Council archive · source document
Traffic Response · MCU15/0122
Attached to the e-mail MCU15/0122 - Response to Information Request - inc Traffic plan & amended floor plan - Email 1 of 3.
28 April 2016 Our Ref: 16BRT0070Tlett160428 NSC Ref: MCU15/0122 Attention: Dennis Wallace Noosa Council Dear Dennis, RE: Proposed Medical and Retail Business - Goodchap Street, Noosaville Response to Traffic Items in Noosa Council Information Request 1 Introduction TTM Consulting have been engaged to provide a response to traffic engineering items in an Information Request from Noosa Council regarding a proposed Medical and Retail Business. The application reference is MCU15/0122 and the Information Request is dated 9 February 2016. The traffic and transport issues include traffic impacts, site access, road infrastructure along the site frontage, development servicing and car park design. 2 Background Road Pro Development prepared a traffic impact assessment for the development proposal. This assessment is dated November 2015 and the reference is 15679. This assessment provides the following information: Site location; Local road network; Trip generation and distribution; Existing and future traffic volumes at the Goodchap Street/Val Crescent/Noosa Private Hospital Access; Sight distance at the access and; Car parking requirements. TTM generally concur with the Road Pro traffic assessment. However, TTM reassessed the assumptions for trip generation rate and trip distribution (20% north/80% south) and have identified alternative recommendations. These items will be discussed further in Section 4. TTM Consulting Pty Ltd P 07 3327 9500 PO Box 1310 ttmgroup.com.au ABN 65 010 868 621 E [email protected] Coorparoo BC QLD 4151
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 24 pages
Page 2
3 Development Proposal
The development proposal has been amended from the previously submitted plans as follows:
The site access has been amended to provide an IPWEAQ 7m wide Type B driveway crossover;
The bus stop is intended to be relocated approximately 27m to the north to be allow site access and bus
movements;
The pedestrian refuge crossing Goodchap Street on the southern side of the Goodchap Street/Val Cresecent
intersection will be widened to 2m to meet current standards;
The applicant intends to extend the islands at the pedestrian refuge at the site frontage to prevent right turn
entry and exit movements between the site and Goodchap Street and relocate ‘Keep Left’ signage;
The applicant intends to provide signage identifying the medical centre can be accessed via U-turn at Juron
Street 150m south of the bus stop. This will be supplemented by a sign banning U-turns facing southbound
drivers; and
Minor amendments to the internal layout to improve car park layout and bicycle provision.
Recommendations for external road works are provided in Attachment 1 (16BRT0070-01C).
4 Traffic Impact (Item 5a)
4.1 Study Area
This traffic impact assessment includes the following intersections:
Hilton Terrace/Earnest Street;
Goodchap Street/Val Crescent/Noosa Private Hospital Access;
Goodchap Street/Juron Street; and
Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street.
4.2 Traffic Surveys
TTM Data undertook intersection movement surveys on Tuesday 22nd March between 2:30-5:30pm and Wednesday 23rd
March between 7:00-9:30am at the Hilton Terrace/Ernest Street and Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street
intersections. The peak hours were found to be 8:00-9:00am and 2:30-3:30pm. The surveyed peak hour traffic volumes
are provided in Attachment 2.
4.3 Trip Generation
As noted in Section 2, TTM have reviewed the application of a 13vph/100m2 trip generation rate. The previous trip
generation results in a peak hour traffic generation of 321vph. The site provides 124 parking spaces and as such, this trip
generation rate results in each space turning over 2.6 times per hour. Once singular movements from staff are factored
in, the consequent turnover of visitor parking spaces is likely to be up to 4 times per hour based on the application of this
Page 3
traffic generation rate. Furthermore, based on the survey of the Goodchap Street/Val Crescent intersection (in the Road Pro assessment), the Noosa Private Hospital opposite the site generates an average of 138vph. As such, application of the 13vph/100m 2 trip generation rate results in the proposed medical centre generating 2.3 times more traffic than the Noosa Private Hospital. The proposed development has access to public transport facilities at the site frontage. This allows staff and patients/clients/visitors an alternative mode of transport to the site from Cooran, Noosa Junction and Tewantin. Lastly, the site is co-located with the Noosa Private Hospital, which will allow active transport options for staff, specialists and some patients, and may further reduce the site traffic generation. For the above reasons, traffic generation to the site is predicted to be much lower than utilised in the Road Pro report. The RTA Guide to Traffic Engineering Developments has undertaken surveys of several medical centres 1991 in the Sydney region. Whilst Sydney has a different transport environment than Noosa, and the surveys were undertaken 25 years ago, it is TTM’s experience that data within this Guide is still reasonable and relevant, and compares favourably to contemporary traffic surveys. This document identifies the medical centres surveyed had a mean trip generation of 10.4vph/100m2 in the AM peak and 8.8vph/100m2 in the PM peak. Application of this rate to the proposed 2,470m 2 centre results in a traffic generation of 257vph in the AM peak and 218vph in the PM peak. The application of these traffic generation rates is considered conservative, as they still result in approximately 2 peak hour traffic movements per parking space. As such, these traffic generation rates will be adopted. 4.4 Trip Distribution As noted in Section 2, TTM have also reviewed the traffic distribution identified in the Road Pro report (80% south/20% north). The development catchment extends from Peregian Beach in the southeast, Ridgewood in the southwest, Kin Kin in the northwest and Cootharaba in the northeast. This is noted as the Trade Area in Figure 4.1 of the Economics Needs Analysis submitted with the assessment. Of this area the majority of the catchment population is south and east of the site, which will drive TTM have reviewed the likely routes used to access the subject site as shown in Figure 1.
