5 ■■■
existing construction project High
42

on Bl 8 Sect 68.
10. Moore Street between Barry Drive to  Improve the pedestrian connection and  Resolution of traffic Territory 1 ■■
London Cirt public safety as a main north / south link management between Barry 2 ■
from Turner to City. Drive and London Cct along Determine 3 ■■
Moore Street and West Row. funding 4 ■■
 Resolution of bus priority priority.
5 ■■
lanes from Barry Drive to
City Interchange. Medium

*Explanation of numbered criteria and evaluation matrix

Evaluation criteria Criteria ranking method
1. Rectify immediate safety concerns such as trip hazards. ■■■ Fully achieves evaluation criterion.
2. Link projects with a significant adjacent upgrading to complete a ‘precinct’. ■■ Partly achieves evaluation criterion.
3. Robust ‘future proofing’ that avoids premature demolition to retro fit services. ■ Is capable of achieving evaluation criterion.
4. Stakeholder need, and strategies to manage potential negative impacts. X Fails to address criteria.
5. Link to a city wide pedestrian ‘safe routes’ strategy.
Table 11 (continued): Possible public realm improvements
Item Description Benefits Interdependencies Funding Evaluation*

11. Footpath and drainage along the  Support pedestrian movement along the  Path width & tree impacts. Territory 1 ■■■
eastern verge of Northbourne major north south corridor. 2 ■■■
 Kerb crossing, drainage and Determine 3 ■■■
Avenue.
Disability Discrimination Act funding 4 ■■■
(DDA) compliance. priority.
5 ■■■
High
12. Master plan for footpath, lighting and  Better understand the long term design  Off site works by Territory 1 ■■
drainage to verges of Mort St of the street given the rapidly changing developers. 2 ■■
Braddon. land uses. Determine 3 ■■
 Vehicle verge crossings and funding 4 ■■
 Better coordinate developer’s off site parking. priority.
5 ■■
works.
Design only
High
13. Master plan for footpath, lighting and  Better understand the long term design  Off site works by Territory 1 ■■
drainage to verges of Lonsdale of the street given the rapidly changing developers. 2 ■■
Street Braddon. land uses. Determine 3 ■■■
43

 Vehicle verge crossings and funding 4 ■■■

 Better coordinate developer’s off site parking. priority.
5 ■■■
works.
Design only
High
14. City east recreational cycle route and  Encourage cycling and walking to  Sight lines to basements at Territory 1 ■■■
pedestrian improvements from Haig support mode shift targets. vehicle verge crossings. Determine 2 ■■■
Park to the Parkes Way overpass via  Eliminate ‘cycling black spots’ that exist funding 3 ■■■
Torrens and Cooyong Streets. along Torrens Street. priority. 4 ■■■
5 ■■■
High
*Explanation of numbered criteria and evaluation matrix
Evaluation criteria Criteria ranking method
1. Rectify immediate safety concerns such as trip hazards. ■■■ Fully achieves evaluation criterion.
2. Link projects with a significant adjacent upgrading to complete a ‘precinct’. ■■ Partly achieves evaluation criterion.
3. Robust ‘future proofing’ that avoids premature demolition to retro fit services. ■ Is capable of achieving evaluation criterion.
4. Stakeholder need, and strategies to manage potential negative impacts. X Fails to address criteria.
5. Link to a city wide pedestrian ‘safe routes’ strategy.
Table 11 (continued): Possible public realm improvements
Item Description Benefits Interdependencies Funding Evaluation*
15. Upgrade Odgers Lane (Melbourne  Create a distinctive public realm  Agreement of adjacent Territory 1 ■■
Building). experience. property owners to orient Determine 2 ■■
 Improve public safety. activity to the laneway. funding 3 ■■
 Add value to the surrounding heritage  Market testing of demand priority. 4 ■■
buildings. for food and entertainment 5 ■■
 Meet the growing need for entertainment, in the space.
food and culture in City West. Medium
 Waste management, sub-
station, drainage & lighting.

