Attachment 3 - Traffic Further Issues Response_TTPlus10553_20220330.pdf

      Query 4
31.   I note that with regards to Council’s fourth query “Item 8b of the RFI has not been addressed. This needs to be
      resolved now, at least conceptually, and not put off to a later stage of approval, because parking supply may
      need to reduce to achieve the eventual outcome.” — item 8b of the Council RFI was addressed in the TTPlus
      report dated 22-Nov-2021 — “The eastern carpark is to be modified such that the southern access is to be
      removed, leaving only the northern access to service both ingress and egress movements. As such, it is now
      proposed to remove one of the parking spaces close to the proposed hotel entrance and provide a marked
      turnaround bay at the southern end of the eastern carpark area. Therefore, if a car enters the eastern carpark
      and is unable to find a space, the turnaround bay will allow the driver to manoeuvre their car to exit the carpark
      without having to reverse down the aisle.”.
32.   To clarify for the sake of directly responding to the query, there is no intent to dedicate/quarantine particular
      areas of the site for specific uses. This allows optimal use of the infrastructure and is not of tangible
      inconvenience to users as, for example, (as evidenced by the surveys) golf patrons already congregate towards
      the western end of the site, whereas hotel patrons, naturally would prefer the eastern end. At busier times of
      course, the appropriate level of mixing would occur.


      Recommendations
33.   To reiterate, as evidenced by the provided survey information, the primary position of TTPlus is that the existing
      on-site car parking provisions would be suitable to accommodate the demands of the proposed use in an
      environment where Noosa Council is actively pursuing an increase in alternative mode provision (to accord with
      Noosa Plan). As a part of this the identified and recommended initiatives directly related to the site ought to be
      implemented, and are able to be conditioned.
34.   In the alternative, should additional car parking be provided on site as is now proposed, whilst still desirable of
      course, no such conditioning related to alternative modes need be included in the conditions of approval as
      sufficient parking will exist to provide 1 space per hotel room.

      We trust that this information is of assistance. Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned to discuss any
      aspect of the above further.




      Yours faithfully




      Bryce Trevilyan – RPEQ #07745
      Traffic & Transport Plus




      Report2_10553—20220328.docx                                                                                8


[OCR of page images]
31.

32.

33.

34.

Query 4

| note that with regards to Council's fourth query “/tem 8b of the RFI has not been addressed. This needs to be
resolved now, at least conceptually, and not put off to a later stage of approval, because parking supply may
need to reduce to achieve the eventual outcome.” — item 8b of the Council RFI was addressed in the TTPlus
report dated 22-Nov-2021 — “The eastern carpark is to be modified such that the southern access is to be
removed, leaving only the northern access to service both ingress and egress movements. As such, it is now
proposed to remove one of the parking spaces close to the proposed hotel entrance and provide a marked
turnaround bay at the southern end of the eastern carpark area. Therefore, if a car enters the eastern carpark
and is unable to find a space, the turnaround bay will allow the driver to manoeuvre their car to exit the carpark
without having to reverse down the aisle.”.

To clarify for the sake of directly responding to the query, there is no intent to dedicate/quarantine particular
areas of the site for specific uses. This allows optimal use of the infrastructure and is not of tangible
inconvenience to users as, for example, (as evidenced by the surveys) golf patrons already congregate towards
the western end of the site, whereas hotel patrons, naturally would prefer the eastern end. At busier times of
course, the appropriate level of mixing would occur.

Recommendations

To reiterate, as evidenced by the provided survey information, the primary position of TTPlus is that the existing
on-site car parking provisions would be suitable to accommodate the demands of the proposed use in an
environment where Noosa Council is actively pursuing an increase in alternative mode provision (to accord with
Noosa Plan). As a part of this the identified and recommended initiatives directly related to the site ought to be
implemented, and are able to be conditioned.

In the alternative, should additional car parking be provided on site as is now proposed, whilst still desirable of
course, no such conditioning related to alternative modes need be included in the conditions of approval as
sufficient parking will exist to provide 1 space per hotel room.

We trust that this information is of assistance. Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned to discuss any
aspect of the above further.

Yours faithfully

BryCe Trevilyan —- RPEQ #07745
Traffic & Transpoft Plus

Report2_10553—20220328.docx 8