Original source · versioned page text
RFI traffic updated 2016
Attached to the e-mail MCU15/0111 Information Request Response to Concurrence Agency - 2-4 Lamonts Rd & 19 Trading post Rd, Cooroy - email 1 of 2.
Cooroy Retirement Community
Traffic Impact Assessment
Prepared by Calibre Consulting
Prepared for Palm Lakes Resorts
February 2016
B14158.ER02
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 48 pages
Page 2
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE All intellectual property rights, including copyright, in Calibre Consulting designs developed and documents created by Calibre Ground Floor, 545 Queen Street Consulting (Qld) Pty Ltd remain the property of this BRISBANE QLD 4000 company. Any use made of such design or document without the prior written approval of Calibre Consulting (Qld) Pty Ltd will constitute an infringement of the rights of Ph: (07) 3895 3444 the company which reserves all legal rights and remedies © 2016 in respect of any such infringement. The information, including any intellectual property, contained in this proposal is confidential and proprietary to the Company. It may only be used by the person to whom it is provided for the stated purpose for which it is provided and must not be imparted to any third person without the prior written approval of the Company. The Company reserves all legal rights and remedies in relation to any infringement of its rights in respect of its confidential information. DOCUMENT CONTROL B14158.ER02 Issue Date Issue Details Author Checked Approved A 08-02-2016 Final AK AK / JvP JvP (RPEQ 7280) B 09-02-2016 Final - minor update to yield AK AK/ JvP JvP (RPEQ 7280)
Page 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1 SUBJECT SITE AND CURRENT SITE DEVELOPMENT ...................................... 1
1.2 Proposed Site Activity ............................................................................................. 3
2 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK ........................................................................................... 4
2.1 Site Access ............................................................................................................. 4
2.2 Traffic Data.............................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Existing Road Network Conditions .......................................................................... 4
3 TRANSPORT NETWORK ASSESSMENT ...................................................................... 11
3.1 Traffic Generation ................................................................................................. 11
3.2 Intersection Assessment ....................................................................................... 12
3.2.1 Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Pearsons Road intersection ..... 12
3.2.2 Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Lamonts Road Intersection ...... 15
3.2.3 Elm Street / Diamond Street Intersection ................................................ 16
3.3 Link Assessment ................................................................................................... 16
3.4 Refuse Collection .................................................................................................. 17
3.5 On-Site Car Parking .............................................................................................. 18
3.6 Aged Care Facility Car Park Entrance Location.................................................... 18
3.7 SDAP Code Compliance ....................................................................................... 18
4 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT NETWORKS ................................................................... 19
4.1 Pedestrian and Cyclist System ............................................................................. 19
4.2 Public Transport Provision .................................................................................... 19
5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................. 21
TABLES
Table 1-1: Proposed Site Activity .............................................................................................. 3
Table 3-1: AM and PM Period Weekday Trip Generation Rates ............................................ 11
Table 3-2: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Pearsons Road intersection SIDRA
assessment outcomes for 2028 Design Year – priority control (give-way sign)
with and without development ............................................................................ 14
Table 3-3: Existing and 2028 Road Link Assessment with and without Development ............ 17
FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Indicative Site Location (Image: Google Earth) ....................................................... 2
Figure 2-1: Site Locality (Source: Google Maps) ....................................................................... 5
Figure 2-2: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) looking north, note site visible to the
right (Image: Google Maps) .................................................................................. 6
Figure 2-3: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) looking south, photo taken south of
Pearsons Road (Image: Google Maps) ................................................................ 6
Figure 2-4: Pearsons Road looking west, site visible on the right (Image: Google Maps) ........ 7
Figure 2-5: Trading Post Road looking north, site visible on the left (Image: Google Maps) ..... 7
Figure 2-6: Trading Post Road looking north-west (note the unsealed turnaround and
private property access to the right of the photo) (Source: Nearmap) ................. 8
Figure 2-7: Lamonts Road, intersection with Elm Street visible in the background (Image:
Google Maps) ....................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2-8: Intersection of Elm Street and Diamond Street, aerial view (Source: Google
Maps) ................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 2-9: Bruce Highway – Elm Street Off-Ramp and Bruce Highway Overpass, aerial
view (Source: Google Maps) .............................................................................. 10
Page 4
Figure 3-1: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Pearsons Road intersection, 2028 AM
and PM Peak Hour, total volumes including Development Traffic ..................... 12
Figure 3-2: Warrant for Turn Treatments at Elm Street / Pearsons Road Intersection ............ 13
Figure 3-3: Road Functional Layout Plan for Elm Street / Pearsons Road (DA Ref:
132007.2398.02) ................................................................................................ 14
Figure 3-4: Road Functional Layout Plan for Elm Street / Lamonts Road (DA Ref:
132007.2398.02) ................................................................................................ 15
Figure 4.1: Translink Public Bus Service 631 shown on the left, Cooroy Township shown
on the right (Source: Translink) .......................................................................... 19
Figure 4.2: Translink Public Bus Service 632 shown on the left, Cooroy Township shown
on the right (Source: Translink) .......................................................................... 20
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A INDICATIVE SITE LAYOUT PLAN
APPENDIX B TRAFFIC SURVEY DATA
APPENDIX C SIDRA ASSESSMENT RESULTS
APPENDIX D VEHICLE TURN PATHS
APPENDIX E STATE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PROVISIONS (SDAP)
REPORTING
Page 5
1 INTRODUCTION
Calibre Consulting have prepared the following report on behalf of Palm Lakes Resort for the proposed development of a
retirement community at Cooroy, located within the Noosa Shire Council jurisdiction. This report is an update to reporting
previously undertaken at the site (Calibre Consulting Traffic Impact Assessment Report B14158ER01) to account for
additional developable area.
The proposed development area has road frontages alongside Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road), Pearsons Road,
Trading Post Road and Lamonts Road.
The revised yield now proposes 220 Independent Living Units and 120 aged care beds, as compared to the previous
yield of 164 Independent Living Units and 120 aged care beds.
Key items arising from the previous development applications for the site include the following:
The provision of upgrade works to Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Pearsons Road intersection to
incorporate a Channelised Right Turn (CHR) on a two lane rural road in accordance with Main Roads Technical
Manuals, Policies and relevant Guidelines.
The provision of upgrade works to the Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Lamonts Road intersection to
incorporate a Channelised Right Turn (CHR) on a two lane rural road in accordance with Main Roads Technical
Manuals, Policies and relevant Guidelines.
The provision of sealed pavement at Lamonts Road from Elm Street to 10m beyond the access to the
development site in accordance with Council design standards and guidelines.
Provision of a bus stop along Elm Street situated south of the Elm Street / Pearsons Road intersection.
This updated Traffic Impact Assessment report provides information on the expected traffic generated by the revised
development yield and also outlines the assessment of the adjoining traffic network and road intersections. The report
also provides an assessment of the car parking and internal arrangements of the proposed development. These analyses
are consistent with the followings codes and standards:
Sunshine Coast Regional Council’s Transport and Parking Code
Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads’ Road Planning and Design Manual (RPDM)
Guidelines for Assessment of Road Impacts of Development (GARID, 2006).
Throughout this report the developable area is referred to as ‘the site’ which is located within the parcel of land described
as Lot 1 on RP215922, Lot 2 on RP165418 and Lot 4 on RP215922 (approximately 13.94 hectares in total).
1.1 SUBJECT SITE AND CURRENT SITE DEVELOPMENT
The location of the site is approximately 1.5km north of the town centre of Cooroy. Refer to the site location illustrated in
Figure 1-1. An illustration of the proposed ultimate layout of the retirement community is included in Appendix A.
The developable area is currently mostly vacant land mainly used for grazing that is predominantly occupied by
vegetation, with the exception of a single residential dwelling that is located adjacent to the existing Lamonts Road
frontage. The site area has several road frontages along Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) for approximately 600m,
along Pearsons Road for approximately 250m, along Trading Post Road for approximately 180m and at Lamonts Road
for approximately 35m. Access to the site is proposed to occur at the lower order roads, at Lamonts Road, Trading Post
Road and Pearsons Road.
The surrounding property to the north and west of the site is currently bushland with scattered rural residential properties.
Further to the north of the site along Lamonts Road, there are is a private heli-aviation company site. To the west of Elm
Street (Cooroy Connection Road) in the vicinity of the site there is the North Coast Railway Line corridor. The
surrounding property to the south and east of the proposed site are a mix of rural and low density residential allotments.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |1
Page 6
Approximately 1km further south of the site along the western side of Elm Street, there is the Cooroy State School for
primary school children.
