Original source · versioned page text
Att 2 - Traffic Plan
Attached to the e-mail Retail Bus Type 2 Shop & Salon, Multiple Housing Type 4 Conventional (2 units) & Boundary Realignment (3 lots into 3) - MCU18/0158 & RAL18/0017.
Plans and drawings
This document appears to be plans or drawings. Its page text below holds only the words printed on the drawings, without the drawings themselves, so it may be jumbled or hard to follow. To see the plans as drawn, choose Original above or download the file (both need you to log in).
Log in to see the plans as drawnTraffic Assessment Material Change of Use (Shopping Centre) 34 Elm St, Cooroy (Lots 4-6 on RP72698) 18 September 2018 Prepared By: 360 Civil Consulting Pty Ltd Prepared For: Mr R McCarthy Reference: 2018082–rpt001-RevB Mobile: 0490 530 793 Email: [email protected] ABN: 13 609 593 339 ACN: 609 593 339
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 21 pages
Page 2
34 Elm St, Cooroy Disclaimer This report has been prepared for the client. It is subject to the provisions of the agreement between 360 Civil Consulting Pty Ltd and the client. Report results should not be used for purposes other than those for which they were prepared. Report Status Reference Date Status Author Reviewed Approval 2018082-rpt001-RevA 10/9/18 DRAFT CG BG 2018082-rpt001-RevA 18/9/18 FINAL CG BG 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 2 of 22
Page 3
34 Elm St, Cooroy
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Sight Distance Assessment for Accesses to Proposed Shopping Centre ........................................ 4
2.1 Available Sight Distance ................................................................................................................ 5
2.2 Sight Distances Requirements – General Information............................................................ 7
2.3 Design Parameters .................................................................................................................. 7
2.4 Minimum Sight Distance Calculations .................................................................................... 7
2.5 Sight Distance Improvements ................................................................................................. 9
2.6 Requirement to comply with Extended Design Domain......................................................... 9
2.7 Extended Design Domain – Crash Data Analysis................................................................... 10
2.8 Extended Design Domain - Minimum Sight Distance Calculations ....................................... 10
2.9 Sight Distance Re-assessment after Sight Distance Improvements and EDD ....................... 12
2.10 Sight Distance Recommendations ........................................................................................ 13
3. Access to Diamond Lane ............................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Diamond Lane / Elm St / Wessel Petroleum / Cooroy Motel Intersection ........................... 15
3.2 Impacts on Diamond Lane .................................................................................................... 16
3.3 Development Impact on Diamond Lane – Summary ............................................................ 16
4. Bus Stop Modifications ................................................................................................................. 16
5. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix A –Proposed Development Plan ........................................................................................... 18
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 3 of 22
Page 4
34 Elm St, Cooroy
1. Introduction
360 Civil Consulting have been engaged to undertake a sight distance assessment for the accesses
to the proposed shopping centre at 34 Elm St, Cooroy (Lots 4-6 on RP72698) and assess the impact
the development will have on Diamond Lane. A copy of the development layout is contained in
Appendix A.
The existing building are currently being demolished. The previous use was for the Cooroy Motel.
The proposed development is for a shopping centre with two unit dwellings. The shopping centre
consists of 9 separate shops. It is proposed that there are two accesses that serve the shopping
centre. Both of these accesses are to Opal St. Of these accesses, one access is proposed to be a
two-way access located on the south-eastern boundary of the lot, and an exit only access is
proposed to be located midway along the southern boundary of the lot.
It is proposed that two single garages be constructed to serve the units. These garages will be
located in the north-eastern boundary of the lot. These garages will access Diamond Lane.
To complete this assessment a site inspection was undertaken on the 29 August 2018.
2. Sight Distance Assessment for Accesses to Proposed Shopping Centre
The proposed development is bounded by Diamond Lane to the north, the Cooroy Sports Hub to
the east, Opal St to the south and Elm St to the west.
