Response to Council IR

 Page 2

Item 3: Demonstrate adequate sight lines at the main site access intersection onto the existing access
easement, having regard for the potential for a fence along the side boundary to the edge of the
access easement. Identify proposed linemarking to define operation of that intersection, having
regard for car and service vehicle turning path requirements should also be identified.

Applicant’s Response to Item 3: Please refer to Attachment B which provides Lambert & Rehbein’s
response to item 3.


Item 4: Demonstrate how vehicles will be able to turn around at the proposed dead end aisles of the
carpark if all parking spaces in those aisles are occupied.

Applicant’s Response to Item 4: Please refer to Attachment A which provides revised plans of the
development prepared by Thomson Adsett Pty Ltd. Please also refer to Attachment B which
provides Lambert & Rehbein’s response to item 4.



Item 5: Identify proposed linemarking and/or layout changes at the south-western corner of the
basement level carpark to clarify how the various movements at the confusing junction would
prioritised, and how it will operate in a satisfactory manner.
Applicant’s Response to Item 5: Please refer to Attachment A which provides revised plans of the
development prepared by Thomson Adsett Pty Ltd. Please also refer to Attachment B which
provides Lambert & Rehbein’s response to item 5.



Item 6: Provide confirmation of the dimensions for the various carparking spaces and aisles on all
levels.
Applicant’s Response to Item 6: Please refer to Attachment A which provides revised plans of the
development prepared by Thomson Adsett Pty Ltd. Please also refer to Attachment B which
provides Lambert & Rehbein’s response to item 6.



Item 7: There is a concern that there are potential issues associated with operating the basement
carparking with one-way operation as proposed, having regard for the very long lengths of circulation
to then exit the carpark from some spaces. It is considered short distances of travel in the opposite
direction will encourage “wrong way” travel along the aisles.
       a)     Demonstrate satisfactory use of the drop-off zone.
       b)     Demonstrate how the required number of bicycle parking spaces will be achieved having
              regard to the layout requirements of AS/NZS2890.3-2015, as well as the number of
              lockers and shower facilities identified in the traffic report.

Applicant’s Response to Item 7: Please refer to Attachment A which provides revised plans of the
development prepared by Thomson Adsett Pty Ltd. Please also refer to Attachment B which
provides Lambert & Rehbein’s response to item 7.

With reference to carparking spaces the submitted planning report indicated:

    Bicycle parking is provided in basement level of building and based on a GFA of 6388m2 a total
    of 128 bicycle spaces would be required to be provided. The applicant has provided 72 secure
    spaces in the basement with 10 spaces at the front of the site. This total of 82 spaces is
    considered sufficient for the development noting that these bicycles spaces would predominately
    be used by staff. End of trip facilities including 10 toilets and 8 showers and change rooms are
    provided in the basement that are also sufficient for the proposed building.

Lambert & Rehbein also confirm that in their opinion the amount of bicycle spaces and facilities
proposed will be sufficient as this form of development does not generate the same trips as a
traditional ‘Commercial Centre’.