Indicative Site Location
North
↑ Pomona (North) → Noosa
↓ Bruce Highway (South)
Figure 1-1: Indicative Site Location (Image: Google Earth)
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |2
Page 7
1.2 PROPOSED SITE ACTIVITY The proposed development is a retirement community consisting of aged care apartments, independent living units (ILU), and shared community centres. Total proposed uses within the site are shown in Table 2-1 with the proposed site layout shown in Appendix A. Table 1-1: Proposed Site Activity Proposed Site Activity Town Planning Definition Extent Aged Care Facility Residential care facility 120 beds Independent Living Units (ILUs) Resort complex 220 lots Community Facilities Clubhouse Indoor sport and recreation 2,100m2 GFA Bowling Greens Outdoor sport and recreation 1,800m2 GFA Tennis Court Outdoor sport and recreation 800m2 GFA Men’s Shed / Workshop Indoor sport and recreation 280m2 GFA B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |3
Page 8
2 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK 2.1 SITE ACCESS The local access streets that currently provide access to the site are Trading Post Road, the main access, and Lamonts Road, the secondary access. The development is proposed to be serviced by three accesses at Lamonts Road, Trading Post Road and Pearsons Road. The accesses at Lamonts Road and Trading Post Road are proposed to provide entry to the retirement resort Independent Living Units (ILUs) and community facilities. The Pearsons Road entry is proposed to provide access to the 120 bed Aged Care Facility and associated car park only. There is no internal roadway connectivity proposed between the 120 bed Aged Care Facility and the balance of the retirement resort. Vehicles travelling to the site will likely utilise Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) and then either Lamonts Road or Pearsons Road. Other roads in the vicinity of the site are Diamond Street (which becomes Tewantin Road (Cooroy-Noosa Road)) located further to the south which provides a link to Noosa and coastal areas to the east. Tewantin Road (Cooroy-Noosa Road) is accessed via the Elm Street / Diamond Street intersection, as Diamond Street becomes Tewantin Road (Cooroy Noosa Road) further east. The Bruce Highway situated to the west of the site is a major road corridor providing a north-south connection to regional destinations such as Gympie to the north, and Eumundi, Nambour, Maroochydore and Brisbane to the south. Bruce Highway is accessed either via Myall Street to the south (permitting, or via Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) to the north via the township of Pomona. 2.2 TRAFFIC DATA For the purpose of this traffic impact assessment, the future year traffic volumes were derived from previous traffic survey data as well as traffic count data obtained from Transport and Main Roads, refer Appendix B. A growth rate of 3.5% per annum, compounded annually was adopted to determine future traffic volumes from current data. This is considered to be a conservative assumption. The opening year, or completion of the works, is anticipated to be towards the end of 2018. The design horizon year is 2028, that is 10 years from the base year of 2018. 2.3 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK CONDITIONS The existing roadway network in the immediate vicinity of the site is comprised of the arterial roads Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) and Tewantin Road (Cooroy-Noosa Road). Both of these routes are within the jurisdiction of the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads. Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) fronts the western boundary of the site. Tewantin Road (Cooroy-Noosa Road) begins as Diamond Street, at the intersection with Elm Street approximately 1.5km south of the site. Refer Figure 2-1. B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |4
Page 9
North
Trading
Post Road
Lamonts Road
Elm Street (Cooroy
Connection Road)
Pearsons Road
Diamond
Street
Figure 2-1: Site Locality (Source: Google Maps)
Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) is a two-way arterial that is sealed single lane carriageway along its length.
Adjacent to the site boundary, Elm Street has a posted speed environment of 100km/h, however the section of Elm Street
south of Pearsons Road has a posted speed environment of 60km/h. Further south of Pearsons Road along Elm Street
there is a school zone with warning signage and speed reductions applicable during school periods. Along its route, Elm
Street is generally 7m in width. The approximate traffic volume along the route is 9,875vpd (TMR, 2013). Elm Street is
mainly used as an access corridor to other local streets in the area, however south of Pearsons Road there are property
accesses directly fronting Elm Street. Along the Elm Street site frontage there are no formal footpaths or cycle ways,
street lighting, or kerb and channel. Further along Elm Street south of the intersection with Pearsons Road towards the
existing school zone, there are footpaths, on-street cycle pathways, street lighting and kerb and channel. Refer Figure
2-2 and Figure 2-3.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |5
Page 10
Figure 2-2: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) looking north, note site visible to the right (Image: Google Maps)
Figure 2-3: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) looking south, photo taken south of Pearsons Road (Image: Google
Maps)
The local roads in the vicinity of the site are Pearsons Road, Trading Post Road and Lamonts Road.
Pearsons Road is a sealed two-way single lane carriageway with no line marking along its length. The posted speed
environment of Pearsons Road is 50km/h, consistent with its classification as a local access street. There are formal
pedestrian pathways located on the southern side of Pearsons Road along its entire length and on the northern side
between Trading Post Road and Kensington Drive to the east. There is generally good street lighting and formed kerb
and channel along the length of Pearsons Road. Refer Figure 2-4.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |6
Page 11
Figure 2-4: Pearsons Road looking west, site visible on the right (Image: Google Maps)
Trading Post Road is a two-way sealed single lane carriageway with kerb and channel along its length. The posted speed
environment of Trading Post Road is 50km/h, consistent with its classification as a local access street. There are
pedestrian pathways located on the northern side of Trading Post Road along its entire length. Trading Post Road is a
no-through route that terminates at a gravel turnaround. Refer Figure 2-5 and Figure 2-6.
Figure 2-5: Trading Post Road looking north, site visible on the left (Image: Google Maps)
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |7
Page 12
Figure 2-6: Trading Post Road looking north-west (note the unsealed turnaround and private property access to the right
of the photo) (Source: Nearmap)
Lamonts Road is currently an unsealed no-through road that provides access to several residential properties and the
heli-aviation company. The posted speed environment of Lamonts Road is 50km/h, consistent with its classification as a
local access street. Do note that the posted speed of the existing Elm Street / Lamonts Road intersection is 100km/h.
Refer Figure 2-7.
Figure 2-7: Lamonts Road, intersection with Elm Street visible in the background (Image: Google Maps)
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |8
Page 13
Further south of the site along Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) there is the Elm Street / Diamond Street
intersection which provides connectivity to the town centre of Cooroy via Elm Street to the south, access to the eastern
coastal areas including Noosa via Diamond Street to the east. Note that Diamond Street becomes Tewantin Road
(Cooroy-Noosa Road) further to the east. The intersection is priority controlled (stop sign) with priority along the north-
south Elm Street intersection approaches. There is a channelised right turn lane from the southern approach, an auxiliary
left turn lane on the northern approach, and a high angle left turn slip lane from the eastern approach. Within the vicinity
of the intersection Diamond Street is a two-way single lane sealed carriageway. Refer Figure 2-8.
Figure 2-8: Intersection of Elm Street and Diamond Street, aerial view (Source: Google Maps)
It is important to note that this intersection also provides access to the Cooroy train station commuter car park. The
access to the commuter car park is priority controlled (stop sign) located to the west of the intersection.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY |9
Page 14
Figure 2-9: Bruce Highway – Elm Street Off-Ramp and Bruce Highway Overpass, aerial view (Source: Google Maps) To the west of the township of Cooroy, the Bruce Highway provides a major north-south link to destinations such as Gympie, Nambour and Brisbane. Refer Bruce Highway (North) off-ramp at Elm Street, and the Elm Street underpass in Figure 2.9. The Bruce Highway (North) is currently accessed via Pomona, although it is understood that works are currently underway by the Queensland Government to provide an interchange at the northern end of Elm Street to provide both access and egress to the northbound and southbound directions along the Bruce Highway. The new interchange is due to be opened later this year in 2016, before the development base year of 2018. This northern connection to the Bruce Highway is not anticipated to affect the site traffic directionality of development vehicle trips. B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 10
Page 15
3 TRANSPORT NETWORK ASSESSMENT
The traffic and transport impact of the proposed development will be considered in this section. For the purposes of the
assessment, it is anticipated that the proposed development will likely be fully developed by the end of year 2018. The 10
year post-construction design horizon will therefore be 2028.
3.1 TRAFFIC GENERATION
The trip generation rate and development traffic for each of the site uses is shown in Table 3-1.
The trip generation rates have been based on the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments. The trip generation
rate for ‘Housing for aged and disabled persons’ is 1 – 2 daily vehicle trips per dwelling, or 0.1 – 0.2 evening peak hour
vehicle trips per dwelling. The guidelines indicate that the trip generation rates of resident funded facilities are generally
greater than subsidised facilities as indicated by the higher end of the range. Therefore a rate of 0.2 evening peak hour
vehicle trips per dwelling has been adopted for the 120 bed aged care facility within the site. A higher trip generation rate
has been applied to the ILUs within the site that is consistent with the RTA Guidelines in relation to medium density
residential flat buildings for smaller units and flats (up to two bedrooms), that is up to 0.5 weekday peak hour vehicle trips
per dwelling. The trip generation rates for the retirement community do not assume a level of self-containment (within the
site), although it is highly probable that some trips will be social visits or recreational trips internal to the retirement
community. Do note that the following assessment is conservative in this regard.
