Wayville residents ANGRY

The residents in Wayville are angry about the State Government's proposal to change the traffic arrangements at the junctions of Joslin and Clark Streets with Greenhill Road.

This blog post is dedicated to publishing the submissions made by residents.
At their request, individual contact details have been suppressed.

The residents are lobbying David Pisoni MP to kill the proposal.

Here are the submissions ...

Submission 1 ...

Bill Zissopoulos
Project Manager
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
15th March, 2014
Dear Mr Zissopoulos,
I write to provide feedback on the DPTI proposal for Greenhill Road and, in particular, to object to the proposed changes for Greenhill Road outlined in the information mailed to residents in affected suburbs, the display in the Unley library, and the Infrastructure website. Please note that I sent my apologies for my non-attendance at the information meeting in Unley.
The DPTI proposal focuses on banning right turns for motorists entering or leaving Greenhill Road from the adjacent residential suburbs, and uses a questionable formula of installing U turns purportedly to make such traffic movements safer. No account is taken of the rights and needs of residents and workers in these suburbs. The sole goal appears to be only that traffic flows along Greenhill Road. In fact, the proposed changes will impact adversely on motorists accessing these suburbs by making such manoeuvres difficult, time consuming and potentially MORE dangerous than the current situation.  Trying to carry out these manoeuvres at peak times will be near impossible. These general comments apply to all the U turns proposed along Greenhill Road in the DPTI proposal.
I also question the use of statistics to support the DPTI proposal, which are not transparent and, depending on their actual breakdown, could well support the continuation of the status quo.
My specific comments below refer to the stretch of Greenhill Road between Goodwood and King William/Peacock Roads. I have been a resident of this area of Wayville for over 36 years and thus have long experience of traffic movements on Greenhill Road
Specific comments
1. The DPTI proposal is too formulaic and little consideration has been made to the different situation pertaining at each side street, nor the differences in the effects of peak traffic flows and queues. For example, the area of Wayville between King William Road and Goodwood Road has particular access problems because it can only be accessed from Greenhill or Goodwood Roads. There is no road access to south or east. Thus changes to access from/to Greenhill Road are of great importance to residents and workers and must be scrutinised carefully before their adoption.
2. The present proposal replaces access at Clark and Joslin Streets with U turns. There are particular problems associated with the proposed positioning of both the east and west U turns for Clark Street, which make them very unsatisfactory. Specifically, the U turn for traffic travelling east from Wayville is very close to Clark St and getting to it will mean crossing 3 lanes of traffic with the car lateral to oncoming traffic – potentially a very dangerous manoeuvre. At peak times it will be impossible to do because of traffic queues blocking access. The U turn to leave Greenhill Road and enter via Clark Street is positioned close to the right turning lane into King William Road, and a considerable distance from Clark Street. This again means that it will be impossible at peak times to get across 3 lanes of banked up traffic into the outer lane to access the U turn, (e.g. if entering from Sir Lewis Cohen), then cross another 3 lanes of banked up west moving traffic to get into Clark Street. Even at non-peak times now, it is not unusual for traffic to bank up in the outer eastern lane of Greenhill Road making it difficult to access the right turning lane into King William Road. Has any consideration been given to how disruptive it will be to traffic flows with vehicles manoeuvring and queuing to cross traffic lanes and get in and out of the proposed U turns? It could cause chaos in anything but light traffic!
3. Entry and egress from Joslin Street
Access to Joslin St from Sir Edwin Cohen must be facilitated safely by modification of the traffic light sequence. At present it is difficult to travel west to Joslin St because of the need to filter in to fast moving traffic and this will be made worse by the proposed changes.
4. The inclusion of pedestrian and cycle access at the U turns has to be questioned. Is this just another feature of the superficial formulaic response? Why is there a need for cycle access adjacent to Clark St. when there is no corresponding cycle path opposite across the Parklands? I am a cyclist, a pedestrian and motorist and see no advantage in this proposal for either pedestrians or cyclists. The excellent and well thought out addition of the pedestrian/cyclist green light at the western side of the intersection at Greenhill/Peacock and King William Road has made it so much safer and better for cyclists and pedestrians. DPTI has my thanks and congratulations for that change!  It appears that cyclist and pedestrians are well served now by traffic lights at this intersection and the Sir Lewis Cohen one. In fact, I would suggest, and support, the removal of the pedestrian traffic lights outside Annesley College, because they are used very infrequently now the school is effectively closed and activity is confined to Rose Terrace.
The situation at Joslin St. is similar to Clark St, where again there is no cycle path from the parklands opposite, but there are satisfactory facilities for cyclists to cross at the Goodwood Road intersection, where a bike path across the parklands ends. So why provide cyclist access at the U turns?
What changes can be made that would make a positive difference to safety at these two side streets for all parties?
I submit that the following simple changes would make a positive difference to safety at Clark and Joslin streets while utilising the current arrangement for access across the median strips.
A] Improve the sight lines for entry and egress by restricting parking (painting yellow lines) on Greenhill Road at all times for a distance of approximately 30 metres on either side of these side streets. This should apply to all the side streets that are included in the DPTI proposal. At present it can be impossible to see vehicles in the inside lane because of parked vehicles which block the sight lines. This is a significant problem for motorists, cyclist and pedestrians, and could be easily remedied. It would be useful if the yellow lines could also extend a similar distance into each side of the side streets to facilitate egress and minimise queuing.
B] Prevent queuing across the intersections on Greenhill Rd by painting ‘keep junction clear’ information on the road as has been done at Roberts Street. It is my experience that this simple addition has made it much easier and safer for traffic entering and leaving Roberts Street, as well as facilitating safer movement of traffic along Greenhill road.
C] Adjusting and coordinating traffic lights at the major intersections on Greenhill Road to allow right turns to be carried out safely into and out of Wayville. This would require coordination of all the traffic lights along this section of Greenhill Road, including those at Sir Edwin Cohen (see [4] above).
D] Separating U turning traffic from right turning traffic. At present there are 4 conflicting traffic movements occurring within each gap in the median strip. It would be helpful if these could be reduced to 2 movements by making U turns at the traffic lights obligatory.
I look forward to your response to this submission and acknowledgement of it’s receipt,

