Traffic Committee

Notice of Meeting

Tuesday, 18 July 2017

Thursday, 13 July 2017

 

Mr John Rayner

 

A Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting will be held at 1.00pm in the 1st floor meeting room, Georges River Civic Centre, McMahon Street Hurstville on Tuesday, 18 July 2017 for the consideration of the business available on Council's website at http://www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-Meetings.

 

 

 

 

 

David Tuxford

Acting General Manager

 

BUSINESS

1.      Apologies

2.      Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

3.      Matters Arising from Previous Meeting

4.      Disclosures of Interest

5.      Agenda Items

6.      General Business

7.      Next meeting Tuesday 15 August 2017 at 12.30pm

 

 


Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting

Summary of Items

Tuesday, 18 July 2017

 

Previous Minutes

MINUTES: Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - 20 June 2017

Agenda Items

TAC071-17       Neville Street, Oatley - Proposed Temporary Road Closure - UBD 293 C14

(Report by Traffic Engineer)......................................................................................... 2

TAC072-17       West Street, Carlton - Proposed "1P" Zone

(Report by Traffic Engineer)......................................................................................... 5

TAC073-17       Allawah Avenue, Carss Park - Proposed "No Parking" zone

(Report by Traffic Engineer)......................................................................................... 7

TAC074-17       Letitia Street, Oatley - Proposed "No Parking" zone

(Report by Traffic Engineer)......................................................................................... 9

TAC075-17       Macquarie Place, Mortdale - Proposed Changes to Parking

(Report by Traffic Engineer)....................................................................................... 12

TAC076-17       Jindabyne Crescent, Peakhurst Heights - Proposed Line Marking and Wheel Stops

(Report by Traffic Engineer)....................................................................................... 15

TAC077-17       Ethel Lane, Carlton - Traffic Concerns

(Report by Traffic Engineer)....................................................................................... 18

TAC078-17       Penshurst Street, Penshurst - Request for disabled parking outside 102.

(Report by Senior Traffic Engineer).......................................................................... 23

TAC079-17       Roundabout at the intersection of Clarendon Road and Belmore Road, Peakhurst

(Report by Senior Traffic Engineer).......................................................................... 26

TAC080-17       Ogilvy Street, Peakhurst - Request to change parking restriction for Peakhurst West Public School

(Report by Senior Traffic Engineer).......................................................................... 28

TAC081-17       PROPOSED RETAIL/RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF A CONSOLIDATED SITE AT 160-178 STONEY CREEK ROAD
BEVERLY HILLS.

(Report by Senior Traffic Engineer).......................................................................... 30

TAC082-17       110 Penshurst Street, Penshurst - Request for 1P restriction

(Report by Senior Traffic Engineer).......................................................................... 40

 

TAC083-17       MacMahon Street, Hurstville - Request for a Disabled Parking Space

(Report by Senior Traffic Engineer).......................................................................... 42

TAC084-17       Treacy Street Hurstville - No Stopping across St Vincent De Paul vehicular crossing

(Report by Senior Traffic Engineer).......................................................................... 44

TAC085-17       Roberts Avenue, Mortdale - Request to Formalise Bus Stop

(Report by Traffic Engineer)....................................................................................... 47

TAC086-17       57-63 Pitt Street, Mortdale - Request to Remove No Parking Restriction

(Report by Traffic Engineer)....................................................................................... 50   

 


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 1

 

AGENDA

1.      Apologies 

2.      Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - 20 June 2017

3.      Matters Arising from Previous Meeting

4.      Disclosure of Interest


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 2

5.      Agenda Items

Item:                   TAC071-17        Neville Street, Oatley - Proposed Temporary Road Closure - UBD 293 C14 

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

(a)     That approval be granted for the closure of a section of Neville Street, Oatley, between Oatley Avenue and Letitia Street, bordered by the boom gates, from 8am until 5pm on Saturday, 4 November 2017, as shown on plan TC1507 attached to the report.

(b)     That Oatley Public School’s representative be advised of Council’s decision.

 

Executive Summary

 

This report seeks the Committee’s consideration to consider a request for the temporary closure of a section of Neville Street, Oatley.

 

Background

 

1.      A request has been received from a representative of Oatley Public School’s P&C to conduct their annual Christmas Fair on Saturday, 5 November 2016.  This request includes a proposal to temporarily close a section of Neville Street, between Oatley Avenue and Letitia Street, Oatley.

 

2.      There are boom gates in this section of Neville Street that are closed from 8am to 4pm on school days to improve the safety for students of Oatley Public School crossing Neville Street.

 

Proposal

 

3.      It is proposed that Neville Street be closed to vehicular traffic at the boom gates located between Oatley Avenue and Letitia Street, from 8am to 5pm on Saturday, 4 November 2017, to allow the safe movement of people attending Oatley Public School’s Christmas Fair.

 

4.      The event would be classified as a Class 3 Event according to the “Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events”, and as such a Traffic Management Plan would not be required to be submitted to the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) for approval prior to the event.