The community facilities within the site are intended for use by the residents and their visitors only. Therefore all trips
associated with the community facilities at the site are internal trips only.
Table 3-1: AM and PM Period Weekday Trip Generation Rates
Proposed Site Activity Number of Units/Beds Final AM Period Trips Final PM Period Trips
Aged Care Facility 120 beds = 0.2 * 120 = 0.2 * 120
=24vph =24vph
Independent Living Units (ILUs) 220 units = 0.5 * 220 = 0.5 * 220
= 110vph = 110vph
Total 340 units/beds 134vph 134vph
1
RTA or Roads and Traffic Authority NSW, “Guide to Traffic Generating Developments” (2002).
Note that there are three proposed accesses to the site, with development traffic proposed to access the site as follows:
Person Road access: proposed access for the 120 bed facility only
Trading Post Road: proposed access for approximately 50% of all trips associated with the ILUs
Lamonts Road: proposed access for approximately 50% of all trips associated with the ILUs
The directionality of trips in/out of the site is as follows:
In/out split of 30/70 during the AM peak hour, with the reverse during the PM peak hour
Total 79vph total two-way development traffic at the Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Pearsons Road
intersection. During the morning peak hour, 24vph travel towards the site, and 55vph travel away from the site.
The reverse is true during the evening peak hour.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 11
Page 16
Total 55vph total two-way development traffic at Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Lamont Road. During
the morning peak hour, 17vph travel towards the site, and 38vph travel away from the site. The reverse is true
during the evening peak hour.
At Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road), it is anticipated that 90% of the 134vph total two-way development
traffic travels south towards the town centre of Cooroy, and the remaining 10% travels north.
The existing properties along Lamonts Road include several (less than 5) rural residential properties and the
heli-aviation company. It is anticipated that the existing traffic volumes along Lamonts Road is approximately
20vph in both the AM and PM peaks. Therefore during the current morning peak hour, it is anticipated that
around 4vph travel towards Lamonts Road, and 16vph travel away from Lamonts Road. The reverse is
anticipated to be true during the evening peak hour.
At the Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Diamond Street intersection the existing directional split of traffic
as per TMR intersection count (2013) has been adopted for the following assessment. That is, from the northern
approach 30% of the outgoing development traffic is anticipated to travel east along Diamond Street towards
Noosa and Tewantin, and 70% of the outgoing development traffic is anticipated to travel south towards the
Cooroy town centre and destinations accessed via the Bruce Highway such as Nambour and Brisbane, 15% of
the incoming development traffic is anticipated to originate from the east from Diamond Street and 85% of the
traffic is anticipated to originate from the south at Elm Street.
Please do note that it is anticipated that up to 10% of all trips may occur by PT or active mode shares however the
following assessment is conservative in allowing for 100% car mode share.
3.2 INTERSECTION ASSESSMENT
The future year (2028) traffic volumes for the intersections within the vicinity of the site have been adjusted to include the
anticipated peak hour development traffic volumes. Each intersection is discussed below.
3.2.1 ELM STREET (COOROY CONNECTION ROAD) / PEARSONS ROAD
INTERSECTION
The anticipated future year traffic volumes, including the development traffic, are presented below in Figure 3-1.
AM Peak PM Peak
Hour
Figure 3-1: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Pearsons Road intersection, 2028 AM and PM Peak Hour, total
volumes including Development Traffic
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 12
Page 17
The intersection under base year 2018 traffic volumes without the development traffic volumes satisfies the TMR
warrants for channelised right turn treatment lane from the southern approach. Refer Figure 3-2 TMR warrants, showing
in grey the 2018 traffic volumes without the development. In the future design horizon year 2028 in the fully developed
scenario, the TMR warrants for channelised right turn lane from the southern approach, as well as the short auxiliary left
turn lane from the northern approach are satisfied, refer Figure 3-2.
Peak Hour Turn Movement Major Road Traffic
From Major Road Volume Parameter
2018 Base Year Without Development
QR = 39 vph max during AM Peak Hour QM = 1041 vpd total two-way AM Peak Hour
QR = 41 vph max during PM Peak Hour QM = 1076 vpd total two-way PM Peak Hour
QL = 3 vph max during AM Peak Hour QM = 752 vpd total two-way AM Peak Hour
QL = 3 vph max during PM Peak Hour QM = 546 vpd total two-way PM Peak Hour
2028 Design Horizon Year With Development
QR = 77 vph max during AM Peak Hour QM = 1520 vph total two-way AM Peak Hour
QR = 108 vph max during PM Peak Hour QM = 1572 vph total two-way PM Peak Hour
QL = 6 vph max during AM Peak Hour QM = 1095 vph total one-way AM Peak Hour
QL = 10 vph max during PM Peak Hour QM = 785 vph total one-way PM Peak Hour
Figure 3-2: Warrant for Turn Treatments at Elm Street / Pearsons Road Intersection
(Source: DTMR Roads Planning and Design Manual, Chapter 13, Figure 13.23)
It is understood that as part of the previous development conditions for the site, that a commitment stands to upgrade the
Elm Street / Pearsons Road intersection to include a channelised right turn treatment at the southern approach and a
short auxiliary left turn lane from the northern approach. Please refer to Council’s Development Works Approval No.
132007.2398.02. Please also refer to Figure 3-3 showing the functional road layout plan by Calibre Consulting Drawing
15-001261-RF02.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 13
Page 18
Figure 3-3: Road Functional Layout Plan for Elm Street / Pearsons Road (DA Ref: 132007.2398.02)
The proposed intersection configuration as shown in Figure 3-3 was assessed in SIDRA for the future design horizon
year 2028. In accordance with GARID, the SIDRA results are reported for the scenario without the development (no
intersection upgrade) and with the development (with intersection upgrade). The SIDRA results are summarised below.
Table 3-2: Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) / Pearsons Road intersection SIDRA assessment outcomes for 2028
Design Year – priority control (give-way sign) with and without development
Degree of Level of 95th Percentile Delay
Scenario Saturation Service (LOS) Queue Length (m) (s)
2028 AM Peak Hour – without 0.55 B 29 4
development traffic
2028 AM Peak Hour – with development 0.82 D 31 49
traffic & intersection upgrade
2028 PM Peak Hour – without 0.44 A 47 4
development traffic
2028 PM Peak Hour – with development 0.40 B 7 21
traffic & intersection upgrade
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 14
Page 19
The SIDRA results show that the intersection configuration with the development will continue to operate adequately in future year 2028 at worst DOS 0.82 being for the Pearsons Road intersection approach during the 2028 AM peak hour with the development. For the Elm Street intersection approaches during the 2028 AM and PM peak hours, the worst DOS is 0.56 with the development, which indicates that there is reserve capacity at the major approaches. The SIDRA modelling results show that all of the traffic operations output parameters are within the bounds of what are considered to be satisfactory operational conditions for the 10 year development horizon scenario. The detailed design of all intersection turn treatments are to be undertaken in accordance with the relevant design standards and guidelines. 3.2.2 ELM STREET (COOROY CONNECTION ROAD) / LAMONTS ROAD INTERSECTION The anticipated development traffic movements at this intersection is up to 55vph total in each peak hour period throughout the assessment period. The total background traffic anticipated in the base year 2018 at the intersection is in the order of 1,492vph in the AM Peak and 1,546vph in the PM peak. The development traffic as a proportion of the total background traffic movements at the intersection in the base year 2018 is less than 5%, being 3.7% in the AM peak and 3.6% in the PM peak. In the design year 2028, the proportion of the development traffic is 2.6% in the AM peak and 2.5% in the PM peak. This is well below the general 5% threshold that triggers more detailed assessments. Notwithstanding, it is understood that a commitment exists to upgrade the intersection configuration to re-align the Lamonts Road approach. The proposed intersection works also include the provision of a right turn lane and left turn lane treatments. Please refer to Council’s Development Works Approval No. 132007.2398.02 and the functional road layout plan by Calibre Consulting Drawing 15-001261-RF01 shown in Figure 3-4. Figure 3-4: Road Functional Layout Plan for Elm Street / Lamonts Road (DA Ref: 132007.2398.02) B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 15
Page 20