Yours faithfully,
Ann C

Submission 2 ...

Bill Zissopoulos,
Project Manager,
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure.
Email: dpti.communityrelations@sa.gov.au
12 March, 2014
Dear Mr Zissopoulos,
Re: Proposed Greenhill Road Safety Improvements, Wayville.
I write on behalf of the Adelaide Showground Area Residents Group (ASARG)
concerning the proposed safety improvements along Greenhill Road,
specifically the proposals for changes between Clark and Joslin Streets,
ASARG has consulted with Wayville residents, and has some concerns with
this proposal. We believe that DPTI needs to make special consideration in
the planning for these changes given the unique situation of Wayville
compared to other suburbs (e.g. Unley North, Parkside) along Greenhill Road
– specifically that Wayville does not have alternate entry and exit routes
available to the south or east (due to the tramline).
Hence all traffic going to and from the suburb must enter or exit via Greenhill
Rd or Goodwood Road. At peak times, and especially when other major
arterial roads are closed due to events such as the Clipsal 500, it is very
difficult to exit the suburb.
ASARG acknowledges that the existing Clark and Joslin Street intersections
have safety issues; in particular the poor sight lines in undertaking a right turn
into Greenhill Road, and the potential conflict with right turning traffic from
Greenhill Road. The accident data provided in the DPTI information sheet is
insufficient to fully analyse the causes of accidents at these intersections, e.g.
it is noted that there were 15 accidents involving right turns from Joslin St into
Greenhill Rd, but it is not clear the proportion of these that involved vehicles
turning right into Joslin St from Greenhill Road, or traffic moving west along
Greenhill Road, or at what times these occurred (e.g. is there a much greater
risk at peak times?) or how many involved bicycles.
As a compromise between the unique access requirements of Wayville and
the necessary safety improvements, ASARG has a number of suggestions to
improve the proposed design:
1. Retain the existing right turns at Clark and Joslin Streets but reduce the
risk of accidents by
a. improving sight lines to reduce the risk of accidents by
permanently eliminating parking on the south side of Greenhill
Road for a sufficient distance; and
b. prohibit u-turns at these intersections to avoid conflict and
uncertainty with left and right turns from Clark or Joslin Streets;
c. Eliminate the unsafe bike lane on the south side of Greenhill
road and construct a dedicated and separate bike lane on the
northern side of Greenhill Road (south parklands). This bike
lane could then connect safely with the new bike lane near the
Wayville train station and the parklands network of bike lanes.
This would be ASARG’s preferred option
2. If retention of the existing turns is not possible, consider retaining a
right turn only from Greenhill Road into Clark St and/ or Joslin St.
This would still improve safety compared to the present situation
(would eliminate the potential conflict of traffic turning in and out of
Wayville), but at least allow residents to enter the suburb without
having to complete a u-turn and then undertake a rapid 3 lane change
(or a rapid 4 lane change from Sir Lewis Cohen Avenue) to make a left
turn off Greenhill Road (see attached diagram).
3. Move the proposed pedestrian refuge crossing at Joslin St to the right
rather than left to avoid conflict with left turning traffic.
4. The proposed new U-turn to the west of Clark Street would appear to
create a more dangerous situation than the current right turn into
Greenhill Road from Clark Street. To complete this manoeuvre from
