D. Traffic Report

        The submitted swept path diagrams demonstrate that a 12.5 metre heavy rigid vehicle reversing from the
        loading bay will conflict with any vehicle utilising bowsers situated at the end of the canopy.

        Amended plans which detail that there will be no bowsers at the end of the canopy or plans amended so that
        this conflict is removed.

        Response 10

        A 12.5m (Austroads) Heavy Rigid Vehicle (HRV) was used to simulate a front loading Refuse Collection
        Vehicle (RCV) accessing the site and rear loading area (as illustrated by Figure 4 within Appendix B of the
        initial traffic report. It is acknowledged that a vehicle cannot be parked at the southernmost bowser while a
        HRV is accessing the site. Figure 5 within Appendix B of the initial traffic report also demonstrated this was
        the case for an 8.8m (Austroads) Medium Rigid Vehicle (MRV). However, the plans for the site have been
        revised to reduce the building’s footprint and relocate the building and loading area further south. While
        an RCV is still unable to circulate and service the site in the event of the southernmost bowser being
        occupied (attached Figures 4 and 5), an MRV can now manoeuvre the southernmost bowser, even when
        occupied by a car, due to the reconfiguration of car spaces (displayed on the attached Figure 6).

        Refuse collection would occur infrequently (i.e. once or twice per week), for a short duration and during off-
        peak periods in which there is limited customer activity. As such, for the isolated occasions a vehicle is
        using the southernmost bowser, the RCV will need to wait momentarily. Accordingly, it is not proposed
        that the southern bowsers be removed. In the event that the frequency of conflict becomes an issue, the
        service station manager may implement strategies to assist access, such as temporarily blocking access to
        the southernmost bowser.

        Reconfiguration of the site’s car parking has also led to an increase in provision by three (3) spaces,
        designated for the following users: two visitor and one air / water space. This increase also means the
        proposed development is fully compliant with the car parking requirements of the Noosa Planning Scheme
        for types 2 and 5 of the ‘Retail Business’ land use (12 spaces as identified in Section 3.2.1 of the initial traffic
        report). The air / water space can be accessed directly from the site’s ingress (shown in the attached Figure
        7), with two visitor bays replacing the single car space previously located in the southeastern corner of the
        site. Provision of the air / water bay along the eastern boundary does not impact the manoeuvring of cars
        and service vehicles.

I trust this additional information is of assistance.

If there any further queries regarding this information, please contact me.

Yours sincerely,




Gerard Reardon
RPEQ #17765
Director
MRCagney Pty Ltd


                                                             3

                                                                                                          6396_B_RFI_001(2)_NSC.docx