Transport Assessment Bingara Gorge Transport Assessment

Transport Assessment

Bingara Gorge NA82013034

Prepared for Lend Lease

November 2015

Bingara Gorge Transport Assessment

Bingara Gorge - Land and Environment Court – Appeal 10554 of 2015 NA82013034


NA82013034 Cardno November 2015 Prepared for Lend Lease ii

Document Information Prepared for Lend Lease

Project Name Bingara Gorge

File Reference NA82013043.TransportAssessment.151125.Final.doc

Job Reference NA82013034

Date November 2015

Contact Information Cardno (Qld) Pty Ltd

ABN 57 051 074 992

Level 11 Green Square North Tower

515 St Paul’s Terrace

Locked Bag 4006

Fortitude Valley Qld 4006

Telephone: 07 3369 9822

Facsimile: 07 3369 9722

International: +61 7 3369 9822

[email protected]

www.cardno.com.au

Document Control

Ve

rsio

n

Date Description of Revision

Au

tho

r

Init

ials

Author

Signature

Rev

iew

er

Init

ials

Reviewed Signature

Draft 23 November, 2015 Draft Report KS Not signed

Final 25 November, 2015 Final Report KS

SH

Ve

rsio

n

Reason for Issue / Stage of Deliverable

Ap

pro

ve

r

Init

ials

Approved

Signature Approved Release Date

Draft Issue to Client for Review KS Not signed 23 November, 2015

Final Issue for Submission KS

25 November, 2015

© Cardno 2015. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Cardno and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person other than by agreement with Cardno.

This document is produced by Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement. Cardno does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document.


NA82013034 Cardno November 2015 Prepared for Lend Lease iii

Executive Summary

Cardno has been engaged by Lend Lease to prepare a Transport Assessment for the Bingara Gorge

Residential Development. This reporting has specifically been prepared in relation to the Land and

Environment Court proceedings 10554 of 2015. The report addresses the traffic and transport items raised

in the Wollondilly Shire Council Statement of Facts and Contentions document, included at Appendix A.

The subject of this Transport Assessment and the above mentioned appeal proceedings relates to the

proposed increase in the Bingara Gorge residential yield to 1,800 dwellings from the already approved

1,165 dwellings. The subject yield change only relates the residential component of the existing Bingara

Gorge development.

At the October 20th 2015 Section 34 conference, Cardno entered into discussions with the Craig McLaren

of McClaren Traffic Engineering who is acting as the opposing traffic expert on behalf of Wollondilly Shire

Council. Subsequent to the October 20th conclave discussions, a technical approach and assessment

scope was developed jointly between Cardno and McLaren Traffic Engineering.

In response to the Wollondilly Shire Council SOFC and the conclave discussions, Cardno has reassessed

a selection of the primary analysis assumptions and developed a new SATURN mesoscopic model that is

representative of the Bingara Gorge development and the adjacent road network at the 2036 time horizon.

The model has been used to quantify and assess the internal and external traffic demands and operations

for the already approved 1,165 dwelling scenario in addition to the proposed 1,800 dwelling scenario.

The SATURN traffic demand estimations include two-way link demands for each of the internal

development road sections as well as intersection turning movements. The turning movements have been

used as inputs to the supplementary SIDRA assessment of the key internal and external traffic

intersections to confirm traffic operations and upgrading requirements.

The SIDRA analysis confirms that engineering solutions are possible at the external Picton Road

intersections of Pembroke Parade and Almond Street. The analysis confirms that both intersections will

ultimately require signalisation irrespective of the Bingara Gorge residential yield scenario. The internal

development intersections have also been assessed as operating well within typically adopted performance

thresholds for both yield scenarios. Ongoing discussions are recommended relating to the timing and

funding of the external intersection solutions.

As would be expected, the SATURN assessment confirms that the proposed yield expansion will result in

an increase in traffic demands on many of the major internal road connections. The daily traffic demands

output from the model indicate key development connections including Pembroke Parade, Oxenbridge

Avenue, Greenbridge Drive, and Fairway Drive will cater for traffic demands that are at the upper range of

the broader planning thresholds typically published by a selection of Australian planning and approvals

authorities.

Cardno suggests that the demands may be considered reasonable based on consideration of:

> The traffic assumptions adopted as part of the SATURN modelling exercise are conservative,

especially at the 2036 time horizon where the car mode share is projected to be lower given

improved public transport and nearby external employment and retail development

> The majority (86-87%) of the proposed 1,800 residential dwellings do not have any frontage to

internal development roads which have been modelled as carrying more than 1,500 vpd. This

figure is comparable or higher than that referenced in the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating

Developments (Section 7.3)

> Each of the critical internal road sections include separate provision for kerbside or indented car

parking, thereby ensuring the full-time provision for two general traffic lanes

> The density of direct residential frontage access on the critical road sections is relatively low

> Road reserves are relatively wide and include pathway provisions for pedestrians and cyclists

> The already constructed residential dwellings on critical internal sections have been located

such that they are set-back 12-25m from the edge of the kerb. These larger than typical set-

back characteristics will likely reduce any acoustic or amenity impact resulting from the

modelled increase in traffic demand.


NA82013034 Cardno November 2015 Prepared for Lend Lease iv

Table of Contents

Executive Summary iii

1 Introduction 1

1.2 Expert Witness Code of Conduct Statement 2

2 Background 3

2.1 Bingara Gorge Development Background 3

2.2 Appeal Background 3

3 Transport Assessment Scope 4

4 Existing Situation 5

4.1 Hume Motorway (Federal Motorway) 5

4.2 Picton Road (State and Regional Road) 5

4.3 Pembroke Parade (Local Road) 5

4.4 Almond Street (Local Road) 6

4.5 Oxenbridge Avenue 6

4.6 Fairway Drive 7

4.7 Greenbridge Drive 9

4.8 Wollondilly Street (Wilton Oval Road) 11

4.9 Key Intersections 11

5 Proposed Development 12

5.1 Proposed (Revised) Yield 12

5.2 Proposed (Revised) Internal Road Layout 12

6 Transport Assessment Methodology 14

6.1 Traffic Generation 14

6.2 School Traffic Generation 17

6.3 Retail Traffic Generation 17

6.4 Leisure and Golf Course Generation 18

6.5 SATURN Traffic Model Development 18

6.6 External Traffic Assignment and Distribution 21

6.7 External Traffic Growth on Picton Road 21

6.8 SIDRA Model Development 22

7 Intersection Operations 23

7.1 External Intersections 23

7.2 Internal Intersections 30

7.3 Other Internal Intersection Operations 33

8 Internal Traffic Demand and Amenity Assessment 34

8.1 Specific Road Section Amenity Comment 39

8.2 General Road Amenity Comment 40

9 Response to Statement of Facts and Contentions 41

10 Summary and Conclusions 45


NA82013034 Cardno November 2015 Prepared for Lend Lease v

Tables

Table 6-1 Primary Cardno External Traffic Distribution Assumptions 21

Table 6-2 Wollondilly Shire Council Requested External Traffic Distribution Assumptions 21

Table 7-1 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Existing) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary 24

Table 7-2 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Upgraded) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary 25

Table 7-3 Picton Road / Almond Street (Existing) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary 27

Table 7-4 Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded Seagull) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary 28

Table 7-5 Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded Seagull) – Failure Year Sensitivity Test 28

Table 7-6 Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary 29

Table 7-7 Existing Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary 31

Table 7-8 Existing Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge Drive – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary 33

Table 8-1 Summary of Published Residential Traffic Amenity Thresholds 34

Table 8-2 Summary of Daily Traffic Demands on Internal Bingara Gorge Road Sections 35

Figures

Figure 1-1 Indicative Boundary and Immediate Site Location of Bingara Gorge Development 1

Figure 4-1 Pembroke Parade Existing Formation 5

Figure 4-2 Pembroke Parade – Road Sections and Summary of Direct Frontage Residential Dwellings 6

Figure 4-3 Oxenbridge Avenue Existing Formation 7

Figure 4-4 Oxenbridge Avenue –Summary of Direct Frontage Residential Dwellings 7

Figure 4-5 Fairway Drive – Existing Cross-Section With Indented Car Parking 8

Figure 4-6 Fairway Drive Bridge – Existing Cross Section 8

Figure 4-7 Fairway Drive –Summary of Direct Frontage Residential Dwellings – Section 3 9

Figure 4-8 Greenbridge Drive – Section 1 Existing Cross Section 10



Figure 4-11 Wollondilly Shire Council – Category C Road Cross-Section 11

Figure 5-1 Bingara Gorge Key Internal and External Road Arrangements 13

Figure 6-1 Residential Traffic Generation Survey Area 15

Figure 6-2 Residential Traffic Generation Survey Results 16

Figure 6-3 SATURN Road and Development Network 20

Figure 6-4 2013 Modelled Traffic Demand Outputs (PB Wilton Junction TMAP) 21



Figure 7-1 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade – Existing Unsignalised Form (Seagull T-Junction) 23

Figure 7-2 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade – SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation 24

Figure 7-3 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade – SIDRA Assessed Upgraded Formation 25

Figure 7-4 Picton Road / Almond Street – Existing Unsignalised Form (T-Junction) 26

Figure 7-5 Picton Road / Almond Street – SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation 26

Figure 7-6 Picton Road / Almond Street – SIDRA Assessed Upgraded (Seagull) Formation 27


NA82013034 Cardno November 2015 Prepared for Lend Lease vi

Figure 7-7 Picton Road / Almond Street – SIDRA Assessed Upgraded Formation 29

Figure 7-8 Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue – Existing Roundabout Form 30

Figure 7-9 Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue – SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation 31

Figure 7-10 Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge Drive – Existing Roundabout Form 32

Figure 7-11 Pembroke Parade / Fairway / Greenbridge Drive– SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation 32

Figure 8-1 2036 Internal Two-Way Daily Traffic Demand – 1,165 Residential Dwellings 36

Figure 8-2 2036 Internal Two-Way Daily Traffic Demand – 1,800 Residential Dwellings 37

Figure 8-3 2036 Internal Two-Way Daily Traffic Demand – Difference Plot between 1,800 and 1,165 Residential Dwellings 38

Appendices

Appendix A Wollondilly Shire Council Statement of Facts and Contentions

Appendix B Section 34 Conclave Traffic Scope and Agreement

Appendix C SATURN Modelling Outputs

Appendix D SIDRA Modelling Outputs

Appendix E Report Author Curriculum Vitaes


NA82013034 Cardno November 2015 Prepared for Lend Lease 1

1 Introduction

Cardno has been engaged by Lend Lease to prepare a transport assessment for the Bingara Gorge

Residential Development.

This reporting has specifically been prepared in relation to the Land and Environment Court proceedings

10554 of 2015. The report addresses the traffic and transport items raised in the Wollondilly Shire Council

Statement of Facts and Contentions document, included at Appendix A.

The subject of this transport assessment and the above mentioned appeal proceedings relates to the



Gorge development. Cardno understand that the non-residential uses and yields including golf course,

ancillary leisure (i.e. private gym and pools), and the neighbourhood retail centre will remain consistent with

the existing approval.

The Bingara Gorge development comprises 450 hectares of land that is approximately 80 kilometres south

of the Sydney CBD. The site is located in the Wollondilly Shire local government area.

The site is generally bounded by Picton Road to the south, the Hume Highway to the west and north, open

space/natural environment to the north and east, and an existing residential catchment in the south-east.

Vehicular access to the site is achieved via Picton Road and primarily via its intersections with Pembroke

Parade and Almond Street.

The indicative location of the proposed Bingara Gorge development is shaded in Figure 1-1 below.

Figure 1-1 Indicative Boundary and Immediate Site Location of Bingara Gorge Development



1.2 Expert Witness Code of Conduct Statement

The technical advice and opinion documented herein is based on transport modelling and investigations

undertaken by Cardno. The transport modelling includes many traffic engineering assumptions, the source

of which are summarised throughout the report. A physical inspection of the current Bingara Gorge site

arrangements was completed prior to the preparation of this advice.

The authors of this report acknowledge the Expert Witness Code of Conduct and we confirm that as far as

is practicable or that we are aware, the facts and statements documented in this report are true and correct

and that the professional opinions made herein are genuinely held. Furthermore, it is our opinion that there

are no matters of significance relating to the issues addressed in this report which we regard as relevant,

which may have been withheld from the Court.

1.2.1 Shane Healey Experience

Shane Healey Shane has a Bachelor of Engineering degree and is a Registered Professional

Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ no. 8343) specializing in traffic engineering and transport

planning.

Shane is a Principal Transport Engineer with Cardno and is currently the Market Sector

Leader – Traffic & Transport for the groups’ operations in both Queensland and Western

Australia. Shane has over 18 years’ experience in the delivery of traffic engineering and

transport planning projects across Australia, having held senior positions within Cardno in both Queensland

and Western Australia.

Shane is regularly called upon to provide expert evidence in Queensland’s Planning and Environment

Court as he is considered an expert in the traffic engineering field. In recognition of his expertise Shane

was seconded to the Department of Transport and Main Roads during 2002 during which time he authored

their guidelines for impact assessments, now known as the Guidelines for Assessment of Road Impacts of

Development (GARID).

A copy of my curriculum vitae is provided at Appendix E.

1.2.2 Kris Stone Experience

Kris is a Senior Traffic Engineer with a Bachelor of Engineering degree. Kris is also a

Department of Transport and Main Roads accredited Senior Road Safety Auditor with eleven

years’ experience in the fields of traffic engineering, transport planning and road safety. Kris

has significant experience in delivering traffic planning and operational input as part of the

design for residential communities, commercial, and super-regional shopping centres.

Kris has recently finalised a 12 month role with the City of Gold Coast where he acted as the

Senior Road Safety Officer. During this time, he was responsible for the development of the City’s first

Road Safety Strategy and Action Plan in partnership with Department of Transport and Main Roads,

Queensland Police, RACQ and the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety.

A copy of my curriculum vitae is provided at Appendix E.



2 Background

2.1 Bingara Gorge Development Background

This Transport Assessment builds upon previous investigations and reporting prepared by Cardno in

relation to the proposed residential yield expansion. It is intended that the results and outcomes reported

herein supersede previous traffic findings where there is conflict.

In the undertaking of this assessment, Cardno has been provided access to a selection of background

traffic and transport studies which may relate to the current Bingara Gorge development. The following is a

brief summary of these documents:

> Bingara Gorge Residential Development – Traffic Impact Assessment (Cardno, April 2015).

This analysis and reporting was submitted in support of the proposed residential yield

expansion. It is understood that the items raised in the SOFC document reference this

particular report

> Wilton Junction Development – Transport Management and Accessibility Plan (PB, June 2014).

This analysis and reporting was prepared by PB for the broader Wilton Junction development

which proposes 11-13,000 residential dwellings inclusive of the Bingara Gorge development

> Traffic Report for Proposed Rezoning for Employment Land, Wilton (Colston Budd Hunt &

Kafes, August, 2005). This is understood to be the original traffic reporting submitted in support

of the (now approved) 1,165 residential dwellings

> Wilton Parklands (Colston Budd Hunt & Kafes, March, 2006). This advice built upon the

information provided by CBH&K in their February advice. Cardno understand that the combined

information supplied by CBH&K in the 2005/2006 studies formed the basis for the original

approval of the 1,165 residential dwellings

> Wilton Parklands – Review of External Traffic Effects (Colston Budd Hunt & Kafes, February

2006). This summary report was prepared by CBH&K in response to RTA and Council queries

raised in relation to the original Development Application traffic reporting.

2.2 Appeal Background

This Transport Assessment has been undertaken in relation to the Land and Environment Court

proceedings 10554 of 2015. Cardno has been engaged to provide traffic and transport advice on behalf of

Lend Lease. While acting in this role, Cardno has been party to the following appeal matters:

> Response to the Wollondilly Shire Council Statement of Facts and Contentions document

> Attendance at Section 34 conclave meeting with opposing traffic expert.

2.2.1.1 Statement of Facts and Contentions

Cardno was involved in preparing a preliminary formal response to the traffic and transport items raised in

the SOFC document. The Cardno technical positions and views has been refined during supplementary

data collection and analysis and this reporting includes updated responses to the SOFC items.

2.2.1.2 Section 34 Conclave meeting with opposing traffic expert





A copy of the most recent Summary of Section 34 Expert Conclave and Agreed Actions is attached at

Appendix B. The Transport Assessment summarised herein has been undertaken generally in accordance

with this October 23rd scope of works.



3 Transport Assessment Scope

The Bingara Gorge development already has an existing planning approval for 1,165 residential dwellings.

The subject of the Development Application is the proposed expansion of this existing approved yield by

635 residential dwellings to 1,800 dwellings.

The scope of this Transport Assessment has been developed such that it assesses both the proposed

(1,800 dwellings) and the approved (1,165 dwellings) scenario. The simultaneous analysis of both yield

scenarios with the same technical methodology (i.e. assumptions, background data, and modelling

tool/package) means that the Transport Assessment can quantify both the ultimate 1,800 dwelling traffic

situation as well as the incremental impacts or effects compared to the already approved situation.

The comprehensive Summary of Section 34 Expert Conclave and Agreed Actions document is included at

Appendix B. The key elements as they relate to the Transport Assessment scope are summarised below:

> The revised analysis will assess and compare the subject residential yield increase (1,165

dwellings to the proposed 1,800 dwellings)

> The Cardno technical approach will utilise a combined SATURN and SIDRA assessment

methodology given the PB AIMSUN model originally requested to be used by RMS in the SOFC

could not be provided in a timely manner

> The revised analysis will assesses the morning and evening peak hour periods, and the daily

traffic demand scenario. The assessment should consider:

- Internal road link demands and possible traffic amenity issues

- External Picton Road intersection operations and upgrade requirements

> The revised assessment should not consider any possible future development identified as part

of the broader Wilton Junction plan as this has already been assessed as part of the Wilton

Junction TMAP.

Based on the items included in the SOFC and the conclave discussions, this Transport Assessment

focuses on the following key traffic and transport aspects:

> External traffic operations at Picton Road intersections

> Internal intersection operations within the Bingara Gorge development

> Internal two-way traffic demands on individual road sections within the Bingara Gorge

development.



4 Existing Situation

4.1 Hume Motorway (Federal Motorway)

The Hume Motorway links Sydney and Melbourne, running approximately 807km in the southwest-

northeast direction. In the vicinity of the subject site, the Hume Motorway consists of two-lane roads in

either direction within an approximate 13.0m carriageway, with a speed limit of 110 km/h.