Clark St , Wayville residents would need to undertake a rapid 5 lane
change (which given the short distance, would be mostly completed
with the car side-on to these lanes) compared to the existing 3 lane
crossing. In addition, it is not possible to complete this u- turn within the
one east-bound lane, at least 2 lanes are required for a larger car, and
this further increases the risk of accidents.
If DPTI does persist with this proposal (which ASARG considers to be
intrinsically unsafe), the proposed extension of the 2 right turn lanes
into Sir Lewis Cohen Avenue should be shortened, so that the u-turn
dos not require so many lane changes (see attached diagram).
Alternatively, the safest option would be allowing u-turns at the Sir
Lewis Cohen Avenue traffic lights.
5. Consider co-ordination of the traffic light sequencing between King
William Road and Sir Lewis Cohen Avenue, so that the 4 lane change
required to enter Joslin St from Sir Lewis Cohen Av could be
completed when there is a break in westerly moving traffic along
Greenhill Road.
This would also assist in providing a break in traffic so that the
proposed u- turn near Clark Street could be completed safely.
6. It is likely that the greatest risk of accidents due to exiting Wayville via
Clark and Joslin Streets (i.e. turning east onto Greenhill Road) occur
at peak hours , therefore a simple and low cost way of reducing
accidents could simply be installing a “No right turn after 5.00 pm” sign
on Clark and Joslin Streets.
7. Consider modification of the pedestrian lights at Young Street on
Goodwood Rd so that they become traffic lights, in order to control
traffic out of Young St, suitably phased with the Greenhill Rd lights.
This will allow right turns from Young Street to Goodwood Road, thus
to allowing a safe exit from the suburb at peak times.
ASARG would welcome the opportunity to discuss these proposals in more
detail, and to consider any proposed changes to the design before finalisation
and construction begins. We will contact you in the near future to discuss a
suitable time.

Adelaide Showground Area Residents Group.

Submission 3 ...

Since our meeting at the library on Thursday night, I have been thinking about the Government's stated need for infill development in the city rim, and there may be an aspect of your plan which you have not "captured" yet

Infill development requires the building of things, and that requires a large number of large trucks to remove the demolition rubble and excavated earth, then deliver things like bricks, structural steel,roof trusses, and the like.

Some years ago, I used to drive semi-trailers, and it got me thinking how I would get a 6 metre prime mover towing a 12 metre trailer into the Wayville area after your non-negotiable right turns are removed.

Now most of the delivery vehicles will be approaching from the north - that's where this stuff comes from and goes to, so if I come along Greenhill road eastbound, do I do a U-turn on Greenhill Road?  Not likely.  Too hard; too dangerous, and if there are parked cars, I possibly won't make it.

So I then have to head through the city, not fun in itself, right turn at either Lewis Cohen Avenue or King William Road, take the centre lane of Greenhill Road westbound, hold up the traffic, check to make sure that there are no lunatics going past me on the left hand side, then make my left turn from the centre lane of Greenhill Road into Clark or Joslin Street. 

Alternatively, I can head south on Goodwood Road, take up the right lane of Goodwood Road, hold up the traffic, then make a left turn into Young or LeHunte Street from the right hand lane of Goodwood Road. 

