Council archive · source document
Response to Further Advice - Road Safety Audit Report 22BRT0122 RSA_2_250722 · OPW25/0042
Road Safety Audit Report Thematic Road Safety Audit 3 – 7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Client: Calile Malouf Investments Pty Ltd
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 19 pages
Page 2
Disclaimer
This letter has been prepared by Colliers for the exclusive use of the client for the specific purpose stated
within. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this letter are based on the
information available, assumptions made, and methodologies applied at the time of analysis.
Colliers shall not be held liable for any losses, damages, or reliance placed on this letter beyond the scope
of the agreed-upon engagement. Any reproduction or distribution of this letter without Colliers’ consent
is prohibited.
Revision Record
No. Author/s Reviewed/Approved Description Date
1. M Grierson M Grierson RSA Report - Final 18/07/2025
N Seneviratne
J Knell
2. M Grierson M Grierson RSA Report - Revised 22/07/2025
N Seneviratne
J Knell
3.
4.
5.
© 2025- Colliers International Engineering and Design (TTMC) Pty Ltd ABN 65 010 868 621
Level 8, 369 Ann Street, Brisbane. PO Box 12015 George Street Brisbane 4003
Page 3
Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 3
1.1 Context ................................................................................................................................................3
1.2 Site Location and Study Area ...............................................................................................................3
1.3 Audit Stage and Audit Procedure ........................................................................................................5
2 Background for this RSA ................................................................................................................................ 6
2.1 Scope of Audit .....................................................................................................................................6
2.2 Responding to this Audit Report .........................................................................................................6
2.3 The Safe System ..................................................................................................................................7
2.4 Audit Team ..........................................................................................................................................8
2.5 Site Inspection .....................................................................................................................................8
2.6 Drawings Reviewed .............................................................................................................................8
3 Existing Road Environment Review................................................................................................................ 9
3.1 Road Network......................................................................................................................................9
3.2 Crash History .......................................................................................................................................9
4 Road Safety Audit Findings.......................................................................................................................... 10
4.1 Findings and Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 10
4.2 Risk Assessment Criteria ................................................................................................................... 10
4.3 Recommendation Hierarchy ............................................................................................................. 12
5 Audit Team Statement ................................................................................................................................ 13
Appendix A Road Safety Audit Findings ........................................................................................................... 14
Table Index
Table 3.1: Existing Road Classifications ......................................................................................................................................9
Table 4.1: Likelihood Profiles (as per Austroads GRS Part 6) ..................................................................................................10
Table 4.2: Crash Severity Profiles (as per Austroads GRS Part 6) ...........................................................................................11
Table 4.3: RSA Risk Matrix (Replication of Figure 10.2 from Austroads GRS Part 6) .............................................................11
Table 4.4: Safe System Treatment Category / Hierarchy ........................................................................................................12
Figure Index
Figure 1.1 Site Location – Area view (Google Maps) .................................................................................................................4
Figure 1.2 Site Location – Intersection view (NearMap Aerial) ................................................................................................5
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 4
1 Introduction 1.1 Context Colliers International Engineering & Design (TTMC) Pty Ltd. has been engaged to undertake a Road Safety Audit (RSA) for proposed development located at 3 – 7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads QLD 4567. This RSA has been commissioned by Calile Malouf Investments Pty Ltd at request of Noosa Shire Council as part of the operational works application process of the project. The associated roads within the study area are controlled by Noosa Shire Council (Council) as the local road authority for the proposed development roads. The audit team has undertaken a thematic audit focused on the temporary safety impacts associated with the heavy vehicle movements of the bulk earthworks and the proposed traffic control. This report summarises the possible road safety issues which have been identified by the audit team using a combination of on-site investigations, review of the existing conditions, a review of the proposed Traffic Guidance Scheme (TGS) and background material (development application traffic reporting). Recommendations for potential remedial treatments have been made in response to each safety issue that has been identified as part of this audit process. A Road Safety Audit is intended to help deliver a safer road system and is not a review of compliance with standards. 1.2 Site Location and Study Area The audit area comprises of the road area surrounding the site, for the extent as defined below: • Grant Street (between Noosa Drive and Banksia Avenue roundabouts). • Banksia Avenue North (along the site frontage and between Grant Street and Serenity Close). • Serenity Close (along the site frontage). A map showing the study area and specific area assessed as part of this audit is included in Figure 1.1. Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 5