4.2 Picton Road (State and Regional Road)

Picton Road runs approximately 37.0km in a west-east direction and links Wollongong and Picton. Picton

Road is a two-lane road for most of its length, with a 14.0 metre carriageway within a 40.0 metre road

reservation. Five million dollars of works are anticipated to begin on Picton Road in mid-2015 to upgrade

the intersection of Hume Motorway and Picton Road. The upgrade to the intersection from priority control to

signals is to improve capacity and safety in response to recent crash history with 45 crashes occurring at

the intersection within the last five years.

In the vicinity of the Bingara Gorge development Picton Road has a speed limit of 90km/hr, with 80km/hr

for westbound traffic west of the intersection of Pembroke Parade. Picton Road provides access to the

Bingara Gorge Residential Development via the intersections with Pembroke Parade and Almond Street.

Picton Road also serves as a major freight corridor and is subject to increased freight movement with the

anticipated expansion at Port Kembla and growth in associated industries.

4.3 Pembroke Parade (Local Road)

Pembroke Parade is a local road that serves as the majority access route to the site to/from Picton Road.

At present, Pembroke Parade has been constructed with a two-lane, median divided form within an

approximate 31-32m road reserve.

Both directions of trafficable pavement are approximately 6m wide and consist of a 3.5 general traffic lane

and a 2.5m kerbside parking lane. Active travel facilities for pedestrians and casual cyclists are provided

via shared 2.5m footpaths constructed in each verge for the entirety of its length. The already constructed

residential dwellings fronting Pembroke Parade are set-back from the kerb by approximately 15-25m.

Figure 4-1 Pembroke Parade Existing Formation

The form of Pembroke Parade is consistent along its entire length; however, it can be evaluated in two

separate sections:

> Section 1 – No direct residential access between Picton Road and Oxenbridge Avenue

> Section 2 – Direct residential access between Oxenbridge Avenue and Fairway / Greenbridge

Drives.



Figure 4-2 Pembroke Parade – Road Sections and Summary of Direct Frontage Residential Dwellings

There are no residential dwellings that achieve direct site access in Section 1 of Pembroke Parade. The

dwellings that are located adjacent to the section achieve access via minor intersecting roadways and

associated laneways.

There are only 17 residential dwellings that achieve vehicular access directly from Section 2 of Pembroke

Parade. Of the 17 total dwellings, there are six on the northern (entry route) and 11 on the southern (exit

route). Vehicles entering these dwellings may decelerate in the kerbside parking lane and should not pose

a significant hazard or delay to other following vehicles continuing straight north or south.

4.4 Almond Street (Local Road)

Almond Street is a local road which extends approximately 1km in a north-south direction and provides

indirect access between Picton Road and Bingara Gorge. Almond Street is constructed with a 7.0 metre

carriageway within a 20.0 metre road reservation. There is limited pedestrian provision with no footpaths,

and no on-street parking available throughout the majority of its length. Almond Street has a speed limit of

50km/h and provides access to the Wilton Recreation Reserve, the existing township of Wilton, and a

selection of existing Bingara Gorge residential dwellings.

4.5 Oxenbridge Avenue

Oxenbridge Avenue has been constructed with a 6.5m trafficable pavement and additional provision for

indented car parking (2.25-2.5m) on both sides of the street within a 19m reserve. The indented car

parking has been constructed for a significant proportion of the length of the street with the exception of

some shorter sections to achieve landscaping and separation between turning movements opposite

intersections.

Section 1 Section 2 Direct Frontage Access Dwellings - Entry Route

- Exit Route



Figure 4-3 Oxenbridge Avenue Existing Formation

In the 480m section between Pembroke Parade and Hornby Street, there are currently 14 residential

dwellings that achieve direct frontage access to Oxenbridge Avenue. The majority of dwellings are set-

back from the edge of the traffic lane by 12-15m.

Figure 4-4 Oxenbridge Avenue –Summary of Direct Frontage Residential Dwellings

4.6 Fairway Drive

Fairway Drive has been constructed with a 6.5-7m trafficable pavement and additional provision for

indented car parking (2.25-2.5m wide) on both sides of the street within an approximate 22m reserve. The

indented car parking has been constructed for a significant proportion of the length of the street with the

exception of some shorter sections to achieve landscaping and separation between turning movements

opposite intersections.



Figure 4-5 Fairway Drive – Existing Cross-Section With Indented Car Parking

The form of Fairway Drive is generally consistent along its entire length; however, it can be evaluated in

three separate sections:

> Section 1 – No direct residential access between Pembroke Parade and Kangaloon Close

> Section 2 – Limited access between Kangaloon Close and Stirling Drive / Kirkwood Chase

> Section 3 – Moderate residential access proposed north of Stirling Drive / Kirkwood Chase.

An exception to the typical form described above occurs in Section 1 at the bridge crossing approximately

110-150m west of Pembroke Parade. In this short bridge section, the following approximate dimensions

have been constructed:

> 2.5m southern footpath

> 4.3m northbound traffic lane

> 1.2m raised central median

> 3.9m southbound traffic lane

> 2.5m northern footpath.

Figure 4-6 Fairway Drive Bridge – Existing Cross Section

No properties front Section 1 of and there are no proposals to ever achieve site access from this section of

Fairway Drive.

Section 2 can only ever accommodate five dwellings that would have the potential to achieve direct access

to the 210m length of Fairway Drive. The four (of five) dwellings that have already been constructed are

set-back from the edge of the traffic lane by 12-15m.



The proposed plans of development (1,800 dwellings) indicate that there may be a further 22 dwellings

developed north of Stirling Drive / Kirkwood Chase which would achieve direct access to/from Fairway

Drive in the 560m section measured to the far right (north) of Figure 4-7. The remainder of dwellings that

front Fairway Drive will achieve access via the minor intersecting roads.

Figure 4-7 Fairway Drive –Summary of Direct Frontage Residential Dwellings – Section 3

The following is a summary of the number of direct residential access driveways that will ultimately be

located on reviewed section of Fairway Drive:

> Section 1 – 0 dwellings



> Combined - 27 dwellings.

4.7 Greenbridge Drive

Greenbridge Drive has been constructed with a variety of configurations and can be described in three

sections:

> Section 1 – Two lane (divided and undivided) with angle car parking adjacent the

neighbourhood retail between Pembroke Parade and Chisolm Street

> Section 2 – 8.5m trafficable pavement with additional indented or kerbside car parking or coach

set-down facilities on both sides of the street creating a 12.75-13m kerb-to-kerb cross-section

opposite the school between Chisolm Street and Beatty Street / Woodward Road

> Section 3 – 7m trafficable pavement with additional indented car parking (2.25-2.5m) on both

sides of the street between Beatty Street / Woodward Road and the (current) terminus near

Maloney Chase.



Figure 4-8 Greenbridge Drive – Section 1 Existing Cross Section





4.8 Wollondilly Street (Wilton Oval Road)

Cardno understand that there is a planning agreement obligation for Lend Lease to construct Wollondilly

Street to a Category C type road cross-section, illustrated on Figure 4-11.

Figure 4-11 Wollondilly Shire Council – Category C Road Cross-Section

The 8m road pavement does not include any indented car parking. The Bingara Gorge development does

not include any frontage to the street section.

4.9 Key Intersections

4.9.1 External Intersections

The following existing key external intersections are located within close proximity to the Bingara Gorge

Residential Development:

> Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (priority control – seagull intersection)

> Picton Road / Almond Street (priority control)

> Hume Highway / Picton Road – (RMS signalisation upgrade).

4.9.2 Internal Intersections

The following internal Bingara Gorge development intersections have been identified as being key:

> Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge – roundabout intersection

> Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge – roundabout intersection.

The assessment of other lower order internal intersections has been undertaken exclusively in SATURN,

not SIDRA.



5 Proposed Development

The already approved Bingara Gorge development is comprised predominately of detached residential

dwellings lots. The approved development also incorporates the following land uses and yields:

> Primary school with 460 enrolments

> 1,252sq.m neighbourhood retail centre

> 18 hole golf course

> Ancillary (private for Bingara occupants) recreation facilities.

Cardno has been advised that it is likely that the already approved 1,165 dwellings would be fully occupied

by 2024-2026.

5.1 Proposed (Revised) Yield

The proposed development includes an expansion of the approved residential yield to include an additional

635 dwellings for a total of 1,800 dwellings. Cardno understand that the proposed development does not

include any notable revisions to the already approved land uses and yields.

5.2 Proposed (Revised) Internal Road Layout

The proposed developable ‘foot print’ remains unchanged from that already approved as part of the 1,165

dwellings scenario. The internal road arrangements therefore remain generally unchanged and could be

considered an evolution of the already approved network.

The internal network will continue to be structured with two separate ‘central spine’ connections providing

access to the northern residential precincts. These routes will also continue to be connected by two east-

west roads; one being the (current) partially constructed Greenbridge Drive / Maloney Chase route passing

through the school and retail centre area, and the other being the existing Hornby Street which connects to

Pembroke Parade via Oxenbridge Avenue.

Only minor modifications are proposed to the secondary and tertiary level street connections as a result of

the proposal to achieve the additional residential yield. No significant modifications are proposed to the

primary Major Collector routes.

The higher order road network that has been included in the traffic assessment is indicated in Figure 5-1.



Figure 5-1 Bingara Gorge Key Internal and External Road Arrangements



6 Transport Assessment Methodology

Consistent with the scope identified in Section 3 of this report, the objective of this Transport Assessment is

to determine the following:

> Investigate and confirm traffic assumptions previously adopted in earlier analysis submitted as

part of the Development Application

> Assess external traffic operations and upgrading requirements at Picton Road intersections

> Assess internal intersection operations within the Bingara Gorge development

> Evaluate internal two-way traffic demands on individual road sections within the Bingara Gorge

development.

In order to deliver outcome for these key elements, the following is addressed:

> Quantify the development traffic generation

> Determine the external development trip distribution

> Evaluate the projected background traffic growth on the adjacent road network (i.e. Picton

Road)

> Develop a network traffic model and assign development traffic to the local road network for the

following scenarios:

- 2013 ‘No Development’ AM, PM, and Daily traffic scenario;

- 2036 ‘With Development’ AM, PM, and Daily traffic scenario.

6.1 Traffic Generation

Cardno has reinvestigated the traffic generation assumptions that were previously adopted in the April

2015 Development Application reporting. The following section outlines the revised generation technical

position and also summarises a selection of the preceding assumptions.

6.1.1 Previous Residential Traffic Generation Assumptions

The following is a summary of the residential traffic generation assumptions made in previous traffic

reporting prepared by Cardno and other engineering consultants. This information is reproduced herein to

provide clarity regarding the previous planning for the development.

6.1.1.1 Traffic Report for Proposed Rezoning for Employment Land, Wilton (Colston Budd Hunt & Kafes, August, 2005).

Traffic generation rates for the residential component are not documented.

6.1.1.1.1 Wilton Parklands – Review of External Traffic Effects (Colston Budd Hunt & Kafes, February 2006)

This 2006 advice prepared by CBH&K referenced the following traffic generation assumptions:

> 0.64 trips per dwelling which was determined from the 0.85 vph per dwelling referenced in the

then current RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Development guideline with an additional 25%

containment factor

> 0.57 trips per dwelling which references the 0.64 vph rate with an additional 10% reduction to

consider travel plans, public transport, and internal employment

> 0.48 trips per dwelling based on a previous assessment undertaken by Kilsby.

6.1.1.1.2 Wilton Parklands (Colston Budd Hunt & Kafes, March, 2006)

This 2006 advice prepared by CBH&K referenced the following traffic generation assumptions:

> Survey of Wilton township (250 dwellings) where the findings were:

- 0.7 trips per dwelling in the AM peak including internal trips adopted for assessment

- Directional Split 65% out and 35% in

- Analysis considered an additional 25% reduction to account for internal development trips.



6.1.1.1.3 Wilton Junction Development – Transport Management and Accessibility Plan (PB, June 2014)

> 0.7 trips per dwellings referenced from the CBH&K surveys, however, assuming that this figure

did not include internal trips

> 0.08 and 0.14 trips per dwelling (AM and PM respectively) increase to account for internal trips

> 0.78 and 0.84 trips per dwelling (AM and PM respectively) adopted for assessment.

6.1.1.1.4 Bingara Gorge Residential Development – Traffic Impact Assessment (Cardno, April 2015)

In the 2015 Development Application reporting, Cardno adopted the residential generation rates used by

PB in their study to ensure consistency when comparing results.

> 0.78 and 0.84 trips per dwelling (AM and PM respectively).

6.1.2 Proposed Residential Traffic Generation Assumptions

This Transport Assessment adopts the following trip generation rates for the residential component:

> 0.8 vph per dwelling in the AM and PM peak hours

> 8.1 vpd per dwelling throughout the day

> 75%/25% in/out (out/in) peak hour directional split.

These rates were determined from pneumatic tube count surveys undertaken for the adjacent Wilton

residential catchment. The surveys were conducted by sub-consultant Austraffic between Saturday

September 5th and Friday September 11th, 2015. The survey area encompassed 167 residential dwellings

located in Wilton, NSW as shown on Figure 6-1 below.

Figure 6-1 Residential Traffic Generation Survey Area

The surveyed catchment includes detached residential dwellings of a similar general nature to those that

have been and are proposed to be constructed as part of the Bingara Gorge development. The survey

area did include a sports club, however, the use is minor and the surveying of any of its related traffic

movements would produce a conservative (higher) generation result.



The survey results are summarised at Figure 6-2. The results indicate that the AM peak hour was lower

than the PM. The PM result was adopted for both peak hour periods so as to provide a conservative

estimate of the potential traffic generation during the critical AM (egress) peak hour.

Figure 6-2 Residential Traffic Generation Survey Results

Cardno suggests that the 0.8 vph per dwelling result is appropriate for use as part of this Transport

Assessment given the similar nature of the residential dwellings and the similar site location. The survey

boundaries will included trips that could be described as being ‘internal’.

The Wollondilly Shire SOFC text (items i and ii) suggests that generation rates equalling 0.94 and 0.9 vph

per dwelling may be more appropriate for the respective AM and PM peak hours. Cardno understands that

these generation rates were determined by Wollondilly Shire Council based on comparisons to the Journey

to Work (JTW) which documents a vehicle driver proportion of 86%.

JTW data reported by Bureau of Statistics for the Local Government Areas surveyed as part of the RMS

TDT 2013/04a advice are very similar to Wollondilly:

> Wollondilly – 85% as driver / 5% as passenger

> Coffs Harbour – 83% as driver / 8% as passenger

> Orange – 83% as driver / 8% as passenger

> Wagga Wagga – 81% as driver / 8% as passenger

> Wollongong – 76% as driver / 6% as passenger.

The SOFC reference to the Journey to Work dataset is reasonable, however, it does not consider trips

made for other non-employment purposes. Based on the most recent 2012/13 Household Travel Survey

(HTS), only 26% of Wollondilly trips are made for commuting or work related business. Furthermore, the

2012/13 HTS reports that 58% of total dwelling trips are made as a car driver and an additional 23% as a

passenger. These proportions are similar to the RMS surveyed Wollongong LGA (53% and 23%).

Based on the JTW and HTS results, Cardno suggests that the Wollondilly travel behaviours are similar to

those surveyed at the five regional RMS sites referenced in TDT 2013/04a, summarised as:

> AM average – 0.71 vph per dwelling

> PM average – 0.78 vph per dwelling

> Daily average – 7.4 vpd per dwelling.

The rates adopted as part of the Transport Assessment are therefore considered reasonable and

appropriate given they have been determined from actual data and are higher than the rates summarised in

the most recent RMS TDT2013/04a advice.



6.2 School Traffic Generation

The already approved primary school has been designed to accommodate an enrolment of 460 students.

Cardno has assumed that this enrolment figure was determined based on the already approved 1,165

residential dwellings and that the majority of students will live locally within the development.

The school traffic generation has been determined via a first principles approach using the following

assumptions:

> 90% - proportion of enrolled students living within Bingara Gorge

> Vehicle mode share

- 60% of internal enrolments travel via car

- 100% of external enrolments travel via car

> 1.33 students per vehicle – average occupancy of all car trips

> Trip assignment

- 20% of internal enrolment school trips are wholly internal to the site (i.e. they are generated

at the dwelling and return to the dwelling after the trip)

- 80% of internal enrolment school trips occur as a segment of a longer multi-leg trip (i.e. drop-

in trip) and continue to external destinations after visiting the school to drop off children

> Peak hour proportions

- 100% of the morning peak school trips are made during the AM road peak hour

- 60% of the afternoon peak school trips are made during the PM road peak hour

> 5% - proportion of peak hour trips that enter, but do not exit during the AM peak hour (i.e. staff

and/or parents arriving at the end of the peak hour). The inverse (5% more) exit without

entering during the PM peak hour

> Daily traffic factor

- The daily traffic generation for the school has been estimated via the application of a factor

of five to the combined AM and PM peak hour demands. This approach is the same as that

employed for the residential trips where the peak to daily factor equals 10. This

approximation is conservative.

The resulting school traffic generation is 430 trips (entering and exiting) during the AM peak hour. This

figure is higher than the previously assessed 359 trips which referenced surveys of other primary schools

(0.78 trips per enrolment).

These school trip end parameters are fixed for the 1,165 dwelling scenario. The level of internalisation

relating to the 1,800 dwelling scenario is therefore lower given no additional residential peak hour trips are

made to/from the school. Any additional education related trips generated by the incremental 635

dwellings therefore travel external to the site to complete their trip purpose.

6.3 Retail Traffic Generation

The already approved neighbourhood retail centre (1,252sq.m GFA) will be of a scale that limits tenants to

those that only serve a convenience or ‘local’ retail focus. The retail is therefore projected to primarily be

frequented by Bingara Gorge residents and is not projected to generate significant external traffic

demands. The following general traffic assumptions have been adopted for the retail component:

> Traffic generation rates

- 5.4 vph per 100sq.m in the AM peak hour

- 12.3 vph per 100sq.m in the PM peak hour

- 121 vpd per 100sq.m throughout the daily assessment period

> Trip origin/destination

- 95% - proportion of retail trips with an internal residential trip end

- 5% - proportion of retail trips generated from external origins

> Internalisation and drop-in trips

- 90% - proportion of the internal trips referenced above that are drop-in trips that are made as

part of an existing multi-leg trip to/from an external origin/destination

- 10% - proportion of the internal trips that originate from an internal dwelling and return to the

same dwelling after visiting the retail use.



Importantly, all of these assumptions still result in a vehicle trip being made on the internal Bingara Gorge

road network. The following is a summary of the trip end traffic generation at the retail node:

> 68 vehicles – AM peak hour

> 154 vehicles – PM peak hour

> 1515 vehicles – Daily period.

