Request for Further Information - 010.2008.00001128.001 [As Published] · 132008.1128

                                                 -6-


       Please also provide a copy of the manual turning movement counts undertaken on
       Wednesday 28 May, as outlined in the Traffic Report, for Council to assess against our own
       traffic count data.

48.   An intersection analysis shall also be carried out on all intersections within the area that result
      in a 5% increase in traffic as a result of the proposed development, and recommendations
      made as to how best to improve these intersections.
49.   It is noted that a 10 year horizon has been used based on all construction being completed by
      2012, giving a projected year of 2022 as stated in Section 4.1.1 of the Traffic Assessment
      Report by ARUP, however at section 4.4 of the report the intersection analysis has been
      based on traffic volumes projected to 2019, not 2022. This anomaly should be corrected and
      the data revised accordingly. Furthermore the completion date of 2012 for the entire
      development with full occupancy seems an ambitious target and it is questionable as to
      whether the 10-year horizon should be based on a more realistic completion date for the
      development.
50.   In terms of traffic distribution it is noted that no assessment has been made for traffic that will
      utilise Eenie Creek Road. Though it is acknowledged that the section of Eenie Creek Road
      that adjoins Ben Lexcen Drive has not been open to traffic at this point in time, this is likely to
      change very soon as this section of the Road network is due to be completed and open before
      the end of 2008. Accordingly some traffic too and from the proposed development is likely to
      use this route and this should be taken into consideration in the analysis.
51.   In terms of the Origin / Destination split of traffic, it is also noted that no assessment has been
      made for traffic that utilises the existing service road that currently cuts across the north-
      eastern boundary of proposed Lot 9, that is, the one-way service road that has entry off Ben
      Lexcen Drive south of Lipton Street. In this regard consideration needs to be given to existing
      traffic that take this route as well as some of the traffic that will be associated with the
      proposed development which will also take this route.
52.   In addition to the above, also review the traffic impacts of changing the one-way service road
      off Ben Lexcen Drive to allow two-way vehicle movements with an exit onto Ben Lexcen Drive
      to avoid vehicles with a southern origin/ destination having to use the Lipton / Ben Lexcen
      Drive roundabout and having to travel past the Shop precinct.
Internal Traffic Generation and Vehicular Access
53.   Provide a plan that clearly illustrates all of the internal road widths and whether two-way or
      one-way vehicle movements are proposed. Information provided to date is unclear and based
      on drawing 0673_DA16 by Smith & Tracey Architects is likely to result in driver confusion,
      panic, and low speed accidents occurring. This convoluted arrangement is unacceptable and
      it is recommended that all circulation roads be designed to cater for two-way movements, with
      low volume internal roads being at least 5.5m wide, and the higher volume internal roads
      being approximately 7m wide as suggested in the Traffic Assessment by ARUP.
54.   Demonstrate that all internal roads can cater for the vehicles intended to use them, by
      illustrating appropriate vehicle swept paths. This is an issue that must be addressed up front
      as opposed to delaying to operational works stage as vehicle turning paths and internal
      roadway requirements are likely to affect the proposed building locations, shapes and sizes.
55.   Provide a plan that also illustrates all internal pathways and the width of such pathways. It is
      suggested that an internal pathway hierarchy needs to be established, with the pathways
      carrying the lower volume of users being 1.5m wide (also the narrowest), and the pathways
      more likely to carry higher volumes being at least 2.0m wide. Consideration also needs to be
      given to the mobility levels of the various patrons, as it is considered that some patrons will
      utilise walking fames and some will be in wheelchairs. To this end the pathway network needs
      to be designed to cater for these users. The applicant may also choose to provide wider
      pathways than that which has been mentioned to enhance the standard of their development.
56.   Demonstrate that service vehicle access (i.e. exit and entry) to various parts of the site will
      occur in a forward gear at all times.