Figure 1.1 Site Location – Area view (Google Maps) Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 6
Figure 1.2 Site Location – Intersection view (NearMap Aerial) 1.3 Audit Stage and Audit Procedure This report results from a Thematic Road Safety Audit (RSA), which has been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of Austroads Guide to Road Safety - Part 6 Road Safety Audit (2022) (GRS Part 6). The thematic audit safety review has focused on the temporary risks that might be exacerbated during the bulk earthworks stages of the project and the Traffic Guidance Scheme (TGS) that has been developed to manage the road environment during this stage of the project. The thematic audit has therefore focused on risk issues associated with increased heavy vehicle (HV) movements and construction operations. This audit has considered the various aspects of the road environment that may result in potential safety issues, generally in line with the elements/topics outlined in the Prompt Lists contained within Appendix H of the Austroads GRS Part 6. This audit covers only the study area and has sought to identify potential safety hazards. However, the auditors would like to point out that no guarantee is made that every deficiency or hazard has been identified. Further, if all recommendations in this report were to be followed, this would not guarantee that the study area is ‘safe’; rather, adoption of the recommendations should improve the level of safety at this location. Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 7
2 Background for this RSA 2.1 Scope of Audit The audited area covers the following Noosa Shire Council controlled road intersections: • Grant Street / Banksia Avenue • Serenity Close / Banksia Avenue In addition to a review of the local road network defined audit area. The location of this intersection is shown in Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2. This report summarises the possible road safety issues which have been identified by the audit team within the audit area, using a combination of on-site investigations and a review of drawings and background material. Recommendations for potential remedial treatments have been made in response to each safety issue that has been identified as part of this audit process. The audit team notes that no guarantee is made that every potential road safety issue within the audit area has been identified. Further, if all recommendations in this report were to be followed, this would not guarantee that the study area is ‘safe’. Rather, adoption of the recommendations to treat the road safety issues identified should improve the overall level of safety for the roads in question. 2.2 Responding to this Audit Report As noted in Austroads GRS Part 6, the client team (i.e. designer/project manager/road authority) is responsible for considering the findings of this RSA and deciding on the most appropriate response. The client team is under no obligation to accept all the recommendations detailed in this report. Also, it is not the role of the audit team to agree or approve the client team’s response to the audit. Rather, the RSA process provides the opportunity for the audit team (which includes independent and appropriate qualified/experienced persons) to identify potential road safety issues that may not have been apparent to the client team. This in turn allows the client team to consider actions to improve overall road safety of a road/design whilst weighing up all other relevant matters (i.e. cost, time, constraints, perceived benefit). In the case of a design stage audit, an action may include a design change to a certain element to resolve the issue. In the case of an existing road stage audit, this may include planning or scheduling proactive/reactive road improvements to resolve the issue. This audit report should be responded to in writing by the client team. If any recommendations in this report are rejected by the client team, then in each case reasons for this rejection should be included in the written response. Acceptance of a recommendation may require no further comment, but an explanation of how or when the action will be taken may be useful and should be provided where possible. To assist the client team with this process, the table of findings and recommendations contains an area for a formal response. Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 8
2.3 The Safe System
The Safe System philosophy is an internationally recognised approach in terms of dealing with the issue of
road safety. This is underpinned by four key elements (‘pillars’) that influence safety outcomes. This includes:
• Safe Roads
• Safe Speeds
• Safe Vehicles
• Safe People
The Safe System approach recognises that all people make mistakes which lead to road crashes. Recognising
this fact, the above four elements should work together in order to reduce the likelihood of Fatal and Serious
Injuries (FSIs) on the road network. Working in harmony, if all elements are strengthened they result in a
multiplying effect to eliminate FSIs. However, if one element fails there is redundancy in the system so road
users are still protected. Further details covering the Safe System is included in the Austroads Guide to Road
Safety Part 1: Introduction and the Safe System (GRS Part 1).
The Safe System philosophy has been considered as part of this RSA in the following ways:
1. Identifying road safety issues likely to result in FSI crashes.
2. Relating possible crash severity/forces to levels likely to results in FSIs and giving these a heightened
priority.
3. Considering recommendations/treatments in alignment with the Safe System elements with the aim to
eliminate FSIs.