16. Northbourne Avenue median  Reinforce the experience of arriving in  Upgrading Sydney and Territory 1 ■
between Sydney and Melbourne Civic. Melbourne Buildings. 2 ■■
Buildings. Include paving, lighting,  Complement investment in Sydney and  Development of Determine
funding 3 ■
furniture. Consider long term Melbourne Buildings. Northbourne Avenue / 4 ■
opportunities for the bus priority  Complement investment in London London Circuit corner sites priority.
5 ■
measures, width of verges and the Circuit adjacent to proposed on Sections 63 and 19.
options for right turning vehicles. development sites either side of Low
A possible landmark project. Northbourne Avenue.
44

17. London Circuit Stage 1 from  Better connect Civic Square to Ainslie  Long term road cross Territory 1 ■■■
Northbourne Ave to the southern Avenue and City’s core. section for London Cct. 2 ■■■
boundary of Ainslie Ave. Determine
 Improve pedestrian movement along the  Private sector investment in 3 ■■
funding
A possible landmark project for western and southern verge of London the hotel, serviced priority. 4 ■■■
Canberra’s Centenary. Cirt. apartments and public 5 ■■■
 Better connect new development on the parking on Bl 23 Sect 19.
High
southern side of London Cirt with Sydney  Tour coach lay over area.
Building.  Link with future intentions
for Civic Square.
*Explanation of numbered criteria and evaluation matrix
Evaluation criteria Criteria ranking method
1. Rectify immediate safety concerns such as trip hazards. ■■■ Fully achieves evaluation criterion.
2. Link projects with a significant adjacent upgrading to complete a ‘precinct’. ■■ Partly achieves evaluation criterion.
3. Robust ‘future proofing’ that avoids premature demolition to retro fit services. ■ Is capable of achieving evaluation criterion.
4. Stakeholder need, and strategies to manage potential negative impacts. X Fails to address criteria.
5. Link to a city wide pedestrian ‘safe routes’ strategy.
Table 11 (continued): Possible public realm improvements
Item Description Benefits Interdependencies Funding Evaluation*
18. Northbourne Avenue tree replacement  Strategic replacement of ageing trees  Implementation of the Urban Territory 1 ■■■
program. along major entry road. Forest Replacement 2 ■
strategy. 3 ■
4 ■■
5 ■
Medium
19. Civic Square. Integrated with 17  Create a more inviting, functional,  As for 15 above plus: Territory 1 ■
above to create a possible landmark active and comfortable public space.  Present more activity to the 2 ■■
project for Canberra’s Centenary. Determine
Square from the Assembly funding 3 ■
Potential as a national design Building and CMaG. 4 ■
competition. priority.
 Access to Canberra Theatre 5 ■
and laneway design on the
Low
Square’s western edge.
 ACT Government office.
20. Barry Drive northern verge.  Accommodate pedestrian and cyclist  Development within the set Territory 1 ■■■
volumes currently generated from back zone of existing Determine 2 ■■
45

Turner and the Sullivans Creek trunk leases. funding 3 ■■

cycle route.  Incoming bus lane on Barry priority. 4 ■■
 Connections through to Cooyong Drive. 5 ■■
Street.
Medium

21. Safety audits and urban design  Improved waste management.  Potential lessee investment Territory 1 ■■■
improvements to Bible Lane,  Public safety improvements. in building upgrades. Determine 2 ■■
Tocumwal Lane and Verity Lane.  Tennant coordination of funding 3 ■■
waster services. priority. 4 ■■
5 ■■
High
*Explanation of numbered criteria and evaluation matrix
Evaluation criteria Criteria ranking method
1. Rectify immediate safety concerns such as trip hazards. ■■■ Fully achieves evaluation criterion.
2. Link projects with a significant adjacent upgrading to complete a ‘precinct’. ■■ Partly achieves evaluation criterion.
3. Robust ‘future proofing’ that avoids premature demolition to retro fit services. ■ Is capable of achieving evaluation criterion.
4. Stakeholder need, and strategies to manage potential negative impacts. X Fails to address criteria.
5. Link to a city wide pedestrian ‘safe routes’ strategy.
Table 11 (continued): Possible public realm improvements
Item Description Benefits Interdependencies Funding Evaluation*
22. Bunda Street from Ainslie Avenue to  Continue Bunda Street as the main  Proposed redevelopment of Territory 1 ■■
Binara Street. pedestrian / shopping street through redundant office building at Determine 2 ■■
City East. Bl 1 Sect 52 to residential funding 3 ■
 Extend into the Binara / Allara Streets uses. priority. 4 ■
connection across Parkes Way to 5 ■
Commonwealth Park.
Medium
23. London Circuit Stage 2 – City West,  Improve pedestrian movement along  Long term road cross Territory 1 ■■
Northbourne Ave to Farrell Place. the western and southern verge of section for London Cct. Determine 2 ■■
London Cct.  Private sector residential funding 3 ■
 Better connect new development on the development on block 13 priority. 4 ■■
southern side of London Cct with section 63. 5 ■■
Sydney Building.
Medium
24. London Circuit Stage 3 – City East,  Improve pedestrian movement along  Long term road cross Territory 1 ■
Ainslie Ave to Constitution Ave. the western and southern verge of section for London Cct. Determine 2 ■
London Cct.  ACT Government office funding 3 ■
 Better connect new development on the block Bl 24 Sect 19.. priority. 4 ■
46

