F - Traffic Response and Revised Traffic Impact Assessment (17.09.19)

showroom standard, a relaxation wouldn’t be appropriate if all the uses occupying tenancies generate a
higher car parking demand, particularly given the developments format that reflects a shopping centre
with a mix of large format retail and specialty shops.
Furthermore, it is not agreed with the proposition in the parking analysis of the Cambray Consulting
report that cross utilisation of parking spaces (where someone parks on the site and visits multiple
tenancies during the one trip) results in a reduced parking demand. Cross utilisation results in lower
traffic generation demands but not reduced parking demands. While the customer is visiting one tenancy
it is generating a parking demand associated with that tenancy, and if that customer then visits another
tenancy it is generating a parking demand at that second tenancy. If the customer only visits the first
tenancy and then departs the site, the vehicle is parked on the site for a shorter period of time and does
not generate the parking demand associated with the visit to the second tenancy.

Information Required – Item 17
Undertake a further worst case parking demand assessment, having regard to the above discussion and:
    a.     which includes clearly defined uses under The Noosa Plan for each tenancy and at a
           minimum, identified anchor tenants; and
    b.     any changes to the proposed configuration and format of uses. Issue – External traffic
           impacts.

The submitted Cambray Consulting report compares the traffic generation of the previous Masters
approval with that of the subject proposal, indicating that the traffic generation of the Masters approval
is greater than that associated with the proposal, such that traffic impact assessment is not required.

However, external traffic conditions may have changed overtime and the traffic generation of the
proposal is governed by the uses that eventuate. Potential uses, different to those assumed in the
Cambray Consulting report, are discussed above, and could lead to greater traffic generation than the
Masters approval. In that regard, if all the smaller tenancies can be shops and food outlets then a shop /
food outlet traffic generation rate would need to be used for those tenancies, if some of the larger
tenancies can be used for hotel and medical centre uses then higher than showroom traffic generation
rates should be used, and a more representative office traffic generation rate of 3vph/100m² should be
used for the offices.

Cambray Response
Further SIDRA traffic impact assessment has been completed based recommended rates for the various
proposed development uses on site. Please refer to Section 9.0 (page 21) and Section 11.0 (page 25) of
the Revised Traffic Report.

The adopted traffic generation rates have been sourced from various industry standard sources,
including:
    • RTA (2002) and RMS (2013) Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (GTGD); and
    • Department of Transport and Main Road (DTMR) (Traffic Generation Data—2006–2018)

These rates are considered to provide an appropriate reflection of the proposed development uses.

The key findings of the traffic analysis are:
    • Peak hour traffic generation associated with the Proposed Development is expected to be lower
        than that of the Previous Approval;
    • The Eenie Creek Road / Walter Hay Drive roundabout intersection might require additional
        capacity upgrades to accommodate background traffic growth (regardless of the proposed
        development);


\\FILE\Projects\BLU0517\01\3. Deliverables\2. Letters\1.RFI\RFI_20 Hofmann Drive, Noosaville.docx   Cambray Consulting Pty Ltd | Page 2