 

5.      The School’s P&C would notify the relevant Emergency Services prior to the event.

 

Financial Implications

 

6.      No budget impact for this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

TC1507 - Neville Street, Oatley

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC071-17           Neville Street, Oatley - Proposed Temporary Road Closure - UBD 293 C14

[Appendix 1]         TC1507 - Neville Street, Oatley

 

 

Page 3

 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 5

Item:                   TAC072-17        West Street, Carlton - Proposed "1P" Zone  

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

That a 25m “1P, 8.30am – 6pm, Mon – Fri” zone be installed on the southern side of West Street, adjacent to number 259, as shown on plan TC1604 attached to the report.

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s consideration of the proposed installation of a “1P, 8.30am – 6pm, Mon – Fri” zone in West Street, Carlton.

 

Background

 

2.      Council has received a request from a local business owner to investigate the possibility of converting the currently untimed parking spaces on the southern side of West Street to a timed parking zone.

 

3.      The business owner has requested this timed zone to increase the parking turnover near the businesses and improve the parking availability for customers of the nearby business premises.

Proposal

4.      Upon investigation of this request, it is proposed to convert 3 unrestricted car parking spaces on the southern side of West Street, adjacent to number 259, to a “1P, 8.30am– 6pm, Mon – Fri” zone to assist nearby businesses with an increase in vehicle turnover in this location during these times.

 

5.      The businesses in this vicinity have been notified by letter of the proposed conversion of the unrestricted area to a “1P” zone.  The closing date for submissions was 7 July 2017.  No objections were received.

 

Financial Implications

 

6.      Within budget allocation – RMS’s Traffic Facility Grant – approximately $300.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Plan TC1604 - West Street, Carlton

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC072-17           West Street, Carlton - Proposed "1P" Zone

[Appendix 1]         Plan TC1604 - West Street, Carlton

 

 

Page 6

 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 8

Item:                   TAC073-17        Allawah Avenue, Carss Park - Proposed "No Parking" zone 

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

 

Recommendation

That a “No Parking, 9am – 4pm Sat – Sun” zone be installed on the inside of the curve of Allawah Avenue, adjacent to number 30, as shown on plan TC1600 attached to the report.

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s consideration of the proposed installation of a “No Parking” zone in Allawah Avenue, Carss Park.

 

Background

 

2.      Council has received a request from a local resident to consider the installation of parking restriction signs on the bend in Allawah Avenue to improve vehicle travel movements.

3.      The resident has advised Council that due to the nearby Carss Park sports fields, on weekends vehicles park on both sides of the road on the curve and due to the narrow carriageway, there is restricted sight distance and insufficient width to allow two-way vehicle travel.

 

Proposal

 

4.      Upon investigation of this request, it is proposed to install a “No Parking, 9am – 4pm Sat - Sun” zone on the eastern side of the bend in Allawah Avenue.  This would prevent vehicles parking in this location and lead to an improvement in vehicle movements. 

 

5.      The proposed “No Parking” times were determined to be when the peak parking and traffic flow was occurring in the street due to the nearby Carss Park sports fields.

 

6.      The residents in this vicinity have been notified by letter of the proposed “No parking” zone.  The closing date for submissions was 3 July 2017.  No objections were received.

 

Financial Implications

 

7.      Within budget allocation - RMS’s Traffic Facility Grant – approximately $300.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Plan TC1600 - Allawah Avenue, Carss Park

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC073-17           Allawah Avenue, Carss Park - Proposed "No Parking" zone

[Appendix 1]         Plan TC1600 - Allawah Avenue, Carss Park

 

 

Page 9

 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 11

Item:                   TAC074-17        Letitia Street, Oatley - Proposed "No Parking" zone  

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

Recommendation

That a 20m “No Parking, Motorcycles Excepted” zone be installed on the eastern side of Letitia Street, adjacent to number 28, as shown on plan TC1601 attached to the report.

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s consideration of the proposed installation of a “No Parking” zone in Letitia Street, Oatley.

Background

 

2.      Council has received a request from a local resident to investigate the possibility of installing parking restriction signs between the driveways of numbers 28 and 30 Letitia Street. 

3.      Council has been advised that vehicles are parking in the small area between the driveways and restricting vehicular access.  Due to the short distance between the driveways, it does not allow a standard vehicle to park legally.

4.      The kerb section between the driveways of numbers 28 and 30 Letitia Street is 3 metres. Council has been advised that vehicles are parking in this area and restricting vehicular access to these driveways. 

5.      In accordance with “Australian Standards 2890.1 – 2004”, the design length of an average car is 4.91m.  As the distance between the driveways is 3m, there is insufficient space to allow a standard car to park legally.  The Standards also indicate that the length of a small car 4.4m and hence there is insufficient area to park a small car legally between the driveways.

 

Proposal

6.      Upon investigation of this request, it is proposed to install a 20 metre “No Parking, Motorcycles Excepted” zone on the eastern side of Letitia Street, adjacent to number 28, to prevent cars parking in this location and blocking access into the residential properties. 

 

7.      Residents in this vicinity have been notified by letter of the proposed installation of the “No parking” zone.  The closing date for submissions was 7 July 2017.  Two objections were received.