southern side of London Cct with 5 ■

Sydney Building.
Low
25. Marcus Clarke Street between Allsop  Improve pedestrian access between  ANU’s development option Territory / 1 ■
Street and University Avenue including Barry Drive and City West. over the City West bus developer off 2 ■
University Avenue between Marcus layover. site works 3 ■
Clarke and Childers Streets.  ANU’s development on the 4 ■
car park between University 5 ■
Ave. and School of Music.
Low
26. Childers Street between William  Complete the connection of the  ANU’s development on the Territory 1 ■
Herbert Place and University Avenue. Childers Street Arts Heart to the ANU’s car park between University Determine 2 ■
School of Art. Ave. and School of Music. funding 3 ■
 Future of the Federal Court priority. 4 ■
(Family Court). 5 ■
Low
 47

Existing

Proposed

Figure 21: Before and after images of Project 1 – Bunda Street improvements.
 48

Existing

Proposed

Figure 22: Before and after images of Project 11 – Footpath improvements and
drainage along the eastern side of Northbourne Avenue.
 49

Existing

Proposed

Figure 23: Before and after images of Project 14 – City East recreational cycle
route and pedestrian improvements.
 50

Existing

Proposed

Figure 24: Before and after images of Project 16 – Improvements to the

Northbourne Avenue median between Sydney and Melbourne Buildings.
 51

Existing

Proposed

Figure 25: Before and after images of Project 17 London Circuit improvements
adjacent to the ACT Legislative Assembly.
 52

Existing

Proposed

Figure 26: Before and after images of Project 17 London Circuit improvements
adjacent to Canberra Museum and Gallery
 53

9.0 MIXED USE OUTCOMES

9.1 Advantages of mixed use development

Mixed Use Development is simply defined as a single project containing two
or more occupancy types of residential, office, or retail. Such developments
should limit any single use, with the dominant use varying between office,
residential and retail depending on the location and specific objectives for
the site.

Mixed use developments are a traditional form of urban development that

reduce peak time demands for transport and parking. Such developments
create variety and the ‘finer grain’ to a city that might otherwise be dominated
by single tenant office buildings and large footprint retail. The concept equally
applies to residential developments where active ground floor uses create
opportunities for small scale businesses, and deliver a sense of life and
interest, that is otherwise absent when the street interface is limited to a single
secure foyer of an apartment building.

9.2 Incentives that support mixed use development

Neither mixed use office, nor mixed use residential developments, have been a
feature of development in the Greater City Area. Changes to planning policies
applying to the CZ3 Services Zone in Braddon were recently amended in order
to stimulate mixed use development. Policies introduced in early 2008 stipulate
that plot ratios do not exceed 2:1 (200%) or 3:1 (300%) where at least 1:1
(100%) of the total plot ratio is residential use. In the case of the Braddon
commercial area, commitment to mixed use may therefore permit a 50%
increase in development opportunity.

Merit criteria under this mixed use policy are:

 Ensure that the intensity of residential use does not restrict provision of
commercial uses;
 Does not cause detrimental impacts, including overshadowing and
excessive scale; and
 Reflect the service trades character of the area.

The variety and activity that can be generated through mixed use
development is depicted in the indicative design of public car parking shown
at Figure 27.
 54

Figure 27: Concept design of a mixed use public car park including residential,
smaller floor plate office and local service retail. Restaurants, cafes, personal
services and child and health care can also be included.
Source: National Capital Authority 2009. Urban Design Guidelines. Illustration supplied by Fender
Katsalidis Architects Pty Ltd.
 55

10. ACHIEVING LONG TERM RESULTS

10.1 Stakeholders and decision making

A number of groups and individuals need to participate in the processes of
growth and change in the Greater City Area, and will input into the planning
and implementation of projects. The various interests are complex and will
evolve through the implementation of this Action Plan. A snapshot of the
range of stakeholders is shown in Figure 28.