With regards to Item 2 above, an understanding of the kinetic energy in crashes is important to estimating
likely crash severity. The Austroads GRS Part 6 suggests the following are the predominant crash types in
Australia and New Zealand that typically result in FSIs:
• Head on crashes
• Intersection crashes
• Run-off road crashes
• Vulnerable road user crashes (pedestrians, cyclists, motorcycles, children/elderly).
Austroads GRS Part 1 also suggests the critical crash speeds for the above crash types is as follows:
• Head-on vehicle-to-vehicle (equal mass) crash: 70 km/h.
• Side impact vehicle-to-vehicle crash: 50 km/h
• Vehicle striking a pole or tree: 40 km/h
• Pedestrian /motorcyclists struck by vehicle: 30 km/h
This information has been considered when completing the risk assessment and ranking of road safety issues
identified as part of this RSA. Further details on this are provided in Section 4.2.
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 9
2.4 Audit Team
The Audit Team comprised the following members:
• Matthew Grierson – Senior Road Safety Auditor (Team Leader), Colliers International Engineering &
Design Pty Ltd
• Nilu Seneviratne – Road Safety Auditor, Colliers International Engineering & Design Pty Ltd
• James Knell – Road Safety Auditor, Colliers International Engineering & Design Pty Ltd
2.5 Site Inspection
A site inspection of the audit area was conducted on Tuesday, 8th July 2025. The inspection was conducted
in the day / night to assess the existing road network conditions. The weather condition during the
inspection was clear and dry during the day and at night. The inspection was carried out both on foot and in
a vehicle.
2.6 Drawings Reviewed
The drawings reviewed as part of the Road Safety Audit are listed below.
Avada Traffic – Traffic Guidance Scheme set of drawings (TGS):
• Plan number CMI-1AP-25040286
o CMI-1AP-25040286.1 – Rev 0
o CMI-1AP-25040286.2 – Rev 0
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 10
3 Existing Road Environment Review
3.1 Road Network
This RSA was carried out within the Noosa Shire Council (NSC) local government area. The hierarchy and
characteristics of roads within the study area are shown in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Existing Road Classifications
Road Speed Limit Lanes Classification Management
Noosa Drive 40 – 50km/h 2 (undivided, sealed) State Road NCC
Grant Street 50km/h 2 (divided, sealed) Local Road NCC
Banksia Avenue North 50km/h 2 (undivided, sealed) Local Road NCC
Serenity Close 50km/h 2 (undivided/divided, sealed) Local Road NCC
3.2 Crash History
Colliers have sourced publicly available crash data from Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR)
for the last 10 years (2014 – 2023), which occurred on the road segments within the study area of this RSA.
Between 2014 –2023 there have been no recorded crashes within the vicinity of the development site or
along the roads within the identified study area.
A number of crashes were reported at intersection of Noosa Drive / Grant Street most of which were
generally lower injury category and consistent with intersection operations (rear end or adjacent approach
crashes).
Based on the above crash data, the audit team has not identified any significant trends associated with the
recorded crashes.
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 11
4 Road Safety Audit Findings
4.1 Findings and Recommendations
A summary of the Road Safety Audit findings along with recommended treatments is provided as appendices
to this report.
Appendix A provides the RSA findings table for the intersection.
Further information is also provided in the following sections to assist with understanding the process used
in ranking the safety issues identified and providing potential recommended treatments.
4.2 Risk Assessment Criteria
The road safety issues identified as part of this audit have been assigned a ranking, as per the methodology
contained within Austroads GRS Part 6, in order to provide an idea of priority for action. The different ranks
include:
• Negligible
• Low
• Medium
• High
• Extreme
These rankings were determined through a risk assessment, using a combination of crash likelihood and
severity (i.e. consequence of resulting crash).
The crash likelihood profile, severity profile and overall risk matrix adopted for the purposes of ranking the
safety issues is summarised Table 4.1, Table 4.2, Table 4.3 respectively. Once again, these are based
primarily on the guidance in Austroads GRS Part 6.