 

8.      The objections related to the loss of parking in the street as a result of the installation of the signage.  However as there is insufficient distance to park a small car between the driveways there is no loss of legal parking in the street.  The addition of the “Motorcycles Excepted” wording on the zone would encourage motorcycles to park in this area rather than occupying car spaces in Letitia Street.

 


 

Financial Implications

 

9.      Within budget allocation – RMS Traffic Facility Grant – approximately $400.

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Plan TC1601 - Letitia Street, Oatley

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC074-17             Letitia Street, Oatley - Proposed "No Parking" zone

[Appendix 1]          Plan TC1601 - Letitia Street, Oatley

 

 

Page 13

 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 15

Item:                   TAC075-17        Macquarie Place, Mortdale - Proposed Changes to Parking 

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the existing “No Parking, 8.30am – 6pm Mon – Fri” zone on the southern side of Macquarie Place, adjacent to Mortdale RSL Club, be converted to a “No Parking, Buses Excepted” and a “No Parking” zone with supplementary plates.

(b)     That a “No Parking, 7am – 5pm Mon – Fri” zone be installed near the Club’s driveway, as shown on plan TC1603 attached to the report.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s consideration of proposed parking changes in Macquarie Place, Mortdale.

Background

 

2.      Council has received a request from a representative of Mortdale RSL to consider changes to the parking signs adjacent to the entrance to the Club on Macquarie Place to improve the locations where their patrons can pick up and drop off passengers.

 

3.      Currently the signposting allows vehicles to park unrestricted outside the Club on Macquarie Street after 6pm weekdays and all weekend.  As the Club is open until 11pm on weekdays and 12:30am on weekends, cars parked outside the Club are preventing patrons from being safely picked up or dropped off.  The Club also operates a Courtesy Bus during the operating hours and parked cars are preventing the bus from stopping safely near the Club’s entrance.

 

Proposal

4.      Upon investigation of this request, it is proposed to convert the existing “No Parking, 8.30am – 6pm Mon – Fri” zone on the southern side of Macquarie Place, adjacent to the Club, to a “No Parking, Buses Excepted” and a “No Parking” zone with supplementary plates.  This would provide an area for the courtesy bus to park and also allow people to pick up and drop off patrons at the entrance.

5.      Council is also proposing a “No Parking, 7am – 5pm Mon – Fri” zone adjacent to the Club’s driveway to improve the turning movements for their delivery vehicles throughout the week.

 

6.      The residents in this vicinity have been notified by letter of the proposed changes to the parking zones.  The closing date for submissions was 7 July 2017.  No objections were received.

 


 

Financial Implications

 

7.      Within budget allocation – RMS’s Traffic Facility Grant – approximately $350.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

TC1603 - Macquarie Place, Mortdale

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC075-17             Macquarie Place, Mortdale - Proposed Changes to Parking

[Appendix 1]          TC1603 - Macquarie Place, Mortdale

 

 

Page 17

 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 18

Item:                   TAC076-17        Jindabyne Crescent, Peakhurst Heights - Proposed Line Marking and Wheel Stops 

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

(a)     That 90 degree angle line marking in accordance with “Australian Standards 2890.5” be painted in the indented parking bays on the northern side of Jindabyne Crescent, adjacent to Gannons Park.

(b)     That wheel stops for rear to kerb parking in accordance with “Australian Standards 2890.1” be installed in the indented parking bays on the northern side of Jindabyne Crescent, adjacent to Gannons Park, as shown on plan TC1605 attached to the report.

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s consideration for line marking and wheel stops in the parking bays in Jindabyne Crescent, Peakhurst Heights.

 

Background

 

2.      Council has received a request from a resident to consider the installation of wheel stops in the parking bays off Jindabyne Crescent to prevent vehicle encroaching on the adjacent shared footpath. 

3.      Council recently completed the construction of a shared footpath around Gannon’s Park with the footpath in Jindabyne Crescent constructed adjacent to the kerb line. As these parking bays are signposted as “rear to kerb”, vehicles have been observed to be parking across the new footpath, minimising the area that people can walk and ride their bikes, as shown in the photographs below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 


Proposal

4.      It is proposed to install wheel stops in accordance with “Australian Standards 2890.1” in the parking bays on the northern side of Jindabyne Crescent, adjacent to Gannons Park, to prevent vehicles parking across the footpath.

5.      It is also proposed to paint 90 degree angle line marking in the parking bays to formalise the parking area adjacent to the park.

 

Financial Implications

 

6.      Within budget allocation – RMS’s Traffic Facility Grant – approximately $5,000.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

TC1605 - Jindabyne Crescent, Peakhurst Heights

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC076-17             Jindabyne Crescent, Peakhurst Heights - Proposed Line Marking and Wheel Stops

[Appendix 1]          TC1605 - Jindabyne Crescent, Peakhurst Heights

 

 

Page 20

 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 22

Item:                   TAC077-17        Ethel Lane, Carlton - Traffic Concerns 

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

To be determined by the Committee.