Page 4
Figure 1: Development Catchment and Approach Routes
10% Tewantin
North Catchment
10% Tewantin
West Catchment Subject
Site 30% Noosaville/ Noosa
` Heads Catchment
10% Cooroy and
West Catchment
30% Sunshine
10% Eumundi and Beach/ Peregian
SW catchment Beach Catchment
Of all the catchments identified, only the Tewantin North catchment is predicted to access the site via the north. For the
Tewantin West catchment, Beckmans Road and St Andrews Drive are expected to be used to access the site via Eumundi
Noosa Road. From the Noosaville/Noosa Heads catchment, Google Maps suggests using Gympie Terrace and Eumundi
Noosa Road to access the site (rather than Hilton Terrace as this is a longer route). As such, only 10% of development
traffic is expected to access the site from the north. Regular patients and staff will become familiar with the access
restrictions and will choose their route accordingly. As such, the percentage of traffic accessing the site from the north is
not expected to exceed 10%.
Based on the development catchments shown in Figure 1, the following distribution is expected:
10% via Goochap Street – North of the site:
o 8% Hilton Terrace - west;
o 2% Hilton Terrace – east;
90% via Goodchap Street – South of the site:
o 60% Eumundi Noosa Road – west; and
o 30% Eumundi Noosa Road – east.
Page 5
The entry/exit distribution of 60%/40% in the AM and the reverse in the PM will be retained. The consequent traffic
movements provided in Attachment 2. This notes a maximum inbound traffic flow from the north of 15 vehicles per hour
in the AM peak.
4.5 Traffic Assessment Scenarios
The following traffic scenarios will be considered as part of this assessment:
2016 Current Case;
2018 Opening Day Base Case;
2018 Opening Day Development Case;
2028 Base Case;
2028 Development Case;
The future cases will be determined by applying a nominal 0.5% p.a. growth rate to through volumes on Goodchap Street
and a 1.0% p.a. growth rate to through volumes on Hilton Terrace and Eumundi Noosa Road. The estimated future peak
hour traffic volumes are provided in Attachment 2.
4.6 Operation of Hilton Terrace/Ernest Street Intersection
TTM have assessed the operation of this intersection using Sidra version 6.1. The intersection layout for the AM peak is
shown in Figure 2 and the layout of the PM peak is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 2: Hilton Terrace/Ernest Street Sidra Layout – AM Peak
Page 6
Figure 3: Hilton Terrace/Ernest Street Sidra Layout – PM Peak In the AM cases, the layout includes a short right turn lane from the Ernest Street approach. This matches the practical intersection operation and was used as a calibration tool to match the Sidra intersection performance with the surveyed intersection performance. All default parameters were used with the exception of gap acceptance and follow up headway in the AM cases. This was changed from the default 7 and 4 seconds to 6.5 and 3.5 seconds respectively to match the Sidra intersection performance with the surveyed intersection performance. In the PM cases the Sidra intersection performance generally matched the surveyed intersection performance without the short right turn lane and changes to the gap acceptance/follow up headway. The results of this analysis are provided in Table 1 and Sidra files have been provided with this assessment.
Page 7
Table 1: Summary of Sidra Outputs – Hilton Terrace/Ernest Street Intersection
Case Degree of Delay (sec) Highest 95th Percentile Critical Queue (m)
Saturation Level of
Average Highest* Service* South East North West
2016 AM Current Case 39.6% 3.8 42.5 E 16.9 0 - 17.9
2018 AM Base Case 40.4% 3.8 44.7 E 17.5 0 - 18.5
2018 AM Project Case 41.3% 3.9 42.7 E 18.2 0 - 19.6
2028 AM Base Case 54.7% 4.2 60.2 F 20.8 0 - 51.9
2028 AM Project Case 55.0% 4.3 57.5 F 21.6 0 - 51.7
2016 PM Current Case 61.0% 4.8 50.6 F 33.1 0 - 17.1
2018 PM Base Case 62.7% 5.0 53.5 F 34.7 0 - 17.7
2018 PM Project Case 66.7% 5.3 55.5 F 39.5 0 - 18.4
2028 PM Base Case 74.7% 6.1 73.4 F 49.3 0 - 36.6
2028 PM Project Case 79.8% 6.8 77.3 F 59.7 0 - 36.6
* Right turn from Ernest Street in all cases
Table 1 shows that this intersection is not expected to exceed capacity in any scenario tested. The right turns from the
minor road (Ernest Street), however, are expected to have high delays and a resultant poor level of service (F). Practically,
if drivers believe the delays are too high, they will perform a left turn from Ernest Street to turn around in Tewantin or
re-route otherwise. This analysis shows that the addition of 2-3 additional vehicle undertaking this turn in a peak hour
will have a negligible impact on the operation of this intersection.
As drivers have several options available and there are low numbers of vehicles performing this manoeuvre, the right
turn from Ernest Street is not considered critical to the operation of the road network. As such, the right turns from
Ernest Street can be banned, however this should not be the responsibility of the applicant as this is an existing problem.
It is also noted that Sidra identifies that queuing from the right turn entering Ernest Street would extend beyond the
current right turn lane in the 2028 Base Cases. This results in vehicles (turning right from Hilton Terrace) blocking through
traffic on the western approach or queuing into the painted chevron. As this will be an issue in the 2028 base case and is
not significantly exacerbated by the addition of development traffic (less than 1 car length additional to the maximum
queue), the applicant should not be responsible for any works to extend the existing turn facility. Practically if queuing
extends beyond the designated right turn lane, rather than stand in the through lane to turn, drivers will stand over the
line marking separating through movements on the approach.
Any operation issues which either are existing, or will exist at this intersection, are not anticipated to be significantly
impacted by the development proposed and as such the applicant should not be responsible for any improvements at
this intersection.
