Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent · the transport planning and traffic engineering matters relating to the redevelopment of 11 Surrey Crescent, Grey Lynn. The proposed re-development

Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11

Surrey Crescent

Transport Assessment

March 2018

Project: Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent

Title: Transport Assessment

Document Reference: P:\nord\001 11 Surrey Crescent TA\Reporting\R1A180315.docx

Prepared by: Yanfei Hong/Russell Brandon

Reviewed by: Bronwyn Coomer-Smit

Revisions:

Date Status Reference Approved by Initials

15 March 2018 A R1A180315 B Coomer-Smit

The drawings, information and data recorded in this document (the information) are the property of Flow Transportation Specialists

Ltd. This document and the information are solely for the use of the authorised recipient and this document may not be used, copied

or reproduced in whole or part for any purpose other than that for which it was supplied by Flow Transportation Specialists Ltd. Flow

Transportation Specialists Ltd makes no representation, undertakes no duty and accepts no responsibility to any third party who may

use or rely upon this document or the information.

Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent Transport Assessment i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Flow Transportation Specialists Ltd (Flow) has been commissioned by Studio Nord to identify and assess

the transport planning and traffic engineering matters relating to the redevelopment of 11 Surrey

Crescent, Grey Lynn. The proposed re-development includes the relocation of the existing villa within

the site, removal of the existing peripheral buildings on the site, and the construction of a 19 unit Cohaus

residential development.

Cohaus is an urban cooperative approach to housing projects founded on cohousing principles, with

members forming an incorporated society. Cohousing is an innovative model originating in Scandinavia

that encourages community interaction and sharing of resources, such as gardens, laundry facilities,

storage, recreational facilities, cars, car parking, and bicycle parking. Overall, it is understood that the

Cohaus principles encourage sustainable living, which in terms of transport will mean less reliance on

cars as a mode of travel.

The key landuse and transportation elements of the proposed development include:

Relocation of the existing villa to the northern boundary of the site, fronting Browning Street. This

villa will be sold as an unrenovated dwelling, under a separate title. The new owner will need to

apply for building consent to complete the dwelling relocation and construction

Removal of the remaining existing buildings on the site

Construction of a 19 dwelling Cohaus development comprising two studio apartments, three one-

bedroom dwellings, seven two-bedroom dwellings, five three-bedroom dwellings, one four-

bedroom dwelling, and one five bedroom dwelling

Implementation of a new vehicle crossing and one off-street parking space for the relocated villa

on Browning Street

Implementation of nine off-street car parking spaces (including three vertically stacked car parking

spaces) for the Cohaus development with vehicle access from Firth Road

The provision of at least 25 bicycle parking spaces for the Cohaus development in a large secure

area, adjacent to the parking area

Dedicated pedestrian accesses from Browning Street and Surrey Crescent and a shared pedestrian

access from Firth Road.

Based on the analysis described in this report, it can be concluded that the proposal will result in no

noticeable adverse transportation effects relating to the function, capacity, and safety of the

surrounding transport network. The predicted additional peak hour vehicle trip generation is

anticipated to be low at between 6 and 12 vehicle trips per hour and can easily be accommodated by

the surrounding road network. The technical parking shortfall is not anticipated to create any noticeable

on-street effects. Further, the layout of the parking and access is considered acceptable, and the areas

of the layout that are not compliant with the AUP-OIP will not affect the safe and efficient operation of

the sites, or the surrounding road network. Accordingly, it is concluded that there are no transport

planning reasons to preclude resource consent being granted.

Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent Transport Assessment ii

CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1

2 AUP-OIP TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK .......................................................................... 2

3 SITE LOCATION ................................................................................................................................. 3

4 EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................... 4

4.1 Existing Site and Surrounding Land Use ................................................................................. 4

4.2 Surrounding Road Network .................................................................................................... 5

4.2.1 Surrey Crescent ............................................................................................................ 5

4.2.2 Browning Street and Firth Road ................................................................................... 6

5 TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY .............................................................................................................. 6

5.1 Private Vehicle Accessibility ................................................................................................... 6

5.2 Public Transport Accessibility ................................................................................................. 6

5.3 Walking and Cycling Accessibility ......................................................................................... 10

6 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................... 11

7 ACCESS ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................................... 13

7.1 Vehicle Access ...................................................................................................................... 13

7.1.1 Cohaus/Firth Road Vehicle Crossing .......................................................................... 13

7.1.2 Browning Street/Villa Vehicle Crossing ...................................................................... 14

7.2 Walking and Cycling Accessibility ......................................................................................... 15

8 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................... 15

8.1 Traffic Generation ................................................................................................................ 15

8.2 Traffic Effects ........................................................................................................................ 16

9 SAFETY ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................... 16

10 PARKING ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................... 18

10.1 AUP-OIP Car Parking Requirements ..................................................................................... 18

10.2 Car Parking Provision and Effects ......................................................................................... 18

10.3 Car Parking Layout................................................................................................................ 19

10.4 Bicycle Parking ...................................................................................................................... 20

10.5 Servicing and Loading Assessment ....................................................................................... 20

11 AUP-OIP ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................... 21

11.1 Detailed Section E27 Assessment ........................................................................................ 21

11.2 Restricted Discretionary Assessment Criteria ...................................................................... 28

12 ASSESSMENT OF CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS ................................................................................... 31

13 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................ 32

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

VEHICLE TRACKING

VISIBILITY PLAN

Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent Transport Assessment 1

1 INTRODUCTION

Flow Transportation Specialists Ltd (Flow) has been commissioned by Studio Nord to identify and assess

the transport planning and traffic engineering matters relating to the redevelopment of 11 Surrey

Crescent, Grey Lynn. The proposed re-development includes the relocation of the existing villa within

the site, removal of the existing peripheral buildings on the site, and the construction of a 19 unit Cohaus

residential development. Cohaus is an urban cooperative approach to housing projects founded on

cohousing principles, with members forming an incorporated society. Cohousing is an innovative model

originating in Scandinavia that encourages community interaction and sharing of resources, such as

gardens, laundry facilities, storage, recreational facilities, cars, car parking, and bicycle parking. Overall,

it is understood that the Cohaus principles encourage sustainable living, which in terms of transport will

mean less reliance on cars as a mode of travel.

This Transport Assessment forms part of the Assessment of Environmental Effects supporting the

development’s resource consent application, and addresses the transport planning and traffic

engineering matters associated with the proposed development, including:

A description of the transport environment as it relates to the subject site, including site location,

surrounding land use activities, existing access provisions and existing and future public transport

accessibility, and walking and cycling accessibility

A description of the proposed development, including a brief description of the transport

elements of the proposal including vehicle and pedestrian access and parking provision to serve

the development

An access assessment, focussing on the vehicular and pedestrian access provisions associated with

the proposal

A traffic assessment including the amount of vehicle trips the proposal is likely to generate during

peak hours and the impact it may have on the surrounding road network during the peak

commuter hours

A safety assessment of the surrounding road network including an analysis of historic crash

records, and an assessment as to the effect the additional traffic expected to be generated by the

proposed development may have on the safety of the surrounding network

A parking assessment including the location, design and adequacy of the parking facility proposed

to support the development

An assessment of the proposal with regard to the transportation rules contained in the Auckland

Unitary Plan – Operative in Part (AUP-OIP)

A preliminary assessment of construction traffic effects.

These and other matters will be addressed in the following detail of this report. By way of summary,

this Transport Assessment concludes that from a land use and transportation perspective, the proposed

development will result in no noticeable effects to the safety and efficiency of the surrounding transport

network. Further, it is concluded that the proposed development provides safe and efficient vehicular

and pedestrian access, as well as adequate onsite car and bicycle parking provision to meet the expected


parking demands. Accordingly, there are no transport related matters that would preclude the granting

of this resource consent application.

2 AUP-OIP TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK

As shown in Figure 1, the proposed development site is located on land zoned Residential – Single House

Zone under the AUP-OIP. The site is also subject to the D18 Special Character Area Overlay.