It is proposed that the development has two accesses to Opal St. A two-way access is proposed to
be located to the south east of the lot and an exit only access is proposed approximately midway
on the southern boundary. Opal St is classified as a Local Street.
Figure 1 – Opal St, View to the west
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 4 of 22
Page 5
34 Elm St, Cooroy
Figure 2 – Opal St, View to the east
2.1 Available Sight Distance
The available sight distance from the accesses was measured from a distance of 3.0m from the lip
of channel. The measurements were taken from an eye height of 1.1m (normal car eye height) to
an object height of 1.25m (normal car object) and of an object height of 0.65m (vehicle indicator
light). The measured sight distances are provided in Table 1.
Table 1 – Available Sight Distance from Proposed Access Locations at 34 Elm St
Direction from Access Location Available Sight Distance (Drivers Available Sight Distance (Drivers
eye height to car object) eye height to vehicle indicator
light)
(m)
(m)
Two-way Access - East 180m 180m
Two-way Access - West 53m 53m
Exit Only Access - East 199m 199m
Exit Only Access – West (veh 32m 32m
travelling south on Elm St and
turning left onto Opal St)
Exit Only Access – West (veh 69m 69m
travelling north on Elm Stand
turning right onto Opal St)
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 5 of 22
Page 6
34 Elm St, Cooroy To the east, there is clear sight distances to the Opal St/Kauri St intersection as demonstrated in Figure 3 below. Figure 3 – Sight Distance to the east from the “exit only” access To the west, the sight distance is currently impeded by the vegetation at the bottom of the street tree as shown in Figure 4 below. Figure 4 – Sight Distance to the west from the “exit only” access 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 6 of 22
Page 7
34 Elm St, Cooroy The available sight distance can also be restricted by the driver’s ability to turn to see an on- coming vehicle. In Austroads Part 4A, Section 3.2.3, this restriction is referred to as the sighting or observation angle. The observation angle for right turn manoeuvres is limited to 110 degrees. The angle from the exit only access to a southbound vehicle on Elm St is 102 degrees and hence is complaint with the requirements of Austroads. 2.2 Sight Distances Requirements – General Information This sight distance assessment includes the Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) and the Minimum Gap Sight Distance (MGSD) in accordance with Austroads, and the minimum Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) as described in AS2890.1. 2.3 Design Parameters Based on Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 3 Section 5.2.2 a reaction time of 2.0 seconds has been adopted and is considered to be a reasonable reaction time for the Opal St environment. For SISD calculations Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 4A Section 3.2.2 allows for a 3.0 second observation time. When calculating the sight distance requirements in accordance with AS2890.1, Figure 3.2 assumes a reaction time of 2.0 seconds for driveways to commercial properties. Based on Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 3 Section 5.2.3 a coefficient of deceleration of 0.36 has been adopted and is considered to be appropriate for Elm St and Opal St. It is estimated that on average the approaches to the accesses is approximately 2% longitudinal downgrade to the east and the west. The existing speed limit along Elm St is 60km/hr and the existing speed limit along Opal St is 50km/hr. The design speed for vehicles coming from Elm St and turning left onto Opal St has been calculated to be approximately 25km/hr based on a turning radius of 15m. The design speed for vehicles turning right onto Opal St from Elm St has been assumed to be 20km/hr. 2.4 Minimum Sight Distance Calculations Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) and Safe Stopping Distance (SSD) have been calculated in accordance with Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 4A Section 3.2.2 and AS2890.1. Table 2 provides a summary of these results. 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 7 of 22
Page 8
34 Elm St, Cooroy
Table 2 – Summary of sight distance requirements
Required Sight Distance
Design
(Minimum) (m) Sight Distance
Speed
Estimate as measured
Austroads AS2890.1
Approach Direction (Frontage Longitudinal on site
Road Speed) Grade (%)
MGSD SISD (Min SSD)
(m)
km/h
(m) (m)
Two-way Access - East 60
-2 83 125 65 180m
(50)
Two-way Access - West 25
-2 35 42 35 53m
(60)
Exit Only Access - East 60
-2 83 125 65 199m
(50)
Exit Only Access – West (veh
25
travelling south on Elm St
-2 35 42 35 32m
and turning left onto Opal (60)
St)
Exit Only Access – West (veh
20
travelling north on Elm St
-2 28 32 35 69m
and turning right onto Opal (60)
St)
As demonstrated in Table 2, the sight distances from the two-way access and the sight distance
from the “exit only” access to the east, and from the “exit only” access to the west (veh travelling
north on Elm St and turning right onto Opal St) comply with Austroad’s Guide to Road Design, SISD
and MGSD and with AS2890.1 minimum SSD requirements.