The point is, semi trailers, being what they are, cannot turn into a relatively narrow side street from the left hand lane of a major road - you need to be at least one lane out to be able to make the turn without destroying the corner.  This is hardly a safe situation.  It is one which is almost guaranteed to add to the accident statistics in this area, and, having had to help pull someone out after they have gone under a semi trailer, I can assure you it is not pretty. 

When the old buildings at Annesley College were being demolished, there was a constant flow of trucks in and out of that site for some months, and every one of then entered the area by a right turn from Greenhill Road into Clark Street.  Not only because it was the easiest option, but also because it was the only safe option.

The safest way for any large vehicle to enter the streets of Wayville, or Parkside, or North Unley, is, without question, for it to make a right hand turn from Greenhill Road.  Turning left from a major road into a side street in a large articulated vehicle is fraught with danger at all points, and should be discouraged by anyone concerned about road safety.
Member, Adelaide Showground Area Residents Group

Submission 4 ...

Dear Mr Zissopoulos,,

I am writing in relation to the proposal to change the flow of traffic exiting from the suburb of Wayville onto Greenhill Road.

The current proposal is ill conceived. It appears to be a reflex response which will not significantly alter traffic flow along Greenhill Road, but will instead render access into and out of the suburb of Wayville both difficult and dangerous. Most of the congestion on Greenhill Road relates to traffic traveling along it from other suburbs. The contribution of traffic exiting or entering Wayville itself is minor by comparison. Nor, in my long experience, does the traffic exiting Wayville substantially interfere with the traffic flow along Greenhill Road.

Wayville is a suburb bordered on two sides ( to the East and South) by the tramline. There is no access across the tramlines to either the East or South. This creates particular issues with access into and out of the suburb. The proposal to further restrict traffic exiting onto Greenhill Road will effectively "land lock" the suburb, which already has difficult and restricted access onto Goodwood Road. The traffic snarl precipitated by events at the Show Grounds, but particularly the Royal Adelaide Show, will make any entry or access to the suburb almost impossible at these times.

The proposal to force right turning traffic entering or exiting the suburb to drive to specified U turn points would be almost farcical, were it not so potentially dangerous. If current right turning traffic has been determined to restrict the flow of traffic along Greenhill Road,  then one can only imagine how much worse the restriction to traffic flow will be when right traveling traffic is forced to first travel left, cross three lanes of traffic, and then perform a U turn in order to continue in the desired direction. At peak traffic times, this will cause almost total standstill, as right turning traffic will have to remain stationary in each left traveling lane while awaiting clearance into the adjacent lane, and then the adjacent lane again, in order to reach the U turn point, where the vehicle will have to again await an opportunity to execute the U turn. These movements  will surely only compound the problem of traffic congestion on Greenhill Road, in  both directions, while making access to and from the suburb extremely difficult. How will emergency vehicles enter and exit the suburb in a timely fashion?

Surely, the problem will be further compounded by the new development on the Annesley site which will only add to traffic volumes entering and exiting from Greenhill Road?

The maneuvers required will also place a vehicle exiting Wayville at high risk, as the vehicle will be traveling at an angle almost perpendicular to the general traffic flow, and will be vulnerable to being hit by oncoming traffic.

The proposal smacks of "Yes Minister" in it's absurdity.

It is not a solution to traffic congestion along Greenhill Road.
It renders access into and out of a suburb with already restricted access both extremely difficult and dangerous.
Indeed, the proposed solution may even exacerbate the problem of congestion. 

The plan appears ill conceived, and does not appear to be supported by appropriate traffic flow studies. Where has this "solution" been successfully executed in other areas? 

Studies are required before such a "solution" is executed. Alternatives require consideration. The "clear way" times along Greenhill Road should be extended, to allow easier egress into Greenhill Road. There should be extended "No Parking" zones adjacent to roads exiting onto Greenhill and Goodwood Roads. The old Annesley pedestrian lights could be removed, and instead, there could be consideration for a traffic light to regulate traffic ( including bicycles) exiting Wayville onto Greenhill Road. ( Similar to the traffic lights adjacent to Mercedes college at the exit of Carrick Hill Drive onto Fullarton/ Taylors Road in Mitcham.)

More study is required. The process needs to be transparent and open to community consultation. Do not waste tax payer's funds on an unsubstantiated and unsatisfactory reflex solution.

(submission from Helen Mc)

Submission 5 ...