4.7 Operation of Goodchap Street/Val Crescent/Noosa Private Hospital Access Intersection
This intersection was assessed in the Road Pro report and was expected to operate suitably in the 2027 peak hours. As
the predicted development traffic generation has reduced, TTM expect the intersection will operate as well as, or better,
than this previous assessment indicates. As such, no further assessment of this intersection is required.
Page 8
4.8 Operation of Goodchap Street/Juron Street Intersection
Right turns into the site will be physically restricted by extending the islands at the pedestrian crossing adjacent to the
entry. It is not possible to physically restrict a vehicle performing a U-turn into the site access whilst allowing movements
into and from 60 Goodchap Street. As such a sign is provided at the pedestrian refuge is provided to identify U-turns are
restricted. Signage identifying that the medical centre can be accessed via a U-turn at Juron Street will also be provided
to advise drivers of an appropriate location to perform a U-turn to access the site. The proposed works are shown in
Attachment 1 (16BRT0070-01B).
A swept path analysis for U-turns at Juron Street is shown in Attachment 4 (16BRT0070-04A). This analysis shows a B99
can adequately perform a U-turn at this intersection. As such, the proposed measures are considered suitable to prevent
U-turns at inappropriate locations.
The development traffic volumes shown in Attachment 2 identify that an expected maximum of 15vph in the AM peak
and 9vph in the PM peak may undertake a U-turn manoeuvre at the Goodchap Street/Juron Street intersection. This
results in an expected maximum of one vehicle undertaking this U-turn in a 4 minute period. This low number of turns is
not expected to adversely impact the operation of this intersection, or result in significant delays to drivers accessing
Juron Street.
The number of vehicles performing these manoeuvres may be reduced as follows:
Drivers may undertake a U-turn at the Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street intersection instead; or
Drivers may re-route to avoid performing a U-turn to enter the site.
As such, the practical number of vehicles accessing the site from the north of Goodchap Street may be lower, up to 5vph,
which equates to one vehicle every 12 minutes.
The anticipated low number of vehicles performing this manoeuvre is not expected to significantly impact the operation
of this intersection.
The development will also increase through volumes at this intersection. Additional vehicles travelling through the
intersection are unlikely to negatively other through traffic. Existing traffic exiting Juron Street may experience an
increase in delays due to additional through vehicles, however this is expected to be relatively minor.
4.9 Operation of Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street Intersection
TTM have assessed the operation of this intersection using Sidra version 6.1. The intersection layout for the peak period
analysis is shown in Figure 4.
Page 9
Figure 4: Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street Sidra Layout All default parameters were used in the analysis. The results of this analysis are provided in Table 2 and Sidra files have been provided with this assessment.
Page 10
Table 2: Summary of Sidra Outputs – Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street Intersection
Case Degree of Delay (sec) Highest 95th Percentile Critical Queue (m)
Saturation Level of
Average Highest* Service* South East North West
2016 AM Current Case 81.9% 12.4 37.0 D 8.7 30.9 97.0 38.2
2018 AM Base Case 84.5% 13.1 41.6 D 8.9 32.4 108.6 39.4
2018 AM Project Case 102.3% 24.0 99.9 F 9.9 42.1 272.4 42.5
2028 AM Base Case 104.3% 25.7 121.4 F 9.6 36.0 294.0 41.1
2028 AM Project Case 122.0% 48.3 251.0 F 10.0 41.3 609.5 53.7
2016 PM Current Case 61.1% 8.6 22.2 C 6.5 29.5 46.7 35.1
2018 PM Base Case 62.9% 8.8 23.4 C 6.7 31.0 49.7 36.3
2018 PM Project Case 78.2% 11.3 32.2 C 7.5 41.4 84.5 39.0
2028 PM Base Case 71.6% 10.0 31.6 C 7.2 37.7 67.1 43.7
2028 PM Project Case 96.6% 18.5 78.0 E 8.4 53.3 193.2 47.0
* Right turn from Goodchap Street in all cases
Table 2 shows that this intersection approaches capacity in the 2018 AM peak with a degree of saturation (DOS) of 84.5%.
With development and further background traffic growth, this intersection is anticipated to exceed available capacity and
result in significant delays and queues for the Goodchap Street approach resulting in a level of service (LOS) F. It is noted
that all other approaches in the 2018 and 2028 AM peak hour scenarios operate with a LOS B and nominal queues.
Table 2 also shows that this intersection operates suitably in the PM peak with the exception of the 2028 project case,
where the DOS exceeds 95%.
TTM have reviewed the layout of the existing intersection and note it may be feasible to reconfigure the Goodchap Street
approach with an all movements lane and dedicated right turn lane. This is considered practical as the predicted through
and left volumes combined are approximately 25% of right turn volumes at this approach in the base scenarios. It may
be possible to make this change with line marking only, with the cycle lane provided left of the all movements lane.
Signage may be required to advise drivers turning left or through this approach to be cautious of cyclists.
The Sidra layout of this arrangement is shown in Figure 5.
Page 11
Figure 5: Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street Modified Sidra Layout Table 3 provides a summary of Sidra outputs for development scenarios with these modifications.
Page 12
Table 3: Summary of Sidra Outputs – Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street Intersection, Modified Layout
Case Degree of Delay (sec) Highest 95th Percentile Critical Queue (m)
Saturation Level of
Average Highest* Service* South East North West
2018 AM Project Case 64.4% 11.0 26.7 C 7.6 23.4 51.7 41.3
2028 AM Project Case 77.5% 14.1 41.0 C 8.3 28.0 79.7 52.4
2018 PM Project Case 59.4% 8.7 20.7 C 5.6 24.6 33.3 37.5
2028 PM Project Case 65.1% 10.0 27.2 C 6.2 30.4 46.9 45.2
* Right turn from Goodchap Street in all cases
Table 3 shows that the proposed modifications significantly improve the operation of this intersection, beyond the
anticipated future base cases. As such, the proposed modifications are considered suitable to mitigate the impact of the
development proposal on this intersection.