The majority of these trip ends are trips that are already made on the internal road network as part of the

residential dwelling generation. The small scale convenience nature of the retail use will mean that many

of the trips occur as part of an existing employment, education, or leisure trip. An example of this trip

expected frequently would include a resident stopping for milk or bread on the way to/from work.

6.4 Leisure and Golf Course Generation

Previous iterations of the Bingara Gorge traffic analysis submitted by Cardno and other consultants have

not included the approved golf course land use. This Transport Assessment has adopted the following

traffic generation assumptions:

> 60 vehicle trips – AM and PM peak hour generation based on surveys of other locations

> 600 vehicle trips – Daily generation

> 50% - proportion of peak hour trips that have an internal residential origin or destination.

The already approved Bingara Gorge development includes a variety of recreational facilities (i.e. pools,

gyms etc.) available only to community residents. The provision of these facilities will mean that some of

the residential trips made for recreational purposes will no longer travel external to the site. The following

assumptions were adopted to account for these internal recreational trip ends:

> 2% - proportion of AM, PM, and daily residential trips with internal recreational destinations.

These trips do not travel external to the site but importantly are still made on the internal road

network.

Importantly, these trips are still made on the internal road network and are considered as part of the two-

way demand assessment.

6.5 SATURN Traffic Model Development

A SATURN mesoscopic model was developed for the internal Bingara Gorge development network

consistent with the discussion between Cardno and McLaren Traffic Engineering subsequent to the Section

34 Conclave meeting.

SATURN is a mesoscopic modelling package that is capable of both intersection and conventional road

segment capacity analysis and assignment. Link based assignments assume that all the delay in

traversing a network is in the mid-block passage and the intersections add zero delay to the travel time.

Delays due to congestion are modelled by modifying the speed along each link as a function of the volume

on the link.

The SATURN ‘simulation’ network assumes that the delay at the ends of each link due to increased link

volume is the major factor in delay and usually only models the on link delay as the time taken to traverse

at free flow speed.

The SATURN model was developed in accordance with best practice principles including reference to

industry guidelines. The following is a summary of the SATURN model development process:

> Create a node and link representation of the existing and proposed development and road

network including:

> Development locations (i.e. traffic generators)

> Road cross-sections

> Posted speed limits

> Intersections arrangements

> Develop a trip end matrix including estimations for each centroid consisting of:

> Peak hour traffic generation (entry and exit)

> Trip origin/destination (internal and external).



The modelled road network was traced from aerials and development plans in MapInfo which allowed for

the modelling of accurate distances between intersections. Each intersection was coded in SATURN as a

simulation node with the saturation flows for each type of movement referenced from the Queensland

Department of Transport and Main Roads SATURN Modelling - Guidelines and Criteria for Queensland

SATURN Model Development (Draft, February 2013).

Development zone were chosen to allow for matching with the planned development subdivisions and to

not have much more than three intersections in any one zone. The one exception to this process occurs at

the northern extremity of the site where dwellings have no alternate route choice for entering/exiting the

development except to travel via either of the major ‘spine roads’.

Figure 6-3 is a reproduction of the Bingara Gorge SATURN model and includes the following:

> Road links

> Intersection nodes

> Development centroids.

A trip matrix was developed based on the assumptions reported earlier herein. The SATURN matrix

assigns the development trips to the internal and external road network via an analytical process which

seeks to find the optimal travel time for all trips.

The analytical SATURN process is suggested as being more logical and accurate compared to the EXCEL

desktop modelling approach previously adopted by Cardno in the April 2015 analysis. The approach is

similar in nature to that employed in 2006 by CBH&K (PARAMICS) and also the AIMSUN micro-simulation

model prepared by PB which was originally requested to be used for this process by RMS.

Peak hourly demands output for the AM and PM peak hour were multiplied by a factor of 5 (i.e.

(AM+PM)*5) in order to estimate the daily traffic demand. This approach is typical of mesoscopic models

where daily demands are produced from peak hour demands.

Traffic demand plots and intersection turning movement estimates were output from the SATURN model

for reference in the following sections of this report.



Figure 6-3 SATURN Road and Development Network



6.6 External Traffic Assignment and Distribution

The April 2015 traffic analysis and reporting prepared by Cardno assessed two different sets of external

traffic distribution assumptions. Table 6-1 summarises the primary distributions developed and

recommended by Cardno based on a review of the available background data and evidence provided by

Lend Lease. Table 6-2 summarises an alternate set of distribution assumptions requested to be used by

Wollondilly Shire Council.

Table 6-1 Primary Cardno External Traffic Distribution Assumptions

Road Destination / Origin Development Traffic Assignment

Hume Motorway (N) Sydney, Campbelltown, Liverpool, Parramatta, Penrith

55%

Hume Motorway (S) Canberra 5%

Picton Road (E) Wollongong 30%

Picton Road (W) Picton 10%

Table 6-2 Wollondilly Shire Council Requested External Traffic Distribution Assumptions

Road Destination / Origin Development Traffic Assignment

Hume Motorway (N) Sydney, Campbelltown, Liverpool, Parramatta, Penrith

60%

Hume Motorway (S) Canberra 5%

Picton Road (E) Wollongong 20%

Picton Road (W) Picton 10%

The Wollondilly Shire Council requested sensitivity scenario assumptions have been adopted as part of this

revised Transport Assessment.

6.7 External Traffic Growth on Picton Road

The rate of Picton Road traffic growth has been determined from the PB AIMSUN modelling outputs

referenced in the Wilton Junction Development – Transport Management and Accessibility Plan (PB, June

2014) report. The following Figures 6-3, 6-4, and 6-5 were specifically referenced and are reproduced

herein.

The PB modelled demands refer to PCU units which are similar to demand, however, heavy vehicles have

a weighting factor of 2.

Figure 6-4 2013 Modelled Traffic Demand Outputs (PB Wilton Junction TMAP)





6.8 SIDRA Model Development

The April 2015 Cardno analysis of the external traffic intersection operations and upgrading requirements

was undertaken using an earlier version of the SIDRA program. This Transport Assessment utilises the

updated SIDRA Version 6.0.

The previous assessment of the existing unsignalised intersections with Picton Road adopted modified gap

acceptance parameters which were consistent with those summarised in the Austroads Guide to Road

Design: Part 4A – Guide to Unsignalised and Unsignalised Intersections. This Transport Assessment no

longer proposes the use of these revised gap acceptance parameters.

The latest version of SIDRA now includes a new method to provide a more systematic approach to the

estimation of gap acceptance parameters (critical gap and follow-up headway) for two-way stop and give-

way / yield sign controlled intersections as a function of intersection geometry, control and flow conditions.

SIDRA documentation recommends that the setting should be engaged which Cardno has in the low

setting. All other SIDRA capacity parameters have been maintained in the default setting.

The intersection operational analysis and results are documented in the Section 7 of this report.



7 Intersection Operations

This Transport Assessment has analysed the future year traffic operations at the 2036 planning time

horizon for the following scenarios:

> Existing approved 1,165 dwelling scenario (i.e. No Development)

> Proposed 1,800 dwelling scenario (i.e. With Development).

Consistent with the discussion in Section 3, the Transport Assessment does not consider the Wilton

Junction plan. Consideration of the possible broader Wilton Junction consistent with the PB analysis is not

possible without having access to the AIMSUN model which was not provided.

Detailed SIDRA output results are included at Appendix D and electronic copies will also be provided for

review.

7.1 External Intersections

The following existing key intersections are located within close proximity to the Bingara Gorge Residential

Development:

> Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (priority control – seagull intersection)

> Picton Road / Almond Street (priority control).

7.1.1 Picton Road and Pembroke Parade Intersection

The intersection of Picton Road and Pembroke Parade has been constructed with an unsignalised seagull

T-Junction formation. Figure 7-1 illustrates the existing layout from recent aerial imagery and Figure 7-2

summarises the existing form assessed in SIDRA.

The right turn egress from Pembroke Parade has been assessed as only being opposed by the eastbound

through movement from Picton Road (west) and the right turn entry movement from Picton Road (east).

The left turn auxiliary lane on Picton Road (west) has been constructed in such a way that these vehicles

do not represent a potential conflict to vehicles exiting Pembroke Parade, hence, the exit flow effect has

been set to 0%.

Figure 7-1 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade – Existing Unsignalised Form (Seagull T-Junction)



Figure 7-2 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade – SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation

Table 7-1 summarises the SIDRA results for the 2036 time horizon for the existing intersection formation

for both residential yield scenarios.

Table 7-1 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Existing) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary

Scenario

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

DoS Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m) DoS

Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m)

1,165 Dwelling Scenario

East – Picton Rd 0.634 0.5 N/A 1.5 0.547 1.4 N/A 5.8

North – Pembroke Pde 2.501 2357.3 F 3424.7 0.729 27.4 B 23.8

West – Picton Rd 0.632 1.2 A 3.7 0.561 3.0 A 17.3

Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Unsignalised Seagull)

2.501 547.8 N/A 3424.7 0.729 4.2 N/A 13.8



North – Pembroke Pde 3.599 3780.4 F 5855.1 1.167 296.9 F 396.8

West – Picton Rd 0.633 1.7 A 6.0 0.614 3.9 A 36.3

Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Unsignalised Seagull)

3.599 1172.2 N/A 5855.1 1.167 56.2 N/A 396.8

The Table 7-1 results confirm that the existing unsignalised T-Junction (Seagull) arrangement will require

upgrading at the 2036 time horizon regardless of the Bingara Gorge residential yield.

Consistent with the April 2015 traffic analysis, signalisation of the intersection is necessary to cater for future year traffic demands. Figure 7-3 overleaf summarises the upgraded signalised formation that has been assessed as part of this assessment. This formation is consistent with the arrangements assessed as part of the April 2015 analysis for the ‘No Wilton Junction’ scenario.



Figure 7-3 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade – SIDRA Assessed Upgraded Formation

Table 7-2 summarises the SIDRA results for the 2036 time horizon for the upgraded signalised intersection

formation for both residential yield scenarios.

Table 7-2 Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Upgraded) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary

Scenario


DoS Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m) DoS

Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m)


East – Picton Rd 0.746 20.2 B 138.6 0.547 13.2 A 78.5

North – Pembroke Pde 0.752 31.5 C 78.7 0.499 30.2 C 19.8

West – Picton Rd 0.757 18.5 B 144.2 0.561 10.4 A 81.2

Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Upgraded Signals)

0.757 22.1 B 144.2 0.561 12.9 A 81.2


East – Picton Rd 0.833 30.6 C 186.9 0.603 14.7 B 79.3

North – Pembroke Pde 0.895 39.6 C 170.1 0.681 29.5 C 28.3

West – Picton Rd 0.878 30.2 C 219.8 0.685 11.3 A 83.0

Picton Road / Pembroke Parade (Upgraded Signals)

0.878 33.2 C 219.8 0.685 14.1 A 83.0

The Table 7-2 results indicate that the assessed signalised intersection upgrade will operate within typically

accepted performance thresholds irrespective of the Bingara Gorge residential yield.

The 156m queue reported on Pembroke Parade in the AM peak hour is anticipated to reach the Oxenbridge Avenue roundabout intersection. The queueing will be transitory as the 95th percentile queue only just exceeds the available 145m intersection separation.



7.1.2 Picton Road and Almond Street Intersection

The intersection of Picton Road and Almond Street has been constructed with an unsignalised T-Junction

formation. Figure 7-4 illustrates the existing layout from recent aerial imagery while Figure 7-5 summarises

the form assessed in SIDRA. The left turn auxiliary lane on Picton Road (west) has been constructed in

such a way that these vehicles do not represent a potential conflict to vehicles exiting Almond Street,

hence, the exit flow effect has been set to 0%.

Figure 7-4 Picton Road / Almond Street – Existing Unsignalised Form (T-Junction)

Figure 7-5 Picton Road / Almond Street – SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation



Table 7-3 summarises the SIDRA results for the 2036 time horizon for the existing unsignalised intersection


Table 7-3 Picton Road / Almond Street (Existing) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary

Scenario


DoS Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m) DoS

Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m)



North – Almond St 5.913 7023.9 F 1204.7 3.405 3001.2 F 944.5

West – Picton Rd 0.595 1.2 N/A 0.0 0.504 0.9 N/A 0.0

Picton Road / Almond Street (Unsignalised T-Junction)

5.913 569.3 F 1204.7 3.405 278.4 N/A 944.5



North – Almond St 7.453 8269.8 F 1458.8 4.458 4238.5 F 1136.6


Picton Road / Almond Street (Unsignalised T-Junction)

7.453 835.8 N/A 1458.8 4.458 411.2 N/A 1136.6

Table 7-3 confirms that the existing unsignalised T-Junction arrangement will require upgrading before the

2036 time horizon regardless of the Bingara Gorge residential yield.

Cardno understand that Lend Lease that there is a planning agreement obligation for to Lend Lease to

provide a monetary contribution towards the upgrading of this intersection to deliver an upgraded seagull

arrangement as part of the already approved 1,165 dwelling yield. Figure 7-6 illustrates the potential form

assessed in SIDRA.

Figure 7-6 Picton Road / Almond Street – SIDRA Assessed Upgraded (Seagull) Formation



Table 7-4 summarises the SIDRA results for the 2036 time horizon for the conditioned upgraded

unsignalised seagull intersection formation for both residential yield scenarios.

Table 7-4 Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded Seagull) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary

Scenario


DoS Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m) DoS

Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m)



North – Almond St 0.841 50.13 D 31.2 0.538 24.5 B 15.2


Picton Road / Almond Street (Unsignalised T-Seagull Junction)

0.841 4.9 N/A 31.2 0.538 3.0 N/A 15.2



North – Almond St 1.045 140.1 F 129.1 0.652 28.6 C 19.9


Picton Road / Almond Street (Unsignalised T-Seagull Junction)

1.045 15.0 N/A 129.1 0.652 3.9 N/A 19.9

Table 7-4 confirms that the conditioned seagull arrangement will operate beyond typically accepted

performance thresholds during the morning peak hour irrespective of the Bingara Gorge residential yield

scenario.

Table 7-5 summarises the results of a supplementary sensitivity review to investigate the likely ‘failure year’

for each yield scenario. A negative growth rate was applied to the Picton Road arterial movements to

backwards estimate the point at which the seagull intersection arrangement capacity was exceeded.

Table 7-5 Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded Seagull) – Failure Year Sensitivity Test

Scenario Failure Year (i.e. DoS < 0.80)

1,165 dwellings – AM peak hour 2035 (Worst Case DoS = 0.79)

1,800 dwellings – PM peak hour 2030 (Worst Case DoS = 0.79)

The Table 7-5 results indicate that the proposed residential expansion to 1,800 dwellings will bring forward

the failure year of the intersection by approximately four-five years. Signalisation of the intersection will

therefore be required at around 2030 if the proposed expanded development was to proceed.

Ongoing discussions are recommended between Lend Lease and approval authorities regarding the timing

and possible contribution to the future signalisation of the intersection over and above the already

conditioned monetary contributions to deliver the seagull arrangement. Cardno suggests that a partial

bring forward amount may be appropriate based on the assessed two year period identified in Table 7-5.

Consistent with the April 2015 traffic analysis, signalisation of the intersection is ultimately necessary to

cater for the 2036 traffic demands. Figure 7-7 summarises the upgraded signalised formation that has

been assessed as part of this Transport Assessment. This formation is consistent with that assessed as

part of the April 2015 analysis.



Figure 7-7 Picton Road / Almond Street – SIDRA Assessed Upgraded Formation

Table 7-6 summarises the SIDRA results for the 2036 time horizon for the upgraded signalised intersection


Table 7-6 Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded) – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary

Scenario


DoS Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m) DoS

Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m)

1,165 Dwelling Scenario (1)

East – Picton Rd 0.592 13.4 A 86.2 0.612 14.1 A 79.2

North – Almond St 0.608 27.7 B 31.9 0.599 23.5 B 27.8

West – Picton Rd 0.631 12.5 A 94.7 0.571 12.3 A 72.2

Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded Signals)

0.631 15.5 A 94.7 0.612 14.2 A 79.2

1,800 Dwelling Scenario (2)

East – Picton Rd 0.611 14.4 A 88.4 0.681 15.9 B 81.5

North – Almond St 0.626 25.4 B 36.7 0.693 22.9 B 28.9

West – Picton Rd 0.667 13.4 A 100.6 0.630 12.7 A 71.5

Picton Road / Almond Street (Upgraded Signals)

0.667 15.0 B 100.6 0.693 15.2 B 81.5

The Table 7-6 results indicate that the assessed signalised intersection upgrade will operate within typically

accepted performance thresholds irrespective of the Bingara Gorge residential yield. It should be noted

that SIDRA has been permitted to optimise the cycle length and phase timing for each scenario. This

characteristic is responsible for the DoS improvement seen between the Table 7-6 results for the 1,165 and

1,800 dwelling scenarios.



7.2 Internal Intersections

The following existing internal Bingara Gorge development intersections have been identified as being key:

> Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge – roundabout intersection

> Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge – roundabout intersection.

7.2.1 Pembroke Parade and Oxenbridge Intersection

The existing internal intersection of Pembroke Parade and Oxenbridge has been constructed as a single

circulating lane roundabout with an internal island radius approximating 22m. The roundabout intersection

is located approximately 140m north of Picton Road and 570m south of the next Pembroke Parade

intersection.

The existing roundabout formation is illustrated in Figure 7-8 from recent aerial imagery and Figure 7-9

assessed in SIDRA.

Figure 7-8 Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue – Existing Roundabout Form

Table 7-7 summarises the SIDRA results for the 2036 time horizon for the existing roundabout formation for

both residential yield scenarios.



Figure 7-9 Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue – SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation

Table 7-7 Existing Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary

Scenario


DoS Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m) DoS

Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m)


South – Pembroke Pde 0.138 5.6 A 6.1 0.443 5.5 A 25.4

East – Oxenbridge Ave 0.250 7.3 A 10.7 0.076 5.8 A 2.8

North – Pembroke Pde 0.369 4.3 A 17.3 0.144 4.9 A 5.4

Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue (Existing Roundabout)

0.369 5.3 A 17.3 0.443 5.4 A 25.4


South – Pembroke Pde 0.207 5.7 A 10.4 0.639 5.7 B 52.4

East – Oxenbridge Ave 0.457 10.5 A 25.3 0.123 6.0 A 4.9

North – Pembroke Pde 0.536 4.8 A 31.1 0.222 5.7 A 9.1

Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Avenue (Existing Roundabout)

0.536 6.4 A 31.1 0.639 5.8 B 52.4

The Table 7-7 results indicate that the existing roundabout formation will operate within typically

acceptance performance thresholds at the 2036 time horizon regardless of the Bingara Gorge residential

yield. Importantly, the peak hour queues on the northbound Pembroke Parade approach do not come

close to reaching Picton Road.