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s consideration on the traffic issues in Ethel Lane, Carlton.

Background

 

2.      Council has received correspondence from a resident in Botany Street, Carlton raising road safety concerns in Ethel Lane. 

3.      A report on this issue was presented at the 4 December 2014 meeting of the Traffic Advisory Committee which included a Road Safety Audit, traffic surveys and a parking survey in Botany Street and Ethel Lane. 

 

4.      To address the road safety concerns, Council engaged an accredited Road Safety Auditor to identify all pedestrian and traffic related road safety issues in Ethel Lane and Botany Street.  The Audit was conducted in accordance with the “RMS’s Guidelines for Road Safety Audit Practice” and the “Austroads Guide to Road Safety – Part 6” documents.

 

5.      Council undertook a comprehensive traffic survey on Botany Street and Ethel Lane to establish the traffic conditions in the area.  Council also undertook a parking survey to ascertain the residents’ concerns regarding lack of on-street parking in Botany Street.

 

Road Safety Audit Findings

 

6.      Ethel Lane is a narrow lane which facilitates access to many residential properties in the area bounded by Xenia Avenue, Botany Street, Forest Road, Lily Street and Durham Street.  It is about 4.5 metres wide between kerbs, with narrow shoulders on either side of varying width.  Ethel Lane runs from the intersection of Xenia Avenue and Ethel Street adjacent to Sydney Technical High School, across Botany Street, Cronulla Lane, Cronulla Street and Lily Lane to Lily Street, where it ends in a T-junction. A steep upgrade exists along the lane from near Cronulla Lane to Lily Street. A short section at the east end is covered by a 40km/h School Zone; however most of the lane is under the general urban speed limit.

 

7.      On site observations by the Auditors showed Ethel lane to be used by low volumes of vehicles and moderate volumes of pedestrians, most of which are generated by the nearby schools (Sydney Technical High, Hurstville Primary and Hurstville High).

 

8.      The Road Safety Audit reported that there was a moderate pedestrian usage of Ethel Lane both before and after school. This included students from Sydney Technical High School, who walked either alone or in small groups, and low volumes of primary school age children attending Hurstville Public School who were all accompanied by adults.

 

9.      Intersection of Ethel Lane and Botany Street

A gate to Sydney Technical High School is located on the northern corner. Botany Street has 3.65 metre wide footpaths on both sides which assist sight distances for motorists waiting at the stop signs, and sign posted No Stopping on each leg of the intersection helps keep the corners clear, which ensures good visibility and enhances safety. Short sections of double centre lines exist in Botany Street, which helps highlight the intersection to motorists travelling along Botany Street. There were no road safety deficiencies identified at this location.

 

10.    Intersection of Ethel Lane and Cronulla Lane

Due to the narrow width of both Ethel Lane and Cronulla Lane and boundary fences on 3 of the 4 corners, sight distances at this intersection are poor. A raised threshold style speed bump is located in Cronulla Lane immediately south of the intersection which highlights the intersection to through traffic along Cronulla Lane and helps to reduce any excessive speeds.

 

The stop signs facing both directions of Ethel Lane are justified by the poor sight distances and observations showed that provided appropriate care and patience are used, motorists can negotiate the intersection safely. This requires moving slowly forward from the stop line to improve sight distance before crossing the intersection.

 

A relatively new residential building is located on the North West corner and a splayed corner has been provided as shown in the following photograph. This assists sight distance on that corner significantly and although there may be limited future opportunities to do the same thing on other corners, Council should consider requiring any future redevelopment of corner properties to provide a similar splay. Other than these possible future corner splays to improve the poor sight distances there were no road safety deficiencies identified at this location.

 

11.    Intersection of Ethel Lane and Cronulla Street

Cronulla Street is of similar dimensions and with similar traffic characteristics as Botany Street. Its wide footpaths and road width provide good sight distances for motorists waiting at the stop signs in Ethel Lane. No Stopping restrictions are located only on the east side of Cronulla Street on both sides of Ethel Lane, because of the steep upgrade in Ethel Lane on that side of the intersection. These restrictions help provide good visibility along Cronulla Street. There were no road safety deficiencies identified at this location.

 

12.    Intersection of Ethel Lane and Lily Lane

Lily Lane is of similar narrow dimensions to Cronulla Lane and consequently there is also poor sight distance for motorists in all directions. However the Audit’s observations showed that provided appropriate care and patience are used, motorists can negotiate the intersection safely. There were no road safety deficiencies identified at this location.

 

13.    Intersection of Ethel Lane and Lily Street

Lily Street is 12.8 metres wide kerb to kerb with 3.65 metre wide footpaths on both sides, which provides motorists exiting Ethel Lane with reasonably good sight distances. It was noted that Ethel Lane is on a slight up grade and that at school pick up times parked cars encroached within the 10 metre statutory No Stopping distance, which reduced visibility for motorists using Ethel Lane. This was exacerbated by a utility service box on the south side.