Table 4.1: Likelihood Profiles (as per Austroads GRS Part 6)
Frequency Description
Almost Certain Occurrence once or more per quarter
Likely Occurrence once per quarter to once per year
Possible Occurrence once per year to once every three years
Unlikely Occurrence once every three years to once every seven years
Rare Occurrence less than once every seven years
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 12
Table 4.2: Crash Severity Profiles (as per Austroads GRS Part 6)
Severity Description
Fatal Likely death at scene or within 30 days of the crash
Serious Admitted to hospital
Moderate Major first aid and/or presents to hospital (not admitted)
Minor Minor first aid
Insignificant Likely trivial injury or property damage only
Table 4.3: RSA Risk Matrix (Replication of Figure 10.2 from Austroads GRS Part 6)
Severity
Insignificant Minor Moderate Serious Fatal
Major first
aid and/or Death within
Property Minor First Admitted to
presents to 30 days of
Damage Aid Hospital
hospital (not the crash
admitted)
Almost Extreme Extreme
One per quarter Medium High High
Certain (FSI) (FSI)
Extreme Extreme
Likely Quarter to 1 year Medium Medium High
(FSI) (FSI)
(includes exposure)
Extreme
Possible 1 to 3 years Low Medium High High (FSI)
(FSI)
Extreme
Unlikely 3 to 7 years Negligible Low Medium High (FSI)
Likelihood
(FSI)
Medium
Rare 7 years + Negligible Negligible Low High (FSI)
(FSI)
FSI – Denotes where the level of risk also includes Fatal or Serious Injuries.
It is noted that this risk ranking is based on the subjective engineering assessment of the audit team of
expected likelihood and severity. With regards to likelihood, guidance has been drawn from any respective
crash history related to the identified issue. Where there is no crash history, likelihood has otherwise been
assumed based on the audit team judgement.
As for severity, guidance for this used to determine the most suitable crash severity has been considered
based on the speed environment and kinetic energy threshold levels (as previously discussed Section 2.3).
Austroads GRS Part 6 suggests the corresponding priorities for mitigation, based on the selected ranking,
should be as follows:
• Negligible – no action required.
• Low – should be corrected.
• Medium – should be corrected or the risk significantly reduced, if the treatment cost is moderate, but
not high.
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 13
• High – should be corrected or the risk significantly reduced, even if the treatment cost is high.
• Extreme – should be corrected regardless of cost.
No definitive guidance can be given as to the respective monetary values of the terms ‘low’, ‘moderate’ or
‘high’ regarding treatment costs, but it is expected that consideration against the total project cost (or total
benefit) would be an important factor when categorising mitigation of each risk.
4.3 Recommendation Hierarchy
When considering the recommendations related to each road safety issue identified in this RSA, the audit
team has determined this in a manner which aligns with the Safe System philosophy. The audit team has
generally followed the treatment category/hierarchy as detailed in Figure 5.3 of Austroads GRS Part 6. This is
replicated in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4: Safe System Treatment Category / Hierarchy
Treatment Category Description
Primary Treatment Road planning, design and management considerations that practically eliminate the
potential of FSIs occurring in association with the foreseeable crash types.
Supporting Road planning, design and management considerations that improve the overall level of
(Step Towards) safety associated with foreseeable crash types, but not expected to virtually eliminate
the potential of FSIs occurring.
However, this treatment improves the ability for a Primary Treatment to be implemented
in the future.
Supporting Treatment Road planning, design and management considerations that improve the overall level of
safety associated with foreseeable crash types, but not expected to virtually eliminate
the potential of FSIs occurring.
This treatment does not change the ability for a Primary Treatment to be implemented in
the future.
Non-Safe System Road planning, design and management considerations that are not expected to achieve
Treatment an overall improvement in the level of safety associated with foreseeable crash types
occurring.
Other Elements
Reduces the ability for a primary treatment to be implemented in the future.
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 14
5 Audit Team Statement We, the undersigned, declare that this RSA has been conducted in accordance with the procedures set out in the Austroads GRS Part 6. This audit report contains findings and recommendations based on examination of the site and/or relevant documentation. The report is based on the conditions viewed on the day / time of each site inspection/s and it relevant at the time of production of the report. Recommendations have been provided, representing options to improve/resolve the identified safety issues in line with Safe Systems principles. Whilst every effort has been made to identify potential safety issues, no guarantee can be made that every deficiency has been identified. We recommend that points of concern be investigated, and necessary corrective actions are undertaken. Matthew Grierson – Senior Road Safety Auditor (Team Leader)............................................. 22/07/25 Nilu Seneviratne – Road Safety Auditor.............................................. 22/07/25 James Knell – Road Safety Auditor............................................. 22/07/25 Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 15
Appendix A Road Safety Audit Findings Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 16
Reviewers: M Grierson, J Knell, N Seneviratne Colliers International Engineering & Design Responder:
Date: 22/07/2025 Date:
Client Response
Item Location Audit Finding Risk Level Recommendation Accept Comments
Yes/No
1 Grant Grant Street is a divided carriageway roadway with kerbside parking. The Severity: Consider expanding the extents of the temporary traffic
Street current TGS does not include the southern section of Grant Street, Fatal management works and reduced speed / speed control area to
where there are some constrained road sections. Likelihood: include more of Grant Street.