The sight distance for the “exit only” access to the west (veh travelling south on Elm St and turning
left onto Opal St) does not comply with Austroad’s Guide to Road Design, SISD and MGSD
requirements or AS2890.1 minimum SSD requirements.
The current sight distance from the exit only access to the vehicles travelling south on Elm St is
restricted by the low vegetation associated with the existing street tree. The available sight
distance can be increased if this lower vegetation were pruned.
Furthermore, Section 3.4 - Sight Distances at Property Entrances from Part 4A of Austroad’s Guide
to Road Design states that the Extended Design Domain (EDD) criteria can be used for SISD for
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 8 of 22
Page 9
34 Elm St, Cooroy some accesses that do not comply with the Normal Design Domain (NDD) standards. If applicable, this will reduce the required SISD. 2.5 Sight Distance Improvements Currently the sight distance from the southern access to the vehicles travelling south on Elm street is restricted by the low vegetation associated with the existing street tree. The sight distance would increase to 36m with an observation angle of 109 degrees if the low vegetation from the existing street tree is removed. Figure 5 – Vegetation restricting sight distance to the vehicles travelling south on Elm St. It is also recommended that a kerbside solid yellow line be installed from the exit only access to the southern end of the current bus bay location on Elm St. This line will restrict vehicles from stopping in the sight distance zone, protecting the sight distance for vehicles exiting from the site. 2.6 Requirement to comply with Extended Design Domain EDD criteria can be used to determine the required sight distance where the NDD cannot be achieved and the geometric road design complies with criteria specified in Austroad’s Guide to Road Design Part 3 Appendix A. In this instance the road is located in an urban footprint and the operating speed is ≤ 70 km/hr. The requirement for compliance for the EDD is that the lane width is greater than 3.0 m. In this instance, the Opal St lane width will be approximately 4.25m once the development has been completed. Furthermore, the site complies with all general considerations as detailed in Austroads Part 3, A.3.1. As such, the proposed driveway complies with the requirements to be assessed under the EDD. 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 9 of 22
Page 10
34 Elm St, Cooroy
2.7 Extended Design Domain – Crash Data Analysis
An EDD assessment is only appropriate when crash data indicates that there are no sight distance
related crashes. To determine whether there have been any sight distance related crashes in this
location, all reported crashes from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2017 was downloaded from
Queensland Government Data on 3 September 2018.
From the information obtained, there were 2 crashes at the Elm St / Opal St intersection. The
details of these crashes are listed below in Table 3.
Table 3 – Reported Crashes near the Elm St / Opal St intersection
Crash Ref Crash Crash Severity Crash Date Crash time / Crash Crash Group
No. Street weather Description Description
Veh'S Same
Cooroy
Friday April 3pm – Dry Direction:
230619 Connection Hospitalisation Parallel lanes
2011 Daylight Right Turn
Rd turning
S/Swipe
Cooroy Monday Veh'S Adjacent
Property Damage 2pm – Dry Intersection
88129 Connection November Approach:
only Daylight from adjacent
Rd 2004 Thru-Right approaches
(Data source Courtesy of Queensland Government)
The two crashes identified in the crash data analysis near the Elm St / Opal St intersection have
occurred where a vehicle has attempted a right turn from Elm St to Opal St. These crashes are
not related to restricted sight distances for south bound vehicles on Elm St turning left onto Opal
St. As such, the reported crashes are not relevant to the EDD assessment of vehicles turning left
from Elm St and onto Opal St. This demonstrates that there is not a history of crashes relating to
sight distance for vehicles travelling south on Elm St turning left onto Opal St and the EDD criteria
can be used for this manoeuvre.