7.2.2 Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge Drive Intersection

The existing internal intersection of Pembroke Parade, Fairway Drive, and Greenbridge Drive has been

constructed as a single circulating lane roundabout with an internal island radius approximating 18m. The

roundabout intersection is located approximately 570m north of the next Pembroke Parade intersection.

The existing roundabout formation is illustrated in Figure 7-10 from recent aerial imagery and Figure 7-11

assessed in SIDRA.

Figure 7-10 Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge Drive – Existing Roundabout Form

Figure 7-11 Pembroke Parade / Fairway / Greenbridge Drive– SIDRA Assessed Existing Formation



Table 7-8 summarises the SIDRA results for the 2036 time horizon for the existing roundabout formation for

both residential yield scenarios.

Table 7-8 Existing Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge Drive – 2036 Traffic Operations Summary

Scenario


DoS Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m) DoS

Delay

(s) LoS

95th %ile

Queue (m)



East – Greenbridge Dr 0.175 6.6 A 6.8 0.058 5.6 A 2.1

North – Spearing St 0.119 6.8 A 4.5 0.075 8.3 A 2.7

West – Fairway Dr 0.287 7.8 A 12.3 0.135 9.2 A 5.1

Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge Drive (Existing Roundabout)

0.287 6.9 A 12.3 0.401 6.7 A 19.8



East – Greenbridge Dr 0.236 8.2 A 9.9 0.069 5.9 A 2.5

North – Spearing St 0.157 8.2 A 6.4 0.087 8.7 A 3.2

West – Fairway Dr 0.413 8.2 A 20.8 0.195 9.6 A 7.9

Pembroke Parade / Fairway Drive / Greenbridge Drive (Existing Roundabout)

0.413 7.5 A 20.8 0.547 6.8 A 33.0

The Table 7-8 results indicate that the existing roundabout formation will operate within typically

acceptance performance thresholds at the 2036 time horizon regardless of the Bingara Gorge residential

yield.

7.3 Other Internal Intersection Operations

The remainder of the internal development traffic intersections have not been assessed in SIDRA based on

the SATURN intersection results which indicate that the turning demands are low enough that there is

adequate capacity.



8 Internal Traffic Demand and Amenity Assessment

Many Local and State government agencies publish their own daily traffic thresholds for different types and

hierarchies of road and streets and there can be substantial variance between these sources. The NSW

RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments itself raises this issue with the text “there is no precise

level at which the traffic environment can be said to be acceptable or unacceptable”.

The RMS Guide references the Australian Model Code for Residential Development (AMCORD) which is

referenced in Table 8-1 below which also summarises a selection of other relevant source documents

describing typical daily traffic thresholds for different hierarchical levels of roads and streets.

Table 8-1 Summary of Published Residential Traffic Amenity Thresholds

Road Hierarchy Level

Road Hierarchy Description Daily Traffic

Threshold (vpd)

LANDCOM – Street Design Guidelines

Collector Street Collector streets link neighbourhood streets together 3,000 – 6,000 vpd

Local Streets Local streets are the predominate street type within a neighbourhood > 3,000 vpd

AMCORD Urban (1997)

Major Collector Generally short and connects collector streets with the road corridor network. Fronting development should still be encouraged, but with siting conditions which ensure acceptable amenity and safety

<6,000 vpd

Minor Collector Collects traffic from access streets and carries higher volumes of traffic <3,000 vpd

Local Street Access streets are generally streets where the residential environment is dominant, traffic is subservient

<2,000 vpd

Access Place The lowest order or street 300 vpd

Queensland Urban Land Development Authority – Street and Movement Network (2012)

Trunk Collector Distributes traffic from the arterial network to the connector network <10,000 vpd

Neighbourhood Connector Street

Connects neighbourhood destinations including shops and parks. Provides access to the surrounding road network…

<7,500 vpd

Neighbourhood Access Street

Provides direct residential property access 2,500 – 5,000 vpd

Western Australian Planning Commission – Liveable Neighbourhoods (2009)

Integrator B Two lane roads that will have at least one clear travel lane in each direction, and a parking and/or manoeuvring lane

7,000 – 15,000 vpd

Neighbourhood Connector A

A two lane divided street used for higher neighbourhood connector volumes, or for character

7,000 vpd

Neighbourhood Connector B (no median)

A two lane undivided street for lower volume neighbourhood connectors 3,000 vpd

Access Street 3,000 vpd

Queensland Streets – Design Guidelines for Subdivisional Networks (1993)

Trunk Collector A two lane road with an 8m cross-section (including kerbside parking) 10,000 vpd

Collector Street A two lane road with a 7.5m cross-section (including kerbside parking) 3,000 vpd

Access Place / Street A two lane road with a 5.5m cross-section (including kerbside parking) 750 vpd

City of Port Phillip

Local Street Provide access to properties within the local area 500 – 3,000 vpd

Collector Road Distributes traffic within the main residential area to link traffic from local roads to the arterial network

3,000 – 8,000 vpd

Major Road Major traffic movement through the network in an efficient manner > 8,000 vpd



The SATURN modelling process described earlier in Section 6 generated estimates for the two-way traffic

demand on every internal Bingara Gorge road section. Outputs of this demand assessment are included in

this section and higher quality A3 versions are also attached at Appendix C for reference. The following

scenarios have been assessed:

> 1,165 dwelling scenario

- AM peak hour traffic demand

- PM peak hour traffic demand

- Daily traffic demand

> 1,800 dwelling scenario

- AM peak hour traffic demand

- PM peak hour traffic demand

- Daily traffic demand.

Table 8-2 summarises the results of the two-way traffic demand for both residential yield scenarios with the

corresponding daily traffic demand SATURN plots included at Figures 8-1 and 8-2. Figure 8-3 is a

difference plot for comparisons between the two yield scenarios.

Table 8-2 Summary of Daily Traffic Demands on Internal Bingara Gorge Road Sections

Road Name Road Section Daily Traffic Demand

1,165 Dwelling Scenario 1,800 Dwelling Scenario

Pembroke Parade

Between Picton Road and Oxenbridge Avenue

9630 vpd 14610 vpd

Between Oxenbridge Avenue and Greenbridge / Fairway Drive

6960 vpd 9630 vpd

Fairway Drive

Between Pembroke Parade and Sutton Crescent

5500 vpd 7890 vpd

Between Sutton Crescent and Stirling Drive / Kirkwood Chase

5470 vpd 7850 vpd

North of Stirling Drive / Kirkwood Chase

3350 vpd 4550 vpd

Greenbridge Drive Between Pembroke Parade and Maloney Chase

2510 vpd 2840 vpd

Oxenbridge Avenue / Hornby Street

Between Pembroke Parade and Wollondilly Street

3020 vpd 3900 vpd

Wollondilly Street Between Greenbridge Drive and Hornby Street

2320 vpd 3610 vpd

Eastern Spine Road North of Greenbridge Drive 2790 vpd 4040 vpd



Figure 8-1 2036 Internal Two-Way Daily Traffic Demand – 1,165 Residential Dwellings



Figure 8-2 2036 Internal Two-Way Daily Traffic Demand – 1,800 Residential Dwellings



Figure 8-3 2036 Internal Two-Way Daily Traffic Demand – Difference Plot between 1,800 and 1,165 Residential Dwellings



8.1 Specific Road Section Amenity Comment

The following conclusions are made following an evaluation of the SATURN two-way traffic results

summarised in Table 8-2 and Figures 8-1, 8-2, and 8-3.

8.1.1 Pembroke Parade Summary

8.1.1.1 Section 1

> The 14,610vpd demand modelled in Section 1 is at the upper range of the typical traffic capacity

threshold for a two lane urban road. This section will ultimately be constructed with a partial

three lane cross-section (one entry and two exit lanes) for more than half of its length

> No residential dwellings will achieve direct access from this road section

> Residential dwellings that are located adjacent to this section are set back 15-25m from the

kerb, thereby reducing any amenity or acoustic impacts.

8.1.1.2 Section 2

> The 9,630vpd demand modelled for Section 2 is within the typical traffic capacity threshold for a

two lane road

> This section could be defined as a Trunk Collector with limited access given consideration of the

following:

- The road is median divided and includes a kerbside parking and/or deceleration lane

- Fewer than 20 residential dwellings achieve direct access along the 750m length of

road which equates to an average site driveway separation of 90m (median controls

movement to/from one direction)

- Relatively wide verges that are approximately 6-7.0m wide

- Provision on both sides of the road for shared 2.5m pathways

> The residential dwellings that front this road section are set-back 15-25m from the kerb, thereby

reducing any amenity impact.

8.1.2 Fairway Drive Summary

8.1.2.1 Section 1


two lane road

> This section could be defined as a Trunk Collector given it primarily services a traffic carrying

function and does not facilitate any direct residential frontage or site access.

8.1.2.2 Section 2


two lane road

> This section could be defined as either a lower order Trunk Collector or a higher order Major

Collector based on the following attributes:

- Only five residential dwellings achieve direct access along the 210m length of road

which equates to an average site driveway separation of 85m (measured along each

individual kerb)

- The current built form provides four effective lanes of travel (i.e. two travel lanes and

two parking lanes)


- Provision on both sides of the road for 2.0m pathways


kerb, thereby reducing any amenity impact

8.1.2.3 Section 3


two lane road

> This section could be defined as a Major Collector based on the following attributes:



- 22 dwellings are likely to be developed and achieve direct access along the 560m

length of road which equates to an average site driveway separation of 50m

(measured along each individual kerb)

- The current built form provides four effective lanes of travel (i.e. two travel lanes and

two parking lanes)


- Provision on both sides of the road for 2.0m pathways


kerb, thereby reducing any amenity impact.

8.1.3 Greenbridge Drive Summary

> The 2,840 vpd demand modelled for Greenbridge Drive is within the typical traffic capacity

threshold for a two lane road

> This section could be defined as a Major or Minor Collector route

> Projected traffic demands and adjoining land uses and residential character and site access is

consistent with many of the amenity and road design thresholds.

8.1.4 Oxenbridge Avenue Summary

> The 3,900 vpd demand modelled for the westernmost section of Oxenbridge Avenue is within

the typical traffic capacity threshold for a two lane road

> This section could be defined as a Major or Minor Collector route given it also connects to

Hornby Street

> There are 14 dwellings that achieve direct access from the 480m section of Oxenbridge Avenue

which equates to an average site driveway separation of 65m (measured along each individual

kerb)


kerb, thereby reducing any amenity impact.

8.1.5 Wollondilly Street Summary

> The 3,610 vpd demand modelled for Wollondilly Street is within the typical traffic capacity

threshold for a two lane road

> This section could be defined as a Major or Minor Collector route given the connection function

it provides to the broader development

> The 8m cross-section conditioned by Wollondilly Shire Council would be appropriate to

accommodate the project traffic demands while also providing for informal kerbside car parking

for some fronting land use.

8.2 General Road Amenity Comment

Cardno has assessed that approximately 230-250 or 13-14% of the residential dwellings proposed as part

of the expanded 1,800 dwelling scenario would front a section of internal road where the daily traffic

demand has been modelled as exceeding 1,500vpd. This figure can be compared to the following RMS

reference made in Section 7.3 of the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments:

“Despite the difficulty of arriving at accurate figures, consideration should be given to the level of

comfort that may be appropriate for residents. In most cases it is reasonable to require that the flow

of traffic passing 85% of households should not exceed 1500 vpd, as a design objective.”

The majority (approximately 86-87%) of residential dwellings will be located on streets where traffic

demands are relatively low.



9 Response to Statement of Facts and Contentions

Table 9-1 summarises updated responses to the Wollondilly Shire Council Statement of Facts and

Contentions (SOFC) document. The responses and references to sections of this Transport Assessment

supersede the preliminary responses made by Cardno in August.

Item ID

Original SOFC Text Summary of Cardno Response

4 Road Capacity, Traffic and Infrastructure

i

The residential traffic generation adopted for the Bingara Gorge proposal relies upon the findings of the Wilton Junction TMAP (Parsons Brinckerhoff 2014), however neither assessment identifies the number of dwellings surveyed or assessment of construction vehicles which may skew survey results. The residential traffic generation is inconsistent with the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments 2002, RMS Technical Direction TDT 2013/04a, Colston Budd Hunt & Kafes 2005 and 2006 assessment or 2011 Journey to Work data for Wilton which indicates a car driver percentage of 86%.

Cardno has undertaken traffic surveys to confirm an appropriate residential traffic generation rate.

Traffic generation surveys were completed in the adjacent Wilton residential township/precinct accessed from Almond Street and Hornby Street.

The survey results confirm an existing residential generation rate of 0.8vph (peak) and 8.1vpd (daily) per dwelling. Refer to Section 6.1.2.

The survey results are generally consistent with broader industry evidence including that reported by RMS in the TDT 2013/04a advice for regional centres.

JTW data reported by Bureau of Statistics for the Local Government Areas surveyed as part of the RMS TDT 2013/04 advice are very similar to Wollondilly:

Wollondilly – 85% as driver / 5% as passenger

Coffs Harbour – 83% as driver / 8% as passenger

Orange – 83% as driver / 8% as passenger

Wagga Wagga – 81% as driver / 8% as passenger

Wollongong – 76% as driver / 6% as passenger.

The reference to the Journey to the Work dataset is reasonable, but it does not consider trips made for other non-employment purposes. Based on the most recent 2012/13 Household Travel Survey (HTS), only 26% of Wollondilly trips are made for commuting or work related business.

The Cardno traffic generation survey results are considered to be conservative at the 2036 assessment horizon where it is likely that public transport will be significantly improved and possibly some components of Wilton Junction employment and retail improve internalisation.

ii

The RMS Technical Direction is the most up to date RMS publication for recommended traffic generation, with prescribed regional rates of 0.74 & 0.71 trips / dwelling in the AM and PM respectively. The survey sites utilised was based on a car driver percentage of 65.6% to 70.2%, with an average of 67.6%. Linearly increasing the Technical Direction suggested trip generation rates based on the Wilton car driver percentage of 86% results in 0.94 and 0.90 trips / dwelling during the AM & PM respectively.

iii

Traffic assignment detailed within the Applicant’s traffic report relies upon information provided by Lend Lease to determine travel patterns. This information is not presented in any form within the traffic report and needs to be presented.

Cardno has revised the external traffic assignment assumptions such that they are now consistent with an earlier sensitivity scenarios requested received by Wollondilly Shire Council. Refer to Section 6.6.

The revised assignment proportions are as follows:

North via Hume Hwy – 60%

South via Hume Hwy – 5%

East via Picton Rd – 20%

West via Picton Rd – 10%

The revised assessment no longer adopts or references information previously supplied by Lend Lease which informed the primary traffic assignment assumptions.



iv

The Applicant’s traffic report focuses on the Picton Road intersections with Pembroke Parade and Almond Street whilst neglecting to analyse internal subdivision roads and traffic flows. The Applicant’s traffic assessment does not include the two-way traffic flows for the approved condition (1,165 Lots), the proposed increase associated with the proposal (1,800 Lots) or the impact of the Wilton Junction TMAP which needs to be separated into the individual scenarios for the following road segments:

Pembroke Parade

Greenbridge Drive

Malony Chase

Hornby Street

Almond Street

Oxenbridge Avenue

Fairway Drive

Wollondilly Street

Spine Road (1 & 2)

Bridge over Hume Highway connecting to the western side from Spine Road 1

Kirkwood Chase

Sarazen Crescent

The revised Cardno transport assessment now considers internal Bingara Gorge traffic demands including link and intersection capacities. Refer to Section 8.

The analysis has been undertaken for both the approved 1,165 and proposed 1,800 residential dwelling scenarios.

The revised transport assessment does not consider the impact or any change relating to the Wilton Junction TMAP. This approach has been agreed with Council’s traffic engineering expert. Any consideration of the ‘With Wilton Junction’ development should be made using the AIMSUN modelling already developed by PB.

The Cardno assessment confirms that the internal Bingara Gorge intersections have sufficient capacity to cater for the 2036 traffic demands estimated to be generated by the proposed 1,800 residential dwelling scenario.

v

The Applicant’s traffic report does not assess two-way traffic flows with consideration to RMS residential amenity criteria or pedestrian / cyclist safety at sensitive locations

The revised Cardno transport assessment now considers internal Bingara Gorge traffic demands including the two-way link demands. Refer to Section 8.

Consideration is given to the RMS and other State and National guidelines published in relation to residential amenity criteria.

The Cardno assessment does indicate that the proposed 1,800 dwellings scenario will generate two-way traffic movements on some sections of road that are at the higher end of normally accepted demand thresholds.

vi

The critical gap and headway gap parameters within the SIDRA modelling have been adjusted. The Applicant is to provide SIDRA modelling for review as well as referenced AUSTROADS Guidelines for justification of reduced gap parameters.

The revised Cardno transport assessment no longer adopts the previously used SIDRA gap acceptance parameters. Refer to Section 7.

vii

The intersection performance of Pembroke Parade / Picton Road is reported as LoS D & C during the AM and PM peak period respectively under Council’s sensitivity testing for the year 2036. The Wilton Junction TMAP reports a LoS B for the AM and PM peak period for the year 2036. It can only be concluded that the additional development associated with the proposed 1,800 Lots reduces the intersection performance from B to D in the AM and B to C in the PM. The Applicant’s traffic report should assess further treatments to retain LoS B for the intersection of Pembroke Parade & Picton Road for the year 2036. The underpinning traffic assignment may be relevant.

The revised Cardno transport assessment include new Level of Service results which supersede the previous April 2015 results. Refer to Section 7.

It is important to note that direct comparisons between LoS results obtained from the two different studies are not accurate given the differences in assumptions, modelling software, and LoS calculation (thresholds).

Importantly, the Section 7 results indicate that upgraded Picton Road intersection formations will operate with good level of performance at the 2036 horizon.



viii

The Applicant’s traffic report identifies the intersection of Picton Road / Almond Street being modified for left in / left out only for the year 2036 however the Wilton Junction TMAP details this intersection to be signalised in the year 2036. The Applicant is requested to clarify the intersection treatment for Picton Road / Almond Road.

The revised Cardno transport assessment has updated the analysis of this intersection to remove consideration of a left in/left out formation. Refer to Section 7.

A signalised intersection formation has been assessed which is understood to be generally consistent with the Wilton Junction TMAP reporting.

An interim Seagull unsignalised formation is possible to delay the construction of the traffic signals.

ix

The Applicant’s traffic report focuses on the Picton Rd intersections with Pembroke Pde and Almond St whilst neglecting to analyse internal subdivision intersections. The following internal subdivision intersection should be assessed:

Pembroke Parade / Oxenbridge Av roundabout taking into account the queue lengths associated with the Pembroke Pde / Picton Rd intersection

Pembroke Pde / Greenbridge Dr roundabout

Fairway Drive / Kirkwood Chase

Hornby Street / Wollondilly Street

Greenbridge Drive / Wollondilly Street

The revised Cardno transport assessment now considers internal Bingara Gorge traffic demands including intersection capacities. Refer to Section 7.2.