Based on the small proportion of development traffic at the intersection (less than 5%) and the proposed intersection configuration, there are no mitigation measures proposed at this intersection location. 3.2.3 ELM STREET / DIAMOND STREET INTERSECTION The anticipated development traffic movements at this intersection consists of 121vph total during peak periods throughout the assessment period. The total background traffic anticipated in the design horizon year 2028 at the intersection is in the order of 3,211vph in the AM Peak and 3,010vph in the PM peak. In the design year of 2018 the development traffic as a proportion of the background traffic is 5.7% which declines during the assessment period to the design horizon year 2028. In the design horizon year 2028, the development traffic as a proportion of the background traffic is 3.8% in the AM peak and 4.0% in the PM peak. This is ultimately below the 5% threshold that triggers more detailed assessments. Based on the low proportion of the development traffic (less than 5% in the ultimate design year 2028) at the intersection, it is anticipated that the development will not significantly impact on the performance of this intersection. As such, there are no mitigation measures required at the intersection. 3.3 LINK ASSESSMENT The key road corridor for the proposed development site is Elm Street (Cooroy Connection Road) that runs along the site frontage. This route is single lane carriageway within the development area of interest. The location of the route within the local road hierarchy is an arterial route. Arterial routes consisting of single lane carriageway can typically accommodate an “amenity” volume of 950 vehicles per hour per lane. Further south of the site at Diamond Street eventually becomes the Cooroy – Noosa Road arterial link to the east. Similar to Elm Street, this arterial road is single lane carriageway and can typically accommodate an “amenity” volume of 950 vehicles per hour per lane. The local roads Lamonts Road and Trading Post Road within the vicinity of the site are no-through routes. Since these routes currently provide property access to local residents only, and are lowly trafficked (anticipated <200vpd) Lamonts Road and Trading Post Road have not been included in the following road link assessment. However do note that Lamonts Road is currently unsealed along its entire length, and provides access to several residential dwellings (estimated to be less than 5) as well as the heli-aviation company. Austroads Guidelines indicate that unsealed road links may accommodate up to 150vpd. It is anticipated that the background traffic volumes along Lamonts Road currently exceed this threshold. The development traffic along Lamonts Road may vary up to 410vpd along the western extent of the route. The existing 2014 estimated through traffic volumes and the future 2028 traffic volumes have been obtained from traffic counts as well as traffic survey data obtained from the Department of Transport and Main Roads. The road link assessment in Table 3-3 indicates that the road corridors surround the site are generally operating with reserve capacity at the link level. However, the capacity of the major arterial route Elm Street in the southbound direction is constrained from Pearsons Road south to Diamond Street. The development traffic is anticipated to have minimal impact on the practical capacity of the existing major road corridors during peak periods. The proportion of heavy vehicles accessing the site is negligible with only about 2 service vehicles per day expected. The road corridors in the vicinity of the proposed development site are anticipated to provide good emergency vehicle access surrounding the proposed site. There are many passing opportunities for private vehicles to allow for emergency vehicle priority, as all of the streets and roads surrounding the site are two-lane or their width allows for stopping opportunities. B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 16
Page 21
Table 3-3: Existing and 2028 Road Link Assessment with and without Development
Existing
Future 2028 Future 2028
2014 Existing Future 2028 Future 2028 Change in
Volume to Volume to
Estimated Estimated Volume Volume – Volume – Volume to
Capacity Capacity
Road Link Capacity Through to Without Site With Site Capacity
Ratio – Ratio – With
(vph) Traffic Peak Capacity Development Development Ratio in
Without Site Site
Volume Ratio (vph) (vph) 2028
Development Development
(vph)
Elm Street 950 252 0.27 408 0.43 428 0.45 +0.02
(Cooroy (464) (0.49) (752) (0.79) (788) (0.83) (+0.04)
Connection Road)
–northbound after
Pearsons Road
Elm Street 950 658 0.69 1,065 1.12 1,101 1.16 +0.04
(Cooroy (478) (0.50) (774) (0.82) (794) (0.84) (+0.02)
Connection Road)
– southbound
before Pearsons
Road
Elm Street 950 284 0.30 459 0.48 496 0.52 +0.04
(Cooroy (495) (0.52) (801) (0.84) (885) (0.93) +0.09
Connection Road)
–northbound
before Pearsons
Road
Elm Street 950 718 0.76 1,162 1.22 1,246 1.31 +0.09
(Cooroy (495) (0.52) (801) (0.84) (838) (0.88) +0.04
Connection Road)
– southbound after
Pearsons Road
Elm Street 950 427 0.45 691 0.73 728 0.77 +0.04
(Cooroy (467) (0.49) (756) (0.80) (840) (0.88) (+0.08)
Connection Road)
– northbound after
Diamond Street
Elm Street 950 828 0.87 1,340 1.41 1,424 1.50 +0.09
(Cooroy (638) (0.67) (1,031) (1.09) (1,068) (1.12) (+0.03)
Connection Road)
– southbound
before Diamond
Street
Pearsons Road – 300 37 0.12 60 0.20 84 0.28 +0.08
eastbound before (38) (0.13) (62) (+0.21) (117) (0.39) (+0.18)
Trading Post Road
Pearsons Road – 300 65 0.22 105 0.35 160 0.53 +0.18
westbound after (28) (0.09) (45) (0.15) (69) (0.23) (+0.08)
Trading Post Road
Note: AM peak values are not in brackets, PM peak values are in brackets
3.4 REFUSE COLLECTION
Within the retirement community, the proposed network of internal roadways are considered to provide appropriate
access for refuse collection services. The roads within the site are all 6.0m wide carriageways minimum. The standard
width of a Refuse Collection Vehicle (RCV) is 2.5m. Therefore it is considered that the internal road network provides an
adequate level of access for a refuse vehicle. Refuse collection is anticipated to occur infrequently, eg: once a week.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 17
Page 22
Within the aged care facility, refuse collection is proposed to take place at the loading/service area, refer layout plan in
Appendix A. It is considered that the location of the internal access roadways are suitable to accommodate an RCV,
refer vehicular access and egress movements and turning paths shown in Appendix D. The vehicle turning templates
confirm that functional access arrangements to all service areas has been provided within the site
It is considered that the proposed road network and road elements provide adequate access for refuse collection
vehicles.
3.5 ON-SITE CAR PARKING
On-site resident and visitor car parking is accommodated by the proposed design. An allowance of 1 resident vehicle is
to be garaged within each allotment. The site also provides 55 visitor car parking spaces scattered across the retirement
community (ILUs) development, which is equivalent to 1 visitor space per 4 ILU allotments as per previous development
conditions for the site. The visitor car parking spaces are conveniently located within easy walking distance to all units.
The amount of visitor parking as per RTA Guidelines (Section 5.4.2 for medium density residential flat buildings)
recommends 1 visitor car parking space per each five units. The provision of on-site visitor car parking within the
retirement community is greater than the than the suggested provision in the RTA Guidelines. Similar developments have
in the past demonstrated that visitor numbers are typically low, since most visitors attending the site pick up residents
rather than remaining on the site for long periods. The number of visitor car parks for the ILUs is hence considered to be
sufficient given the nature of the development.
The aged care facility has a designated car park consisting of visitor and staff parking. Provision has been made for 24
visitor parks (at a rate of 1 visitor space per 5 aged care units) with the balance of car parks provided for employee
parking. The provision and location of the car parking spaces are considered to provide good amenity at the site. The
number of car parks for the Aged Care Facility is considered to be appropriate for the nature of the development.
3.6 AGED CARE FACILITY CAR PARK ENTRANCE LOCATION
A brief review of the proposed aged care facility car park entrance has been undertaken. Whilst this car park is subject to
detail design, it is noted that the proposed layout is as follows:
It is proposed that the aged care facility car park access be a left-in/left-out configuration with separate crossovers for
entry movements and exit movements.
The entrance driveway is situated at a distance greater than 20m from the intersection of Elm Street (Cooroy
Connection Road) and Pearsons Road
The nearest local road intersection is Carruthers Crescent. The proposed driveway exit driveway is located greater
than 10m from this local road intersection.
The exit and entry crossovers are located minimum 3m from adjacent private driveways.
The majority of the traffic movements associated with the site access will be either left turns into the access and
carpark area or right turn movements out of the site as there are very limited destinations further east along
Pearsons Road. Given the estimated relatively low traffic volumes it is recommended that a standard crossover be
provided. In addition, no other road infrastructure is required, that is as either short right turn lanes in or left turn
lanes in to the site.
3.7 SDAP CODE COMPLIANCE
Reporting on the relevant State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAP) is included in Appendix E. The proposed
development achieves the requirements of applicable State regulations and guidelines. There are no anticipated impacts
arising from the proposed development on the management and operation of the adjoining state-controlled road corridor.