4.10 Traffic Impact Assessment Summary
The development proposal does not significantly exacerbate traffic issues at the Hilton Terrace/Ernest Street intersection
(primarily the right turn from Ernest Street).
The Goodchap Street/Val Crescent intersection is expected to perform as well as, or better, than identified in the Road
Pro assessment, as the traffic generation is expected to be lower.
Right turns into and from the site will be restricted by extending traffic islands at the adjacent pedestrian refuge. U-turns
are restricted at this refuge through signage and are encouraged through signage (adjacent to the refuge) to occur at
Juron Street.
The development impact on the Eumundi Noosa Road/Goodchap Street intersection can be mitigated by reconfiguring
the approach lanes on Goodchap Street to provide an all movement lane and a dedicated right turn lane.
The proposed works are considered suitable to mitigate the development impact on the road network and encourage
suitable road operation.
5 Site Access – Design (Item 6)
The proposed site access has been reconfigured to a single access point. The driveway crossover is 7m wide Type B based
on IPWEAQ specifications. This driveway type and design is considered suitable to meet Probable Solution S1.2 of the
Driveways and Carparking Code and other relevant Council requirements.
Pedestrian and cyclist impacts of the proposed driveway are expected to consistent with other standard commercial
accesses.
Goodchap Street is a district collector road, and as such has the dual function of transport movement and access. Along
the site frontage of Goodchap Street, there are two pedestrian refuges, a bus stop on each side and a hospital which
would generate pedestrian movements to paths and public transport. As such, road user safety – particularly for
pedestrians and cyclists – is considered more important than transport movement/efficiency in the vicinity of the subject
site.
Page 13
An auxiliary left turn lane into the site is not proposed, and as such, left turn vehicles will require following vehicles to
slow to a minor extent. This is considered positive as it creates a lower speed environment in this vicinity of the adjacent
pedestrian crossing.
The driveway crossover is located approximately 50m from the Val Crescent roundabout. This is not considered to be in
close proximity and is unlikely to impact queuing to the roundabout (Roadpro assessment indicated 2.7m or 1 car queuing
on the southern approach). Queuing inside the site is not expected to be impacted by the proximity to the roundabout.
6 Site Access – Movements from North (Item 7)
As noted in Section 4.8, right turns into the site are physically restricted and signage will be provided to identify drivers
to perform a U-turn at Juron Street to access the medical centre. As shown in Attachment 4 (16BRT0070-3C), a B99 is
able to perform a U-turn at the Goodchap Street/Juron Street intersection. The low number of vehicles performing this
U-turn is not predicted to have significant impacts on the operation of this intersection.
A very small number of drivers may perform a U-turn at other locations, such as private driveways, however the majority
of drivers are expected to obey signage and perform a U-turn at Juron Street or further south at the Eumundi Noosa Road
roundabout.
7 Access and Bus Stop Interaction (Item 8)
Attachment 1 (16BRT0070-1C) identifies recommendations for roadworks to enable:
Right turn entry/exit restrictions through extension of the pedestrian island and signage;
Relocation of the bus stop by approximately 27m; and
Widening the pedestrian refuge at the Val Crescent roundabout.
Section 5 identifies how the proposed driveway would operate in terms of the road network. It is noted that all traffic
exiting the site would exit to the north (left) and perform a U-turn at the Val Crescent roundabout if travelling
southbound.
Right turns into and from the site are physically restricted through the extension of the pedestrian islands and this is
reinforced through signage.
Attachment 4 (16BRT0070-3C) shows that a bus can enter and exit the bus stop clear of the access and within the road
reserve.
Sight lines for buses will not be restricted by the proposed access arrangements as buses have priority over cars. Buses
standing in the bus stop will not impact sight distance to cars as the driveway egress is left out only.
The existing regular bus stop was constructed in 2011. The latest standards for bus stop design were released from the
Department of Transport and Main Roads in 2015 entitled ‘Public Transport Infrastructure Manual (PTIM)’. TTM have
reviewed the existing bus stop design and it is generally consistent with a regular bus stop design with mid/front path in
the PTIM. As such there is considered to be no requirement for significant changes to the existing bus stop design, beyond
its relocation as identified in Attachment 1 (16BRT0070-1C).