 

Due to the higher traffic volumes and speeds along Lily Street compared to other nearby residential streets, the auditor recommended the installation of 10 metre No Stopping signs in Lily Street on both sides of Ethel Lane.  This was completed by Council in early 2015.

 

14.    STOP signs in Ethel Lane

Each intersection along Ethel Lane is controlled by STOP signs. STOP signs are normally reserved for intersections which have poor safety records or factors which require motorists to stop before proceeding. In the case of Ethel Lane, the poor sight distances at Cronulla Lane, Lily Lane, Lily Street and Xenia Avenue justify the use of STOP signs.

 

The justification for STOP signs at Botany Street and Cronulla Street is lower however the STOP signs also serve as a deterrent to potential through traffic users (rat-runners) who may otherwise use Ethel Lane, creating higher volumes and speeds.

 

The Road Safety Audit concluded that the existing STOP sign controls along Ethel Lane are appropriate and should not be altered.

 

15.    Potential One-Way Traffic

As part of the Road Safety Audit report, the assessors were requested to consider whether one-way traffic being introduced into Ethel Lane could improve road safety.

 

On site observations showed that on the few occasions that vehicles travelled in opposite directions at the same time, they had no difficulty passing each other and did so at appropriate speeds. There was no physical impediment to two way traffic.

 

There are known disadvantages to one-way traffic and it is generally accepted that there needs to be significant potential advantages before one way traffic is introduced.

 

The usual advantages are to reduce congestion in a traffic network (e.g. in a CBD) or to address an accident record relating to two way traffic. The Road Safety Audit noted that there is no congestion or accident record which could be reduced by one-way traffic in Ethel Lane.

 

The disadvantages of introducing a one way restriction include:

•   Speeds increase in one-way streets;

•   Increased speeds reduce pedestrian safety and increase risks for resident’s use of driveways / garages;

•   It forces motorists into round-the-block movements, adding to driver frustration and increasing turning movements at nearby intersections;

•   It is inconvenient for many residents; and the inconvenience usually leads to occasional illegal driving against the one-way flow, significantly increasing crash potential.

 

Implemented Works

 

16.    Existing “Give Way” restrictions on Ethel Lane at all intersecting streets have been converted to “STOP” signs and statutory 10m “No Stopping” signs were installed in Botany Street and Lily Street at their intersection with Ethel Lane.

 


 

17.    The resident has made representations that the traffic measures implemented were ineffective and as a result, safety of residents and motorists is still being compromised. The resident is requesting that Council investigate the traffic issues being experienced in Ethel Lane and make changes to improve the safety.

 

Resident Concerns

 

18.    The resident turns from Botany Street into Ethel Lane and if there are vehicles travelling eastbound along the lane they are required to reverse back onto Botany Street.

 

19.    When garbage trucks use the lanes on collection days, there is insufficient width to allow two-way vehicle flow and the resident has encountered many near misses with the truck at the intersections along Ethel Lane.

 

20.    The resident is requesting that Ethel Lane and Cronulla Lane be converted to one-way with vehicles entering Ethel Lane from Botany Street (westbound direction) and Cronulla Lane exiting onto Durham Street (southbound direction).

 

Financial Implications

 

21.    No budget impact for this report.

 

File Reference

D17/684480

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Ethel Lane Aerial

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC077-17             Ethel Lane, Carlton - Traffic Concerns

[Appendix 1]          Ethel Lane Aerial

 

 

Page 26

 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 27

Item:                   TAC078-17        Penshurst Street, Penshurst - Request for disabled parking outside 102. 

Author:              Senior Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

a)      That the perpendicular parking space outside no 102 Penshurst Street, Penshurst be signposted as disabled parking.

b)      That the restriction be reviewed on an annual basis to verify if it is still required.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report seeks the committee approval to install a disabled parking space outside number 102 Penshurst Street, Penshurst.

 

Background

1.   Council received a representation from a close relative of the resident of 102 Penshurst Street Penshurst.  She advised that at present there is an on street parking space in front of the elderly resident’s home running across the nature strip perpendicular to the road. 

 

2.   This space was created some years ago when the roadside parking was replaced with a “No Stopping” zone, to clear the sight distance for the pedestrian crossing in Penshurst Street. 

 

3.   Two spaces were created in front of 102 and 104 Penshurst Street, Penshurst, as these two premises do not have off street parking and relied solely on street parking. Accordingly needed to be compensated for the loss of parking that resulted from the “No Stopping” restriction.  

 

4.   The space outside 102 Penshurst Street has primarily been utilised by the carers of this resident, including her daughter (primary carer), her GP, district nurse and other service providers who need to park within close proximity to her premises.

 

5.   However, in recent times the parking spot is being used more frequently for school drop-off and pick-up at the adjacent Catholic school, and longer term or full day parking.

 

6.   Council has been advised that the resident is a 94 year old War Widow and Veterans Affairs pensioner. In the past 18 months she has suffered considerable loss of mobility. She is unable to walk without assistance and cannot walk in excess of 50 meters.