The analysis has been undertaken for both the approved 1,165 and proposed 1,800 residential dwelling scenarios.

The Cardno assessment confirms that the internal Bingara Gorge intersections have sufficient capacity to cater for the 2036 traffic demands estimated to be generated by the proposed 1,800 residential dwelling scenario.

x

The Applicant’s traffic report does not assess the proposal’s impact on the road network in the year 2036 without Wilton Junction beyond Bingara Gorge.

The revised Cardno transport assessment has been updated to evaluate the traffic operations at the 2036 time horizon for the ‘Without Wilton Junction’ scenario. Refer to Section 7.

xi

The Applicant’s traffic report recommends that the majority of residents are to be within an 800m walking catchment of a bus stop. Current design criteria requires majority of dwellings to be within 400m walking distance of a bus stop. This criteria is acknowledged within the Wilton Junction TMAP and the Draft Wilton Junction Masterplan (2012). As a consequence road widths / road design may need to be altered to cater for bus movements and bus stop provision.

Cardno submits that the public transport route coverage achieved to the 1,800 dwellings will not vary significantly compared to the already approved 1,165 dwellings.

The site ‘developable area’ remains unchanged, as will the already approved bus routes. Only the density of the residential development will change.

Any deficiency in public transport route coverage will a direct result/outcome of the already approved layout.

xii The applicant should provide further details of the intended bus routes and frequency of service for the 1,800 Lot yield.

Proposed bus routes will not change compared to existing provisions already made as part of the existing 1,165 dwelling approval.

The broader Wilton Junction TMAP considers future possible bus routes, although ultimately, the provision of these routes is dependent on local and state government agencies.

xiii

The Applicant’s traffic report does not consider future road works associated with the Hume Highway / Picton Road interchange and should contain an assessment of the potential impacts on the interchange performance related to the proposal.

The revised Cardno assessment has been updated to consider the incremental demand increase at the Hume Hwy interchange, although an analysis of any potential traffic operations has not been undertaken at this time.

Cardno understand that RMS have immediate/short term plans to install traffic signals at each of the interchange intersections which will improve traffic operations compared to the existing situation.

xiv

The Applicant’s traffic report does not clearly identify the traffic assignment associated with the approved 1,165 Lots, the proposed additional 635 Lots and the impact of the Wilton Junction TMAP particularly along internal roads as well as at the Picton Road intersections. The volume of traffic for the 1,165 Lots and 1,800 Lot condition should be based on the Figure 4.1 of the Applicant’s traffic report.

The revised Cardno transport assessment utilises a SATURN analysis procedure to assign traffic to the internal road connections. Section 8 of the upgraded Transport Assessment provides information regarding the estimated internal traffic demands, as well as the difference between the approved 1,165 dwelling scenario and the proposed 1,800 dwelling scenario.



xv The traffic impact assessment has not given any consideration to the capacity of the bridge located between Sutton Crescent and Pembroke Parade.

The revised Cardno transport assessment now considers the link traffic capacity of the section of Fairway Drive at the bridge location. Refer to Section 8.

xvi The bridge over Stringy Bark Creek does not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the increased traffic generation.

The revised Cardno transport assessment determines the future peak hour and daily traffic demands over the Stingy Bark Creek bridge. Refer to Section 8. The results indicate that a two lane cross-section is adequate.

xvii

The construction of Wollondilly Street has been delayed due to flora and fauna impacts within the road reserve (the review of the REF has raised a number of issues which are yet to be resolved – letter sent to the applicant May 2014 is yet to be responded to). While a requirement of the Voluntary Planning Agreement, there is no timeframe as to when this road will be constructed and this will inevitably only increase the impact along Oxenbridge and Hornby Streets.

The Cardno analysis indicates that the Wollondilly Street connection would have to be delivered before any approval of additional dwellings over and above the already approved 1,165 dwellings.

xviii

Baseline traffic volumes require modelling the junctions onto Picton Road. The Roads and Maritime Services consider that network modelling is required to determine the likely distributions onto the network with considerations to the additional 635 lots on the interchange given.

The revised Cardno transport assessment utilises a SATURN analysis procedure to assign traffic to the internal road connections. Information to be provided in support of the report will confirm the internal traffic demands, as well as the difference between the approved 1,165 dwelling scenario and the proposed 1,800 dwelling scenario.

Refer to Section 6.5.

As stated previously, the ‘network modelling’ does not include the AIMSUN modelling requested by RMS, but instead adopts a partial network model produced in SATURN.

xix

No information has been provided to demonstrate that pedestrians will be able to cross Fairways Drive and/or Greenbridge Drive from the existing residential area in the Highlands and Pembroke releases to the school, shopping centre and child care having regard to the additional traffic placed on Fairways Drive and Greenbridge Drive by this development.

This aspect has not been fully addressed at this time as part of the revised Transport Assessment. The SATURN modelling outputs indicate that traffic demands will not preclude typical pedestrian movement. Refer to Section 8.

Cardno suggests that safe and efficient pedestrian movements can be provided within the development.

xx

The NSW Roads and Maritime Services have requested SIDRA or any other traffic modelling that has been prepared for this application prior to any further assessment of the development proposal.

Electronic copies of all SIDRA and SATURN files will be provided to RMS as part of the revised Cardno transport assessment.



10 Summary and Conclusions

Cardno has been engaged by Lend Lease to prepare a Transport Assessment for the Bingara Gorge

Residential Development. This reporting has specifically been prepared in relation to the Land and

Environment Court proceedings 10554 of 2015. The report addresses the traffic and transport items raised

in the Wollondilly Shire Council Statement of Facts and Contentions document, included at Appendix A.

The subject of this Transport Assessment and the above mentioned appeal proceedings relates to the



Gorge development.





In response to the Wollondilly Shire Council SOFC and the conclave discussions, Cardno has reassessed

a selection of the primary analysis assumptions and developed a new SATURN mesoscopic model that is

representative of the Bingara Gorge development and the adjacent road network at the 2036 time horizon.

The model has been used to quantify and assess the internal and external traffic demands and operations

for the already approved 1,165 dwelling scenario in addition to the proposed 1,800 dwelling scenario.

The SATURN traffic demand estimations include two-way link demands for each of the internal

development road sections as well as intersection turning movements. The turning movements have been

used as inputs to the supplementary SIDRA assessment of the key internal and external traffic

intersections to confirm traffic operations and upgrading requirements.

The SIDRA analysis confirms that engineering solutions are possible at the external Picton Road

intersections of Pembroke Parade and Almond Street. The analysis confirms that both intersections will

ultimately require signalisation irrespective of the Bingara Gorge residential yield scenario. The following

upgrades have been identified:

> Picton Road and Pembroke Parade – Upgrade to a signalised intersection. Lend Lease has

already delivered the unsignalised seagull upgrade conditioned as part of the 1,165 dwelling

scenario

> Picton Road and Almond Street – Ultimately, a signalised intersection will be required by 2029

or 2031 depending on the Bingara Gorge residential yield. The already conditioned Lend Lease

contribution to delivering an unsignalised seagull arrangement may be modified to deliver the

ultimate signals sooner if this results in cost savings and is agreeable to all parties.

Ongoing discussions are recommended between Lend Lease and approval authorities regarding the timing

and possible contribution to deliver the external intersection solutions.

The internal development intersections have also been assessed as operating well within typically adopted

performance thresholds for both yield scenarios. The internal operations can be summarised as follows:

> Pembroke Parade and Oxenbridge Avenue – the existing roundabout will operate within

acceptance performance thresholds and no upgrading is required to accommodate the

proposed expanded yield. Importantly, queuing will not extend to or interfere with the Picton

Road intersection

> Pembroke Parade, Fairway Drive, and Greenbridge Drive - the existing roundabout will operate

within acceptance performance thresholds and no upgrading is required for the proposed

expanded yield

> All other internal development intersections have been assessed in SATURN as performing well

within acceptable performance thresholds.



The SATURN assessment confirms that the proposed yield expansion will result in an increase in traffic

demands on many of the major internal road connections. The daily traffic demands output from the model

indicate key development connections including Pembroke Parade, Oxenbridge Avenue, Greenbridge

Drive, and Fairway Drive will cater for traffic demands that are at the upper range of the broader planning

thresholds typically published by a selection of Australian planning and approvals authorities.

Cardno suggests that the demands could be considered reasonable based on consideration of:

> The traffic assumptions adopted as part of the SATURN modelling exercise are conservative,

especially at the 2036 time horizon where the car mode share is projected to be lower given

improved public transport and nearby external employment and retail development

> The majority (86-87%) of the proposed 1,800 residential dwellings do not have any frontage to

internal development roads which have been modelled as carrying more than 1,500 vpd. This

figure is comparable or higher than that referenced in the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating

Developments (Section 7.3)

> Each of the critical road sections include separate provision for kerbside or indented car

parking, thereby ensuring the full-time provision for two general traffic lanes

> The density of direct residential frontage access on the critical road sections is relatively low

and could be considered comparable to that achieved by medium density residential

development with consolidated access

> Road reserves are relatively wide and include pathway provisions for pedestrians and cyclists

> The demands modelled by Cardno in SATURN are in some locations lower than those

estimated by PB as part of the Wilton Junction Development – Transport Management and

Accessibility Plan (PB, June 2014)

The already constructed residential dwellings on critical sections have been located such that they are set-

back 12-25m from the edge of the kerb. These larger than typical set-back characteristics will likely reduce

any acoustic or amenity impact resulting from the modelled increase in traffic demand.

The analysis and findings summarised herein indicate that the proposed yield expansion to include 1,800

residential dwellings would be possible with some modifications and upgrades to the existing intersections

and road network.



Bingara Gorge

APPENDIX A WOLLONDILLY SHIRE COUNCIL STATEMENT OF FACTS AND CONTENTIONS



Bingara Gorge

APPENDIX B SECTION 34 CONCLAVE TRAFFIC SCOPE AND AGREEMENT

NA82013043.Section34ConclaveSummary.151104.docx Page 1

Technical Memorandum

This Technical Memorandum has been prepared in relation to the proposed Bingara residential development and specifically, traffic engineering items relating to the Land and Environment Court proceedings 10554 OF 2015.

This advice summarises the 20th October Section 34 conclave discussions between traffic experts, being:

> Cardno, represented by Shane Healey and Kris Stone who act on behalf of Lend Lease

Communities; and

> McLaren Traffic Engineering, represented by Craig McLaren acting on behalf of Wollondilly

Shire Council.

Summary of Conclave Discussion

1. Shane Healey (SH) and Craig McLaren (CM) discussed and agreed that a revised transport

assessment would be required to evaluate the proposed increase in the approved yield from

1,165 dwellings to 1,800 dwellings

2. SH identified that the AIMSUN model requested to be used by the NSW Roads and Maritime

Services (RMS) as part of the Statement of Facts and Contentions (SOFC) has not been

made available to Cardno. CM has requested whether the model can be provided via

Council

3. SH and CM agreed that an alternate assessment procedure (i.e. non AIMSUN) would be

acceptable to assess the proposed Bingara Gorge development traffic situation (assuming

it can be agreed that it has been properly calibrated etc). SH and CM agreed that the

assessment (and modelling tool) should address the following:

a. Internal road link demands and possible traffic amenity issues

b. External Picton Road intersection operations and upgrade requirements, including its

junction with the Hume Highway on/off ramp, Pembroke Parade, and Almond Street

It was also agreed that the assessment would consider the following scenarios:

i. Morning peak (7-9am), evening peak (3-4pm school and 4-6pm), and daily

traffic demand scenarios

ii. Approved 1,165 dwelling yield

iii. Proposed 1,800 dwelling yield

4. SH and CM agreed that the modelling procedure should be developed exclusive of the

broader Wilton Junction proposed development, although forecast flows over the bridge

connecting Bingara Gorge and Wilton Junction to be extracted from the AIMSUN model

5. SH and CM agreed that the Parsons Brinkerhoff AIMSUN modelling outputs and reporting

prepared to consider the broader Wilton Junction development and related traffic

Title Bingara Gorge Land and Environment Court Appeal

Summary of Section 34 Expert Conclave and Agreed Actions

Client Lend Lease Communities Project No NA82013043

Date November 4, 2015 Status Draft

Author Kris Stone Discipline Traffic and Transport

Reviewer Shane Healey Office Brisbane

Bingara Gorge Land and Environment Court Appeal Summary of Section 34 Expert Conclave and Agreed Actions

NA82013043 Cardno November 4, 2015

Prepared for Lend Lease Communities Page 2

implications within the Bingara Gorge site would be appropriate for consideration of broader

impacts

6. CM requested that the assessment identify timing thresholds and yield sensitivities,

including:

a. Timing and need for construction of Stringybark Creek and Wollondilly Street

connections

b. Yield thresholds beyond which internal link demands and intersection operations

would exceed environment amenity or operational thresholds. This assessment would

assume no additional bridge structure over the freeway that may be delivered as part

of the broader Wilton Junction development

c. Upgrade of Picton Road/Hume Highway northbound on ramp and southbound off

ramp including assessment of imminent traffic signals provided by RMS next year on

road safety grounds

7. CM identified that the assessment should also address and compare variations between the

approved and proposed yields for the following aspects, including detailed road width,

indented parking, bus stops locations, and pedestrian/cyclist paths:

a. On-street car parking

b. Public transport route accessibility and dwelling ‘coverage’

c. Pedestrian provisions

d. Cycle paths

e. Internal site traffic generation ‘containment’ (i.e. internalisation of development trips)

8. CM identified that emergency access routes would ideally be investigated and variances

identified as they relate to the approved residential yield

9. CM also requested details of current ‘catchment’ of trips

Suggested Next Steps

Cardno submits the following analysis procedure for discussion and agreement between the two traffic engineering expert groups.

10. Undertake traffic generation surveys to confirm the existing residential traffic generation

potential of the local residential dwelling catchment as well as current containment

11. Prepare a detailed SATURN transport model for the Bingara Gorge development site which

will be used to evaluate and compare the following outcomes for both the approved and

proposed yield scenarios

a. Morning peak, evening peak, and daily traffic demand scenarios

b. Route assignment and choice

c. Traffic demands on individual road segments

d. Intersection turning movements

12. Prepare a series of SIDRA analyses to assess the SATURN output turning movements at

critical intersection locations including:

a. Picton Road and Pembroke Parade

b. Picton Road and Almond Street

c. Picton Road and Hume Highway on/off ramps

d. Pembroke Parade, Greenbridge Drive, and Fairways Drive

e. Pembroke Parade and Oxenbridge Avenue

f. Greenbridge Drive, Beaty Street, and Woodward Road

The SIDRA analysis will confirm the need and timing for intersection upgrade requirements

resulting from the proposed residential yield increase to 1,800 dwellings.

13. The SATURN and SIDRA findings will be referenced to assess the items raised in Point 7.

The modelling will confirm either the appropriateness of the proposal or alternatively identify

a yield and/or timing threshold beyond which other works or the broader Wilton Junction

would need to be considered

14. All input data (including) link capacities of all road segments, traffic flows, and delays) and

output data to be provided in word format.