Page 14
The plans in Attachment 1 (16BRT0070-1C) show the design and widths of the proposed driveway crossovers. TTM were unable to gain access to Council’s standard drawings as per Probable Solution S2.1 and S2.2. It is understood, however, that Council’s standard drawings are based on IPWEAQ standard drawings. The proposed access design is consistent with a Type B driveway crossover in the IPWEAQ RS-0051 standard drawing. The proposal is therefore considered to be compliant with Specific Outcome O2. TTM understand that the access and ground level parking grades will be no more than 1:20 (1:40 at the PWD bays) which complies with AS/NZS2890.1 requirements. The access grades are therefore considered suitable. 8 Refuse Collection (Item 9) PSP9 identifies design parameters of a front and rear loading waste collection vehicle (WCV), however, does not identify the design vehicle for a rear loading WCV, which is the proposed design vehicle for the subject site. TTM have chosen to use a 10.3m long rear loading WCV, which is based on design parameters of rear loading WCV in other Council areas. This design WCV is 0.4m longer than either of Council’s nominated WCV’s and is therefore considered a suitable design WCV. Swept paths of this vehicle accessing the site, loading and exiting the subject site is shown in Attachment 4 (16BRT0070- 2C). Standard clearances to obstructions are shown (300mm for a rigid truck moving at a low speed). Attachment 4 (16BRT0070-2C) also shows that a loading WCV can stand clear of the vehicle movements at the access. The proposed waste collection arrangements are therefore considered suitable. 9 Internal Design (Item 10) Swept paths of B99/B85 vehicles passing on internal bends on the ramp are shown in Attachment 4 (16BRT0070-3C). The entry to the ramp from the ground level is suitably designed for two-way car movements. Recommendations are provided in Attachment 4 (16BRT0070-3C) to provide priority to entering vehicles the basement and to ensure sufficient sight distance in the vicinity of the plantroom. Should these recommendations be provided, the proposed ramp design is considered suitable. TTM have review the proposed car park dimensions. It is noted that all parking spaces are 2.6m wide except spaces 21 and 41. These spaces should be widened to 2.6m to be compliant with AS2890.1 Class 3 requirements. Permanent structures should not be located within PWD bays. As such the columns adjacent to spaces 16 and 17 should be removed from the development plans. The columns adjacent to spaces 4 and 5 are suitable as they provide 2.4m wide spaces in compliance with AS2890.6. An MRV and ambulance bay are located adjacent to the site entry. Swept path analysis of these spaces is provided in Attachment 4 (16BRT0070-2C). The amended development proposal now has only one driveway crossover. Additional bicycle spaces are provided adjacent to the entry walkway are also shown in this plan. If TTM’s recommendations regarding basement access, removal of columns, and widening of parking spaces is provided, the development layout will be designed to comply with AS2890.1, AS2890.2 and AS2890.6 requirements.
Page 15
10 External Works (Item 11)
Probable Solution S13.1 identifies the ‘following infrastructure components already exist at the frontage of the site or are
provided at the developer’s expense:
a. Full width sealed road;
b. Concrete kerb and channel where appropriate;
c. Forming and grading to footpaths;
d. Vehicular kerb and footpath crossings;
e. A constructed bikeway;
f. A constructed footpath;
g. A constructed carriageway;
h. Required alterations to public utility mains, services and installations;
i. Constructions of any required alterations to public utility mains, services or installations;
j. Stormwater drainage works; and
k. Installation of electrical conduits.’
It is noted that the site frontage already contains a full width sealed road, footpaths (on Goodchap Street), and an on-
street cycle lane/cycle awareness zone.
As part of the development proposal, the following works are recommended:
Widen pedestrian refuge at the roundabout (southern Goodchap Street approach) to 2m;
Repair or reinstate kerb and channel where driveways are removed, site works require the removal and/or
impact the current condition of the existing kerb and channel;
Construct a 2m wide footpath along the Goodchap Street frontage.
Should these recommendations be provided items a) to g) will be met. TTM cannot comment on items h) to k).
Probable Solution S13.2 requires ‘road and drainage design and construction is in accordance with Sections 3 and 4 of the
PSP5 Engineering Design Standards – Roads, Drainage and earthworks.
TTM cannot comment on Section 4 of PSP5. Section 3 relates to carriageway, path and verge design. It is TTM’s opinion
that the recommendations noted above will result in compliance with Section 3 of PSP5.
Should Council prefer the “Noosa Coastal” type of shelter, in lieu of relocation of the existing shelter, this should be at no
additional cost to the applicant.
Page 16
11 Summary The key traffic issues of the development relate to access movements, traffic impacts and infrastructure within the road reserve. This assessment provides recommendations in the form of signage, line marking, works to existing pedestrian refuges and widening the path along the Goodchap Street frontage. Should you have any questions in relation to this assessment, call Gary Harris on (07) 3327 9500. Yours sincerely, Gary Harris Project Consultant TTM Consulting Pty Ltd Attachment 1: Recommended External Roadworks (16BRT0070-01C) Attachment 2: Current and Anticipated Future Traffic volumes Attachment 3: Sidra Files (Electronic) Attachment 4: Swept Path Analyses and Recommended Basement Works (16BRT0070-02C, 16BRT0070-03C)
Page 17
Attachment 1: Recommended External Roadworks (16BRT0070-01C) [OCR of page images] ttm Attachment 1: Recommended External Roadworks (16BRT0070-01C)
Page 18
EXISTING BUS RELOCATE BUS
INSTALL BACK IPWEAQ TYPE B STOP/SHELTER
ACCESS 7m STOP/SHELTER
TO BACK SIGNS
KEEP
LEFT
R2-3A R2-5B
EXISTING
KEEP SIGNS
3m
LEFT REMOVED/
RELOCATED
3.5m
20m
3.2
3.2
35m 2m
5.5m
INSTALL SIGN
U-TURN K
E
JURON STREET E
P
L
EXTENSION OF EXISTING 150 m E
F
T WIDEN EXISTING
TRAFFIC MEDIAN TO RESTRICT CUSTOM PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS TO LEFT IN / LEFT OUT GUIDE SIGN TC9265-2 REFUGE AREA
NOTES:
1. PRELIMINARY DESIGN FOR COMMENTS ONLY.
2. REFER TO TTM DRAWING 16BRT0070-02 AND 03 FOR INTERNAL
SITE DETAILS AND SERVICE VEHICLE SWEPT PATH DETAILS.
3. REFER TO IPWEAQ DRAWING RS-051 FOR DRIVEWAY DETAILS.
4. MINIMUM 300mm CLEARANCE PROVIDED BETWEEN FACE OF
KERB AND ALL TRAFFIC SIGNS AS PER MUTCD STANDARDS.