 

7.   The full and partial occupancy of the parking spot on a regular basis means that her carer (who herself has a disability parking permit), her doctor, nurse and other service providers find it difficult (and at times impossible) to park within a reasonable proximity to her house, which creates difficulty for her to attend medical and other necessary appointments.

 

8.   In line with government policy on care for the ageing, the resident has expressed her wishes to stay in her own home for as long as possible. In recent times this has become more difficult due to her reduced mobility and further exacerbated by the current parking issues.

 

9.   Accordingly the resident has requested to have the zoning for the current public parking spot changed to disabled parking only. She is aware that the disabled parking would not be for her benefit solely, and would be available for anyone entitled to disability parking.

 

 

Financial Implications

10.    Within budget allocation. Estimates cost $500

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 30

Item:                   TAC079-17        Roundabout at the intersection of Clarendon Road and Belmore Road, Peakhurst  

Author:              Senior Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

That the proposed design as per attached plan number U580  to install a roundabout at the intersection of Clarendon Road/Richards Avenue and Belmore Road, Peakhurst be approved.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s approval for the installation of a roundabout at the intersection of Clarendon Road/Richards Avenue and Belmore Road, Peakhurst.

 

Background

 

2.   The intersection of Belmore Road with Clarendon/ Richards Avenue is currently controlled by Give-Way restriction, whereby traffic travelling along Belmore Road has priority.

3.   In analysing the crash history for blackspot funding for the 2017/2018 Financial Year, it was found that there is a cluster of crashes that indicated that the subject intersection needs a treatment to enhance its safety.

4.   Accordingly Council applied for Blackspot funding to install a roundabout at the intersection of Belmore Road and Clarendon/Richards Avenue Peakhurst.

 

5.   The Roundabout design has catered for two pedestrian refuges in Belmore Road, north and south of the roundabout to assist pedestrians to cross Belmore Road. There are no such facilities in Clarendon Road or Richards avenue, due to bus manoeuvres needing to be accommodated.

 

6.   The design as per attached diagram has been sent to RMS for review and approval

 

7.   It is anticipated that Council’s submission for blackspot funding will be approved which will mean that RMS will contribute 100% funding for the installation of the roundabout.

 

 

 

 

Financial Implications

8.      Within budget allocation. $193,000 RMS Blackspot funding

 

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 32

Item:                   TAC080-17        Ogilvy Street, Peakhurst - Request to change parking restriction for Peakhurst West Public School 

Author:              Senior Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

That the existing restriction outside Peakhurst West Public School in Ogilvy Street, be changed to “No Parking, 8:00am-9.30am- 2.30pm-4:00pm School Days” and “1P at all other times ending at 6pm, Mon-Sun”.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.   This report seeks the traffic committee‘s recommendation to change the parking restriction in Ogilvy Street outside Peakhurst West Public School

 

Background

 

1.   In July 2015 Council received representation from Peakhurst West Public School requesting some parking restrictions to be implemented along the Ogilvy Street frontage of the school.

 

2.   The school’s request was taken to the traffic committee and the following recommendation was carried out

 

a.   “THAT the existing ‘No Parking, 8.00am-9.30am, 2.30pm-4.00pm, Bus Zone at all other times’ restriction be changed to ‘No Parking, 8.00am-9.30am, 2.30pm-4.00pm”, Bus Zone 9.30am-2.30pm, 4.00pm-6.00pm, School Days’”

 

3.   The School had requested the above mentioned Bus Zone for before and after school care.

 

4.   The School has once more written to Council advising them that the Bus Zone is no longer required due to changes in their school programs and would like the parking to be changed to “No Parking” during school times and “1P” outside school times.

 

5.   It is advised that this is a favourable outcome as the 1P will be utilised by users of the Peakhurst West Shops.

 

6.   Accordingly it is recommended to change the current parking restriction in Ogilvy Street outside the school frontage to 

 

“No Parking, 8:00am-9.30am- 2.30pm-4:00pm School Days” and “1P at all other times ending at 6.00pm Mon-Sun”.

 

7.   It is advised that the above restriction is completely contained within the school’s frontage and accordingly having the 1P restriction would benefit the customers of Peakhurst West Shops without impacting on any resident’s on street parking.

 

 

Financial Implications

8.      Within budget allocation. Estimated Cost $500

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 34

Item:                   TAC081-17        PROPOSED RETAIL/RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF A CONSOLIDATED SITE AT 160-178 STONEY CREEK ROAD
BEVERLY HILLS. 

Author:              Senior Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

a)    That the traffic calming device located on Lee Avenue north of Stoney Creek Road be redesigned and reconstructed at the cost of the developer, so as to accommodate a 12.5m Heavy Rigid Vehicle (HRV) accessing the proposed development at 160-178 Stoney Creek Road Beverly Hills.

b)    That the driveway alignment of the proposed development application along Lee Avenue be redesigned to eliminate the possibility of HRV’s from turning left out of the development into Lee Avenue.

 c)   That all loading vehicles must enter Lee Avenue and exit Lee Avenue via Stoney Creek Road to avoid heavy vehicles associated with the proposed development circulating through the surrounding local roads.

d)    That the traffic committee review the report presented to them by the author and advise of any concerns or conditions that may arise as part of the proposed development application at 160-178 Stoney Creek Road, Beverly Hills.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.      This report seeks the traffic committee’s feedback and input in regards to traffic impact that may result from a proposed development application at 160-178 Stoney Creek Road, Beverly Hills.