Bingara Gorge

APPENDIX C SATURN MODELLING OUTPUTS

NA82013043 - Bingara Gorge Appeal - Road Network 23-11-15

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06AMv12.UFS

bingaragorge

Scale 11779

NA82013043 - Bingara Gorge Appeal - 1165 Lots 2036 Daily Total Tra 23-11-15

6980

15750

13290

24280

3150

870

170

670

1760

960150

110

120

520

80

1790

430

200

180

180

70

170 90

80

70

70

50

80

50

50

6090

170

140

50

60

80

100

60

110

90

90

70

90

50

90

120

180

100

110 70

60

7060

60

110110

60

140

200

50

70

90

50

70

90

90

12060

80

60

60

60

100

60

70

60

60

60

60

230

8060

120

310

480

24660

9190

10330

189001920

730630

860

110

90210

100

120

80

940

220

120

60

360

11201010

590

4860

3350

240

5470

3230

3220

25790

28690

5340

9450

7010

3030

70

50

31503090

7010

7150

25805500

1610

26603020

390

502930

510

2250

1790

1790

380

2430

710

60

120

90

180

260

190

180

180

340

2510 630

60

2550

2620

170

24709090

100

110

1040150

160

150

180

1090

130

1020

1050

1510

2320

2790

1210

330

240

170

70

24280

24380

2190

3340

3600

1050

1060

1070

200

200

70

90

3200

80

120 80

3150

80

630

630

200

210

200

190

180

200

190

370

2160

380

300

290

1610

12901130 80

990

940

790

110

2580

110

2330

310

19401850

180

230

130

160

120

60

480

480

2610

6960

4720

15750

6980

6390

15050

13290

60

4120

32810

1410

1840

5140

6390

15050

94403850

4470

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06PMv12.UFS

bingaragorge

gorge06AMv14

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

Daily

Net. 1 Only

Bandwidths =

1000./mm

Summed data

NA82103043 - Bingara Corge Appeal - 1800 Lots 2036 Daily Total Tra 23-11-15

7100

16490

14770

25020

3400

860

170

640

1790

960150

170

170

520

80

2720

640

3 00

260

260

100

260 140

110

110

110

80

70

110

80

80

50

90140

60

230

190

60

70

90

100

140

90

150

120

120

90

120

60

70

130

70

180

270

150

160

100

9060

9080

8060 17

0160

80

200

280

70

100

120

70

60 90

110

120

1508060

130

8060

60

80

60

80

150

90

100

80

90

806060

60

80

60

340

110

70

80

60

170

60

450

690

27010

9930

11810

212401920

940

160

80

490

7850

4550

26480

30250

8110

1461

0

9630

4530

100

4460

9630

7890

2720

2710

550

2760

7 40

160

180240

470

2840

3860

3760120

120

120

1240

140150

1270

140

1170

1210

2180

3610

4040

1750

490

350

260100

25020

24910

3740

4280

1640

1560

300

240

90140

3470

80180 120

3400

120

940

300

310

280

260

280

280

540

3250

390

450

2330

1630

1430

150

450

2 800

2670

260

330

190

60

230

170

80

690

690

3900

4720

16490

7100

6510

16530

14770

90

6510

36750

1570

1840

6510

16530

10920

4590

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06AMv13.UFS

bingaragorge

gorge06PMv11

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

Daily

Net. 1 Only

Bandwidths =

1000./mm

Summed data

NA82013043 - Bingara Gorge Appeal - 1800 vs 1165 Lots 23-11-15

120

740

1480

740

250

60

930

210

100

90

90

80

60

50

60

90

50

5050

60

80

110

50

140

210

2340

740

1480

2340

360310420

50

100

50

60

460

110

60

130

580

490

240

2120

1390

90

2380

1340

690

1550

2770 5160

2610

1490

1310129

0

2610

2630

3702390 1

60

1310

1490

200

1230

1160

930

930

170

330

70

60

130

330250

1320129090

1300

200 180 150

160

670

1290

1250

540

160

110

80

740

530

520

400

680

580

570

480

90

270110

70

60

250

31031

0

100

100

100

90

80

80

90

170

1100

150

130

720

580

500

440

420

350

1150 1040

140860

820

80

100

60

70

50

210

210

1290

2600

740

120

120

1480

1480

2390

3940

160

120

120

1480

1480

120

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06PMv12.UFS

bingaragorge

gorge06AMv14

gorge06PMv11

gorge06AMv13

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

+ Daily

- Daily

Net. 1 Only

Bandwidths =

1000./mm

Summed data

NA82013043 - Bingara Gorge Appeal - 1165 Lots 2036 AM total traff 23-11-15

480

1040600 12

70

12701290

130

200

60

40

30

20

70130

9030

30

10

40

140

40

30

20

30

10

10

10

10

1020

20

20

40

10

7801800

480420

1330

5601480

220

60

20

10 5070

20

20

20

20

20

70

20

20

30

90

3020

80

40

10

350140

100

230

20

400

150

100

100

220

1420

1380

1990

1320

20

740

740

220

160 54

0

70

230

100210100

210

530

17018 0

540

130

170150

400

40

110

70

200 220

70

10

30

90

200

40

10

50

170

40

140

140

40

10 20

100

170

4 0 2 0

30

1010

10

10

10

20

110

180

20

40

60

190

200

70

10

60

180

30

8020

20

20

20

30

90

20

30

90 30

90

70

90

70

170

60

220

70

70

3020

10

1290

1270

1380

1250

20 170

200

140

17019

030

60

30 60

60

50

20

10

200

130

200

130

50

10

10 5020

2020

30

20

3030

160

50

60

30

20

130

40

30

100

30 90

20

80

70

20

20

60

60

200

50

180

20

4 0

1 50

40

14010

20

10

10

40

1040

10

60

200

160

530

6206001040

480

730

1950

1270

1901990

1520

170

120

360

730

1950

950

320

510

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06AMv14.UFS

bingaragorge

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

Demand flow

Bandwidths =

100./mm


490

1060650 13

50

12901350

130

220

60

40

30

20

60130

9030

30

10

10

10

40

210

60

50

20

20

40

10

20 10

10

20

20

10

10

10

20

10 10

10

10

2020

10

30

10

4010

50

20

8002080

530440

1550

5901760

220

20 7020 30

10

580

140

130

1460

1410

2290

30

1150

1150

220

120

320

130

740

220

200210

580

280

120

60

210

210

60

20

110

200

4 0 2 0

30

10

20

20

120

210

110 20

110

40

100

1010

30

110

20

30

40

100

110

110

260

100

310

110

10 4030

20

1350

1290

1410

1280

220

170

22021

050

100

110

50

10

10

220

140

20

220

130

20

20 20

2020

4010

20

4040

10

250

80

60

40

180

60

40

130

40

110

90

10

10

10

30

7 0

2 20

60

21020

30

20

20

10

50

2050

100

6206501060

490

750

2170

1350

4002290

1610

180

120

750

2170

1030

530

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06AMv13.UFS

bingaragorge

gorge06PMv11

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

Demand flow

Net. 1 Only

Bandwidths =

100./mm


6

18

55 74

18

55

6

18

72

23

16

5

8

13

6

6

6

8

10

16

5

25277

55

18

222

25

277

8 24

86

180

34

34

34

35

296 10

40940

9

55

45

92

33

204

56

3460

182

81

45

23

72

72

23

10

34

11

33

46

7

46

21 195

17

43

41 92

31

94

41

1296

55

18

35

25

18

27

55

1713 39

41

5

-7

17

8

13

18

6

8

8 8

88

13

6

1313

85

27

14

54

18

13 38

11

3226

10

2 2 6 5

21 62

6

8

5

16

516

39

55

18

618

222

74

202

296

99

9

18222

74

18

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06AMv14.UFS

bingaragorge

gorge06AMv13

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

+ Demand flo

- Demand flo

Differ: 2-1

Bandwidths =

100./mm

NA82013043 - Bingara Gorge Appeal - 1165 Lots 2036 PM total traff 23-11-15

920

650860 13

90

11601130

190

120

40

30

40

1060

8050

8030

40

20

40

140

30

20

30

10

10

10

10

20

10

20

20

10

40

10001350

610330

740

830

910170

20

60

50 2020

70

20

20

70

20

20 30

30

9080

20

10

50

130

350

240

100

10

150

400

230

230

100

1170

1190

1290

1140

90

220

220

720

530 170

220

90

230

90220

90

170

530

540

180

150

60400

150

100

80

190

80 90

220

30

10

210

90

20

30

170

50

140

40

40140

30 10

150

60

40

40

10

10

10

20

20

20

20 10

150

70

60

10

180

80

80

190

10170

80

80

20

70

20

70

2070

30

60

80

170

60

210

70

40

70

30

20

10

1130

1160

1190

1060

80

170

140

190

170

190

90

30

90

30

3080

10

20

130

190

10

120

190

20

50

50 20

20

2020

30

20

30 50170

20

20

20 40

120

100

30

90

30

80

20

20

70

60

20

200

60

180

50

30

150

50

140

40

10

20

10

10

10

40

10

40

190

80

530

170

320

860650

920

550

1060

1390

6301290

1770

110

250

670

550

1060

940

450

380

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06PMv12.UFS

bingaragorge

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

Demand flow

Bandwidths =

100./mm

NA82013043 - Bingara Gorge Appeal - 1800 Lots 2036 PM Total Traff 23-11-15

930

710880 16

10

12201150

210

130

40

30

40

1060

8050

8030

10

10

40

20

70

210

20

50

20

10

40

20

10

10

20

10

10

10

10 20

10 10

1010

20

20

10

10

30

10

1030

20

50

10701450

630390

810

9001000

170

70 2010

40

210

330

330

1210

1230

1390

120

33033

0

730

330

140

320

240

730

70580

210

120

330

210

70

70210

40

160

70

5 0 4 0

20

20

30

160

80

270

260

90

30

80

30

70

70

30

90

260

90

310

100

50

40 10

30

20

1150

1220

1230

1070

150

210

19024

014

0

40

40

120

20

30

10

140

210

20

130

210

1070

70

20

20

1040

20

1010

40

80

250

20

30 10

60180

120

40

110

3030

10

40

10

2 10

7 0

200

60

20

30

20

20

10

20

5020

280

320

880710

930

560

1140

1610

9101390

2060

130

250

560

1140

1160

390

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

23-11-15

06AMv13.UFS

bingaragorge

gorge06PMv11

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

Demand flow

Net. 2 Only

Bandwidths =

100./mm

NA82013043 - Bingara Gorge Appeal Diff between 1800 7 1165 Lots PM

20

40

219

100

25

20

18

72

17

13

11

17

60

65

40

55

60

65

17

14

48

116

115

50

63

70 58

8282

211

101

38

113

54

211

12189

48

34

100

72

18

18

72

15

13

12

12

15

73

71

11

102

25

99

25

12

25

100

63

14

17

21

15

7876 14

54

11

20 20

17

17

13

21

24

93

14

15

57

40 10

36

126 8 1 8

65 17

17

80

40

20

55

219

245

70

279

36

55

219

SATURN

Atkins Ltd /

DVV / ITS

CARDNO T&T

11-11-15

06PMv06.UFS

bingaragorge

gorge06AMv07

gorge06AMv08

gorge06PMv07

Scale 11779

Link Annot:

+ PM_Diff

- PM_Diff

Net. 1 Only

Bandwidths =

100./mm



Bingara Gorge

APPENDIX D SIDRA MODELLING OUTPUTS

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Existing Layout - 1165 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 AM Base + Development NO WJ Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)

Movement Performance - Vehicles

Mov ID ODMov

Demand Flows Deg. Satn Average Delay

Level of Service

95% Back of Queue Prop. Queued

Effective Stop Rate

Average Speed Total HV Vehicles Distance

veh/h % v/c sec veh m per veh km/h

East: Picton Road

5 T1 1124 17.0 0.634 0.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

6 R2 22 1.0 0.063 16.8 LOS B 0.2 1.5 0.83 0.94 47.5

Approach 1146 16.7 0.634 0.5 NA 0.2 1.5 0.02 0.02 78.4

North: Pembroke Parade

7 L2 101 1.0 0.470 25.7 LOS B 1.6 11.5 0.91 1.04 41.5

9 R2 638 1.0 2.501 2726.5 LOS F 485.1 3424.7 1.00 20.01 1.3

Approach 739 1.0 2.501 2357.3 LOS F 485.1 3424.7 0.99 17.41 1.5

West: Picton Road

10 L2 194 1.0 0.121 7.4 LOS A 0.5 3.7 0.08 0.58 54.9

11 T1 1105 19.4 0.632 0.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

Approach 1299 16.7 0.632 1.2 LOS A 0.5 3.7 0.01 0.09 74.5

All Vehicles 3184 13.0 2.501 547.8 NA 485.1 3424.7 0.24 4.08 6.1

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Existing Layout - 1165 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 PM Base + Development NO WJ Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1010 10.4 0.547 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 85 1.0 0.223 17.0 LOS B 0.8 5.8 0.83 0.95 47.3

Approach 1095 9.7 0.547 1.4 NA 0.8 5.8 0.06 0.07 75.6


7 L2 35 1.0 0.145 18.1 LOS B 0.4 3.0 0.84 0.92 45.3

9 R2 186 1.0 0.729 29.2 LOS C 3.4 23.8 0.94 1.22 39.5

Approach 221 1.0 0.729 27.4 LOS B 3.4 23.8 0.92 1.17 40.3

West: Picton Road

10 L2 629 1.0 0.415 7.7 LOS A 2.4 17.3 0.25 0.58 54.3

11 T1 1040 9.7 0.561 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

Approach 1669 6.4 0.561 3.0 LOS A 2.4 17.3 0.09 0.22 67.7

All Vehicles 2985 7.2 0.729 4.2 NA 3.4 23.8 0.14 0.24 66.9

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Existing Layout - 1800 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 AM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1130 17.0 0.637 0.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

6 R2 32 1.0 0.093 17.0 LOS B 0.3 2.1 0.84 0.94 47.4

Approach 1162 16.6 0.637 0.6 NA 0.3 2.1 0.02 0.03 78.0


7 L2 239 1.0 1.120 274.8 LOS F 39.0 275.4 1.00 4.42 10.9

9 R2 910 1.0 3.599 4701.1 LOS F 829.3 5855.1 1.00 23.64 0.8

Approach 1149 1.0 3.599 3780.4 LOS F 829.3 5855.1 1.00 19.64 1.0

West: Picton Road

10 L2 290 1.0 0.183 7.4 LOS A 0.8 6.0 0.11 0.58 54.8

11 T1 1107 19.4 0.633 0.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

Approach 1397 15.6 0.633 1.7 LOS A 0.8 6.0 0.02 0.12 72.6

All Vehicles 3708 11.4 3.599 1172.3 NA 829.3 5855.1 0.33 6.14 3.0

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Existing Layout - 1800 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 PM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1011 10.4 0.548 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 116 1.0 0.313 18.5 LOS B 1.2 8.6 0.85 0.98 46.5

Approach 1127 9.4 0.548 2.0 NA 1.2 8.6 0.09 0.10 74.2


7 L2 48 1.0 0.205 19.5 LOS B 0.6 4.4 0.85 0.94 44.6

9 R2 277 1.0 1.167 344.9 LOS F 56.2 396.8 1.00 5.64 8.9

Approach 325 1.0 1.167 296.9 LOS F 56.2 396.8 0.98 4.95 10.2

West: Picton Road

10 L2 906 1.0 0.614 8.2 LOS A 5.1 36.3 0.39 0.59 53.8

11 T1 1050 9.7 0.567 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

Approach 1956 5.7 0.614 3.9 LOS A 5.1 36.3 0.18 0.27 65.1

All Vehicles 3408 6.5 1.167 31.2 NA 56.2 396.8 0.23 0.66 44.1

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Upgraded Signals 1165 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 AM Base + Development NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 70 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1124 17.0 0.746 19.8 LOS B 17.3 138.6 0.90 0.83 55.8

6 R2 22 1.0 0.138 41.1 LOS C 0.7 5.2 0.96 0.70 36.4

Approach 1146 16.7 0.746 20.2 LOS B 17.3 138.6 0.90 0.82 55.3


7 L2 101 1.0 0.122 10.2 LOS A 1.4 9.8 0.50 0.65 50.1

9 R2 638 1.0 0.752 34.8 LOS C 11.2 78.7 0.99 0.91 37.4

Approach 739 1.0 0.752 31.5 LOS C 11.2 78.7 0.92 0.87 38.7

West: Picton Road

10 L2 194 1.0 0.135 8.0 LOS A 0.7 4.6 0.20 0.66 54.5

11 T1 1105 19.4 0.757 20.3 LOS B 17.7 144.2 0.90 0.84 55.4

Approach 1299 16.7 0.757 18.5 LOS B 17.7 144.2 0.79 0.81 55.3

All Vehicles 3184 13.0 0.757 22.1 LOS B 17.7 144.2 0.86 0.83 50.3

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Upgraded Signals 1165 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 PM Base + Development NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 60 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1010 10.4 0.547 11.3 LOS A 10.3 78.5 0.74 0.65 64.2

6 R2 85 1.0 0.456 36.9 LOS C 2.5 18.0 0.98 0.76 38.0

Approach 1095 9.7 0.547 13.2 LOS A 10.3 78.5 0.76 0.66 61.0


7 L2 35 1.0 0.048 7.6 LOS A 0.3 2.2 0.41 0.60 52.0

9 R2 186 1.0 0.499 34.4 LOS C 2.8 19.8 0.99 0.77 37.5

Approach 221 1.0 0.499 30.2 LOS C 2.8 19.8 0.90 0.74 39.3

West: Picton Road

10 L2 629 1.0 0.454 8.8 LOS A 4.1 28.9 0.39 0.72 53.8

11 T1 1040 9.7 0.561 11.4 LOS A 10.7 81.2 0.74 0.66 64.1

Approach 1669 6.4 0.561 10.4 LOS A 10.7 81.2 0.61 0.68 59.8

All Vehicles 2985 7.2 0.561 12.9 LOS A 10.7 81.2 0.69 0.68 57.9

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Upgraded Signals 1800 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 AM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 80 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1130 17.0 0.833 30.2 LOS C 23.3 186.9 0.96 0.95 48.2

6 R2 32 1.0 0.229 47.2 LOS D 1.3 8.9 0.97 0.72 34.3

Approach 1162 16.6 0.833 30.6 LOS C 23.3 186.9 0.96 0.95 47.7


7 L2 239 1.0 0.265 12.9 LOS A 4.5 32.0 0.58 0.70 48.3

9 R2 910 1.0 0.895 46.6 LOS D 24.1 170.1 0.97 1.05 33.4

Approach 1149 1.0 0.895 39.6 LOS C 24.1 170.1 0.89 0.98 35.7

West: Picton Road

10 L2 290 1.0 0.201 8.0 LOS A 1.2 8.6 0.21 0.66 54.5

11 T1 1107 19.4 0.878 36.0 LOS C 26.9 219.8 0.97 1.02 44.8

Approach 1397 15.6 0.878 30.2 LOS C 26.9 219.8 0.81 0.95 46.5

All Vehicles 3708 11.4 0.895 33.2 LOS C 26.9 219.8 0.88 0.96 42.8

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Pembroke Pde - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Upgraded Signals 1800 Picton Road / Prembroke Parade 2036 PM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 55 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1011 10.4 0.603 12.4 LOS A 10.4 79.3 0.80 0.70 63.0

6 R2 116 1.0 0.571 34.7 LOS C 3.2 22.9 0.99 0.80 38.9

Approach 1127 9.4 0.603 14.7 LOS B 10.4 79.3 0.82 0.71 59.2


7 L2 48 1.0 0.064 7.9 LOS A 0.4 3.0 0.45 0.62 51.7

9 R2 277 1.0 0.681 33.2 LOS C 4.0 28.3 1.00 0.87 38.0

Approach 325 1.0 0.681 29.5 LOS C 4.0 28.3 0.92 0.83 39.6

West: Picton Road

10 L2 906 1.0 0.685 9.8 LOS A 8.7 61.8 0.59 0.78 53.0

11 T1 1050 9.7 0.623 12.5 LOS A 10.9 83.0 0.81 0.72 62.8

Approach 1956 5.7 0.685 11.3 LOS A 10.9 83.0 0.71 0.74 57.9


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Existing Layout 1165 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 AM Base + Development NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 980 17.0 0.558 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 22 1.0 0.064 17.0 LOS B 0.2 1.5 0.82 0.93 47.5

Approach 1002 16.7 0.558 0.5 NA 0.2 1.5 0.02 0.02 78.4

North: Almond Street

7 L2 43 1.0 0.282 32.8 LOS C 0.9 6.1 0.90 1.03 38.9

9 R2 151 1.0 5.913 9014.8 LOS F 170.6 1204.7 1.00 4.14 0.4

Approach 194 1.0 5.913 7023.9 LOS F 170.6 1204.7 0.98 3.45 0.5

West: Picton Road

10 L2 171 1.0 0.093 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 1030 19.4 0.595 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

Approach 1201 16.8 0.595 1.2 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.09 77.2

All Vehicles 2397 15.5 5.913 569.3 NA 170.6 1204.7 0.09 0.33 5.9

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Existing Layout 1165 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 PM Base + Development NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 988 10.0 0.540 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 51 1.0 0.101 13.6 LOS A 0.4 2.6 0.74 0.90 49.7

Approach 1039 9.6 0.540 0.8 NA 0.4 2.6 0.04 0.04 77.4


7 L2 69 1.0 0.278 22.6 LOS B 0.9 6.6 0.84 1.04 43.5

9 R2 142 1.0 3.405 4448.6 LOS F 133.8 944.5 1.00 5.24 0.8

Approach 211 1.0 3.405 3001.2 LOS F 133.8 944.5 0.95 3.87 1.2

West: Picton Road

10 L2 111 1.0 0.060 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 920 10.5 0.504 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.7

Approach 1031 9.4 0.504 0.9 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.06 77.9