B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 18
Page 23
4 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT NETWORKS 4.1 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SYSTEM On Elm Street, pedestrian pathways are located on the eastern side between Diamond Street and Pearsons Road and on the western side between Diamond Street and the entrance to Cooroy State School, adjacent to Sapphire Street. There are pedestrian pathways located on the south of Pearsons Road along its entire length and on the northern side between Trading Post Road and Kensington Drive. There are pedestrian pathways located on the northern side of Trading Post Road along its entire length. Lamonts Road has no existing pedestrian pathways. As per previous development application advice, it is understood that additional pathways are proposed on the western side of Elm Street between Pearsons Road and the proposed additional bus stop location. On the northern side of Pearsons Road a pathway along the site frontage with two pedestrian accesses into the development are proposed. It is suggested that a pathway be installed on the southern side of Trading Post Road along the site frontage to connect with the existing pathway around the cul-de-sac. There are no designated bikeways surrounding the study area, however it is likely that the surrounding road network could be utilised by cyclists. The road shoulders on Elm Street between Diamond Street and Pearsons Street are of varying width and quality. The proposed development is anticipated to have negligible impact on the local cyclist traffic. 4.2 PUBLIC TRANSPORT PROVISION There are several rail and bus options available in the Cooroy region that provide travel choice for residents within the community. Translink information indicates that there are existing bus stops through the Cooroy township along Maple Street, Diamond Street and Tewantin Road (Cooroy-Noosa Road). The nearest bus stop to the proposed site is located approximately 1.1km south along Elm Street adjacent to the Diamond Street intersection (bus stop ID 301598). This bus stop services route 631 that provides connectivity between Noosa, Tewantin, Cooroy, Eumundi, Yandina and Nambour South, as well as route 632 that provides connectivity to Pomona and Cooran further north. Refer Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2. The bus routes operate with a frequency of one bus every hour. Figure 4.1: Translink Public Bus Service 631 shown on the left, Cooroy Township shown on the right (Source: Translink) B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 19
Page 24
Figure 4.2: Translink Public Bus Service 632 shown on the left, Cooroy Township shown on the right (Source: Translink) The Cooroy railway station is the nearest rail service providing connectivity to Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast, located approximately 1.5km south of the site along Elm Street. The Cooroy railway station provides approximately 100 car parks within the commuter car park. There are approximately four trains per day servicing the Cooroy railway station. It is understood that a commitment exists to install an indented bus stop alongside the southbound lane of Elm Street, south of Pearsons Road. The proposed configuration is shown in Calibre Consulting Drawing 15-001261-RF02 (refer Figure 3-3) and also refer to Council’s Development Works Approval No. 132007.2398.02. B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 20
Page 25
5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Based on the assessment of the network it is concluded that the majority of the road links and intersection arrangements as proposed will be able to accommodate the anticipated traffic volumes to at least the design year of 2028. The forecast demand estimates are based on the ultimate development scenario as outlined above. The key finding of this traffic impact assessment is that the proposed intersection treatments and infrastructure is sufficient to support the proposed development. There are no adverse impacts anticipated as a result of the development traffic generated by the expanded developable site area. Based on the analysis there are no further mitigation measures proposed. The current level of design detail available for this DA phase shows that the proposed development layout is compliant with the relevant State Planning Codes. The detailed design of all upgrade works including intersection turn treatments and road treatments are to be undertaken in accordance with the relevant design standards and guidelines. B14158.ER02-B | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 21
Page 26
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDICES [OCR of page images] APPENDICES
Page 27
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX A INDICATIVE SITE LAYOUT PLAN B14158.ER02-0 | TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT | PALM LAKES RESORTS COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY | 23
Page 28
193 192 191 190 189 188 187
214 213 211 210 209 208 207 199 198 197 196 195 194
186 DETENTION
185
206 201 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184
212 200 174 175 176 160
161
205 202
171 170 169 168 167 166 165 164 163 162
173
203
172 157 158 159
204
146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156
7m EASEMENT
145
131 130 129 128 127 126 125 124 123 122
144
143
T
EN
DETENTION
120 121
SEM
132
142 141
EA
133
140 119
8m
134 105
139 118
135 106
138 117
107
116 104
137 108
115 103
109 90
220
136 102
110 91 219
114
T
101
EN
92 218
89
SEM
113 100 215
93
EA
112 88 216
99 74
6m
94
111 87 217
75
95
98 86
76
73 DETENTION
85
97 77
84 72
96 58 BIN STORAGE AREA
78
71 1
83 79 59
70 2
82 60
57
69 3
81 61
68 56 42
62 4
80 55
43 5
67 63
54
44 6
66 53 41
52 45 7
65 40
27
46 8
64 39
47 28
9
51 38
29
26 10
50 37
36 30
25
49 11
31
24
48 12
32
23
35 13
22
34 14
21
33 15
16
20
GATEHOUSE
19
18
17
0m 50m 100m 150m 200m
SCALE 1:2500 (AT A3)
OVERALL SITE PLAN
[OCR of page images]
| 214 | 213 211
212
ce
1
|
a™~
x 3
5 i
=
S 42m NX
LANDSCAPE
TREATMENT << 20a | 17?
aN 146
145
12m
LANDSCAPE 144
TREATMENT
143,
139
LANDSCAPE:
‘TREATMENT
WITHIN
ROOF OVERHANG
SETBACK
18,000mm_MINIMUM
DETENTION
TREATMENT
‘COURT
\carernens CARAVAN, CARAVAN
| PARKING
Ht
WASHDOWN
BIN STORAGE AREA
2m
LANDSCAPE
‘TREATMENT
é 8
¢| < = GATEHOUSE
& RESIDENCE & So = wane
qe Max. Cover 65.0% Total Ss 2 TREATMENT
2 - 2 oe PEDESTRIAN M
ENTRY a waa ——"S\
FARE RATED WALL 60/60/60
+—Garage to Boundary — 2m
TREATHENT
(02 SITING CONSTRAINTS
(OTT GENERIC SITE AREA - 254.0 Sqm
PROPOSED RESORT DEVELOPMENT—AREA 121,378sqm
TOTAL DWELLINGS = 220
MIN VISITOR SPACES = 55
MIN LOT SIZE = 230sqm
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE MIN/LOT = 20sqm
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE MIN WIDTH = 3m
MAX SITE COVER = 65%
MIN 450mm EAVES, EXEPT TO GARAGES BUILT TO ZERO LOT LINE
MAX SINGLE STOREY NOT GREATER THAN 6m IN HEIGHT
MIN 12° ROOF PITCH
MIN SETBACK TO PUBLIC ROAD 6m
(EXCLUDING COVERED OUTDOOR AREA)
MIN PROPERTY BOUNDARY SETBACK = 3m
CAR PARKING LOCATIONS MAY ALTER IN FINAL LAYOUT.
NOTE: GARAGE MAY BE BUILT TO ZERO LOT LINE
PROPOSED AGED CARE DEVELOPMENT—AREA 20,245sqm
TOTAL BEDS = 120
CAR PARKING LOCATIONS MAY ALTER IN FINAL LAYOUT.
