Traffic Response · MCU15/0122

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.