 

Background

 

2.      Council is currently assessing a development application proposed at 160-178 Stoney Creek Road, Beverly Hills

 

The proposed development site has a total area of approximately 3780m2 with frontages of 88m to Stoney Creek Road and 34.53m to Lee Avenue.

 

The site formerly accommodated a service station with vehicular access off both Stoney Creek Road and Lee Avenue. However that former site development has now been demolished and the site is currently vacant.

 

The existing landuse surrounding the development site comprises:

 

·        Retail/commercial properties on the north-eastern corner of Stoney Creek Road and

King Georges Road


 

 

·        3P Council carpark on the south-eastern corner of King Georges Road with Beresford

Avenue, containing a total of 29 parking spaces.

·    Predominantly residential development in the remainder of the block bounded by Stoney Creek Road – King Georges Road – Beresford Avenue and Lee Avenue.

 

The proposed development comprises of

 

·    44 x residential apartments (including 5 adaptable apartments) comprising 5 x 1-bedroom, 31 x 2-bedroom and 8 x 3-bedroom apartments.

·    A small shopping centre containing an Aldi supermarket with a total floor area of 1514m2 GLFA and 3 specialty shops with a total floor area of approximately 606m2 GLFA.

         

The proposed development will be served by a total off-street parking provision of 203 parking spaces on 3 basement parking levels with 66 parking spaces allocated to the residents of the proposed development and their visitors, and 137 parking spaces allocated to the retail component of the proposed development.

 

A loading area 20.2m x 4.5m capable of accommodating a 12.5m long heavy rigid vehicle

(HRV) is proposed to be located on Basement Level 1, where a turntable will be provided on the approach to the loading dock to facilitate truck access to/from it.

 

Vehicular access for the proposed development is proposed to be off Lee Avenue via a combined entry/exit driveway splayed to a width of approximately 10m at the property boundary, and a 6.5m wide (plus 300mm kerbs on either side) internal access ramp about 60m long. 

 

Pedestrian access is proposed off the Lee Avenue frontage as well as from the Council carpark in Beresford Street.

 

Council DCP requirement for parking stipulates that a minimum of 63 parking spaces is required for residents and their visitors and 43 parking spaces is required for the retail component of the development (DCP requires a total of 106 spaces).  This is in contrast to the RMS guidelines which stipulates that 52 parking spaces is required for residents and their visitors and 92 spaces is required for the retail component of the development (RMS requires a total of 144 spaces).

 

As mentioned before the proposed development will be served by a total off-street parking provision of 203 parking  spaces on 3 basement parking levels with 66 parking spaces allocated to the residents of the proposed development and their visitors, and 137 parking spaces allocated to the retail component of the proposed development. This exceeds both Council DCP requirement and RMS requirement.

 


 

The traffic generation potential of the proposed retail/residential development during the

weekday AM and PM peak periods is as per the below table:

 

 

 

The proposed development is likely to generate a total of 111 vtph in the am Peak, and 283 vtph in the pm peak

 

The effect of the additional traffic generated by the proposed development on key intersections on the road network serving the site has been assessed using the SIDRA traffic model.

 

The results of which is as per below.


 

The access routes likely to be used by traffic when approaching/departing the proposed development is shown as per below:

 

 


 

A comparison of existing and projected AM and PM peak period traffic flows on those

routes is set out on the table below:

The RTA Guidelines specify the following environmental capacity performance standards for residential streets:

 

As can be observed

 

·    The additional traffic demand on the local street system which provides access to the site is restricted to relatively few residential streets, Lee Avenue, Norfolk Avenue and Morgan Street

 

·    The projected post-development traffic demand is less than the maximum level of traffic activity recommended by the environmental capacity performance standards for local residential streets by the RTA Guidelines in Lee Avenue and Norfolk Avenue.

 

·    Traffic activity on Morgan Street exceeds the maximum level for a collector road specified by the environmental capacity performance standards adopted by the RTA Guidelines under both existing and projected post-development traffic demand.

In regards to loading and unloading the proposed development makes a provision for a loading area of 20.2m x 4.5m on the basement 1 level of the building, which can accommodate a heavy rigid vehicle 12.5m long. 

 

Vehicular access for the loading area is proposed via the driveway and access ramp off Lee Avenue with a turntable provided to facilitate truck access from the loading dock.

 

The majority of commercial vehicles using the loading area will be generated by the Aldi

Supermarket, with an anticipated average of up to 6-7 deliveries per day concentrated during

the morning period.

 

Aldi advised that the largest size vehicle required for deliveries to the supermarket is the 12.5m long HRV, and have provided the following indicative delivery schedule:

 

Produce:           1-2 deliveries by HRV generally between 6.00-8.00am

Dry Goods:       2-3 deliveries a week by HRV, generally during the morning

Bread:                1 delivery per day by an MRV or smaller vehicle, typically between 7.00-8.00am

Miscellaneous Goods: 2-3 deliveries per day by an MRV (or smaller vehicle), spread throughout the day.