0 50m 100m 150m 200m
SCALE 1:2500 (AT A3)
© coprricht DRAWING REFERENCE No, HOUSE TYPE 7 VARIATION DEVELOPMENT NAME DRAWN
suureemeetersrs | co-g00-2014 |S SE Fc coor |) || Foam
BEHALF OF PALM LAKE GROUP. lest
aN oe, CEN Na nn os Fe — PATE |PRWN Oe 7 RP2IS9Ce —_rv"Nseet Ne “ »
SOUTHPORT CENTRAL TOWER 3
LAWSON ST SOUTHPORT QLD 4215 E ae pee, ol & LOT 1 & 2 RP165416> Ol
PO BOX 10479 SOUTHPORT BC QLD 4215 F LAYOUT osvosi EJ | STREET |TRADING POST RD ABN TT 915 457 981 ACN 006 277 098
PH: 07 5552 1300 FAX: 07 5552 1399 LAWSON ST SOUTHPORT OLD 4215
Email: [email protected] GY Ane Suan [i671o7s] EJ |SUBURB |COOROY 0 2 PO BOK 0479 SOUTHPORT BELO 415
H] save savs|_ey [econe [4563 | state[OLD soci neGpaite cin a
S Website: www.PalmLakeResort.com.au
Y
Page 29
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX B TRAFFIC SURVEY DATA [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX B_ TRAFFIC SURVEY DATA
Page 30
Traffic Analysis and Reporting System
Intersection Analysis Report TARS
Region 207 - North Coast Road Section 145 - Cooroy Connection Road
16-Nov-2014 13:13 Intersection 95 - Rd142/Rd145 1.96km (Id95) Page 1 of 2 (2 of 3)
Wednesday 09-Feb-2011 06:00 - 18:00
Summary
Rd Section 145 Site 21832 N Road
Leg 1 0 degrees Leg Angle Section Site TDist Site Description
1 0 145 21832 1.980 Rd 145-Int Rd 142 S/B
2 90 142 21833 0.000 Rd 142-Int Rd 145 W/B
3,479 (5.3% HV)
1,742 (5.7% HV)
3 180 145 21834 1.980 Rd 145-Int Rd 142 N/B
(5.6% HV)
3839
Leg Period Left Turn Through Right Turn U Turn Pedestrians
1 Total 1742 3479
Rd Section 142
5.7% HV 5.3% HV
4575 Leg 2 AM Peak 218 529
(6.3% HV) 2.8% HV 4.3% HV
PM Peak 154 421
4.5% HV 6.7% HV
90 degrees
2 Total 3208 1010
7.9% HV 7.0% HV
Site 21833
AM Peak 397 62
1,010 (7.0% HV) 7.1% HV 4.8% HV
PM Peak 327 71
3,208 (7.9% HV) 8.9% HV 8.5% HV
3 Total 2829 2833
5.1% HV 6.7% HV
AM Peak 323 260
6.2% HV 6.5% HV
PM Peak 350 354
6.6% HV 7.1% HV
2,829 (5.1% HV)
2,833 (6.7% HV)
(6.6% HV)
6687
Rd Section 145 Site 21834
Leg 3 180 degrees
Page 31
Traffic Analysis and Reporting System
Intersection Analysis Report TARS
Region 207 - North Coast Road Section 145 - Cooroy Connection Road
16-Nov-2014 13:13 Intersection 95 - Rd142/Rd145 1.96km (Id95) Page 2 of 2 (3 of 3)
Wednesday 09-Feb-2011 06:00 - 18:00
Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3
Time Left Through Right U-Turn Pedestrians Left Through Right U-Turn Pedestrians Left Through Right U-Turn Pedestrians Total Traffic 1/4 hr
06:00-0615 19 37 34 5 8 23 126
06:15-0630 27 40 46 6 15 18 152
06:30-0645 38 43 56 9 25 38 209
06:45-0700 38 44 51 15 21 28 197
07:00-0715 31 62 54 13 21 42 223
07:15-0730 41 77 87 12 33 35 285
07:30-0745 72 90 61 8 38 54 323
07:45-0800 55 99 88 13 52 49 356
08:00-0815 56 123 99 18 61 70 427
08:15-0830 40 143 122 18 108 64 495
08:30-0845 69 140 106 11 94 76 496
08:45-0900 53 123 70 15 60 50 371
09:00-0915 32 102 56 20 49 55 314
09:15-0930 42 95 65 12 43 62 319
09:30-0945 35 68 55 14 58 53 283
09:45-1000 29 72 61 19 48 58 287
10:00-1015 45 70 67 18 46 56 302
10:15-1030 38 65 65 19 50 47 284
10:30-1045 37 48 61 15 49 65 275
10:45-1100 39 52 52 17 57 64 281
11:00-1115 32 59 61 23 45 47 267
11:15-1130 27 58 63 20 49 64 281
11:30-1145 43 55 56 11 37 49 251
11:45-1200 35 63 70 18 41 62 289
12:00-1215 34 45 73 26 41 67 286
12:15-1230 28 54 67 27 62 57 295
12:30-1245 25 64 56 23 51 70 289
12:45-1300 20 63 61 32 67 51 294
13:00-1315 41 55 60 14 56 60 286
13:15-1330 28 65 67 19 51 51 281
13:30-1345 43 39 42 24 54 47 249
13:45-1400 21 51 62 26 56 55 271
14:00-1415 23 52 62 30 61 62 290
14:15-1430 35 47 62 30 61 58 293
14:30-1445 32 89 68 34 80 56 359
14:45-1500 39 109 83 15 88 76 410
15:00-1515 34 161 83 20 83 92 473
15:15-1530 39 76 80 14 88 94 391
15:30-1545 42 75 81 22 91 92 403
15:45-1600 39 81 82 23 67 66 358
16:00-1615 33 84 73 51 76 69 386
16:15-1630 34 65 78 39 84 75 375
16:30-1645 34 73 58 38 72 70 345
16:45-1700 31 77 71 16 96 82 373
17:00-1715 36 53 53 26 115 75 358
17:15-1730 26 65 64 49 71 68 343
17:30-1745 27 62 60 33 92 61 335
17:45-1800 25 46 56 30 58 50 265
Total 1742 3479 3208 1010 2829 2833
%Truck/Bus 5.5 4.8 6.9 6.9 4.7 5.7
%Articulated .2 .5 1.1 .1 .4 1.0
%RoadTrain .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0
AM Peak 218 529 397 62 323 260
PM Peak 154 421 327 71 350 354
Blank cells indicate the non-collection of corresponding counts.
[OCR of page images]
Ke 2) Queensland Traffic Analysis and Reporting System
GES Government Intersection Analysis Report
— Region 207 - North Coast Road Section 145 - Cooroy Connection Road
16-Nov-2014 13:13 Intersection 95 - Rd142/Rd145 1.96km (Id95) Page 2 of 2 (3 of 3)
Wednesday 09-Feb-2011 06:00 - 18:00
Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3
Time | Left | Through | Right | U-Turn | Pedestrians U-Turn | Pedestrians || Left | Through | Right | U-Turn | Pedestrians || Total Traffic 1/4 hr
06:00-0615, 19 37 8 23 126
06:15-0630, 27 40 15 18 152
06:30-0645, 38 43 25 38 209
06:45-0700 38 44 al 28 197
07:00-0715, 31 62 al 42 223
07:15-0730 41 7 33 35. 285,
07:30-0745, 72 90 38 54 323
07:45-0800 55 99 52 49 356
08:00-0815, 56 123 61 70 427
08:15-0830, 40 143 108 64 495,
08:30-0845, 69 140 94 76 496
08:45-0900 53 123 60 50 371
09:00-0915 32 102 49 55 314
09:15-0930 42 95 43 62 319
09:30-0945 35. 68 58 53 283,
09:45-1000, 29 72 48 58 287
10:00-1015, 45 70 46 56 302
10:15-1030, 38 65 50 47 284
10:30-1045, 37 48 49 65 275
10:45-1100, 39 52 57 64 281
11:00-1115, 32 59 45 47 267
11:15-1130, 27 58 49 64 281
11:30-1145, 43 55 37 49 251
11:45-1200, 35. 63 41 62 289
12:00-1215, 34 45 41 67 286
12:15-1230, 28 54 62 57 295,
12:30-1245, 25 64 51 70 289
12:45-1300, 20 63 67 51 294
13:00-1315, 41 55 56 60 286
13:15-1330, 28 65 51 51 281
13:30-1345, 43 39 54 47 249
13:45-1400, 21 51 56 55 271
14:00-1415, 23 52 61 62 290
14:15-1430, 35, 47 61 58 293
14:30-1445, 32 89 80 56 359°
14:45-1500, 39 109 88 76 410
15:00-1515, 34 161 83 92 473
15:15-1530, 39 76 88 94 391
15:30-1545, 42 75 o1 92 403,
15:45-1600, 39 81 67 66 358
16:00-1615, 33, 84 76 69 386
16:15-1630, 34 65 84 75 375
16:30-1645, 34 73 72 70 345,
16:45-1700, 31 77 96 82 373
17:00-1715, 36 53 115 75 358
17:15-1730, 26 65 71 68 343
17:30-1745, 27 62 92 61 335,
17:45-1800, 25 46 58 50 265
Total | 1742 3479 2829 | 2833
%Truck/Bus 5.5 48 47 5.7
%Articulated 2 5 4 1.0
‘%RoadTrain 0 0 O 0
AM Peak 218 529 323 260
PM Peak 154 421 350 (354
Blank cells indicate the non-collection of corresponding counts.
Page 32
1
Background traffic
volume of 20vph
peak volume 2
14
assumed for Lamonts
Road, as indicated
3
Updated data from TMR
used in this location
2007 AM Peak Traffic Volumes Adapted From Traffic Data Sourced From McCormick Rankin Cagney
(July 2008)
Page 33
2
Background traffic
volume of 20vph
peak volume 1
3
assumed for Lamonts
Road, as indicated 14
Updated data from TMR
used in this location
2007 PM Peak Traffic Volumes Adapted From Traffic Data Sourced From McCormick Rankin Cagney
(July 2008)
Page 34
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX C SIDRA ASSESSMENT RESULTS [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX C SIDRA ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Page 35
LANE SUMMARY
Site: Elm Street / Pearson Road AM Peak 2028 without dev
New Site
Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)
Lane Use and Performance
Demand Flows Deg. Lane Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Lane Lane Cap. Prob.
Total HV Cap. Satn Util. Delay Service Veh Dist Config Length Adj. Block.
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %
South: Elm Street
Lane 1 460 0.0 1560 0.295 100 9.6 LOS A 4.2 29.4 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 460 0.0 0.295 9.6 NA 4.2 29.4
East: Pearson Road
Lane 1 105 0.0 366 0.287 100 17.8 LOS B 1.0 7.2 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 105 0.0 0.287 17.8 LOS B 1.0 7.2
North: Elm Street
Lane 1 1065 0.0 1950 0.546 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 1065 0.0 0.546 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0
Intersection 1630 0.0 0.546 4.0 NA 4.2 29.4
Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW).
Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.
Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.
NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a
good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.
SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: Brown Consulting | Processed: Monday, 15 December 2014 5:03:03 PM
Project: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.R\Technical\Elm St - Pearson Rd 2028 AM & PM - without & with dev_ver28.01.16.sip6
Page 36
LANE SUMMARY
Site: Elm Street / Pearson Road PM Peak 2028 without dev
New Site
Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)
Lane Use and Performance
Demand Flows Deg. Lane Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Lane Lane Cap. Prob.