Figure 1: AUP-OIP zoning 11 Surrey Crescent1

The proposed development is an Integrated Residential Development. Integrated Residential

Developments in the Single House Zone are classified as a discretionary activity. As such the proposed

development is subject to an assessment against the objectives and policies in the AUP-OIP. Section H3

Residential – Single House Zone of AUP-OIP has no objectives and policies relevant to transport.

With regard to Section E27 Transport of the AUP-OIP, the proposed development is classified as

Restricted Discretionary according to the following criteria set out in Table E27.4.1:

“(A2) Parking, loading and access which is an accessory activity but which does not comply with

the standards for parking, loading and access” (parking space provision, stacked parking spaces)

“(A5) Construction or use of a vehicle crossing where a Vehicle Access Restriction applies under

Standard E27.6.4.1(2) or E27.6.4.1(3)” (vehicle crossing being located within 10m of an

intersection)

1 https://unitaryplanmaps.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/upviewer/ accessed 22/08/2017

11 SURREY CRESCENT

https://unitaryplanmaps.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/upviewer/


Under E27.8.1, the Matters of Discretion relating to the above restricted discretionary activity are as

follows:

“The Council will restrict its discretion to the following matters when assessing a restricted

discretionary resource consent application.

(6) any activity or development which provides fewer than the minimum number of parking

spaces under Standard E27.6.2(1):

(a) adequacy for the site and the proposal;

(b) effects on adjacent activities and on the adjoining transport network; and

(c) availability and suitability of alternative parking supply and management

arrangements.

(9) any activity or development which infringes the standards for design of parking and loading

areas under Standard E27.6.3 or the standards for design, number, and location of vehicle

crossings and access under Standards E27.6.4.2, E27.6.4.3, and E27.6.4.4:


(b) design of parking, loading and access;

(c) effects on pedestrian and streetscape amenity; and

(d) effects on the transport network.

(12) construction or use of a vehicle crossing where a Vehicle Access Restriction applies under

Standard E27.6.4.1(2) and Standard E27.6.4.1(3):


(b) design and location of access;

(c) effects on pedestrian and streetscape amenity; and

(d) effects on the transport network.”

As such this Transport Assessment report focuses on these above matters, and also includes an

assessment of other transportation matters as outlined previously.

3 SITE LOCATION

The development site is located at 11 Surrey Crescent, Grey Lynn as shown in Figure 2 below. The site

is located approximately 400 m north-east of the Grey Lynn town centre, opposite Grey Lynn School and

within 500 m of Grey Lynn Park, located to the north east of the site.


Figure 2: Site Location of Proposed Development2

4 EXISTING CONDITIONS

4.1 Existing Site and Surrounding Land Use

As shown in Figure 3 overleaf, the subject site of 11 Surrey Crescent is presently occupied by Fairleigh

Lodge, a residential support of mental health and addictions service. To the south of the site, is Grey

Lynn School and the Grey Lynn town centre, and to the west of the site is mixed retail and medium

density residential apartments. The balance of land use activity surrounding the site, is predominantly

low density, residential houses.

The site currently has one, two-way vehicle access from Surrey Crescent.

2 Auckland Council GeoMaps

11 Surrey Crescent

CBD

Western Spring Park Grey Lynn Town Centre

Grey Lynn Park


Figure 3: Site and immediately surrounding transport network3

4.2 Surrounding Road Network

4.2.1 Surrey Crescent

As stated previously, the site is located on Surrey Crescent which is classified as an Arterial Road in the

AUP-OIP. The traffic volumes on Surrey Crescent in the vicinity of the site are approximately 11,700

vehicles per day4. The speed limit of Surrey Crescent in the vicinity of the site is 50 km/hr.

As shown in Figure 4 overleaf, the existing cross section of Surrey Crescent in the vicinity of the site

currently comprises one traffic lane in each direction, a flush median, and a shoulder on both sides of

the road. These shoulders are approximately 2.3 m wide, and are used for parking. The 5.4 m wide

traffic lanes and 2.5 m flush median allow sufficient room for through traffic to manoeuvre past parked

vehicles that may be wider than the shoulder width provided. The flush median also accommodates

vehicles turning right into and out of vehicle accesses and side roads.

3 Auckland Council GeoMaps 4 Auckland Transport 5 day volume, between Selbourne Street and Firth Road, December 2012

11 Surrey Crescent


Figure 4: Surrey Crescent looking west5

4.2.2 Browning Street and Firth Road

To the western and eastern side of the site, Browning Street and Firth Road surround the site

respectively but do not at present provide direct vehicular access to the site. Both of these streets are

residential, local roads, intersecting with Surrey Crescent with Give Way controls, and both providing for

two traffic lanes and on-street parking. The speed limit on both roads is 50 km/hr.

5 TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY

5.1 Private Vehicle Accessibility

The site has good private vehicle accessibility to and from key local areas. Western Springs Park is within

700 m via Surrey Crescent/Old Mill Road, St Lukes Mall within 3.5 km via Bullock Track/Great North

Road/St Lukes Road, and the Auckland City Centre is within 4 km via Great North Road. The development

site is well located with respect to the State Highway network with access to the Northwestern

Motorway (SH 16) 1.3 km southwest of the site via Great North Road/St Lukes Road interchange.

5.2 Public Transport Accessibility

The existing bus routes in the vicinity of the development are shown in Figure 5 overleaf. The nearest

bus stops are located approximately 200 m west of the development on Surrey Crescent and are serviced

by the 020 bus service to Westmere. This service, as shown in Table 1, runs every 20 mins during

weekdays and Saturdays, and every 30 minutes on weekdays, and Saturdays after 7 pm, and on Sundays.

5 ©Google Street View

11 Surrey Crescent


In addition, bus stops on Great North Road and Williamson Avenue, located approximately 400 m south

of the development, (5-minute walk), service the 010 bus route to Onehunga via Mt Albert, and the 030

bus route to Point Chevalier. The 010 service operates on weekdays every 30 minutes during peak

commuter times, and every one hour between 9 am and 3 pm. The 030 service operates every 30

minutes during all times.

Figure 5: Existing bus network near the site6

Table 1: Existing Bus Routes serving the Site

Route Route Description Weekday Frequency Weekend Frequency

Surrey Crescent

020(X) Britomart to

Westmere

Every 20 minutes before

19:00, otherwise every 30

minutes

Every 20 minutes between 9.00 and 19.00,

otherwise every hour on Saturdays. Every

30 minutes on Sundays

Great North Road

010 Wynyard Quarter

to Onehunga

Transport Centre

Every 1 hour between 9.00

and 15.00, otherwise every

30 minutes

No service

030 Mid town to Point

Chevalier

Every 30 minutes Every 30 minutes

6 https://at.govt.nz/bus-train-ferry/timetables/

030

020 11 Surrey Crescent


In summary, there are a considerable number of bus services within walking distance of subject site,

which provide excellent opportunity of accessing the Auckland CBD, Westmere, Point Chevalier,

Onehunga and other central suburbs by bus.

A new public transport network through the central suburbs is proposed to be implemented in late 2018.

This new network is shown in Figure 6 and Table 2. The bus service 105 will travel on the western side

of Surrey Crescent from the city to Westmere, which will play a very similar role of the existing bus

service 020 with a few changes to the route in the city centre. A significant number of bus services will

travel on Great North Road to a range of suburbs in the West Auckland.

Figure 6: Proposed Bus Network7

Table 2: Future Bus Routes serving the Site

Route Route Description Weekday Frequency Weekend Frequency Additional

Information

Surrey Crescent

105 City to Westmere Every 10 minutes in the

peak, every 20 minutes

during the day, and

every 30 minutes in the

evening.

Every 20 minutes during

the day and every 30

minutes during the

evening.

7 https://at.govt.nz/media/1865789/central-suburbs-post-consultation-map.pdf

11 Surrey Crescent


Table 2: Future Bus Routes serving the Site

Route Route Description Weekday Frequency Weekend Frequency Additional

Information

Great North Road

18 City Centre to New

Lynn via Great

North Road

Every six minutes in the


during the day, and


evening.

Every six minutes in the


during the day, and


evening.