Throughout the life of this Action Plan stakeholder engagement aimed at

reviewing and defining common goals will help deliver outcomes, and
minimise adverse responses.

10.2 Leadership and public investment

City is a major part of Griffin’s Canberra, the planned capital of Australia. It is
also the cultural heart of the ACT local community, and the regional centre
serving south eastern Australia.

Private investment in the study area over the next seven years will be in the
order of $1.5b. Much of the public infrastructure supporting this investment
has been in place for almost 40 years. Paths, lighting and the design of the
open spaces need to be adapted to increasing usage levels and changes in
the urban character. Areas that were peripheral to the city are now integral to
the city’s urban form, and need to link into a unified whole.

In order to refresh the look and functionality of the study area and leverage off
the significant private sector investment, public leadership in alliances that
give effect to large scale civic improvements is essential.

Responsibility for coordinating and integrating multiple projects naturally falls

on the Territory. This leadership responsibility is necessitated by the fact that
the Territory has a higher long term commitment to the public realm than most
commercial investors, and assumes ongoing responsibility for management
and ongoing maintenance.

10.3 Implementation
The plan as it currently stands is based on the knowledge that exists at the
start of 2010. Estimates are made about completion dates for major private
sector developments but in reality, those dates may slip by a year or two,
depending on leasing commitments, building costs and other investment
conditions. The programming of Territory funded works needs to be
sufficiently flexible to alter the sequencing in line the uncertainties impacting
on the total program. In practice, the delivery of each phase of the plan will
clarify the detail of subsequent phases.
 56

Master planning for a number of higher priority projects at the outset provides
opportunities to accelerate detailed design of alternative projects, in response
to the roll out of new private investment.

Inherent uncertainty around long term investment decisions, and the need for
flexibility, demonstrate a need for monitoring and overall control. A clear
understanding about the implications of different outcomes helps with
streamlined decision making, maintains stakeholder engagement and
incrementally achieves the overall goal. This central project coordination role
is illustrated in Figure 28.

Figure 28: Stakeholder snapshot and the complexity of decision making.

 57

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ACT Chief Minister’s Department (September 2009). Canberra construction

snapshot – An overview of construction industry activities in the Capital region.
SMEC (18 November 2009). Cost benefit analysis of the Greater Civic Area
road network improvements (Draft).
SMEC (13 November 2009). Northbourne Avenue – London Circuit
intersection analysis (Draft).
AECOM (October 2009). Vernon Circle and Northbourne Avenue transport
options study.
TRACT Consultants (October 2009). Greater Civic area urban design report.
ACT Government, Canberra. (2002). The Canberra Plan.
OECD, Paris (2002). Canberra: A sustainable future.
Intelligent Space Partnership (December 2006). Canberra central
(pedestrian) movement study. ACTPLA, Canberra
Maunsell / AECOM (July 2006). Canberra Central road engineering feasibility
study. ACTPLA
Maunsell / AECOM (April 2007). City transport options feasibility study. ACTPLA
Maunsell / AECOM (30 September 2008). Section 63 City transport study.
ACT Government
MacroPlan Australia (January 2007). Canberra central land economics study.
ACTPLA
Canberra Central street tree master plan. Redbox design group (April 2007).
ACTPLA
Cardno (March 2006). City area infrastructure capacity and catchment study.
ACTPLA
Webb Australia (30 May 2007). Canberra Central lighting master plan. ACTPLA
GHD (November 2007)City West infrastructure Stage 3 (Marcus Clark Street
master plan). ACTPLA
ACTPLA / TAMS (October 2007). Canberra Central Design manual Design
Standards for Urban Infrastructure DS26.
National Capital Authority. National Capital Plan. Canberra
National Capital Authority. National Capital Plan Amendment 59 (Griffin
Legacy). Canberra
ACT Planning and Land Authority. Territory Plan. Canberra
Purdon and Associates / Brown Consulting (2006). Belconnen to City Busway
– Preliminary Assessment. Canberra