Total HV Cap. Satn Util. Delay Service Veh Dist Config Length Adj. Block.
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %
South: Elm Street
Lane 1 801 0.0 1834 0.437 100 6.5 LOS A 6.8 47.3 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 801 0.0 0.437 6.5 NA 6.8 47.3
East: Pearson Road
Lane 1 45 0.0 441 0.102 100 14.1 LOS A 0.3 2.3 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 45 0.0 0.102 14.1 LOS A 0.3 2.3
North: Elm Street
Lane 1 774 0.0 1949 0.397 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 774 0.0 0.397 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0
Intersection 1620 0.0 0.437 3.7 NA 6.8 47.3
Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW).
Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.
Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.
NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a
good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.
SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: Brown Consulting | Processed: Monday, 15 December 2014 5:03:04 PM
Project: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.R\Technical\Elm St - Pearson Rd 2028 AM & PM - without & with dev_ver28.01.16.sip6
Page 37
LANE SUMMARY
Site: Elm Street / Pearson Road AM Peak 2028 with dev - functional layout
Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)
Lane Use and Performance
Demand Flows Deg. Lane Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Lane Lane Cap. Prob.
Total HV Cap. Satn Util. Delay Service Veh Dist Config Length Adj. Block.
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %
South: Elm Street
Lane 1 419 0.0 1970 0.213 100 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Lane 2 77 0.0 397 0.194 100 14.8 LOS B 0.7 4.9 Short 60 0.0 NA
Approach 496 0.0 0.213 2.3 NA 0.7 4.9
East: Pearson Road
Lane 1 161 0.0 196 0.822 100 48.9 LOS D 4.4 30.8 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 161 0.0 0.822 48.9 LOS D 4.4 30.8
North: Elm Street
Lane 1 6 0.0 1828 0.003 100 5.5 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Short 15 0.0 NA
Lane 2 1095 0.0 1970 0.556 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 1101 0.0 0.556 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0
Intersection 1758 0.0 0.822 5.2 NA 4.4 30.8
Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW).
Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.
Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.
NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a
good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.
SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTD | Processed: Friday, 29 January 2016 11:26:23 AM
Project: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.R\Technical\Elm St - Pearson Rd 2028 AM & PM - without & with dev_ver28.01.16.sip6
Page 38
LANE SUMMARY
Site: Elm Street / Pearson Road PM Peak 2028 with dev - functional layout
New Site
Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)
Lane Use and Performance
Demand Flows Deg. Lane Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Lane Lane Cap. Prob.
Total HV Cap. Satn Util. Delay Service Veh Dist Config Length Adj. Block.
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %
South: Elm Street
Lane 1 778 0.0 1950 0.399 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Lane 2 108 0.0 722 0.150 100 9.8 LOS A 0.6 4.2 Short 60 0.0 NA
Approach 886 0.0 0.399 1.2 NA 0.6 4.2
East: Pearson Road
Lane 1 69 0.0 235 0.293 100 21.1 LOS B 1.0 6.9 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 69 0.0 0.293 21.1 LOS B 1.0 6.9
North: Elm Street
Lane 1 10 0.0 1857 0.005 100 5.5 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Short 15 0.0 NA
Lane 2 785 0.0 1950 0.403 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0
Approach 795 0.0 0.403 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0
Intersection 1750 0.0 0.403 1.5 NA 1.0 6.9
Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW).
Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.
Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.
NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a
good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.
SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com
Organisation: CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTD | Processed: Friday, 29 January 2016 3:35:01 PM
Project: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.R\Technical\Elm St - Pearson Rd 2028 AM & PM - without & with dev_ver28.01.16.sip6
Page 39
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX D VEHICLE TURN PATHS [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX D VEHICLE TURN PATHS
Page 40
-
CC___
BBQ AREA
DECK
__
CC___
[OCR of page images]
1.60 m
STEERING LOCK ANGLE = 29.3 deg,
ACHIEVED STEERING ANGLE:
30 deg, SWEEP ANGLE: 18.5 deg.
60 deg. SWEEP ANGLE: 25.2 deg,
90 deg. SWEEP ANGLE: 27.7 deg,
120 deg. SWEEP ANGLE: 28.7 deg.
150 deg. SWEEP ANGLE: 29.1 deg.
3.10 m 180 deg. SWEEP ANGLE: 29.2 deg.
}
|
|
|
Sunshine Coast WRV
Custom
ou ou tou
LE, 15-0026t-102.duq_DATE: 09-12-2015 TIME: 0805
iret’: X_{5-001061_TITLE X_15-O01261_BASE X_15-001261_CONTS X_15-0O1261_CUTFLLHATCH USR: Samantha Thorpe
Sunshine Coast WRV
eters
width £2.50
Track 12/50
Lock to Lock Time :6.0
Steering Angle 229.3
REF NO. 132007.2398.02
FOR & ON BEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTD
PALM LAKE RESORT
CONSULTING
Diss Cater Ueber heiwy Sngpon SumbneCoat — Lc4004
aes ee — 38 Neybourne Street, Crelmer QLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD Cc a E SITE LAYOUT
MB 1500 1 5 0 10 20 M1 Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] — a’ TURN TEMPLATES
HG Drawn cuecn| '1207 »% PROJECT Wo, [ APPROVED 19 TRADING POST ROAD il Clr Consuiting (QLD) Pty Lid $.C.C. REFUSE VEHICLE
fr 15-001261 paren me COOROY calibre areal aa Sots fae re ooeLsKil4 |
s|F ="
Page 41
CALIBRE CONSULTING
APPENDIX E STATE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PROVISIONS (SDAP)
REPORTING
[OCR of page images]
CALIBRE CONSULTING
APPENDIX E STATE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PROVISIONS (SDAP)
REPORTING
Page 42
Response column key:
Achieved
19.1 Access to state-controlled roads state code P/S Performance solution
N/A Not applicable
Table 19.1.1: All development
Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment
Location of the direct vehicular access to the state-controlled road
PO1 Any road access location to the AO1.1 Any road access location to the state-controlled N/A There is currently no road access to the state-controlled
state-controlled road from adjacent land road complies with a decision under section 62 of the TIA. road network from the site.
does not compromise the safety and OR
efficiency of the state-controlled road.
AO1.2 Development does not propose a new or
temporary road access location, or a change to the use or
operation of an existing permitted road access location to
a state-controlled road.
OR
AO1.3 Any proposed road access location for the
development is provided from a lower order road where
an alternative to the state-controlled road exists.
OR all of the following acceptable outcomes apply
AO1.4 Any new or temporary road access location, or a N/A
change to the use or operation of an existing permitted
road access location, demonstrates that the development:
(1) does not exceed the acceptable level of service of a
state-controlled road
(2) meets the sight distance requirements outlined in
Volume 3, parts 3, 4, 4A, 4B and 4C of the Road
planning and design manual, 2nd edition, Department
of Transport and Main Roads, 2013
(3) does not exceed the acceptable operation of an
intersection with a state-controlled road, including the
degree of saturation, delay, queuing lengths and
intersection layout
(4) is not located within and/or adjacent to an existing or
planned intersection in accordance with Volume 3,
parts 4, 4A, 4B and 4C of the Road planning and
design manual, 2nd edition, Department of Transport
and Main Roads, 2013
(5) does not conflict with another property’s road access
location and operation.
State development assessment provisions Module 19 — State transport network functionality 19.1 Access to state-controlled roads state code
23 November 2015 V1.7 Page 1 of 4
Page 43
Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment
Editor’s note: To demonstrate compliance with this acceptable
outcome, it is recommended a traffic impact assessment be
developed in accordance with Chapters 1, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the
Guidelines for assessment of road impacts of development
(GARID), Department of Main Roads, 2006, and the
requirements of Volume 3, parts 4, 4A, 4B and 4C of the Road
planning and design manual, 2nd edition, Department of
Transport and Main Roads, 2013, SIDRA analysis or traffic
modelling.
AND
AO1.5 Development does not propose a new road access N/A
location to a limited access road.
Editor’s note: Limited access roads are declared by the chief
executive under section 54 of the TIA. Details can be accessed
by contacting the appropriate DTMR regional office.
Number of road accesses to the state-controlled road
PO2 The number of road accesses to the AO2.1 Development does not increase the number of
state-controlled road maintains the safety road accesses to the state-controlled road.
and efficiency of the state-controlled
road. AND
AO2.2 Where multiple road accesses to the premises There is currently no direct road access to the state-
exist, access is rationalised to reduce the overall number controlled road network from the site.
of road accesses to the state-controlled road.
AND
AO2.3 Shared or combined road accesses are provided N/A
for adjoining land having similar uses to rationalise the
overall number of direct accesses to the state-controlled
road.