Additional 01.00,

02.00, 03.00 services

on Friday and Saturday

evenings. These trips

will extend from New

Lynn to Henderson via

Great North Rd

110 City Centre to

Westgate via

Northwestern

Motorway

Every 30 minutes in the

peak and during the day,

and every hour in the

evening.


peak and during the day,

and every hour in the

evening.

Additional 00.35,

01.35, 02.35 services

on Friday and Saturday

evenings

129 City Centre to

Westgate via Don

Buck Road

Four services to City

between 06:45 and

08:15, and from City

between 16:15 and

17:45.

No service.

132 City Centre to Te

Atatu Peninsula



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.

132x and 133x travel

directly to the City via

Northwestern

Motorway at peak

times

133 City Centre to

Henderson via Te

Atatu Road



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.

134 City Centre to

Henderson via Te

Atatu Road



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.

195 City Centre to New

Lynn via Green Bay

and Blockhouse Bay



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.



during the day, and

every hour in the

evening.

This new network retains the existing 020 bus service with the route number changings to 105, and

proposes a frequent service along Dominion Road between the city centre and Blockhouse Bay. The


frequent service on Dominion Road (Route 25) will run every three minutes in the peak, every five

minutes during the day, and every ten minutes in the evening. Taking these changes onto account, it is

considered that the public transport accessibility of the site will be equal if not better with the new

network, compared to the existing network.

5.3 Walking and Cycling Accessibility

Footpaths are provided on both sides of Surrey Crescent which are approximately 2.5 m wide. Footpaths

are also provided on both sides of Firth Road and Browning Street. There is a pedestrian zebra crossing

100 m east of the site which provides safe opportunities for pedestrians to cross Surrey Crescent, and a

pedestrian refuge island at the Firth Road/Surry Crescent intersection. As such, the subject site has good

pedestrian accessibility.

Currently there are limited cycle facilities in the area surrounding the development site. However, an

Auckland Transport project is underway which includes the implementation of high quality, safe cycle

routes in the Grey Lynn area, linking parks, shops, and other cycle facilities that will cater for people with

a range of confidence levels. The extent of this project is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Grey Lynn Safe Cycle Routes

11 Surrey Crescent


The currently proposed cycle facilities for Surrey Crescent in the vicinity of the development site are

shown in Figure 8, with buffered/protected cycle lanes provided on both sides of the road. The project

is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2018.

Figure 8: Proposed Surrey Crescent Cycle Lanes8

In future, it is anticipated that the proposed/currently being constructed Grey Lynn cycle ways will

connect to the North Western Cycleway, and the cycleways in the Auckland City Centre. Completion of

this network will make the much of the central Auckland isthmus area accessible by bicycle from the 11

Surrey Crescent. Assuming that the cycle network is constructed as intended, the proposed

development site is considered to have excellent cycle accessibility.

6 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The site plan of the proposed Cohaus residential development at 11 Surrey Crescent, Grey Lynn is shown

in Figure 9 below, with a full set of drawings of the proposal attached to the resource consent

application. The key landuse and transportation elements of the proposed development include:

Relocation of the existing villa to the northern boundary of the site, fronting Browning Street. This

villa will be sold as an unrenovated dwelling, under a separate title. The new owner will need to

apply for building consent to complete the dwelling relocation and construction

Removal of the remaining existing buildings on the site

Construction of a 19 dwelling Cohaus development comprising two studio apartments, three one-

bedroom dwellings, seven two-bedroom dwellings, five three-bedroom dwellings, one four-

bedroom dwelling, and one five bedroom dwelling

8 https://at.govt.nz/media/1973937/surrey-crescent-to-garnet-road-updated-maps.pdf

11 Surrey Crescent


Implementation of a new vehicle crossing and one off-street parking space for the relocated villa

on Browning Street

Implementation of nine off-street car parking spaces (including three vertically stacked car parking

spaces) for the Cohaus development with vehicle access from Firth Road

The provision of at least 25 bicycle parking spaces for the Cohaus development in a large secure

area, adjacent to the parking area

Dedicated pedestrian accesses from Browning Street and Surrey Crescent and a shared pedestrian

access from Firth Road.

Figure 9: Proposed Development

Vehicle access

Pedestrian access


7 ACCESS ASSESSMENT

7.1 Vehicle Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed via a new vehicle crossing on Firth Road for the Cohaus

development, and a new vehicle crossing on Browning Street for the relocated villa. The existing vehicle

crossing on Surrey Crescent will be removed, and as such, there will be no vehicle crossings onto Surrey

Crescent which is an arterial with cycle lanes proposed. This is considered to result in a significant

beneficial safety effect to cyclists and pedestrians over the existing situation which allows vehicles to

reverse from the existing parking area into Surrey Crescent.

7.1.1 Cohaus/Firth Road Vehicle Crossing

The Cohaus vehicle crossing on Firth Road will be located adjacent to the northern boundary of the site,

and will be 4.5 m wide at the boundary. For developments of six or more dwellings the AUP-OIP permits

a maximum width of 6 m and a minimum width of 2.75 m provided there are clear sight lines. The

proposed access is short and straight with clear sight lines into and out of the parking area. As such the

proposed vehicle crossing width at the boundary is compliant.

The proposed Firth Road vehicle crossing is located opposite/adjacent to an existing pedestrian refuge

island. Vehicle tracking shown in Appendix A shows that the proposed 4.5 m boundary width is sufficient

to allow an 85th percentile car to enter and exit the proposed vehicle crossing, and that there is sufficient

room for am 85th percentile car to turn right around the pedestrian refuge island with at least 500 mm

clearance. As such no changes to the refuge island are considered necessary.

It is noted that a kerb extension has been constructed on the western side of Firth Road which ends in

the vicinity of the proposed vehicle crossing, shown in Figure 10. To accommodate the proposed vehicle

crossing, this kerb extension may need to be adjusted/extended. This detail will be provided at building

consent stage, however the tracking plan in Appendix A shows an indicative layout.

Figure 10: Firth Road Kerb Extension

11 Surrey

Crescent

Kerb

Extension


The location of the Cohaus vehicle crossing is 8.5 m from the Firth Road/Surrey Crescent intersection as

measured from the boundary. This is slightly less than the minimum 10 m permitted by the AUP-OIP.

For low volume driveways on local roads with an operating speed of 40 kmh, RTS 6 Guidelines for

Visibility at Driveways (RTS6) specifies a minimum sight distance of 30 m. As shown in the sight distance

plan included in Appendix B, there is at least 30 m sight distance to vehicles turning left into Firth road

from Surrey Crescent. There is also more than 30 m visibility to vehicles from all other approaches. As

such, the location of the vehicle crossing is considered a very minor non-compliance and is not

anticipated to affect the safe operation of the access.

On the southern side to the driveway, the existing hedge will be cut back to provide a visibility splay

from the driveway. Along the northern edge of the proposed vehicle crossing the existing 2 Firth Road

fence and hedge will remain. While this may affect the driveway visibility splay to the north, this is an

existing fence and hedge belonging to the adjacent property, and as such cannot be removed. It is also

noted that shifting the proposed vehicle crossing south to improve the visibility splay would increase the

proximity of the vehicle crossing to the intersection, and require the existing pedestrian refuge island to

be significantly reduced in size. Notwithstanding this, as a very low volume driveway with a very low

likelihood of an egressing car meeting an entering car, drivers are likely to position their vehicle in the

centre of the 4.5 m wide driveway as opposed to the left hand side. This will allow for some visibility

splay to the north for exiting drivers. The access is also very short, therefore speeds out of the driveway

will be very low, and all the parking spaces are allocated to residents meaning all drivers will be familiar

with the layout and will know to look for pedestrians on their left.

As such, the lack of visibility splay to the north of the driveways is not anticipated to adversely affect the

safety of pedestrians on Firth Road. It is also noted that RTS6 only recommends visibility splays are

considered on high volume driveways with high pedestrian activity. As a short local road, Firth Road is

unlikely to accommodate a high volume of pedestrian activity throughout the day.