2.8 Extended Design Domain - Minimum Sight Distance Calculations
There are three EDD cases that apply to this intersection. These cases are:
1. Base case (car) (norm-day) (normal conditions)
2. Check Case (car) (mean-day); and
3. Base case (truck-day).
The other check cases do not apply due to the intersection being well lit from the four street lights
at the intersection of Elm St and Opal St.
The following values for observation times and longitudinal deceleration have been determined
from Appendix A.2.4 and A.2.5 from Part 4A of Austroads Guide to Road Design and are included
in Table 4 below.
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 10 of 22
Page 11
34 Elm St, Cooroy
Table 4 – Design Parameters for EDD Analysis
Observation time Reaction time (from Longitudinal Design speed
(from Austroads part Austroads part 3 deceleration (km/hr)
EDD case
4A App 1 section Appendix 1 section (d=)
A.2.4) A.3.4)
Base case (car)
(norm-day)
2.0 seconds 1.5 seconds 0.46 25
(normal
conditions)
Check Case (car)
2.0 seconds 0.41 21.251
(mean-day) 1.5 seconds
Base case (truck-
2.0 seconds 0.29 222
day) 1.5 seconds
1. The design speed for the check case (car) (mean-day) has been set at 0.85 of the assumed 85th percentile speed for
a car as suggested in Austroads, Part 3 - Table A3.
2. The 85th percentile design speed for trucks approaching from the north has been assumed to be 22 km/hr. This
assumption has been determined using Table C 3 of Austroads Part 4A Unsignalised and Signalised Intersections for a
turning radius of 15m with a superelevation of 6%.
A summary of the EDD analysis for cars is shown in Table 5 and for trucks is shown in Table 6.
Table 5 – Summary of EDD for cars sight distance requirements
Design SISD (Minimum) from
Sight
Speed for Distance
base case Estimate SISD=((DtxV)/3.6)+v^2/(254x(d+0.0
accounting
Longitudi 1xa)) (m) (from Austroads part 4A
Approach Direction section 3.2.2) for
(design nal
vegetation
speed for Grade
removal
check case) (%) EDD Base Case EDD Check Case
(norm-day) (m) (mean-day) (m) (m)
km/h
25
Exit Only Access – West (veh
-2 30 25 36
travelling south on Elm St)
(21.25)
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 11 of 22
Page 12
34 Elm St, Cooroy
Table 6 – Summary of EDD for trucks sight distance requirements
Design SISD (Minimum) from Sight Distance accounting
Speed for vegetation removal
Estimate SISD=((DtxV)/3.6)+v^2/(254x(d+0. (truck drivers eye 2.4 m
(Frontag Longitudin 01xa)) (m) (from Austroads part above road surface)
Approach Direction
e Road al Grade 4A section 3.2.2)
Speed) (%) (m)
EDD Base Case (truck-day) (m)
km/h
Exit Only Access –
West (veh travelling 22
south on Elm St and -2 30 36
turning left onto Opal (60)
St)
The EDD analysis demonstrates that the proposed access achieves the required SISD for cars and
trucks.
2.9 Sight Distance Re-assessment after Sight Distance Improvements and EDD
Pruning and removing the low vegetation on the street tree will increase the sight distance from
the exit only access to the southbound vehicles approaching from Elm St to approximately 36m.
Assessing the SISD for vehicles on the southern access to the southbound vehicles approaching
from Elm St using the EDD method, reduces the required SISD to 30m. The revised Summary of
Sight Distances which includes the increased sight distance and reduced sight distance
requirement, is listed in Table 7 below. Table 7 is a re-assessment of Table 2 accounting for the
sight distance improvements and the EDD analysis for the Exit Only Access – West (veh travelling
south on Elm St and turning left onto Opal St).