Editor’s note: Shared road accesses may require easements to
provide a legal point of access for adjacent lots. If this is required,
then the applicant must register reciprocal access easements on
the titles of any lots for the shared access.
Design vehicle and traffic volume
PO3 The design of any road access AO3.1 Any road access meets the minimum standards
maintains the safety and efficiency of the associated with the design vehicle.
state-controlled road. Editor’s note: The design vehicle to be considered is the same as
the design vehicle set under the relevant local government
State development assessment provisions Module 19 — State transport network functionality 19.1 Access to state-controlled roads state code
23 November 2015 V1.7 Page 2 of 4
Page 44
Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment
planning scheme.
AND
AO3.2 Any road access is designed to accommodate the
forecast volume of vehicle movements in the peak periods
of operation or conducting the proposed use of the
premises.
AND
AO3.3 Any road access is designed to accommodate 10
year traffic growth past completion of the final stage of
development in accordance with GARID.
AND
AO3.4 Any road access in an urban location is designed
in accordance with the relevant local government
standards or IPWEAQ R-050, R-051, R-052 and R-053
drawings.
AND
AO3.5 Any road access not in an urban location is
designed in accordance with Volume 3, parts 3, 4 and 4A
of the Road planning and design manual, 2nd edition,
Department of Transport and Main Roads, 2013.
Internal and external manoeuvring associated with direct vehicular access to the state-controlled road
PO4 Turning movements for vehicles AO4.1 The road access provides for left in and left out N/A There is currently no direct road access to the state-
entering and exiting the premises via the turning movements only. controlled road network from the site.
road access maintain the safety and
efficiency of the state-controlled road. AND
AO4.2 Internal manoeuvring areas on the premises are Internal manoeuvring areas are designed so that all vehicles
designed so the design vehicle can enter and leave the can enter and leave the site in a forward gear at all times.
premises in a forward gear at all times. Please refer to Traffic Impact Assessment.
Editor’s note: The design vehicle to be considered is the same as
the design vehicle set under the relevant local government
planning scheme.
PO5 On-site circulation is suitably AO5.1 Provision of on-site vehicular manoeuvring space There is existing on-site circulation that is suitably designed
designed to accommodate the design is provided to ensure the flow of traffic on the state- to accommodate the anticipated development traffic. There
vehicle associated with the proposed controlled road is not compromised by an overflow of is no queueing or adverse impact arising on the external
land use, in order to ensure that there is traffic queuing to access the site in accordance with road network. Please refer to the Traffic Impact
no impact on the safety and efficiency of AS2890 – Parking facilities. Assessment.
the state-controlled road. AND
State development assessment provisions Module 19 — State transport network functionality 19.1 Access to state-controlled roads state code
23 November 2015 V1.7 Page 3 of 4
Page 45
Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment
AO5.2 Mitigation measures are provided to ensure that As above, there are no mitigation measures required.
the flow of traffic on the state-controlled road is not
disturbed by traffic queuing to access the site.
Vehicular access to local roads within 100 metres of an intersection with a state-controlled road
PO6 Development having road access to AO6.1 The road access location to the local road is Refer to the Traffic Impact Assessment.
a local road within 100 metres of an located as far as possible from where the road intersects
intersection with a state-controlled road with the state-controlled road and accommodates existing
maintains the safety and efficiency of the operations and planned upgrades to the intersection or
state-controlled road. state-controlled road.
AND
AO6.2 The road access to the local road network is in
accordance with Volume 3, parts 3, 4 and 4A of the Road
planning and design manual, 2nd edition, Department of
Transport and Main Roads, 2013, and is based on the
volume of traffic and speed design of both the local road
and intersecting state-controlled road for a period of 10
years past completion of the final stage of development.
AND
AO6.3 Vehicular access to the local road and internal
vehicle circulation is designed to remove or minimise the
potential for vehicles entering the site to queue in the
intersection with the state-controlled road or along the
state-controlled road itself.
State development assessment provisions Module 19 — State transport network functionality 19.1 Access to state-controlled roads state code
23 November 2015 V1.7 Page 4 of 4
Page 46
Response column key:
Achieved
19.2 Transport infrastructure and network design state code P/S Performance solution
N/A Not applicable
Table 19.2.1: All development
Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment
All state transport infrastructure – except state-controlled roads
PO1 Development does not compromise No acceptable outcome is prescribed. There is no impact to the state transport infrastructure or
the safe and efficient management or transport networks. Please refer to the Traffic Impact
operation of state transport infrastructure Assessment.
or transport networks.
Editor’s note: To demonstrate compliance with
this performance outcome, it is recommended
that a traffic impact assessment be prepared.
A traffic impact assessment should identify
any upgrade works required to mitigate
impacts on the safety and operational integrity
of the state transport corridor.
PO2 Development does not compromise AO2.1 The layout and design of the proposed The proposed development does not impact on the delivery
planned upgrades to state transport development accommodates planned upgrades to state of state transport infrastructure.
infrastructure or the development of transport infrastructure.
future state transport infrastructure in AND
future state transport corridors.
Editor’s note: Written advice from DTMR AO2.2 The layout and design of the development The proposed development does not impact on the delivery
advising that there are no planned upgrades of
accommodates the delivery of state transport of state transport infrastructure or future state transport
state transport infrastructure or future state
transport corridors that will be compromised infrastructure in future state transport corridors. corridors.
by the development will assist in addressing Editor’s note: To demonstrate compliance with this acceptable
this performance outcome. outcome, it is recommended that a traffic impact assessment be
prepared.
PO3 Development does not adversely AO3.1 Development does not require a new railway
impact on the safety of a railway crossing.
crossing. OR
AO3.2 A new railway crossing is grade separated. N/A
OR
AO3.3 Impacts to level crossing safety are mitigated. N/A
Editor’s note: To demonstrate compliance with this acceptable
outcome, it is recommended that a traffic impact assessment be
prepared. An impact on a level crossing may require an
Australian Level Crossing Assessment Model (ALCAM)
assessment to be undertaken. Section 2.2 – Railway crossing
State development assessment provisions Module 19 — State transport network functionality 19.2 Transport infrastructure and network design state code
23 November 2015 V1.7 Page 1 of 3
Page 47
Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment
safety of the Guide to Development in a Transport Environment:
Rail, Department of Transport and Main Roads, 2015, provides
guidance on how to comply with this acceptable outcome.
AND
AO3.4 Upgrades to a level crossing are designed and N/A
constructed in accordance with AS1742.7 – Manual of
uniform traffic control devices, Part 7: Railway crossings
and applicable rail manager standard drawings.
AND
AO3.5 Access points achieve sufficient clearance from a N/A
level crossing in accordance with AS1742.7 – Manual of
uniform traffic control devices, Part 7: Railway crossings
by providing a minimum clearance of 5 metres from the
edge running rail (outer rail) plus the length of the largest
vehicle anticipated on-site.
AND
AO3.6 On-site vehicle circulation is designed to give
priority to entering vehicles at all times.
State-controlled roads
PO4 Development does not compromise No acceptable outcome is prescribed. Refer to the Traffic Impact Assessment.
the safe and efficient management or
operation of state-controlled roads.
Editor’s note: A traffic impact assessment will
assist in addressing this performance
outcome.
PO5 Development does not compromise AO5.1 The layout and design of the development
planned upgrades of the state-controlled accommodates planned upgrades of the state-controlled
road network or delivery of future state- road.
controlled roads. AND
Editor’s note: Written advice from DTMR that
there are no planned upgrades of state-
controlled roads or future state-controlled AO5.2 The layout and design of the development
roads which will be compromised by the accommodates the delivery of future state-controlled
development will assist in addressing this
performance outcome.
roads.
Editor’s note: To demonstrate compliance with this acceptable
outcome, it is recommended that a traffic impact assessment be
State development assessment provisions Module 19 — State transport network functionality 19.2 Transport infrastructure and network design state code
23 November 2015 V1.7 Page 2 of 3
Page 48
Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment
prepared.
PO6 Upgrade works on, or associated AO6.1 Upgrade works for the development are consistent
with, the state-controlled road network with the requirements of the Road planning and design
are undertaken in accordance with manual, 2nd edition, Department of Transport and Main
applicable standards. Roads, 2013.
AND
AO6.2 The design and staging of upgrade works on or
associated with the state-controlled road network are
consistent with planned upgrades.
PO7 Development does not impose AO7.1 New lower order roads do not connect directly to a
traffic loadings on the state-controlled state-controlled road.
road network which could be AND
accommodated on the local road
network.
AO7.2 The layout and design of the development directs
traffic generated by the development to use lower order
roads.
State development assessment provisions Module 19 — State transport network functionality 19.2 Transport infrastructure and network design state code
23 November 2015 V1.7 Page 3 of 3
Page 49
CALIBRE CONSULTING www.calibreconsulting.co [OCR of page images] Se (er||le)f CONSULTING www.calibreconsulting.co