Bill Zissopoulos
Project Manager
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
16th March, 2014

Dear Mr Zissopoulos,
First, I wish to comment on the process adopted by the DPTI in presenting this proposal to the people most affected, the residents of the adjacent suburbs. The proposal has been presented to us for comment in a very short time frame as a fait accomplis with every indication that whatever comments are made, the work will proceed in March. This is outrageous because it is quite clear from the material that we have been given that the proposal is a standard “off the shelf” design which we are assured works on Anzac Highway. Had the department sought information from the residents of the adjacent suburbs prior to making the plans, the serious errors inherent in the plan would have been avoided. Quite simply, Greenhill Road and its adjacent suburbs have special requirements which are completely unrecognised by the proposal. Had a proper consultation process been undertaken these factors would have been taken into account and an appropriate plan addressing all the needs of users of Greenhill Road put in place.

Second, I have been a resident in Wayville for over 30 years. The remainder of my submission refers principally to how the proposal affects access to and from that suburb.
The proposal fails because it does not recognise the following fundamental features:
1. Greenhill Road differs from most other major roads in that it is effectively one sided. It only has businesses and residential suburbs on the Southern side. A high proportion of East bound traffic is therefore intending to make a Right turn or a U turn to access the Southern side of the road.
Due to the aggressive behaviour of motorists in the outer (Right hand) lane who make it difficult for others to move into the Right hand lane many motorists take the earliest opportunity to move into this lane and then stay in it even though they do not intend to make a right turn until several junctions have been passed. This results in considerable tail backs in the outer lane, even to the extent that there is frequently little or no traffic in the left hand lanes and access at any non- light controlled junctions is blocked

2. WAYVILLE only has access on the Northern and Western sides due to the Tram line which cuts the suburb off to the South and East. Further, only two roads give access to Greenhill Road, while of the four roads giving access to Goodwood Road, one has restricted access.

As the DPTI has recognised, the current situation of access to Greenhill road is unsatisfactory. What it has not recognised is that the small proportion of accidents which occur at the crossing points in the median strip (the data show that most accidents occur at light controlled junctions) is due to the bad design of these crossing points. Confusion (and therefore accidents) arises because of users inability to distinguish between right turning traffic and U turning traffic in the median strip crossing point.
The solution is to continue to allow right turning traffic to and from Joslin and Clarke Streets but to separate this traffic from that making U turns on Greenhill Road. The proposal as presented is over complicated and excessively restrictive to residents exiting and entering Wayville. It will lead to dangerous frustration because of the pattern of use of the East bound carriageway indicated above and manifestly will not work in maintaining safe traffic flow.
Rather than just making adjustments to the median strip as proposed, serious consideration must be given to a major upgrade of Greenhill Road. This is now a major traffic route carrying large volumes of traffic all day, with even heavier traffic at peak times. The length of these peak times gets longer and longer as the traffic increases. Under these circumstances it is no longer acceptable that vehicles should be allowed to park on the roadway eliminating the use of the Left hand lane at any time in the day. In addition the “part time” cycle lane is now inappropriate and needs to be relocated.

The proposed changes need to be postponed. The proposal needs to be re-assessed with proper consideration for the needs of the residents of the adjacent suburbs. There needs to be proper consultation with residents and users both before and after the creation of a modified plan. Special attention must be given to the following points.
1. Right hand turns into and out of Wayville need to be retained. Similar considerations apply to the other suburbs (e.g. North Unley and Parkside) bordering Greenhill Road on the south side where road closures have created similar circumstances.
2. Right turning traffic needs to be separated from U turning traffic.
3. Parking on Greenhill Road must be confined to specifically created parking bays and not allowed on the roadway, thus enabling full use of all three lanes.
4. The cycle lanes must be transferred to the southern margin of the parklands where currently no cycle paths exist for movement in an east –west direction.

I look forward to your response to this submission.
Yours faithfully,
(submission from Jeff)


  1. Excellent feedback from the residents.
    Thanks for publishing them and showing support.

  2. Lots of spot on commnetary - the DPTI needs to listen to the residents if it wants to get a safe change for the better
    It seems there are simpler/cheaper/better solutions possible than the changes proposed

  3. Peter is right. Other options need to be considered.
    It needs to be remembered that Wayville is locked in by Goodwood Road and the tram line.


Post a Comment

I would appreciate your feedback.