7.1.2 Browning Street/Villa Vehicle Crossing

The villa vehicle crossing on Browning Street is proposed to be located adjacent to the northern

boundary of the site, and will be 3 m wide. The existing 3 Browning Street vehicle crossing is also

approximately 3 m wide and is located immediately adjacent to the boundary. As such the two vehicle

crossings will be combined with a maximum width of 6 m, compliant with the AUP-OIP. The proposed

vehicle crossing is located over 30 m from the Browning Street/Surrey Crescent intersection as

measured from the boundary, and Browning Street is straight in the vicinity of the site allowing for

sufficient visibility.

As mentioned, the villa is intended to be sold under a separate title, as an unrenovated dwelling, with

the vehicle crossing not intended to be constructed as part of the Cohaus development. More detail

about the construction of the vehicle crossing and surrounding fences that may be located within sight

lines will be provided by the new owner when building consent is lodged. It is however recommended

that fences, including the fence between the existing 3 Browning Street vehicle crossing and the

proposed villa vehicle crossing are kept low as to not obstruct sight lines to pedestrians. It is also noted

that an existing tree is located approximately 5 m south of the boundary, and as such the proposed

driveway will be constructed within its dripline. Input from an arborist at building consent may therefore

be required to ensure the construction of the vehicle crossing does not affect this tree.


7.2 Walking and Cycling Accessibility

A network of pedestrian paths is provided within the Cohaus development site as shown in previous

Figure 9. These footpaths are generally between 1.2 m and 1.8 m wide. Two dedicated pedestrian

entries to the site are provided off Surrey Crescent, with separate direct building entries provided off

both Surrey Crescent and Browning Street. Pedestrian access will also be available via the vehicle access

on Firth Road, which given the low volume of vehicles anticipated, will be safe for pedestrians to share.

Overall the Cohaus development is considered to have excellent pedestrian connectivity. The villa will

also have pedestrian access, the details of which will be given when building consent is lodged by the

new owner.

The bicycle parking area will be in a storage room adjacent to the car parking area. As such, bicycle

access will be via the vehicle access. As previously stated, only a low volume of traffic is anticipated

therefore the vehicle access is anticipated to be safe for cyclists and vehicles to share.

8 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT

8.1 Traffic Generation

A summary of the traffic anticipated to be generated by the proposed development is shown in Table 3.

This is based on the following vehicle trip rates as specified in RTA Guide to Traffic Generating

Developments, Australia (RTA):

Medium density one and two bedroom apartments

0.50 vehicle trips per peak hour per dwelling

5 vehicle trips per day per dwelling

Medium density three plus bedroom apartments/town houses:


6.5 vehicle trips per day per dwelling

Low density dwellings:


9 vehicle trips per day per dwelling

Table 3: Traffic Generation

Dwelling Type Number of

Dwellings

Predicted Peak

Hour Vehicle

Trip Rate

Predicted

Peak Hour

Vehicle Trips

Predicted

Daily Vehicle

Trip Rate

Predicted

Daily Vehicle

Trips

Villa 1 0.85 1 9 9

1-2 Bedroom Apartments 12 0.5 6 5 60

3+ Bedrooms Apartments 7 0.65 5 6.5 46

Total 20 - 12 - 115


Based on these RTA trip generation rates, it is predicted that the proposed development will generate a

total of 12 peak hour vehicle trips, and a total of 115 daily vehicle trips. Fairleigh Lodge is a supported

residential care facility accommodating approximately 25 residents and 11 staff. For supported

residential care facilities, the RTA specifies a vehicle trip generation rate of 0.2 peak hour trips per

dwelling and two daily trips per dwelling. Assuming that each resident is housed in a separate

room/dwelling, it is estimated that the existing site could generate up to five peak hour trips, and 50

daily trips. When considering this, it can be concluded that the nett additional vehicle trips generated

by the proposed development could be around seven in the peak hour and 65 during the whole day.

It is further noted that the above predication for traffic generation of the Cohaus residential dwellings

is based on standard residential traffic generation rates which do not taken into account any onsite

parking restraints. Traditionally the above RTA traffic generation would be based on a minimum onsite

parking provision assumption of at least one parking space for each one to two bedroom unit, and a two

parking space provision per unit for dwellings which have three of more bedrooms. This would have

resulted in around 26 parking spaces having to being provided on the site for the above development

proposition as shown in Table 3 (excluding the villa) of 12 one to two-bedroom units and 7 units with

three plus bedrooms. This Cohaus development promote less reliance on private vehicle and has the

philosophy of sharing cars, and as such it is the intention to provide for nine cars to service the entire 19

unit Cohaus development. As such it is considered that the actual traffic expected to be generated by

the Cohaus proposal during the peak hours and during a typical day will be under half of the above RTA

prediction of around six trips per hour and 55 trips per day, as less than half the traditional amount of

onsite parking is intended to be provided. This may also be similar to the current volume of traffic

generated by the existing Fairleigh Lodge.

8.2 Traffic Effects

An additional 6 to 12 peak hour vehicle trips is considered to be very low and can be easily

accommodated by the surrounding road network. While it is possible that it may be difficult to turn

right onto Surrey Crescent from Firth Road during peak traffic periods, it is noted that there is a network

of local roads that drivers can use to avoid this movement if desired. Further there is an existing flush

median that will remain with the proposed improvements to Surrey Crescent which allow for right turns

into, and out of Firth Road.

The adjacent Grey Lynn School is currently undergoing expansion with an increasing roll. There is likely

to be congestion around the school gates during pick up and drop off periods. Peak traffic generation

for the proposed development is likely to be before and after peak commuter hours, and not before and

after school hours. Therefore, the traffic anticipated to be generated by the proposed development is

highly unlikely to noticeably contribute to traffic congestion caused in the vicinity of the school.

9 SAFETY ASSESSMENT

The New Zealand Transport Agency’s (NZTA) Crash Analysis System (CAS) has been used to search for

crashes reported on the section of Surrey Crescent between Richmond Road and Prime Road, for the

five year period 2012 to 2016. The results of this search are shown in Figure 11. A total of seven crashes

were reported including three that resulted in minor injury.


Figure 11: Collision diagram

The description and causes of the reported crashes are:

A car parked on Surrey Crescent pulling out in front of a scooter (minor injury)

A car pulling out of a driveway on Surrey Crescent colliding with a car parked (non-injury)

A car pulling out of a driveway on Surrey Crescent hitting a pedestrian crossing Surrey Crescent

(non-injury)

A car parking on Surrey Crescent pulling out in front of an oncoming car (minor injury)

A driver travelling along Surrey Crescent was hit by sun strike and collided with a car waiting to

turn right into Browning Street (non-injury)

A car turning right from Firth Road onto Surrey Crescent failed to give way to a car travelling along

Surrey Crescent (minor injury)

A car travelling along Surrey Crescent undertook a U-turn, colliding with a motorbike trying to

overtake it (non-injury)

The reported crashes are all low severity, appear random in nature, and do not indicate any specific

safety concerns. The low volume of traffic predicted to be generated by the proposed development is

therefore not anticipated to exacerbate any new or create any new road safety issues. Indeed, as

mentioned previously the removal of the existing Surrey Crescent vehicle access to the site can be

regarded as a safety improvement.


10 PARKING ASSESSMENT

10.1 AUP-OIP Car Parking Requirements

The proposed site is zoned Residential – Single House Zone under the AUP-OIP, and is subject to the

Special Character D18 Special Character Areas Overlay. Residential sites subject to the D18 Special

Character Areas Overlay have the following parking requirements:

Sites less than 500 m2:

No minimum/no maximum

Sites greater than 500 m2 – As per the underlying zone (Residential – Single House)

Minimum one per dwelling/no maximum

As such, the proposed villa site, which has a site area of 400 m2 has no minimum and no maximum

parking requirement. The Cohaus development requires a minimum of 19 parking spaces for the

proposed 19 dwellings.

10.2 Car Parking Provision and Effects

It is proposed that the villa will have a single parking space, which complies with the requirement of the

AUP-OIP.