PRELIMINARY
ISSUED FOR COMMENT ONLY
SCALE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER ORIGINAL SIZE
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5m
T TM CONSULTING PTY LTD GOODCHAP STREET, NOOSAVILLE 16BRT0070 A3
ABN 65 010 868 621 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER REVISION
SCALE 1:250 AT ORIGINAL SIZE
LEVEL 1, 129 LOGAN ROAD, WOOLLOONGABBA, QLD, 4102
C 22-04-16 NEW COMBINED DRIVEWAY BASE BW GH GH NORTH CLIENT P.O. BOX 1310, COORPAROO BC, QLD, 4151 DEVELOPMENT ACCESS CONFIGURATION 16BRT0070-01 C
B 12-04-16 ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE AND NOTES ADDED BW GH GH
T: (07) 3327 9500 F: (07) 3327 9501 EXTERNAL WORKS DATE SHEET
A 07-04-16 ORIGINAL ISSUE BW GH GH E: [email protected] W: www.ttmgroup.com.au 27 APR 2016 1 OF 3
REV. DATE AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
Page 19
Attachment 2: Current and Anticipated Future Traffic Volumes
2016 Surveyed Traffic Volumes Development Traffic Volumes
Thursday AM Thursday AM
Ernest Street Ernest Street
Thursday PM Thursday PM
536 698 - -
Hilton 348 442 Hilton Hilton 7 12 Hilton
Terrace - - Terrace Terrace - - Terrace
364 544 - -
410 8 18 25 8 2 - 3 2
447 9 10 3 -
Ernest Street Ernest Street
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
3 11 - 4 311 16 - - - - 9 -
- - - 1 476 27 - - - - 15 -
Val 3 5 Noosa Val - - Noosa
Crescent - - Hospital Crescent - - Hospital
- - - -
5 26 - -
2 344 69 - 1 - - 10 - 93 - -
3 443 44 - 18 70 - 13 - 118 - -
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
384 127
Site 499 Site 108
Access - - Access 131 103
Subject - 415 Subject 154 -
- 490 87 -
Site Goodchap Street
Site Goodchap Street
- 384 9 118
Juron - 499 Juron 15 93
Street Street
415 139
490 78
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
566 586 - 346 29 50 52 92 - 79 - 39
Eumundi 709 640 - 408 51 70 Eumundi Eumundi - - - 62 - 31 Eumundi
Noosa 97 110 Noosa Noosa - - Noosa
Road 42 68 Road Road - - Road
10 15 - -
71 49 46 26
122 41 95 - 590 739 - - - - - -
110 26 33 1 46 33 - - - - - -
Lutheran College Lutheran College
[OCR of page images]
Attachment 2: Current and Anticipated Future Traffic Volumes
2016 Surveyed Traffic Volumes
Thursday AM
Ernest Street
Thursday PM
536 698—>
Hilton 348 442—y
Terrace 5
Ss (Ty |< 364 544
410 8 y 8 25
447 9
Ernest Street
|
Goodchap Street
3 u ‘|. 4 3 16
- - — 1 476 U
Val 3 5 -y -
Crescent - a J
‘ Str A T ? Xs 26
2 344 69 -—1 -
3 443 44 - | y~ 18 70
Goodchap Street
384
Site 499
Access - Aly
: t
SWie}icfeay | = ais
P - 490
Site
Goodchap Street
- 384
Juron - 499
Street aty
4
415
490
Goodchap Street
566 sac |- 346 29 50
Eumundi 709 640—>| - 408 51 70
Noosa 97 x SJ J
Road 42
s yt eA r 10 15
? An 49
122 41 +—590 739
110 26 33 1 |y~ 46 33
Lutheran College
Hilton
Terrace
Noosa
Hospital
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
Development Traffic Volumes
Pouredayen Ernest Street
Thursday PM
- o-oo
Hilton 7 2-y
Terrace on <|
<P i:
8 2 = iv 3 2
10 3 a
Ernest Street
I
Goodchap Street
Do ApS See
- - —>]- - BB -
Val > - ES d
Crescent - - 4) 4 | L
Vt
re
118
- 10
- 2B -
Goodchap Street
Site
Access
131 103 _ 4
+
154 -
87
Subject
Site
Goodchap
Juron
Street
Eumundi =e
Noosa - &
~ TEP
Street
9 118
ap Street
- 7 - 39
- 31
SJ 14
mate as
A456 26
Lutheran
College
Hilton
Terrace
Noosa
Hospital
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
Page 20
2018 Estimated Base Traffic Volumes (0.5%/ 1.0% p.a. growth) 2018 Base and Development
Thursday AM Thursday AM
Ernest Street Ernest Street
Thursday PM Thursday PM
547 712 547 712
Hilton 351 446 Hilton Hilton 358 458 Hilton
Terrace - - Terrace Terrace - - Terrace
371 555 371 555
414 8 18 25 422 10 21 27
451 9 461 12
Ernest Street Ernest Street
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
3 11 - 4 316 16 3 11 - 4 325 16
- - - 1 483 27 - - - 1 498 27
Val 3 5 Noosa Val 3 5 Noosa
Crescent - - Hospital Crescent - - Hospital
- - - -
5 26 5 26
2 349 69 - 1 - 2 359 69 - 1 -
3 450 44 - 18 70 3 463 44 - 18 70
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
389 516
Site 506 Site 614
Access - - Access 131 103
Subject - 420 Subject 154 438
- 497 87 520
Site Goodchap Street
Site Goodchap Street
- 389 9 507
Juron - 506 Juron 15 599
Street Street
420 559
497 575
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
572 592 - 349 29 51 624 684 - 428 29 90
Eumundi 723 653 - 412 51 71 Eumundi Eumundi 723 653 - 474 51 102 Eumundi
Noosa 97 110 Noosa Noosa 97 110 Noosa
Road 43 69 Road Road 43 69 Road
10 15 10 15
72 49 118 75
122 41 95 - 602 754 122 41 95 - 602 754
110 26 33 1 46 33 110 26 33 1 46 33
Lutheran College Lutheran College
[OCR of page images]
2018 Estimated Base Traffic Volumes (0.5%/ 1.0% p.a. growth)
aie
Thursday AM
Thursday PM
547
Hilton 351
Terrace
4
414
451
3
Val 3
Crescent o
2 349
3 450
Site
Access e
Subject
Site
Juron
Street
572
Eumundi 723
Noosa 97
Road 43
Tira
122
110
4
26
Ernest Street
712—
406 y
2
<— 371 555
8 ¥_ 18 25
9
Ernest Street
|
Goodchap Street
ul.