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 12 of 22
Page 13
34 Elm St, Cooroy
Table 7 – Summary of sight distance requirements after sight distance improvements
Required Sight Distance
Design
(Minimum) (m) Sight Distance
Speed
Estimate as measured
Austroads AS2890.1
Approach Direction (Frontage Longitudinal on site
Road Speed) Grade (%)
MGSD SISD (Min SSD)
(m)
km/h
(m) (m)
Main Access - East 60
-2 83 125 65 180m
(50)
Main Access - West 25
-2 35 42 35 53m
(60)
Exit Only Access - East 60
-2 83 125 65 199m
(50)
Exit Only Access – West (veh
25
travelling south on Elm St
-2 35 301 35 36m2
and turning left onto Opal (60)
St)
Exit Only Access – West (veh
20
travelling north on Elm
-2 28 32 35 69m
Stand turning right onto (60)
Opal St)
1 – denotes that the SISD was assessed using the EDD method.
2- denotes that the available sight distance once sight distance improvements works have been completed.
2.10 Sight Distance Recommendations
360 Civil Consulting has completed an assessment of the available sight distances for the accesses
to the proposed development at 34 Elm St. Subject to the vegetation clearing as detailed in
Section 2.5 – Sight Distance Improvements, and the installation of a solid yellow kerbside line, the
proposed access locations comply with the sight distance requirements.
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 13 of 22
Page 14
34 Elm St, Cooroy
3. Access to Diamond Lane
Previously the site was used for the Cooroy Motel. The Cooroy Motel had direct access to Elm St
and an access Diamond Lane opposite the Wessel Petroleum petrol station’s access to Diamond
Lane. The Cooroy Motel and Wessel Petroleum access to Diamond Lane is located close to the
intersection between Diamond Lane and Elm St as shown in Figure 6 below.
Figure 6 – Existing configuration of the Diamond Lane / Elm St intersection.
In addition to the commercial aspect of the development which is accessed by Opal St, the
development is proposing two dwelling units, each with a single garage to be accessed via
Diamond Lane. These garages are located approximately 37m from the kerb adjacent to Elm St.
Diamond Lane typically has a 3.5m road pavement width. There are swale drains on either side of
the road. Although there is insufficient room for vehicles to pass, there are no restrictions on
vehicle directions. Diamond Lane is approximately 210m long.
The typical condition of Diamond Lane is demonstrated in Figure 7 below.
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 14 of 22
Page 15
34 Elm St, Cooroy Figure 7 – Diamond Lane, view to the East 3.1 Diamond Lane / Elm St / Wessel Petroleum / Cooroy Motel Intersection The Wessel Petroleum and Cooroy Motel access to Diamond Lane is located approximately 8m from the Elm St intersection. It is also located approximately 25m from the location where the slip lane from Diamond St joins Elm St. The location and alignment of these intersections are non- compliant with current standards. The proposed development would remove the Cooroy Motel access onto Elm St and Diamond Lane. Removing the access to Elm St is in line with the requirement to limit direct access to major roads. The removal of the access to Diamond Lane will significantly improving the safety of the intersection. Furthermore, the proposed development will reduce the volume of traffic directed towards the non-compliant Diamond Lane / Elm St / Wessel Petroleum access. Some the traffic generated by the Cooroy Motel contributes to the number of vehicles traversing this intersection. The Guide to Traffic Generating Developments by the Road and Traffic Authority (RTA) was used to estimate the volume of traffic generated by the Cooroy Motel. Based on the assumption of 25 units, with 85% occupancy and a caretaker’s residence, it is estimated that the Cooroy Motel currently contributes approximately 73 vehicle trips per day. It is expected that approximately 50% of these trips will utilise the Diamond Lane / Elm St intersection. The proposed development will have two dwelling units accessing Diamond Lane. Based on the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, each of these units can be expected to generate between 4 and 5 vehicle trips per day resulting in an expected total trip generation of 9 vehicle trips per day. It can be expected that the majority of the vehicle trips will travel through the Diamond Lane / Elm St intersection. The proposed development will decrease the amount of traffic to the Diamond Lane / Elm St intersection by approximately 27 trips per day. 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 15 of 22
Page 16
34 Elm St, Cooroy
This reduction in vehicle movements at the Diamond lane / Elm St intersection, alongside the
removal of the Cooroy Motel’s non-complaint access to Diamond Lane, will improve the safety and
functionality of the Diamond Lane / Elm St intersection.