It is proposed that the Cohaus development will provide nine onsite parking spaces for the 19 dwellings,

which results in a shortfall of ten parking spaces under the AUP-OIP parking requirements. As stated

previously, the Cohaus principles promote less reliance on private single occupant vehicles. It is the

intention that the parking spaces and cars will be for shared use. It is also intended that the residents

of the development will all be members of the Cohaus incorporated society and as such will be willing

to use more sustainable travel modes over the single occupant private vehicle, noting that the site is

located in close proximity to frequent bus services and is located on an existing and planned cycle

network.

With regard to on street parking provision and demand, it is noted that a residential parking scheme is

proposed for the area of Grey Lynn north of Surrey Crescent, and is understood to be implemented

within the next few years. This includes Browning Street and Firth Road. Residential parking schemes

cap the number of permits for residential parking in an area to 85% of the total number of on-street

parking spaces in the zone, which therefore allow 15% of the available on-street parking to be used by

visitors to the area. Residential parking permits are distributed based on a hierarchy of dwellings, with

townhouses/apartments ranked after single houses. As such, it is unlikely that residents of the Cohaus

development will be able to acquire permits, therefore the non-compliant parking provision will not

affect the availability of resident on-street parking in Grey Lynn north of Surrey Crescent, once the

residential parking scheme is in effect.

The land south of Surrey Crescent is zoned Residential – Terrace House/Apartment Buildings and

Business – Mixed Use. Under the AUP-OIP, residential dwellings in both of these zones have no onsite

minimum or maximum parking requirements. As such, the proposed Cohaus development car parking


provision aligns with the AUP-OIP car parking objectives and policies for the land immediately to the

south.

Overall, it is anticipated that the provision of nine onsite parking spaces will be more than sufficient to

meet the expected car parking demands of the Cohaus development and that there will be minimal

impact on the availability of on-street parking compared to the existing situation.

10.3 Car Parking Layout

The layout for the Cohaus parking area is shown in Figure 12. Three 2.4m wide, 4 m long with 1 m

overhang parking spaces are proposed along the northern side, and three 2.75 m wide, 5 m long parking

spaces with vertical stackers are proposed along the western side. The minimum width of the

manoeuvring area is 7.8 m, therefore this parking layout is technically compliant with the AUP-OIP. The

northern parking spaces will have kerb along the end to ensure car overhang does not affect the adjacent

footpath.

While the layout is technically compliant, it is not a standard layout. As such tracking plans included in

Appendix A have been prepared and demonstrate the ability of an 85th percentile car to enter and exit

all of the parking spaces, and exit the site onto Firth Road in a forwards direction. Multiple manoeuvres

may be required for cars exiting the northern parking spaces, however this is considered acceptable for

allocated, residential parking spaces.

Figure 12: Proposed Cohaus Parking Area

The AUP-OIP requires stacked parking spaces to be allocated to individual tenancies. This is to ensure

that the stacked cars are easily accessible at all times. For the Cohaus development, it is likely that cars

belonging to different residents may be parked in a single stacker, which is technically non-compliant.

The principals of the Cohaus development promote shared use of facilities and a close-knit community.

As such the use of stacked parking spaces by separate dwellings is anticipated to be easily managed

between residents and will not adversely affect access to vehicles.


10.4 Bicycle Parking

The AUP-OIP required bicycle parking at the following rates:

Residential developments of 20 dwellings or more:

One visit bicycle parking space per 20 dwellings

One secure bicycle parking space per dwelling without a dedicated garage

As stated previously, the villa will be sold under a separate title. As a single dwelling, the villa therefore

does not require any bicycle parking. Notwithstanding this, there will be space in the yard around the

villa to accommodate bicycle parking if required. This detail will be provided in the building consent for

the villa when it is lodged by the new owner.

The Cohaus development with 19 dwellings also does not require bicycle parking. However, in line with

the Cohaus principles which aim to improve sustainability and reduce reliance on private vehicle, at least

25 bicycle parking spaces will be provided in the storage area adjacent to the car parking area.

10.5 Servicing and Loading Assessment

For the Cohaus development, it is proposed that rubbish will be collected by private services via the car

parking area. This will require a rubbish truck to reverse into the site from Firth Road. Tracking

demonstrating the ability of an 8 m rigid truck to undertake this manoeuvre is shown in Appendix A.

Reverse manoeuvres into parking areas with more than four parking spaces is not compliant with the

AUP-OIP. However, it is noted that the reverse manoeuvre will occur on Firth Road which is a low volume

local road, accommodating a low volume of pedestrians. Rubbish is generally collected outside of peak

traffic hours. It is therefore not considered that this reverse manoeuvre, which would occur at most a

couple times a week, would adversely affect the safe operation of Firth Road. As such this non-

compliance is considered acceptable.

Rubbish collection for the villa will occur via council services on Browning Street.


11 AUP-OIP ASSESSMENT

11.1 Detailed Section E27 Assessment

The proposed development has been assessed against the requirements of Section E27 Transport of the

AUP-OIP, shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Auckland Unitary Plan: Assessment of Transport Matters

Relevant E27 Standard Assessment

E27.6.1. Trip generation

(1) Where a proposal (except where excluded in

Standard E27.6.1(2)) exceeds one of the following

thresholds:

(a) a new development in Table E27.6.1.1;

Table E27.6.1.1 New Development Thresholds

-(T1) Residential Dwellings – 100 Dwellings

(b) 100 v/hr (any hour) for activities not specified in

Table E27.6.1.1 requiring a controlled or restricted

discretionary land use activity consent in the

applicable zone where there are no requirements for

an assessment of transport or trip generation

effects. This standard does not apply to

development activities provided for as permitted in

the applicable zone; or

Resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity

is required.

(1) Complies: Only 20 residential dwellings are

proposed.

E27.6.2. Number of parking and loading spaces

(1) The number of parking spaces:

(c) must meet the minimum rates and not exceed

the maximum rates specified

which apply to the zone or location specified in Table

E27.6.2.3.

Table E27.6.2.4 Parking Rates - Area 2

(T144) D18 Special Character Area Overlay with area

less than 500 m2:

- no minimum /no maximum

(T45) D18 Special Character Area Overlay with area

greater than 500 m2:

- minimum 1 per dwelling/no maximum

(1) Does not comply: Only 9 parking spaces are

provided for the Cohaus development.

This non-compliance is assessed in Section 11.2.

The villa does not require any parking




(6) Bicycle parking:

(a) the activities specified in Table E27.6.2.5 must

provide the minimum number of bicycle parking

spaces specified; and

Table E27.6.2.5 Required Bicycle Parking Rates

-(T81) Residential developments of 20 or more

dwellings:

- minimum visitor space 20 dwellings

- minimum one secure space per dwelling

(6) Complies: Only 19 dwellings are proposed in the

Cohaus development therefore no bicycle parking is

required. However, at least 25 bicycle parking spaces

are proposed.

The villa does not require bicycle parking.

(7) End-of-trip facilities:

(a) the activities specified in Table E27.6.2.6 must

provide end-of-trip facilities

(7) Not Relevant: No end of trip facilities required for

residential activities.

(8) Number of loading spaces:

(a) all activities must provide loading spaces as

specified in Table E27.6.2.7.

Table E27.6.2.7 Minimum loading space

requirements

-(T112) All other activities, except for activities

within rural area with GFA up to 5000 m2:

- No loading required

(8) Complies: The development has a GFA of less

than 5,000 m2 therefore no loading zone is required.

(10) Accessible parking:

(a) where parking is provided, the Building Code

requires parking spaces to be provided for people

with disabilities and accessible routes from the

parking spaces to the associated activity or road.

The dimensions and accessible route requirements

are detailed in the New Zealand Building Code

D1/AS1 New Zealand Standard for Design for Access

and Mobility – Buildings and Associated Facilities

(NZS: 4121-2001).

(10) Not Relevant: Accessible parking is not required

for private residential developments as per the

Building Act.