Temporary Consider additional signage and temporary line marking to help
Risk of vehicle speeds not being appropriately managed on approach to Possible
Traffic manage vehicle speeds on approach to the works area and through
the works area and leading to increased risk of vehicles (especially HV) Outcome:
Manageme the bend of Grant Street.
crashes. Extreme
nt TGS
(FSI)
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 17
Client Response
Item Location Audit Finding Risk Level Recommendation Accept Comments
Yes/No
2 Constructi The pedestrian pathways and crossing provisions surrounding the site Severity: Consider a review of the pedestrian provisions around the works
on Site are incomplete and/or disconnected in some locations (Grant Street). Fatal area and the temporary traffic control to redirect pedestrians away
Accesses With the inclusion of additional limitations due to temporary works Likelihood: from potential conflicts.
and areas, pedestrians may walk on the roadway to avoid works area. Possible Pedestrian provision should consider bypassing critical conflict
Frontages Exposing themselves to increase risk of collisions with vehicles in the
Outcome: locations with HV crossing the verges.
roadway.
Extreme
Consider redirecting and provide temporary kerb ramping to allow
(FSI)
for less mobile users to avoid the works area interface.
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 18
Client Response
Item Location Audit Finding Risk Level Recommendation Accept Comments
Yes/No
3 Grant There is a potential pinch point on Grant St at the northern bend Severity: Consider restricting parking on the westbound section of Grant
Street approaching the Banksia Avenue roundabout. Due to the Fatal Street at the bend to provide additional turning width for vehicles
westbound separated lanes and kerbside parking. Likelihood: driving westbound on Grant Street.
Consider the use of some form of signage, bollards and/or line
lane Possible
Risk of larger vehicles colliding with parked cars, cyclists on the marking (yellow no standing line marking) in proximity to the Grant
Outcome: St bend to widen out the available road area.
road at this pinch point. Risk of cyclists being caught between a
Extreme
parked car and a passing truck.
(FSI)
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 19
Client Response
Item Location Audit Finding Risk Level Recommendation Accept Comments
Yes/No
4 Grant There are a number of narrow indented parking bays along the northern Severity: Consider a review of the indented parking bays along the northern
Street (southbound) extent of Grant Street. Serious side Grant Street and restrict parking as required.
Likelihood: The indented parking bays near bend are the most likely to impact
Eastbound These narrow bays may not be suitable to accommodate a parked car available road width for through vehicles.
and still maintain appropriate lane width for a Heavy Vehicle to pass. Possible
/ Consider extending the road works speed control along the
Outcome: northern side of Grant St (west / southbound) to reduce vehicle
southboun Risk of a larger vehicle colliding with /clipping a parked car overhanging
High (FSI) speeds and mitigate the severity and likelihood of possible crashes.
d into the through lane. A parked car may have occupants, or a passing
pedestrian might be hit by an impacted vehicle.
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Page 20
Client Response
Item Location Audit Finding Risk Level Recommendation Accept Comments
Yes/No
5 Serenity The pedestrian path on Serenity Close terminates near the midblock site Severity: Consider additional pedestrian detour signage to encourage
Close access (northern property frontage). Pedestrians continuing along the Fatal pedestrians to the northern side of Serenity Close along the existing
Southern southern verge could conflict with HV turning movements into/out of Likelihood: paved footpaths and restrict pedestrian access along the site
Frontage the site. frontage (southern side of Serenity Close).
Rare
Risk of pedestrians being struck by HV accessing/egressing the site.
Outcome:
High (FSI)
Site: Serenity Close Noosa Heads – Thematic RSA Report
Reference: 22BRT0122 RP01_2_RSA
Used in these records
Response to Further Advice - Road Safety Audit Report 22BRT0122 RSA_2_250722.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 1.2 MB (small file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.