3.2 Impacts on Diamond Lane
As detailed previously, Diamond Lane is approximately 210m in length and typically has a
pavements width of approximately 3.5m. The lane allows two directional traffic however has
insufficient room for vehicles to pass and does not contain formalised passing bays.
The development proposes to widen the Diamond Lane pavement to the proposed landscaping on
the northern boundary. This will result in a sealed pavement approximately 6.5m wide for
approximately 14m east of the access to Wessel Petroleum. This will allow eastbound vehicles to
queue on Diamond Lane while waiting for a westbound vehicle to pass. This queueing can occur
clear of the Wessel Petroleum access and the Diamond Lane / Elm St Intersection.
The proposed development will assist in improving the functionality of Diamond Lane by reducing
the volume of traffic using Diamond Lane and increasing the queueing capacity should a vehicle
have to wait at the western end of Diamond Lane while a west bound vehicle traverses Diamond
Lane.
3.3 Development Impact on Diamond Lane – Summary
The Diamond Lane / Elm St intersection, in conjunction with the Wessel Petroleum and Cooroy
Motel accesses are non-compliant to current standards.
The proposed development will improve the safety and functionality of this area by:
• Removing the Cooroy Motel access;
• Reducing the volume of traffic at the non-compliant Elm St / Diamond Lane intersection;
and
• Providing a queuing and passing area on Diamond Lane adjacent to the development.
4. Bus Stop Modifications
The proposal includes moving the existing bus shelter on Elm St approximately 10 – 15m north and
the bus bay approximately 5m north. Moving the bus bay north will ensure that a parked bus will
not adversely impact on the available sight distances. As the proposed relocation is less than 20m,
approval from Translink is not required and can be approved by Council as part of the
development approval process.
These adjustments will not have an adverse impact on the functionality of the bus bay.
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 16 of 22
Page 17
34 Elm St, Cooroy
5. Conclusion
In conclusion, 360 Civil Consulting has undertaken an assessment of the access arrangements for
the proposed development on Opal St, and the impact that the proposed development will have
on Diamond Lane.
Subject to the pruning of the street tree and the installation of a solid yellow line as defined in
Section 2.5 – Sight Distance Improvements, the sight distances from both Opal St proposed
accesses are compliant with Austroads SISD and MGSD as well as AS2890.1 Minimum SSD.
The proposed development will improve the current arrangement on Diamond Lane by removing
the current Cooroy Motel access, reducing the volume of traffic to the Diamond Lane / Elm St
intersection, and provide a queueing and passing opportunity for vehicles on Diamond Lane
without affecting the access to Wessel Petroleum or traffic flow on Elm St.
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 17 of 22
Page 18
34 Elm St, Cooroy Appendix A –Proposed Development Plan 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 18 of 22
Page 19
34 Elm St, Cooroy DRAWING SCHEDULE 1 TITLE PAGE 2 SITE PLAN/ GROUND FLOOR PLAN 3 SITE PLAN/ FIRST FLOOR PLAN 4 ELEVATIONS no. date amendments ail "LES Wl andrew mckellar design 62 hilton terrace noosaville (07) 5449 9066 www.and-design.com.au [email protected] 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 19 of 22
Page 20
34 Elm St, Cooroy
date amendments
SITE AREA: 2014 SQM
GROSS FLOOR AREA:
SHOPS: 640sqm ;
UNITS: 2 x 2 bedroom (90sqm ea)
CAR SPACES:
SHOPS: 32 required (1/20 )
31 provided inc 8 scooters (2 cars q
UNITS: 2 cars (garages).
