Skip to the record
Accept no imitations.

Council archive · source document

Information Request MCU23-0135 [As Published] · MCU23/0135

of 15

Text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

                          g) Identify car park layout details on the plans including aisle dimensions, car parking
                             space dimensions, column sizes and their location relative to parking spaces and
                             aisles.

                          h) Redesign the loading area to accommodate an Austroads HRV.

                          i)   Provide a more direct linkage off the end of the bottom of the western ramp in the
                               basement, eliminating the dog-leg manoeuvre.

                          j)   Provide clear definition of priority and assess and provide appropriate sight lines
                               at the junctions in the vicinity of the base of the western basement ramp, and at
                               the top of the deck ramp.

                          k) Provide clear dimensions and longitudinal gradients of the proposed circulation
                             ramps.

                 Issue – Traffic Impact Assessment
                 The following concerns with the traffic impact assessment have been identified:
                          a) While the traffic impact assessment assessed impacts on intersections on the local
                             road system, it did not assess impacts at the most critical locations, being at the
                             Walter Hay Drive access and the Eenie Creek Road access, which is required to
                             be undertaken.

                          b) Traffic counts were undertaken when roadworks was being undertaken at the
                             eastern end of Civic Drive such that the eastern end of Civic Drive was
                             unusable. The extent to which existing access occurs via Walter Hay Drive was
                             thus unable to be determined and creates uncertainty as to the validity of any
                             further assessment requested in (a), unless the traffic counts are redone.

                          c) The traffic generation calculations for the new development did not consider or
                             inappropriately considered the following elements:

                                   i.   The traffic generation of the existing development includes a significant
                                        proportion of showroom elements, which generate lower traffic volumes
                                        than shops. It is therefore not appropriate to assume that the proposed
                                        new retail area will generate traffic at the same or lesser rate than the
                                        existing development on Lot 1. An adjustment to the existing traffic
                                        generation for Lot 1 needs to be made to inflate that volume to reflect the
                                        fact that the existing traffic generation includes a significant amount of lower
                                        traffic generating showroom areas.

                                  ii.   There is no indication of whether there were any vacant tenancies in Lot 1
                                        when the surveys were undertaken. If there were, then the generation rate
                                        of existing Lot 1 development needs to be inflated accordingly.

                                 iii.   Decay curve adjustments to the traffic generation rate used in the traffic
                                        impact assessment for the larger overall development have been
                                        undertaken on an absolute basis which is inappropriate. Proportional
                                        adjustments would be considered, but not a blanket reduction of 2.5vph per
                                        100m2 for all centre sizes.
                 Information Required:
                 14. Update the traffic impact assessment to incorporate the above elements.




                                                                                                              Page 12 of 15
Document Set ID: 22664361
Version: 1, Version Date: 15/11/2023

Used in these records

About this file

File size
150 KB (small file)
File type
PDF

No other editions are linked here.

Original file

Log in to download the original file

Information Request MCU23-0135 [As Published].pdf · 150 KB (small file)

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.