E27.6.3.1. Size and location of parking spaces

(1) Every parking space must:

(a) comply with the minimum dimensions given in

Table E27.6.3.1.1 and Figure E27.6.3.1.1; and

(b) be located on the same site as the activity to

which it relates

(c) not be used for any other purpose; and

(d) be kept clear and available at all times the

activity is in operation

(e) be located outside any area designated for road

widening; and

(g) not to be sold or leased separately from the

activity for which it provides parking required under

a resource consent.

(1) Complies: The car parking spaces proposed meet

the dimensional requirements, are located on the

same site as the activity, will not be used for any

other activity, will be kept clear and available at all

times, are located outside any area designated for

road widening, and will not be sold or leased

separately from the activity.

E27.6.3.2. Size and Location of Loading Spaces

(1) Every loading space must:

(a) comply with the minimum dimensions given in

Table E27.6.3.2.1;

(b) be located on the same site as the activity to

which it relates and be available at all times while

the activity is in operation;

(c) be located outside any area designated for road

widening; and

(1) Not Relevant: No loading spaces proposed.

E27.6.3.3. Access and manoeuvring

(1) Every parking space must have driveways and

aisles for entry and exit of vehicles to and from the

road, and for vehicle manoeuvring within the site.

Access and manoeuvring areas must accommodate

the 85 percentile car tracking curves in Figure

E27.6.3.3.1

(1) Complies: All parking spaces have access to the

road, and are accessible with an 85th percentile car.

(2) Every loading space and where access and

manoeuvring areas must accommodate heavy

vehicles, a tracking curve for an appropriately sized

truck for the type of activities to be carried out on the

site must be assessed. Heavy vehicle tracking curves

are set out in the following NZTA guidelines: RTS 18:

NZ on-road tracking curves (2007).

(2) Not Relevant: No loading spaces proposed.




(3) Where a dwelling provides more than one parking

space, these may be stacked. Stacked parking means

access is required through another parking space.

(3) Does not comply: Three vertical car stackers are

proposed, which may be allocated to separate

dwellings.


E27.6.3.4. Reverse manoeuvring

(1) Sufficient space must be provided on any the site

so vehicles do not need to reverse off the site or onto

or off the road from any site where any of the

following apply:

(a) four or more required parking spaces are served

by a single access;

(b) there is more than 30m between the parking

space and the road boundary of the site; or

(c) access would be from an arterial road or

otherwise within a Vehicle Access Restriction

covered in Standard E27.6.4.1.

(1) Does not comply: There is sufficient space within

the site for all cars to turn around and exit in a

forwards direction. However, the proposed rubbish

truck will be required to reverse into the site to

service the development.


E27.6.3.5. Vertical clearance

(1) To ensure vehicles can pass safely under overhead

structures to access any parking and loading spaces,

the minimum clearance between the formed surface

and the structure must be:

(a) 2.1m where access and/or parking for cars is

provided for residential activities

(d) 3.8m where loading is required

(1) Complies: No vertical obstructions are proposed

within the vehicle parking and access area other than

the vertical stackers which will be as per industry

standards.

E27.6.3.6. Formation and gradient

(1) Except for Standard E27.6.3.6(2) below, the whole

area of parking and loading spaces, and manoeuvring

areas and aisles must be formed, drained, provided

with an all-weather surface to prevent dust and

nuisance, and be marked out or delineated. This must

be done before the activity to which those parking

and loading spaces relate commences, and

maintained for as long as that activity is continued.

(1) Complies: The vehicle parking and access area

will be formed, drained, provided with an all-weather

surface, and marked out and delineated as required.

(3) The gradient for the surface of any parking space

must not exceed:

(b) 1 in 20 (five per cent) in any direction for other

spaces.

(3) Complies: The maximum gradient of the vehicle

parking and access area is approximately 1:29 (3.5%).

(4) The gradient for the manoeuvring area must not

exceed 1 in 8.






E27.6.3.7. Lighting

(1) Lighting is required where there are 10 or more

parking spaces which are likely to be used during the

hours of darkness. The parking and manoeuvring

areas and associated pedestrian routes must be

adequately lit during use in a manner that complies

with the rules in Section E24 Lighting.

(1) Complies: Only nine parking spaces are proposed

therefore no lighting is required.

E27.6.4.1. Vehicle Access Restrictions

(1) Vehicle Access Restrictions apply and new vehicle

crossings must not be constructed to provide vehicle

access across that part of a site boundary which is

subject to:

(a) a Vehicle Access Restriction – General Control as

shown on the planning maps in the Business – City

Centre Zone; or

(b) a Key Retail Frontage Control as shown on the

planning maps;

(1) Complies: The proposed vehicle crossing is not

subject to the Vehicle Access Restriction – General

Control, or a Key Retail Frontage Control.

(2) Standard E27.6.4.1(3) below applies in any of the

following circumstances:

(a) a new vehicle crossing is proposed;

(b) a new activity is established on a site;

(c) there is a change of type of activity;

(3) Vehicle Access Restrictions apply and vehicle

crossings must not be constructed or used to provide

vehicle access across that part of a site boundary

which:

(a) is located within 10m of any intersection as

measured from the property boundary, illustrated in

Figure E27.6.4.1.1;

(b) is subject to the following types of Vehicle

Access Restriction as identified on the planning

maps in the zones listed in Table H27.6.4.1.1;

(c) has frontage to an arterial road as identified on

the planning maps; or

(d) is located closer than 30m from a railway level

crossing limit line.

(2/3) Does not comply: The proposed vehicle

crossing is located 8.5 m from the Firth Road/Surrey

Crescent intersection as measured from the

boundary.





E27.6.4.2. Width and number of vehicle crossings

(1) The maximum number of vehicle crossings

permitted for any site and separation distance

between crossings is specified in Table E27.6.4.2.1.

Table E27.6.4.2.1 Maximum number of vehicle

crossings and separation distance between crossings

(T146) All Other Sites:

-Minimum one vehicle crossing per 25 m of road

frontage

- Minimum 2 m separation between vehicle crossings

serving adjacent sites, unless combined with a

maximum width of 6 m

(1) Complies: Two vehicle crossings are proposed

and there is 90 m of road frontage.

The Firth Road vehicle crossing is at least 14 m from

the nearest vehicle crossing serving an adjacent site.

The Browning Street vehicle crossing is combined

with the adjacent 2 Browning Street vehicle crossing

with a maximum width of 3 m.

(2) The width of a vehicle crossing(s) must meet the

minimum width and not exceed the maximum width

as specified in Table E27.6.4.3.2.

Table E27.6.4.3.2 Vehicle crossing and vehicle access

widths

(T151) Residential zone serving 10 or more parking

spaces or more than six dwellings

-Minimum 5.5 m (or minimum 2.75 m if clear sight

lines and passing bays at 50m intervals are provided)

-Maximum 6 m

(2) Complies: The proposed vehicle crossing is 4.5 m

wide at the boundary, with clear sight lines.

(3) With the exception of vehicle crossings on

unsealed roads, all vehicle crossings must be designed

and constructed to maintain the level, colour, and

materials of the footpath to clearly identify to

vehicles that pedestrians have priority.

(3) Complies: The proposed vehicle crossing will be

built to the required standard.

(5) Where a vehicle crossing is altered or no longer

required, the crossing, or redundant section of

crossing, must be reinstated as berm and/or footpath

and the kerbs replaced. The cost of such work will be

borne by the owner of the site previously accessed by

the vehicle crossing

(5) Complies: The existing vehicle crossing on Surrey

Crescent will be removed and the

kerb/berm/footpath reinstated.




E27.6.4.3. Width of vehicle access and queuing requirements

(1) Every on-site parking and loading space must have

vehicle access from a road, with the vehicle access

complying with the following standards for width:

(a) passing bays are provided in accordance with

Table E27.6.4.3.1;

Table E27.6.4.3.1 Passing bay requirements

(T148) All Other Zones with accesses exceeding

50 m

-Maximum 50 m intervals

(b) meeting the minimum formed access width

specified in Table E27.6.4.3.2.

Table E27.6.4.3.2 Vehicle crossing and vehicle

access widths

(T151) Residential zone serving 10 or more parking

spaces or more than six dwellings

-Minimum 5.5 m

(1) Complies: The proposed access is less than 50 m

long and has a minimum internal width greater than

5.5 m.