- —>|-
Sy
Vt Take
69 -
44
4 316 16
1 483 t
Xs 26
+1 o
~_ 18 70
Goodchap Street
389
506
- Aly
- 420
497
Goodchap Street
4
420
497
Goodchap Street
502 - 349 29 51
653—> | - 412 51 71
= Syd |
© 0 5
A272 49
+— 602 754
y % 33
Lutheran College
330 («1
aust
Hilton
Terrace
Noosa
Hospital
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
2018 Base and Development
Thursday AM
Thursday PM
Ernest
547 712—>
Hilton 358 458—y
Terrace
422 10
461 12
3 un
SY
Val 3
Crescent a
* LT TL C
Site
Access
NY0]0)(-leig
Site
131 103 _/
154 438
87 520
Goodcha
Juron
Street
+
559
575
Goodch:
684 +
653—>
110\
8 4)
SEER
122 41
110 26
624
723
2
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
31
Lutheran
a
Street
+ 371 555
yy 2 27
Ernest Street
Goodchap Street
- 4 325 16
1 498 U
Pst HG
aa
A 5 26
+1 -
¥_ 38 70
Goodchap Street
516
614
y
p Street
9 507
15 599
ay
ap Street
- 428 29 90
- 474 51 102
Ji
® 10 15
A's 75
+— 602 754
¥ 6 8
College
Hilton
Terrace
Noosa
Hospital
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
Page 21
2028 Estimated Base Traffic Volumes (0.5%/ 1.0% p.a. growth) 2028 Base and Development
Thursday AM Thursday AM
Ernest Street Ernest Street
Thursday PM Thursday PM
604 787 604 787
Hilton 369 469 Hilton Hilton 376 481 Hilton
Terrace - - Terrace Terrace - - Terrace
410 613 410 613
435 8 19 27 443 10 22 29
475 10 485 13
Ernest Street Ernest Street
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
3 11 - 4 332 16 3 11 - 4 341 16
- - - 1 508 27 - - - 1 523 27
Val 3 5 Noosa Val 3 5 Noosa
Crescent - - Hospital Crescent - - Hospital
- - - -
5 26 5 26
2 367 69 - 1 - 2 377 69 - 1 -
3 473 44 - 18 70 3 486 44 - 18 70
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
405 532
Site 531 Site 639
Access - - Access 131 103
Subject - 438 Subject 154 438
- 520 87 520
Site Goodchap Street
Site Goodchap Street
- 405 9 523
Juron - 531 Juron 15 624
Street Street
438 577
520 598
Goodchap Street Goodchap Street
601 622 - 367 29 53 653 714 - 446 29 92
Eumundi 799 721 - 433 51 74 Eumundi Eumundi 799 721 - 495 51 105 Eumundi
Noosa 97 110 Noosa Noosa 97 110 Noosa
Road 47 77 Road Road 47 77 Road
11 17 11 17
75 52 121 78
122 41 95 - 665 833 122 41 95 - 665 833
110 26 33 1 46 33 110 26 33 1 46 33
Lutheran College Lutheran College
[OCR of page images]
2028 Estimated Base Traffic Volumes (0.5%/ 1.0% p.a. growth)
Thursday AM
Ernest Street
Thursday PM
604 737—>
Hilton 369 469 y
Terrace - a »)
S ? ry |< “00 os
435 8 ¥. 9 27
475 10
Ernest Street
i
Goodchap Street
3 nu). 4 32 46
- - >] - 1 508 27
Val 3 5 _y 7
Crescent - 5 <| “J
‘ { r (+ A 5 26
2 367 69 -|+-1 -
3 473 44 - |y¥—18 70
Goodchap Street
405
Site 531
Access - - Aly
; t
SNyiei] = ase
3 - 520
Site
Goodchap Street
- 405
Juron - 531
Street at y
s
438
520
Goodchap Street
601 6227 | - 367 29 53
Eumundi 799 721—>| - 433 51 74
Noosa 97 110) a | re
Road a7 7 +
4 t r eu 7
[* A 75 52
122 41 95 - | +—665 833
110 26 33 1/¥ 46 33
Lutheran College
Hilton
Terrace
Noosa
Hospital
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
2028 Base and Development
Thursday AM
Thursday PM
Ernest
604 787—>
Hilton 376 481—y
Terrace °
485 13
3 u—+
—
Sy
Val 3
Crescent
2
3
377 69 -
486 44 -
Site
Access
MU] o) {cle
Site
131103 _
154 433
87 «=©520
Juron
Street
577
598
714 +
721
110V
653
799
7
47
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
Ltt ft
222 41 95 -
110 26 33 1
Lutheran
arr
443 10
7
71 «|
Street
<— 410 613
ly 22 29
Ernest Street
Goodchap Street
a 4 341 16
a 1 523 27
Ja tk
_
YtTr nS:
A 5 26
+1 =-
y 8 70
Goodchap Street
532
639
v
Goodchap Street
9
15,
aj
523
624
,
Goodchap Street
- 446 29 92
- 495 51 105
JJ tu
eu 7
A121 78
665 833
6 3
College
Hilton
Terrace
Noosa
Hospital
Eumundi
Noosa
Road
Page 22
Attachment 3: Sidra Files (Electronic) [OCR of page images] ttm Attachment 3: Sidra Files (Electronic)
Page 23
Attachment 4: Swept Path Analyses and Recommended Basement Works (16BRT0070-02C, 16BRT0070-03C)
Page 24
2m
REVERSE IN, FORWARD
OUT MANOEUVRE
REVERSE IN, FORWARD
OUT MANOEUVRE 05 06