All Vehicles 2281 8.7 3.405 278.4 NA 133.8 944.5 0.10 0.41 11.2

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Existing Layout - 1800 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 AM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 975 17.0 0.555 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 30 1.0 0.092 17.8 LOS B 0.3 2.2 0.83 0.94 47.0

Approach 1005 16.5 0.555 0.6 NA 0.3 2.2 0.02 0.03 78.0


7 L2 75 1.0 0.530 42.4 LOS C 1.8 12.9 0.94 1.09 35.3

9 R2 175 1.0 7.453 11795.8 LOS F 206.6 1458.8 1.00 4.02 0.3

Approach 250 1.0 7.453 8269.8 LOS F 206.6 1458.8 0.98 3.14 0.4

West: Picton Road

10 L2 171 1.0 0.093 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 1050 19.4 0.606 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

Approach 1221 16.8 0.606 1.2 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.08 77.2

All Vehicles 2476 15.1 7.453 835.8 NA 206.6 1458.8 0.11 0.37 4.1

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Existing Layout - 1800 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 PM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1008 10.0 0.551 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 104 1.0 0.212 14.4 LOS A 0.8 5.7 0.77 0.92 49.2

Approach 1112 9.2 0.551 1.4 NA 0.8 5.7 0.07 0.09 75.3


7 L2 78 1.0 0.323 23.8 LOS B 1.1 7.9 0.85 1.05 42.9

9 R2 155 1.0 4.458 6359.5 LOS F 161.0 1136.6 1.00 4.92 0.6

Approach 233 1.0 4.458 4238.5 LOS F 161.0 1136.6 0.95 3.63 0.9

West: Picton Road

10 L2 133 1.0 0.072 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 930 10.5 0.509 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.7

Approach 1063 9.3 0.509 1.0 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.08 77.6

All Vehicles 2408 8.4 4.458 411.2 NA 161.0 1136.6 0.13 0.42 8.0

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Upgraded Interim Seagull Layout 1165 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 AM Base + Development NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 980 17.0 0.558 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 22 1.0 0.064 17.0 LOS B 0.2 1.5 0.82 0.93 47.5

Approach 1002 16.7 0.558 0.5 NA 0.2 1.5 0.02 0.02 78.4


7 L2 43 1.0 0.282 32.8 LOS C 0.9 6.1 0.90 1.03 38.9

9 R2 151 1.0 0.841 55.0 LOS D 4.4 31.2 0.97 1.40 31.5

Approach 194 1.0 0.841 50.1 LOS D 4.4 31.2 0.96 1.31 32.9

West: Picton Road

10 L2 171 1.0 0.093 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 1030 19.4 0.595 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

Approach 1201 16.8 0.595 1.2 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.09 77.2

All Vehicles 2397 15.5 0.841 4.9 NA 4.4 31.2 0.08 0.16 70.0

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Upgraded Interim Seagull Layout 1165 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 PM Base + Development NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 988 10.0 0.540 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 51 1.0 0.101 13.6 LOS A 0.4 2.6 0.74 0.90 49.7

Approach 1039 9.6 0.540 0.8 NA 0.4 2.6 0.04 0.04 77.4


7 L2 69 1.0 0.278 22.6 LOS B 0.9 6.6 0.84 1.04 43.5

9 R2 142 1.0 0.538 25.4 LOS B 2.1 15.2 0.88 1.13 42.2

Approach 211 1.0 0.538 24.5 LOS B 2.1 15.2 0.87 1.10 42.6

West: Picton Road

10 L2 111 1.0 0.060 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 920 10.5 0.504 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.7

Approach 1031 9.4 0.504 0.9 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.06 77.9

All Vehicles 2281 8.7 0.540 3.0 NA 2.1 15.2 0.10 0.15 72.1

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Upgraded Interim Seagull Layout - 1800 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 AM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 975 17.0 0.555 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 30 1.0 0.092 17.8 LOS B 0.3 2.2 0.83 0.94 47.0

Approach 1005 16.5 0.555 0.6 NA 0.3 2.2 0.02 0.03 78.0


7 L2 75 1.0 0.530 42.4 LOS C 1.8 12.9 0.94 1.09 35.3

9 R2 175 1.0 1.045 181.9 LOS F 18.3 129.1 1.00 2.79 15.0

Approach 250 1.0 1.045 140.1 LOS F 18.3 129.1 0.98 2.28 18.2

West: Picton Road

10 L2 171 1.0 0.093 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 1050 19.4 0.606 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.5

Approach 1221 16.8 0.606 1.2 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.08 77.2

All Vehicles 2476 15.1 1.045 15.0 NA 18.3 129.1 0.11 0.28 58.4

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond Rd - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Upgraded Interim Seagull Layout - 1800 Picton Road / Almond Road 2036 PM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Stop (Two-Way)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1008 10.0 0.551 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.6

6 R2 104 1.0 0.212 14.4 LOS A 0.8 5.7 0.77 0.92 49.2

Approach 1112 9.2 0.551 1.4 NA 0.8 5.7 0.07 0.09 75.3


7 L2 78 1.0 0.323 23.8 LOS B 1.1 7.9 0.85 1.05 42.9

9 R2 155 1.0 0.652 30.9 LOS C 2.8 19.9 0.92 1.19 39.7

Approach 233 1.0 0.652 28.6 LOS C 2.8 19.9 0.90 1.14 40.7

West: Picton Road

10 L2 133 1.0 0.072 7.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.60 65.9

11 T1 930 10.5 0.509 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 79.7

Approach 1063 9.3 0.509 1.0 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.08 77.6

All Vehicles 2408 8.4 0.652 3.9 NA 2.8 19.9 0.12 0.18 70.4

MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond St - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Upgraded Signals 1165 Picton Road / Almond Parade 2036 AM Base + Development NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 60 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)

Movement Performance – Vehicles

Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 980 17.0 0.592 12.9 LOS A 10.8 86.2 0.79 0.69 62.4

6 R2 22 1.0 0.118 35.2 LOS C 0.6 4.4 0.94 0.70 38.5

Approach 1002 16.7 0.592 13.4 LOS A 10.8 86.2 0.79 0.69 61.5

North: Almond Parade

7 L2 43 1.0 0.057 8.3 LOS A 0.4 3.0 0.45 0.62 51.5

9 R2 151 1.0 0.608 33.2 LOS C 4.5 31.9 0.99 0.83 38.0

Approach 194 1.0 0.608 27.7 LOS B 4.5 31.9 0.87 0.78 40.4

West: Picton Road

10 L2 171 1.0 0.120 8.0 LOS A 0.6 4.0 0.23 0.66 54.4

11 T1 1030 19.4 0.631 13.3 LOS A 11.6 94.7 0.81 0.71 62.0

Approach 1201 16.8 0.631 12.5 LOS A 11.6 94.7 0.73 0.71 60.8


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond St - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Upgraded Signals 1165 Picton Road / Almond Parade 2036 PM Base + Development NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 55 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 988 10.0 0.612 13.1 LOS A 10.4 79.2 0.82 0.72 62.1

6 R2 51 1.0 0.251 33.0 LOS C 1.3 9.5 0.95 0.74 39.4

Approach 1039 9.6 0.612 14.1 LOS A 10.4 79.2 0.83 0.72 60.4


7 L2 69 1.0 0.085 7.6 LOS A 0.6 4.1 0.44 0.62 51.9

9 R2 142 1.0 0.599 31.3 LOS C 3.9 27.8 0.99 0.82 38.8

Approach 211 1.0 0.599 23.5 LOS B 3.9 27.8 0.81 0.76 42.3

West: Picton Road

10 L2 111 1.0 0.081 8.2 LOS A 0.4 2.9 0.26 0.66 54.3

11 T1 920 10.5 0.571 12.8 LOS A 9.5 72.2 0.80 0.70 62.5

Approach 1031 9.4 0.571 12.3 LOS A 9.5 72.2 0.74 0.69 61.5


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond St - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - AM Upgraded Signals - 1800 Picton Road / Almond Parade 2036 AM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 60 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 975 17.0 0.611 13.7 LOS A 11.0 88.4 0.81 0.71 61.5

6 R2 30 1.0 0.161 35.4 LOS C 0.9 6.1 0.95 0.71 38.4

Approach 1005 16.5 0.611 14.4 LOS A 11.0 88.4 0.82 0.71 60.4


7 L2 75 1.0 0.097 8.8 LOS A 0.8 5.7 0.48 0.64 51.1

9 R2 175 1.0 0.626 32.4 LOS C 5.2 36.7 0.99 0.84 38.3

Approach 250 1.0 0.626 25.4 LOS B 5.2 36.7 0.83 0.78 41.4

West: Picton Road

10 L2 171 1.0 0.121 8.0 LOS A 0.6 4.0 0.23 0.66 54.4

11 T1 1050 19.4 0.667 14.2 LOS A 12.3 100.6 0.84 0.74 61.0

Approach 1221 16.8 0.667 13.4 LOS A 12.3 100.6 0.76 0.73 59.9


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Picton Rd/ Almond St - 2036 w/o Wilton Junction - PM Upgraded Signals - 1800 Picton Road / Almond Parade 2036 PM Base + Development (1800) NO WJ Signals - Fixed Time Isolated Cycle Time = 50 seconds (Optimum Cycle Time - Minimum Delay)


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



East: Picton Road

5 T1 1008 10.0 0.681 14.3 LOS A 10.7 81.5 0.88 0.79 60.9

6 R2 104 1.0 0.465 31.0 LOS C 2.6 18.1 0.97 0.77 40.3

Approach 1112 9.2 0.681 15.9 LOS B 10.7 81.5 0.89 0.79 58.1


7 L2 78 1.0 0.097 8.0 LOS A 0.7 4.7 0.49 0.64 51.7

9 R2 155 1.0 0.693 30.5 LOS C 4.1 28.9 1.00 0.88 39.1

Approach 233 1.0 0.693 22.9 LOS B 4.1 28.9 0.83 0.80 42.6

West: Picton Road

10 L2 133 1.0 0.103 8.5 LOS A 0.6 4.1 0.32 0.67 54.1

11 T1 930 10.5 0.630 13.3 LOS A 9.4 71.5 0.86 0.74 61.9

Approach 1063 9.3 0.630 12.7 LOS A 9.4 71.5 0.79 0.73 60.8


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Oxenbridge - AM - 1165 Pembroke Pde - Oxenbridge Av - AM - 1165 dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Pembroke Sth

2 T1 144 2.0 0.138 4.0 LOS A 0.9 6.1 0.11 0.48 54.0

3 R2 69 2.0 0.138 8.9 LOS A 0.9 6.1 0.11 0.48 53.5

Approach 213 2.0 0.138 5.6 LOS A 0.9 6.1 0.11 0.48 53.8

East: Oxenbridge

4 L2 208 2.0 0.250 6.9 LOS A 1.5 10.7 0.65 0.71 49.9

6 R2 18 2.0 0.250 12.0 LOS A 1.5 10.7 0.65 0.71 54.6

Approach 226 2.0 0.250 7.3 LOS A 1.5 10.7 0.65 0.71 50.4

North: Pembroke (Nth)

7 L2 2 2.0 0.369 4.2 LOS A 2.4 17.3 0.25 0.40 54.8

8 T1 531 2.0 0.369 4.3 LOS A 2.4 17.3 0.25 0.40 54.5

Approach 533 2.0 0.369 4.3 LOS A 2.4 17.3 0.25 0.40 54.5


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Oxenbridge - PM - 1165 Pembroke Pde - Oxenbridge Av - PM - 1165 dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Pembroke (Sth)

2 T1 508 2.0 0.443 4.0 LOS A 3.6 25.4 0.16 0.46 53.6

3 R2 205 2.0 0.443 9.0 LOS A 3.6 25.4 0.16 0.46 53.0

Approach 713 2.0 0.443 5.5 LOS A 3.6 25.4 0.16 0.46 53.4

East: Oxenbridge

4 L2 68 2.0 0.076 4.5 LOS A 0.4 2.8 0.33 0.53 50.5

6 R2 23 2.0 0.076 9.5 LOS A 0.4 2.8 0.33 0.53 55.4

Approach 91 2.0 0.076 5.8 LOS A 0.4 2.8 0.33 0.53 52.2


7 L2 13 2.0 0.144 4.8 LOS A 0.8 5.4 0.38 0.48 54.3

8 T1 156 2.0 0.144 4.9 LOS A 0.8 5.4 0.38 0.48 53.5

Approach 169 2.0 0.144 4.9 LOS A 0.8 5.4 0.38 0.48 53.6


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Oxenbridge - AM - 1800 Pembroke Pde - Oxenbridge Av - AM - 1800 dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




2 T1 207 2.0 0.207 4.0 LOS A 1.5 10.4 0.13 0.48 53.4

3 R2 115 2.0 0.207 8.9 LOS A 1.5 10.4 0.13 0.48 52.8

Approach 322 2.0 0.207 5.7 LOS A 1.5 10.4 0.13 0.48 53.2

East: Oxenbridge

4 L2 312 2.0 0.457 10.2 LOS A 3.6 25.3 0.86 0.92 46.2

6 R2 20 2.0 0.457 15.2 LOS A 3.6 25.3 0.86 0.92 52.4

Approach 332 2.0 0.457 10.5 LOS A 3.6 25.3 0.86 0.92 46.8


7 L2 2 2.0 0.536 4.6 LOS A 4.4 31.1 0.41 0.46 54.1

8 T1 736 2.0 0.536 4.8 LOS A 4.4 31.1 0.41 0.46 53.2

Approach 738 2.0 0.536 4.8 LOS A 4.4 31.1 0.41 0.46 53.2


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Oxenbridge - PM - 1800 Pembroke Pde - Oxenbridge Av - PM - 1800 dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




2 T1 698 2.0 0.639 4.2 LOS B 7.4 52.4 0.27 0.46 52.9

3 R2 322 2.0 0.639 9.1 LOS B 7.4 52.4 0.27 0.46 52.2

Approach 1020 2.0 0.639 5.7 LOS B 7.4 52.4 0.27 0.46 52.7

East: Oxenbridge

4 L2 107 2.0 0.123 4.8 LOS A 0.7 4.9 0.42 0.56 50.3

6 R2 32 2.0 0.123 9.9 LOS A 0.7 4.9 0.42 0.56 55.2

Approach 139 2.0 0.123 6.0 LOS A 0.7 4.9 0.42 0.56 51.8


7 L2 13 2.0 0.222 5.5 LOS A 1.3 9.1 0.51 0.56 53.7

8 T1 223 2.0 0.222 5.7 LOS A 1.3 9.1 0.51 0.56 52.6

Approach 236 2.0 0.222 5.7 LOS A 1.3 9.1 0.51 0.56 52.7


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Greenbridge Fairway - AM - 1165 Pembroke Pd / Greenbridge Dr / Fairways Dr / Spearing St - AM - 1165 Dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate



South: Pembroke Pde (Sth)

1 L2 122 2.0 0.126 4.2 LOS A 0.7 5.0 0.16 0.51 54.3

2 T1 12 2.0 0.126 4.4 LOS A 0.7 5.0 0.16 0.51 53.2

3 R2 39 2.0 0.126 8.8 LOS A 0.7 5.0 0.16 0.51 54.2

3u U 3 2.0 0.126 10.8 LOS A 0.7 5.0 0.16 0.51 56.4

Approach 176 2.0 0.126 5.3 LOS A 0.7 5.0 0.16 0.51 54.2

East: Greenbridge Drive

4 L2 139 2.0 0.175 6.3 LOS A 1.0 6.8 0.54 0.65 52.4

5 T1 19 2.0 0.175 6.5 LOS A 1.0 6.8 0.54 0.65 53.3

6 R2 10 2.0 0.175 10.9 LOS A 1.0 6.8 0.54 0.65 34.9

6u U 1 2.0 0.175 12.9 LOS A 1.0 6.8 0.54 0.65 52.5

Approach 169 2.0 0.175 6.6 LOS A 1.0 6.8 0.54 0.65 51.7

North: Spearing Street

7 L2 1 2.0 0.119 6.3 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.54 0.61 45.6

8 T1 104 2.0 0.119 6.5 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.54 0.61 51.4

9 R2 7 2.0 0.119 10.9 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.54 0.61 50.4

9u U 1 2.0 0.119 12.9 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.54 0.61 33.0

Approach 113 2.0 0.119 6.8 LOS A 0.6 4.5 0.54 0.61 51.2

West: Fairways Dr

10 L2 15 2.0 0.287 4.3 LOS A 1.7 12.3 0.23 0.58 48.2

11 T1 91 2.0 0.287 4.6 LOS A 1.7 12.3 0.23 0.58 52.0

12 R2 294 2.0 0.287 8.9 LOS A 1.7 12.3 0.23 0.58 53.4

12u U 1 2.0 0.287 10.9 LOS A 1.7 12.3 0.23 0.58 53.9

Approach 401 2.0 0.287 7.8 LOS A 1.7 12.3 0.23 0.58 53.0


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Greenbridge Fairway - PM - 1165 Pembroke Pd / Greenbridge Dr / Fairways Dr / Spearing St - PM - 1165 Dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L2 314 2.0 0.401 4.6 LOS A 2.8 19.8 0.33 0.53 53.7

2 T1 86 2.0 0.401 4.8 LOS A 2.8 19.8 0.33 0.53 52.3

3 R2 134 2.0 0.401 9.2 LOS A 2.8 19.8 0.33 0.53 53.5

3u U 4 2.0 0.401 11.2 LOS A 2.8 19.8 0.33 0.53 55.8

Approach 538 2.0 0.401 5.8 LOS A 2.8 19.8 0.33 0.53 53.5


4 L2 18 2.0 0.058 5.0 LOS A 0.3 2.1 0.37 0.51 52.7

5 T1 41 2.0 0.058 5.2 LOS A 0.3 2.1 0.37 0.51 53.6

6 R2 5 2.0 0.058 9.6 LOS A 0.3 2.1 0.37 0.51 35.5

6u U 1 2.0 0.058 11.6 LOS A 0.3 2.1 0.37 0.51 52.9

Approach 65 2.0 0.058 5.6 LOS A 0.3 2.1 0.37 0.51 52.2


7 L2 1 2.0 0.075 5.4 LOS A 0.4 2.7 0.43 0.62 44.3

8 T1 29 2.0 0.075 5.6 LOS A 0.4 2.7 0.43 0.62 50.2

9 R2 49 2.0 0.075 10.0 LOS A 0.4 2.7 0.43 0.62 49.2

9u U 1 2.0 0.075 12.0 LOS A 0.4 2.7 0.43 0.62 32.1

Approach 80 2.0 0.075 8.3 LOS A 0.4 2.7 0.43 0.62 49.4

West: Fairways Dr

10 L2 4 2.0 0.135 5.2 LOS A 0.7 5.1 0.42 0.64 47.0

11 T1 17 2.0 0.135 5.4 LOS A 0.7 5.1 0.42 0.64 50.9

12 R2 126 2.0 0.135 9.8 LOS A 0.7 5.1 0.42 0.64 52.5

12u U 1 2.0 0.135 11.8 LOS A 0.7 5.1 0.42 0.64 52.9

Approach 148 2.0 0.135 9.2 LOS A 0.7 5.1 0.42 0.64 52.3


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Greenbridge Fairway - AM - 1800 Pembroke Pd / Greenbridge Dr / Fairways Dr / Spearing St - AM - 1800 Dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L2 179 2.0 0.170 4.2 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.19 0.50 54.3