(2) Access must be designed so that vehicles using or

waiting to use fuel dispensers, ticket vending

machines, remote ordering facilities and devices,

entrance control mechanisms, or other drive-through

facilities do not queue into the adjoining road reserve

or obstruct entry to or exit from the site.

(2) Not Relevant: No entrance control mechanisms

are proposed.

E27.6.4.4. Gradient of vehicle access

(1) The gradient of the access must not be steeper

than specified in Table E27.6.4.4.1:

Table E27.6.4.3.2 Vehicle crossing and vehicle access

widths

(T157) Vehicle Access Serving Residential

- Maximum gradient of 1:5 (20%)



(2) To avoid the underside of the car striking the

ground, as illustrated in Figure E27.6.4.4.2, access

with a change in gradient exceeding 1 in 8 (greater

than 12.5 per cent change) at the summit or a 1 in 6.7

(15 per cent change) at a sag must include transition

sections to achieve adequate ground clearance, refer

to Figure E27.6.4.4.3. Typically, a transition section

requires a minimum length of 2m.






(3) All vehicle access must be designed so that where

the access adjoins the road there is sufficient space

onsite for a platform so that vehicles can stop safely

and check for pedestrians and other vehicles prior to

exiting. This is illustrated in Figure E27.6.4.4.4. The

platform must have a maximum gradient no steeper

than 1 in 20 (5 per cent) and a minimum length of 4m

for residential activities and 6m for all other activities



E27.6.5. Design and location of off-road pedestrian and cycling facilities

(1) The design and location of the proposed facility to

ensure good connections to existing facilities.

(1) Complies: The proposed development provides

multiple pedestrian access points to surrounding

facilities.

(2) The width of the path is designed to accommodate

the anticipated number and type of users.

(2) Complies: The width of the proposed pedestrian

facilities is sufficient to meet the needs of the

development.

(3) The surface of the path is designed to safely

provide for the anticipated number and type of users.

(3) Complies: The proposed pedestrian facilities will

be paved in an all-weather surface.

11.2 Restricted Discretionary Assessment Criteria

The relevant Restricted Discretionary assessment criteria for parking, loading and access which does not

comply with the E27 standards is as follows:

Parking Shortfall:

(5) any activity or development which provides fewer than the required minimum number of parking

spaces under Standard E27.6.2(1):

(a) the amount of parking proposed is sufficient for the proposal having regard to:

i) the nature of the operation including the interaction between activities on the site;

(ii) the availability and accessibility of the site by public transport serving the site;

(iii) the measures and commitments outlined in a travel plan for the site which will reduce the need

for vehicle use to a level where parking demands can be satisfactorily addressed through efficient

use of the proposed parking; or

(iv) the extent to which activities on the site have complementary parking demands.

(b) the effects of parking overspill from the reduction in parking on adjacent activities and on the

transport network;

(c) the extent to which there is public parking on-street or off-street in the immediate vicinity with

capacity and availability at the times required to serve the proposal;

(d) the extent to which the parking requirements of the proposal will be met by entering into a shared

parking arrangement with another site in the immediate vicinity that has available parking spaces

which are not required at the same time as the proposed activity;


e) the extent to which it is physically practicable to provide the required parking on the site including

in terms of the existing location of buildings and the availability of access to the road; or

As described in the detail of this report, the principles of the Cohaus development are based on shared

use of facilities (including cars) promoting community, and are understood to promote sustainability and

less reliance on private single occupant vehicle travel. As such, while the proposed parking provision is

ten less than the required amount, it is considered sufficient to meet the needs of the development.

This is because demand for parking will be lower compared to single houses that are otherwise

permitted in the single house zone. In addition to the Cohaus principles, the site is located in close

proximity to frequent bus routes and is located in close proximity to existing and proposed cycle facilities

making travel by non-car modes easier and more attractive. As such, the on-street parking demand

generated by the Cohaus development is anticipated to be no more than minor

Should on street parking demand be generated, the proposed Grey Lynn Residential parking scheme will

restrict the ability for this demand to occupy spaces on Browning Street, Firth Road and other streets

north of Surrey Crescent. This is because as a townhouse/apartment development, residents will be

unlikely to acquire parking permits. When considering any on-street parking demand effects on Surrey

Crescent and streets south of Surrey Crescent, it is noted that this area is zoned Residential – Terrace

House/Apartment Buildings and Business – Mixed Use, under which residential developments have no

parking requirements. As such, developments that generate on street parking demand align with the

policies and objectives of the AUP-OIP for this area.

Overall, given the principles of the Cohaus development which will actively discourage car ownership,

the management of parking in the area, and the zoning of land adjacent to the development, it is

considered that technical parking shortfall is acceptable and will not adversely affect the parking supply

on the surrounding streets beyond what is intended by the AUP-OIP.

Stacked parking, reverse manoeuvring:

“(8) any activity or development which infringes the standards for design of parking and loading

areas under Standard E27.6.3 or the standards for design, number, and location of vehicle

crossings and access under Standards E27.6.4.2, E27.6.4.3, and E27.6.4.4:

(a) effects on the safe and efficient operation of the adjacent transport network having regard

to:

(i) the effect of the modification on visibility and safe sight distances;

(ii) existing and future traffic conditions including speed, volume, type, current accident

rate and the need for safe manoeuvring;

(iii) existing pedestrian numbers, and estimated future pedestrian numbers having regard

to the level of development provided for in this Plan; or

(iv) existing community or public infrastructure located in the adjoining road, such as bus

stops, bus lanes, footpaths and cycleways.

(b) effects on pedestrian amenity or the amenity of the streetscape, having regard to:

(i) the effect of additional crossings or crossings which exceed the maximum width;

(c) the practicality and adequacy of parking, loading and access arrangements having regard to:


(i) site limitations, configuration of buildings and activities, user requirements and

operational requirements;

(i) the ability of the access to accommodate the nature and volume of traffic and vehicle

types expected to use the access. This may include considering whether a wider vehicle

crossing is required to:

• comply with the tracking curve applicable to the largest vehicle anticipated to use

the site regularly;

• accommodate the traffic volumes anticipated to use the crossing, especially where

it is desirable to separate left and right turn exit lanes; o the desirability of separating

truck movements accessing a site from customer vehicle movements; o the extent to

which reduced manoeuvring and parking space dimensions can be accommodated

because the parking will be used by regular users familiar with the layout, rather than

by casual users; “

It is possible that the vertically stacked parking may be allocated to separate dwellings in the Cohaus

development. While this may be non-compliant, it is not anticipated to generate any significant

operational issues. The Cohaus development is founded on principles that promote community through

the use of shared facilities, which includes cars and car parking spaces. It is therefore anticipated that

use of the vertically stacked parking spaces will be easily managed, and that this technical non-

compliance is acceptable.

As a development with over four car parking spaces, it is not compliant for the rubbish truck to reverse

into the site as proposed. However, Firth Road is a short, low volume local road, providing access to low

density residential. As demonstrated in Appendix B, there is sufficient visibility to the driveway. A

rubbish truck reversing into the site a couple times a week at most is therefore unlikely to create any

traffic safety issues and is unlikely to create any effects different to an Auckland Council rubbish truck

collecting bins on-street in the same location. As a low volume street in a low density residential area,

there is also unlikely to be high volumes of pedestrians, therefore the reversing truck is unlikely to

adversely affect the safety of pedestrians. It is also noted that a truck will be clearly visible to

pedestrians, and trucks are generally fitted with reversing beepers, so pedestrians should be fully aware

of the trucks presence if the truck driver has not seen them first. Overall, it is considered that this non-

compliance will not adversely affect road operation or safety, and as such is acceptable.