1.5m
MRV ACCESS AMBULANCE ACCESS RCV STANDING / B99 PASSING
05 06
PRELIMINARY
ISSUED FOR COMMENT ONLY
5.2 B99 Vehicle (Realistic min radius) (2004)
Overall Length 5.200m
Overall Width 1.940m
Overall Body Height 1.878m
Min Body Ground Clearance 0.272m
Track Width 1.840m
Lock-to-lock time 4.00s
0.95 3.05
Curb to Curb Turning Radius 6.250m
6.3
QAS F250 Ambulance
Overall Length 6.300m
Overall Width 2.680m
Overall Body Height 2.461m
Min Body Ground Clearance 0.189m
Max Track Width 1.670m
Lock-to-lock time 4.00s
0.65 4.1 Curb to Curb Turning Radius 8.500m
8.8
MRV - Medium Rigid Vehicle
Overall Length 8.800m
Overall Width 2.500m
Overall Body Height 3.633m
Min Body Ground Clearance 0.428m
Track Width 2.500m
Lock-to-lock time 4.00s
Curb to Curb Turning Radius 10.000m
1.5 5
10.3
Acco RCV 2016
Overall Length 10.300m
Overall Width 2.500m
A Overall Body Height 3.400m
06 Min Body Ground Clearance 0.304m
Track Width 2.500m
Lock-to-lock time 6.00s
Curb to Curb Turning Radius 9.500m
1.55 5.55 1.3
RCV SITE ACCESS
SCALE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER ORIGINAL SIZE
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5m
T TM CONSULTING PTY LTD GOODCHAP STREET, NOOSAVILLE 16BRT0070 A3
ABN 65 010 868 621 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER REVISION
SCALE 1:250 AT ORIGINAL SIZE
LEVEL 1, 129 LOGAN ROAD, WOOLLOONGABBA, QLD, 4102
C 27-04-16 NEW COMBINED DRIVEWAY BASE BW GH GH NORTH CLIENT P.O. BOX 1310, COORPAROO BC, QLD, 4151 DEVELOPMENT ACCESS CONFIGURATION 16BRT0070-02 C
B 12-04-16 ADDITIONAL SWEPT PATHS ADDED BW GH GH
T: (07) 3327 9500 F: (07) 3327 9501 SWEPT PATH ANALYSIS - SERVICE VEHICLES DATE SHEET
A 07-03-16 ORIGINAL ISSUE BW GH GH E: [email protected] W: www.ttmgroup.com.au 27 APR 2016 2 OF 3
REV. DATE AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
Page 25
JURON STREET
2200mm FALL
12500@1:6
2000@ 1:8
245mm
FALL
97
2000 @ 1:8
245mm
98
FALL
2200mm FALL
12500@1:6
99
GOODCHAP STREET
B99 - BASEMENT LEVEL
44
45
STOP 46
47
BAR 48
49
JURON STREET - U-TURN MANOEUVRE - B99
B85/B99 RAMP PASSING - GROUND LEVEL
2000@ 1:8
245mm
70
FALL
CENTRELINE 97
MARKING
98
45° TRUNCATION
2200mm FALL
82 83
12500@1:6
99
B85/B99 RAMP PASSING - BASEMENT LEVEL
B85 Vehicle (Realistic min radius) (2004)
A B 4.91 Overall Length 4.910m
06 05 Overall Width 1.870m
Overall Body Height 1.421m
Min Body Ground Clearance 0.159m
Track Width 1.770m
Lock-to-lock time 4.00s
0.92 2.8 Curb to Curb Turning Radius 5.750m
5.2 B99 Vehicle (Realistic min radius) (2004)
Overall Length 5.200m
Overall Width 1.940m
Overall Body Height 1.878m
Min Body Ground Clearance 0.272m
Track Width 1.840m
Lock-to-lock time 4.00s
0.95 3.05
Curb to Curb Turning Radius 6.250m
ON STREET BUS STOP MANOEUVRE - 14.5m BUS
14.494
Single Unit Truck/Bus (14.5m)
Overall Length 14.494m
Overall Width 2.500m
Overall Body Height 3.102m
PRELIMINARY Min Body Ground Clearance
Track Width
0.337m
2.500m
Lock-to-lock time 6.00s
ISSUED FOR COMMENT ONLY 2.86 7 1.3
Curb to Curb Turning Radius 12.135m
SCALE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER ORIGINAL SIZE
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5m
T TM CONSULTING PTY LTD GOODCHAP STREET, NOOSAVILLE 16BRT0070 A3
ABN 65 010 868 621 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER REVISION
SCALE 1:250 AT ORIGINAL SIZE
LEVEL 1, 129 LOGAN ROAD, WOOLLOONGABBA, QLD, 4102
C 27-04-16 NEW COMBINED DRIVEWAY BASE BW GH GH NORTH CLIENT P.O. BOX 1310, COORPAROO BC, QLD, 4151 DEVELOPMENT ACCESS CONFIGURATION 16BRT0070-03 C
B 12-04-16 ADDITIONAL SWEPT PATHS ADDED BW GH GH
T: (07) 3327 9500 F: (07) 3327 9501 SWEPT PATH ANALYSIS - VARIOUS DATE SHEET
A 12-04-16 ORIGINAL ISSUE BW GH GH E: [email protected] W: www.ttmgroup.com.au 27 APR 2016 3 OF 3
REV. DATE AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
Used in these records
Traffic Response.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 3.5 MB (large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.