2 T1 14 2.0 0.170 4.4 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.19 0.50 53.3

3 R2 39 2.0 0.170 8.8 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.19 0.50 54.3

3u U 5 2.0 0.170 10.8 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.19 0.50 56.5

Approach 237 2.0 0.170 5.1 LOS A 1.0 7.3 0.19 0.50 54.3


4 L2 159 2.0 0.236 7.8 LOS A 1.4 9.9 0.68 0.75 51.2

5 T1 22 2.0 0.236 8.0 LOS A 1.4 9.9 0.68 0.75 52.0

6 R2 11 2.0 0.236 12.4 LOS A 1.4 9.9 0.68 0.75 33.9

6u U 3 2.0 0.236 14.4 LOS A 1.4 9.9 0.68 0.75 50.8

Approach 195 2.0 0.236 8.2 LOS A 1.4 9.9 0.68 0.75 50.5


7 L2 1 2.0 0.157 7.7 LOS A 0.9 6.4 0.66 0.70 44.7

8 T1 117 2.0 0.157 7.9 LOS A 0.9 6.4 0.66 0.70 50.6

9 R2 8 2.0 0.157 12.3 LOS A 0.9 6.4 0.66 0.70 49.5

9u U 1 2.0 0.157 14.3 LOS A 0.9 6.4 0.66 0.70 32.1

Approach 127 2.0 0.157 8.2 LOS A 0.9 6.4 0.66 0.70 50.4

West: Fairways Dr

10 L2 15 2.0 0.413 4.4 LOS A 2.9 20.8 0.28 0.59 47.7

11 T1 101 2.0 0.413 4.7 LOS A 2.9 20.8 0.28 0.59 51.5

12 R2 466 2.0 0.413 9.1 LOS A 2.9 20.8 0.28 0.59 53.1

12u U 1 2.0 0.413 11.1 LOS A 2.9 20.8 0.28 0.59 53.5

Approach 583 2.0 0.413 8.2 LOS A 2.9 20.8 0.28 0.59 52.8


MOVEMENT SUMMARY

Site: Pembroke Greenbridge Fairway - PM - 1800 Pembroke Pd / Greenbridge Dr / Fairways Dr / Spearing St - PM - 1800 Dwellings Roundabout


Mov ID ODMov


Level of Service


Effective Stop Rate




1 L2 485 2.0 0.547 4.8 LOS A 4.6 33.0 0.42 0.54 53.6

2 T1 95 2.0 0.547 5.0 LOS A 4.6 33.0 0.42 0.54 52.2

3 R2 153 2.0 0.547 9.4 LOS A 4.6 33.0 0.42 0.54 53.4

3u U 6 2.0 0.547 11.4 LOS A 4.6 33.0 0.42 0.54 55.7

Approach 739 2.0 0.547 5.8 LOS A 4.6 33.0 0.42 0.54 53.4


4 L2 22 2.0 0.069 5.3 LOS A 0.4 2.5 0.43 0.54 52.5

5 T1 45 2.0 0.069 5.5 LOS A 0.4 2.5 0.43 0.54 53.4

6 R2 5 2.0 0.069 9.9 LOS A 0.4 2.5 0.43 0.54 35.3

6u U 1 2.0 0.069 11.9 LOS A 0.4 2.5 0.43 0.54 52.6

Approach 73 2.0 0.069 5.9 LOS A 0.4 2.5 0.43 0.54 52.1


7 L2 1 2.0 0.087 5.8 LOS A 0.5 3.2 0.50 0.64 44.0

8 T1 33 2.0 0.087 6.0 LOS A 0.5 3.2 0.50 0.64 49.9

9 R2 51 2.0 0.087 10.4 LOS A 0.5 3.2 0.50 0.64 48.9

9u U 1 2.0 0.087 12.4 LOS A 0.5 3.2 0.50 0.64 31.8

Approach 86 2.0 0.087 8.7 LOS A 0.5 3.2 0.50 0.64 49.1

West: Fairways Dr

10 L2 4 2.0 0.195 5.4 LOS A 1.1 7.9 0.47 0.66 46.7

11 T1 19 2.0 0.195 5.7 LOS A 1.1 7.9 0.47 0.66 50.6

12 R2 184 2.0 0.195 10.0 LOS A 1.1 7.9 0.47 0.66 52.3

12u U 1 2.0 0.195 12.0 LOS A 1.1 7.9 0.47 0.66 52.7

Approach 208 2.0 0.195 9.6 LOS A 1.1 7.9 0.47 0.66 52.1




Bingara Gorge

APPENDIX E REPORT AUTHOR CURRICULUM VITAES

www.cardno.com SHANE HEALEY Page 1 of 6

Current Position

Senior Principal Business Unit Manger - Traffic & Transport

Profession

Traffic & Transport Engineer

Years' Experience

22 Years

Joined Cardno

October 1993

Education

BEng (Civil)

Professional Registrations

RPEQ (8343)

Affiliations

Member - Engineers Australia (EA)

Committee Secretary, EA Transport Panel

Member - Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management (AITPM)

Member - Queensland Environmental Law Association (QELA)

Summary of Experience

Shane is a Senior Transport Engineer and Principal with Cardno and functions as the Business Unit Manager for the Traffic and Transport activities of Cardno in the northern division of Asia Pacific. Shane has 22 years' experience in the delivery of traffic engineering and transport planning projects across Australia, having held senior positions in both Queensland and Western Australia. His business management experience includes being the Brisbane Office Manager, Perth Office Manager until 2010 and the founder of the firm’s Gold Coast traffic and transport team operations in 2003.

Shane has significant experience in the transport masterplanning of large scale projects drawn from senior level involvement in strategic and detailed transport assessment and design studies for retail, residential, commercial and industrial development proposals throughout Australia and overseas. Shane’s experience in the transport planning discipline includes corridor studies, master planning, parking assessments, transport infrastructure concept design management of road safety related projects, and infrastructure charges/contributions plans.

Key projects in which Shane has been heavily involved include detailed parking and transportation studies for key metropolitan centres at Helensvale, Mt Gravatt, Carindale, Chermside, Innaloo, Carousel and Whitfords, strategic and detailed road network master planning for the Varsity Lakes, Emerald Lakes, North Shore and Rocky Springs mixed use residential developments and direction of major transportation studies for resource projects in the Bowen and Surat Basins. Significant transport corridor studies in which Shane has been involved include strategic road network planning for the Cairns and Ballina Council regions. He has regularly been called upon to provide expert evidence in Queensland Planning and Environment Court appeal matters. Shane also has a thorough understanding of road safety audit and traffic management plan practices and guidelines.

Significant Projects

> Carousel Regional Centre Planning, Perth

> Sterling City Centre, Perth

> Bremer Industrial/Business Park, Ipswich

> Garden City Key Regional Centre, Brisbane

> North Shore Residential Development, Townsville

> Townsville Shopping Centre Expansion, Townsville

> Ballina Western Arterial Corridor Assessment, Ballina

> Rocky Springs Residential Development, Townsville

> Ballina Road Network Study, Ballina

> Goonyella Mine Expansion EIS

> Bowen Basin Arrow Gas LNG Field EIS

> Whole of Gold Coast Parking Strategy, Gold Coast

Shane Healey

www.cardno.com


Professional History

May 2010 - Current Senior Principal & Business Manager, Traffic & Transport, Cardno (Brisbane)

Apr 2008 - May 2010 Principal & Manager, Traffic and Transport , Cardno (Perth)

Jul 2007 - Mar 2008 Senior Principal, Cardno Eppell Olsen (Brisbane)

Jan 2005 – Jun 2007 Principal, Cardno Eppell Olsen (Gold Coast)

Traffic and Transport Surveys

As a cadet engineer, Shane worked as a field supervisor/data analyst for Abacus Surveys Pty Ltd, a subsidiary company (at the time) of Eppell Olsen & Partners. Abacus Surveys specialised in the conduct of traffic and transport surveys and Shane was responsible for the installation of automatic speed and count equipment (pneumatic and magnetic), completion of travel time surveys, traffic generation, bus patronage surveys and parking studies. Shane managed the operations of Abacus Surveys and had extensive involvement in the design and management of numerous survey projects.

Retail Centre Traffic &Transport Planning

Shane has project managed the traffic and transport design for numerous retail developments ranging in scale from convenience facilities to regional centres. This work requires extensive assessment of traffic demands, parking requirements, infrastructure provision and public transport, pedestrian and cycle components. Technical analysis for these types of projects has included a combination of EMME/2 and SATURN area modelling combined with SIDRA, Paramics, Transyt detailed operational analysis. Major projects include Helensvale Town Centre (Gold Coast), Carindale Shopping Centre (Brisbane), Springfield Town Centre (Ipswich), Stirling City Centre (Perth) and Carousel Retail Centre (Perth).

Transportation Master Planning & Assessment

Significant residential growth in Queensland has led to Shane having significant involvement in the traffic/transport planning elements for a number of large Greenfield residential communities. This work has generally involved early identification of external road network connection constraints and development of appropriate road network plans which balance the needs of accessibility, connectivity and amenity. Elements of this work include consideration of road hierarchy principles, sub-divisional design, public transport, pedestrian and cycle planning.

Shane has also been required to investigate the detailed impacts of proposed residential developments on the operation of road and street networks throughout Australia for local and state authorities. These assessments have required the use of various analysis techniques for the identification of potential impacts (strategic and detailed modelling tools), calculation of infrastructure contributions and resolution of mitigation measures.


Shane has provided traffic and transport direction to the master planning for integrated mixed use development precincts which generally include high density residential components, commercial office land uses and retail precincts.

Examples of projects include:

> Queens Wharf Integrated Resort, Brisbane: Greenland/Crown

> Varsity Lakes, Gold Coast: Lend Lease

> SALT Community, Kingscliff: Ray Group

> Sanctuary Cove, Gold Coast: Mulpha Sanctuary Cove

> CityPort, Cairns: Cairns Port Authority

> Emerald Lakes, Gold Coast: Nifsan

Mixed Use and Transit Orientated Development

Shane has directed input into numerous mixed use precincts particularly those focused around major transit corridors. These projects rely upon advanced understanding of demographic/land use and transport relationships combined with innovative solutions to travel demand, car parking, servicing, and sustainable transport modes.

Examples of projects include:

> Commonwealth Games Village, Gold Coast

> Varsity Lakes Transit Oriented Development, Gold Coast

> Southport Central Mixed Use Precinct, Gold Coast

Community Facilities and Event Traffic Planning

Shane has provided traffic and transport input to the development of a range of community facilities and major events. This work involved consideration of likely traffic and parking demands, identification of appropriate mitigation/management strategies, preparation of public transport event schedules and community consultation exercises to inform affected stakeholders.

Examples of relevant projects include:

> Cairns Esplanade & Foreshore Redevelopment: Cairns City Council

> Cairns Convention Centre: Project Services

> Kings Beach Redevelopment: Caloundra City Council

> SALT Central Park, Kingscliff Traffic Plan: Ray Group

> Woodford Folk Festival: Festival Organisers


Development Traffic Impact Assessment

A principle component of Shane’s work during the past twenty years has been preparation of development impact assessments for private developer clients, local government authorities and the Department of Main Roads. Developments which Shane has assessed vary in form and scale but have included major shopping centres, fast food outlets, service stations, offices, residential subdivisions, high rise apartment buildings and commercial developments located throughout Australia and in USA.

The assessments generally incorporate estimation of traffic generation and traffic growth (for all transport modes including commercial vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians), identification of associated traffic impacts and any necessary road infrastructure upgrading works. Shane has extensive knowledge of the relevant planning legislation, relevant Austroads guidelines and Australian Standard policies.

Parking Assessment/Policy

Shane has significant experience with parking assessment and policy projects. Parking within centres can be an important travel demand management tool and is a significant consideration for the planning of major development proposals. Important aspects in which Shane has provided expert direction include quantification and forecasting of demand, cross utilization and temporal variations within mixed use precincts, enforcement procedures, parking efficiency measurement and policy advice regarding appropriate planning scheme requirements. Projects Shane has undertaken in this discipline include consideration of on-street and off-street parking.

Other aspects of which Shane has significant experience include the review and design of car park facilities with regard to appropriate access location and parking requirements relevant to Australian Standards and local authority guidelines. These elements are regularly reviewed for private developer clients and architects.

Project examples include:

> Whole of Gold Coast Parking Study: Gold Coast City Council

> Cairns CBD Parking Study: Cairns City Council

> Ballina CBD Parking Study: Ballina Shire Council

> Cairns Accommodation Parking Requirements: Cairns City Council

Local Area Transport Planning and Traffic Management

During the past twenty years, Shane has undertaken a number of local area studies which have incorporated identification of community issues, resolution of traffic deficiencies and preparation of local area traffic management strategies. These techniques have been applied to residential neighbourhoods, main street environments and school precincts.

Projects of this nature have also required community consultation and Shane has been responsible for the preparation and presentation of material at community meetings and workshops. Projects for which Shane has been responsible include:

> Ballina River Street Traffic Management; Ballina Shire Council

> Stanthorpe Schools Safety Review: Stanthorpe Shire Council

> Charters Towers Town Centre Plan: Charters Towers Council

> Cairns Parramatta Park/Manoora Area LATM: Cairns City Council

Expert Advice & Court Appeal Evidence

Shane has provided in house support to local and state authorities for review of development proposals and has provided technical input to a number of Planning and Environment Appeal matters. He is familiar with the legislative framework existing in Queensland, Western Australia and New South Wales and has been commissioned to provide expert traffic evidence in both the Planning & Environment and Criminal Courts.


Transport Policy/Education

Due to his extensive experience in development assessment procedures, Shane was involved in the preparation of policy documentation for the Department of Main Roads to formalise traffic operations and pavement impact assessment procedures. This policy was stimulated by the State Government’s change in approach to infrastructure charging and a subsequent change in Planning and Environment legislation.

Shane has also provided input to strategic planning instruments, road hierarchy planning and documentation of professional resource material for AUSTROADS and the Department of Main Roads. Shane has contributed to the development of the profession by presenting lectures to third and fourth year civil engineering students at the Queensland University of Technology and University of Queensland.

Road Corridor Planning

Shane has directed corridor planning activities in both New South Wales and Queensland. Projects in which Shane has had involvement include detailed strategic modelling, detailed micro-simulation modelling, assessment of public transport corridors and high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane strategies for major arterials. Studies have incorporated identification of existing and forecast occupancy/demand levels, consideration of possible geometric layouts, through traffic/local access separation options and demands for future interchanges and intersections. Studies include:

> Cairns Redlynch Deviation: Department of Main Roads

> Cairns HOV Assessment: Queensland Transport

> Western Freeway-Toowong Roundabout: Department of Main Roads

> Cairns Bruce Highway Upgrading: Department of Main Roads

> Ballina Western Arterial Route Alignment Assessment, Ballina Shire Council

> Ballina Road Network Study, Ballina Shire Council

> Skennars Head Road Network Planning, Ballina Shire Council


Jan 2004 - Jan 2005 Senior Associate, Manager Gold Coast Office, Cardno Eppell Olsen (Formerly Eppell Olsen & Partners)

Jan 2001 - Jan 2004 Associate, Eppell Olsen & Partners (Gold Coast)

Jan 1998 - Jan 2004 Associate, Eppell Olsen & Partners

Jan 1994 - Jan 1998

Traffic Engineer, Eppell Olsen & Partners

Cadet Engineer, Eppell Consulting (Jan 93-94)

www.cardno.com

Current Position

Senior Traffic & Transport Engineer

Profession

Traffic & Transport Engineer

Years' Experience

11 Years

Joined Cardno

July 2004

Education

BEng (Civil)

Summary of Experience

Kris has developed extensive traffic engineering, transport planning, and road safety experience during his 11 years' working in private consulting and Local and State Government traffic roles. He has recently developed a specialisation in the field of road safety engineering and policy development.

Kris has been responsible for delivering successful outcomes across a variety of projects including environmental impact assessments, traffic and construction management planning, traffic analysis and modelling, parking studies, road safety auditing and policy development, and heavy vehicle route planning.

Kris has acted in traffic engineering and road safety roles at Brisbane City Council (2011), Toowoomba Regional Council (2013), City of Gold Coast (2014), and the Department of Transport and Main Roads where he is currently assisting the Safer Roads team.

In 2014, Kris finalised a 12 month role with the City of Gold Coast where he acted as the Senior Road Safety Officer. During this time, he was responsible for the development of the City’s first Road Safety Strategy and Action Plan in partnership with Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Police, RACQ and the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety (CARRS-Q).

At Council, Kris also undertook road safety engineering reviews and an analysis of network safety. He also assisted the road network team in developing and programming engineering interventions and championed the incorporation of safety costs in the prioritisation of capacity upgrades in the Road Network Plan. Kris was also responsible for preparing the 2014-2015 Black Spot funding submissions for the City, all of which were successful and delivered an additional three million dollars in road safety funding for the region.

Kris is currently assisting the Department of Transport and Main Roads' Safer Roads team in understanding network safety issues and developing safer infrastructure solutions.

Significant Projects

Gold Coast Rapid Transit Broadbeach Early Works Traffic Manager, Gold Coast

Gold Coast Road Safety Plan, Gold Coast

2014-15 and 15-16 Gold Coast Black Spot analysis and procurement, Gold Coast

Surfers Paradise Hilton Hotel, Gold Coast

Horizon Shores Marina, Gold Coast

Road Safety Audits (ten plus of)

Brisbane City Council Infrastructure Charing Policy 2011 update, Brisbane

Stirling City Centre (Innaloo) Centre expansion, Perth

Chermside Shopping Centre expansion, Brisbane

Garden City Shopping Centre expansion, Brisbane

Pacific Fair Shopping Centre expansion, Gold Coast

Carindale Shopping Centre expansion, Brisbane

Gladstone Shopping Centre expansion, Gladstone.

.

Road Safety Auditing, Various.

Kris Stone

www.cardno.com

Documents

Transport Assessment Bingara Gorge Transport Assessment