Proximity of vehicle crossing to intersection:

“(11) construction or use of a vehicle crossing where a Vehicle Access Restriction applies:

(a) this applies where a Vehicle Access Restriction is identified in Standard E27.6.4.1(2) and Standard

E27.6.4.1(3), other than a Vehicle Access Restriction Level Crossing or a Vehicle Access Restriction

Motorway Interchange:

(i) effects of the location and design of the access on the safe and efficient operation of the

adjacent transport network having regard to:

• visibility and safe sight distances;

• existing and future traffic conditions including speed, volume, type, current accident rate,

and the need for safe manoeuvring;


• proximity to and operation of intersections;

• existing pedestrian numbers, and estimated future pedestrian numbers having regard to

the level of development provided for in this Plan;

• existing community or public infrastructure located in the adjoining road, such as bus stops,

bus lanes and cycleways;

(iii) the practicability and adequacy of the access arrangements considering site limitations,

arrangement of buildings and activities, user requirements and operational requirements,

proximity to and operation of intersections, having regard to:

• the extent to which the site can reasonably be served by different access arrangements

including: o access from another road;

o shared or amalgamated access with another site or sites;

o via a frontage road, such as a slip lane or service road; or

• the extent to which the need for access can reasonably be avoided by entering into a shared

parking and/or loading arrangement with another site or sites in the immediate vicinity.”

The Cohaus development Firth Road vehicle crossing is 8.5 m from the Firth Road/Surrey Crescent

intersection as measured from the boundary where a minimum of 10 m is required. This will be a low

volume vehicle crossing serving only nine parking spaces in a development based on principles that

actively discourage private vehicle travel. The visibility plans in Appendix B demonstrate that sight

distance to and from the proposed vehicle crossing is not compromised. Noting that the infringement

is only 1.5 m, it is not anticipated that this non-compliance will adversely affect the safe operation of the

vehicle crossing.

The vehicle crossing is located as far as possible from the intersection, right up against the northern

boundary on the Firth Road site frontage. The site currently has a vehicle crossing on Surrey Crescent

which will be removed as part of this development, improving the safety of the cycle lanes proposed.

While the site also has frontage to Browning Street where it is possible that a compliant vehicle crossing

could be located, use of the south eastern corner of the site that fronts Firth Road for parking allows for

more efficient development of the site, and minimises any potential impact on the existing Browning

Street trees. Firth Road is therefore considered the best location for this vehicle crossing.

Overall it is considered that the non-compliance is very minor, will not adversely affect road safety,

improves the safety of the proposed cycle lane, and as such is acceptable.

12 ASSESSMENT OF CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS

The effects of construction traffic on the environment will need to be managed to ensure that, from a

transport point of view, the surrounding road network operates safely for all modes of travel. A detailed

Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) will be prepared closer to the commencement of the

construction and will be in accordance with Auckland Council’s standard requirements for such CTMPs

and Transit New Zealand’s Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (COPTTM).

A typical CTMP would include such matters as:

A description of the construction site and a programme and scope of the works


Routes to be used by construction traffic to access and egress the site and the adoption of any

measures on these routes to ensure a safe environment for all road users, including existing

residents and pedestrians to ensure that the surrounding road network will continue to operate

in an efficient manner.

The amount of construction traffic expected during each phase of construction

Access for construction vehicles onto the road network from the site and measures to be adopted

at these access points to ensure a safe traffic environment for other road users, especially

pedestrians

Parking for contractor vehicles on the development site thereby ensuring that the on-street

parking effects as a result of the construction activity are minimised.

It is proposed that the implementation of a CTMP be subject to a condition of consent associated with

the proposed development.

Overall it is anticipated that the effects of construction traffic will be able to be safely managed through

the preparation of a CTMP.

13 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the analysis described in this report, it can be concluded that the proposal to relocate the

existing villa and construct a 19 dwelling Cohaus development at 11 Surrey Crescent will result in no

noticeable adverse transport effects relating to the function, capacity, and safety of the surrounding

transport network.

The predicted additional peak hour vehicle trip generation is anticipated to be low at between 6 and 12

vehicle trips per hour and can easily be accommodated by the surrounding road network. The technical

parking shortfall is not anticipated to create any noticeable on-street effects. Further, the layout of the

parking and access is considered acceptable, and the areas of the layout that are not compliant with the

AUP-OIP will not affect the safe and efficient operation of the sites, or the surrounding road network.

Accordingly, it is concluded that there are no transport planning reasons to preclude resource consent

being granted.

Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent Transport Assessment

APPENDIX A Vehicle Tracking

UP

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

UP

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

of sheets

scale: design:

date:

checked:ref:

drawn:

Level 1, 11 Blake Street, Ponsonby, Auckland | PO Box 47497 Ponsonbyp 09 970 3820 | f 09 970 3890 | www.flownz.com

P:\nord\001 11 Surrey Crescent TA\Drawings\5.2 Our Drawings\D2A180221 - Vehicle Tracking.dwg

issued

8m0a

status

vj1

1 51:200 A3

22/02/2018

nord 001 bcs

rb

rb

a 22/02/2018 11 Surrey CrescentVehicle Crossing Tracking

22/02/2018 11:50 am

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

85th Percentile Carvehicle width: 1.87m

lock to lock time: 4.00strack width: 1.77m

turning radius: 5.75mvehicle speed: 5-10kmph

vehicle chassis outline (forwards)vehicle chassis outline (reverse)

overhang of vehicle (forwards)overhang of vehicle (reverse)

500mm clearance (forwards)500mm clearance (reverse)

vehicle tracking key:

Not to Scale

vehicle specs:








Not to Scale

vehicle specs:

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

AutoCAD SHX Text

INDICATIVE VEHICLE CROSSING

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING KERB EXTENSION

AutoCAD SHX Text

INDICATIVE KERB EXTENSION

AutoCAD SHX Text

INDICATIVE VEHICLE CROSSING

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING KERB EXTENSION

AutoCAD SHX Text

INDICATIVE KERB EXTENSION

UP

12.6 m²

STAIR 2

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

48.8 m²

C1

UP

12.6 m²

STAIR 2

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

48.8 m²

C1

of sheets

scale: design:

date:

checked:ref:

drawn:



issued

8m0a

status

vj2

2 51:200 A3

22/02/2018

nord 001 bcs

rb

rb

a 22/02/2018 11 Surrey CrescentParking Space Tracking

22/02/2018 11:50 am






Not to Scale

vehicle specs:





Not to Scale

vehicle specs:







AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

UP

12.6 m²

STAIR 2

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

48.8 m²

C1

UP

12.6 m²

STAIR 2

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

48.8 m²

C1

of sheets

scale: design:

date:

checked:ref:

drawn:



issued

8m0a

status

vj3

3 51:200 A3

22/02/2018

nord 001 bcs

rb

rb


22/02/2018 11:50 am






Not to Scale

vehicle specs:





Not to Scale

vehicle specs:







AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

UP

12.6 m²

STAIR 2

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

48.8 m²

C1

UP

12.6 m²

STAIR 2

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

48.8 m²

C1

of sheets

scale: design:

date:

checked:ref:

drawn:



issued

8m0a

status

vj4

4 51:200 A3

22/02/2018

nord 001 bcs

rb

rb


22/02/2018 11:50 am









Not to Scale

vehicle specs:





Not to Scale

vehicle specs:




AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

AutoCAD SHX Text

4.91m

Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent Transport Assessment

APPENDIX B Visibility Plan

UP

UP

12.6 m²

STAIR 2

Not Enclosed

GARAGE

83.9 m²

CYCLES / STORE

5m

30m

of sheets

scale: design:

date:

checked:ref:

drawn:



issued

8m0a

status

vj1-1

1 11:200 A3

22/02/2018

nord 001 bcs

rb

rb

a 22/02/2018 11 Surrey CrescentVisibility Plan

22/02/2018 11:50 am

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

AutoCAD SHX Text

7

AutoCAD SHX Text

6

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

9

AutoCAD SHX Text

LOCATION OF HEDGE DISTORTED IN AERIAL. ACTUAL LOCATION IS AT THE BACK OF THE FOOTPATH AS PER PHOTO BELOW.

Documents

Grey Lynn Cohaus, 11 Surrey Crescent · the transport planning and traffic engineering matters relating to the redevelopment of 11 Surrey Crescent, Grey Lynn. The proposed re-development