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT: 10%; 201
212.75sq
0 2000 5000 10000 20000
Ty]
scale 1:200
Lots 4 - 6 on RP72698
34 Elm Street
Cooroy
Tea 2h
Tom Pere elEa Rae Peketvame
Tithe Or
u
ANVT GNOWVIC
proposed easement
/ shown hatched; 864.25sqm
LSS5YLS WdO
gta
gsao
+
soe yatiow line martin
‘ne stopping-ne
wo eat 5 . =
jy . hy FORE IY
wet aan + ae 4 soo 4 ° | 4
ELM STREET a | ¥
is) £
z i
i | ' é
site plan/ i |
round floor plan al
g p e
a
ae) |
§| |
12
= Client Location o Drawing Scale Drawn
al design KEXRON PTY LTD {| SITE PLAN/ 1200@A2] AM
vndrew metsier tte an 34 ELM STREET GROUND FLOOR PLAN
62 hitton te Project Drawing no. Page Date
rece saan ce cash ry. 0073 | DOVECOT MERCIAL DA-16.0518.2 20F4 | suLy2018
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment
Page 20 of 22
Page 21
34 Elm St, Cooroy no. date amendments o 2000 5000 10000 20000 scale 1:200 ANVT GNOWVIG fey poe se em, ase Oo , 0 2 > . 5 = + % BaP EL HT PaaeEH : a T I ; a m m 4 3 90 me 90.m2 : 3h bse ed i Wr wr = —= LOT4 986eqm Nl | WA \ \ = : = —— f ELM STREET site plan/ first floor plan - Client Location Drawing Scale Drawn al ilesign KEXRON PTY LTD SITE PLAN/ 1200@42| AM sadrew mekellar deslan 34 ELM STREET GROUND FLOOR PLAN ot ‘ Project COOROY Drawi Pi Date Papamoa sone cosams e607 | DOE SOUR MERCIAL DA-16.0518.3 "30F4 | yury 20s 360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 21 of 22
Page 22
34 Elm St, Cooroy
no. Mate amendments
yi
ireay
is trace height 5.0 te
eolourbond custom orb soutieg
ited tires gabe seats
cotourbond suns
eet
5)
3
im str
north elevation
i elevation to diamond lane =
; —sam pon E
a / featse vent cladding on steaiftirber tamed .
3 A parepel as selected \ 3
/
comutund custom
ub wotry lo meriy
diamond lane
opal street
FS
durian Yaned wep torts
west elevation
elevation to elm street
adSry on ee irbe Yee
parepel as selected =
Taundaryline
cotourbond custom ob rating —— .
cotoubond windeas food NH coeustund custom ‘"
“ NN arb roaring 1 waning —\, \
= SN .
g | * ! |
————+ / ry
sete inter gate ten —}—/
taatre wal wth
Se south elevation
Eeebet fenestration betwee!
poste
J 2
i elevation to opal street 4
J nas hag 00m ki o
meen 3 2
i ‘ Fog
Bothy = .
= Fr * a arcane uted guitar & tases &
a : S
=] cS
tendered & painted
biochwork fre-wat
4
I
enttngen cnatnter ane | /
' so eed
ahem trees widow
east elevation
0 2000 5000 10000 20000
TUS LJ = Client Location Drawing Scale Drawn
scale 1:200 al design KEXRON PTY LTD ELEVATIONS 1:200@A2] AM
we dsew meteor Neian 34 ELM STREET
62 hiton terrace Pree o COOROY Drawing no. Page Date
PERL EMS aca rey.es07s | DEVELOPMENT aL DA-16.0518.4 40F4 | uty2018
360 Civil Consulting - Traffic Assessment Page 22 of 22