 


 

The users of the other three retail spaces remains unknown until the development is completed, accordingly the delivery vehicle generation potential of the 3 small retail tenancies cannot be certain, However it is anticipated that deliveries to/from the smaller retail tenancies in the proposed development are expected to be made using an MRV or smaller vehicle.

 

It can also be anticipated that these retail tenancies will each typically generate 1 delivery per week by MRV (i.e. 3 x MRV deliveries per week)

 

Turning path diagrams showing the HRV entering/departing the site via the Lee Avenue driveway and the HRV manoeuvring into and out of the loading area are as shown:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As can be seen from the above swept path diagrams the HRV truck accessing the site drives over the existing traffic calming device as shown in the picture below.  Accordingly if the DA is approved in its current form, the subject traffic device will need to be redesigned and reconstructed to accommodate the manoeuvre of the heavy vehicle into the property.

The threshold can remain in its current location, but it will need to be redesigned without the landscaped kerb blisters.

The cost of the redesign and reconstruction of the subject traffic calming device will need to be borne by the developer.

Furthermore it is paramount that all heavy vehicles entering and leaving the site must do so by utilising Stoney Creek Road. This is to avoid heavy vehicles circulating local roads to access the subject development.

 

 

Financial Implications

3.      No budget impact for this report.

 

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 45

Item:                   TAC082-17        110 Penshurst Street, Penshurst - Request for 1P restriction 

Author:              Senior Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

 Recommendation

That the request to install a designated “1P” parking restriction outside 110 Penshurst Street, Penshurst be denied.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      This report is presented to the committee to review a request made by the strata managing agent of 110 Penshurst Street Penshurst on behalf of the owner’s corporation to restrict one car parking space outside their premises to 1 hour parking.

 

Background

 

2.    Council received a request from the strata managing agent of 110 Penshurst Street Penshurst on behalf of the owner’s corporation to restrict a car parking space outside their premises to 1 hour.

3.    The agent has advised that as their strata plan is an over 55’s building, many of their owners require various services to frequently attend to their lot due to age and disabilities.

4.    Accordingly the strata body has requested that Council to consider installing a 1P restriction to allow for more parking availability outside their property at 110 Penshurst Street Penshurst.

 

5.    It is advised that Penshurst Street, north of Forest Road is a local residential street.  This section of Penshurst Street does not accommodate any businesses except for St Declan’s Catholic School and St Declan’s Church.

 

6.    While it is appreciated that the above mentioned facilities do generate demand for parking, by employees of the school, parishioners of the church and parents dropping off and picking up their children, there is ample street parking within close vicinity to 110 Penshurst Street, Penshurst.

 

7.    There is a 5.5m long driveway servicing the complex which can be utilised for pick-up and drop-off of residents as required.

 

8.    In addition it is advised that installing a 1P restriction outside 110 Penshurst Street Penshurst, would set a precedent at this location whereby all other home/strata corporations would be entitled to the same request.

 

 

9.   Parking restrictions are reserved for business centres where quick turnover of parking is required for customers of the businesses.

 

 

 

Financial Implications

10.    No budget impact for this report.

 

 

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 47

Item:                   TAC083-17        MacMahon Street, Hurstville - Request for a Disabled Parking Space  

Author:              Senior Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

 Recommendation

That a 5.5m disabled parking space be installed outside 9 MacMahon Street, Hurstville.

 

Executive Summary

1.      This report seeks the Committee’s approval to install a disabled parking space in MacMahon Street, Hurstville.

 

Background

 

2.      In May 2016, Hurstville City Council and Kogarah City Council were amalgamated to form Georges River Council. The subsequent movement of staff from the existing Kogarah Civic Centre to the new Georges River Civic Centre at Hurstville required the allocation of additional car parking to accommodate operational council vehicles. This parking was created in the MacMahon Street Carpark and operates between 6am and 6pm weekdays. 

3.      As a result of the change to the MacMahon Street car park it has been identified that there is no longer a disabled parking space available in the upper car park between 6am and 6pm weekdays.

4.      To compensate for the loss of this disabled parking zone it is recommended that 5.5m of the existing “1P” restriction outside number 9 MacMahon Street, Hurstville be converted to disabled parking.

5.      MacMahon Street houses medical services and a pharmacy along its frontage which would generate a demand for disabled parking spaces.

6.      The proposed location of the new disabled parking space is directly across the road from the MacMahon Street car park and should provide additional benefit in being located on the same side of the road as the existing medical facilities and pharmacy.  

Financial Implications

7.      Within budget allocation. Estimated cost of $500.

 

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 49

Item:                   TAC084-17        Treacy Street Hurstville - No Stopping across St Vincent De Paul vehicular crossing  

Author:              Senior Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

That a “No Stopping” restriction be installed across the vehicular crossing of St Vincent De Paul Society on Treacy Street, Hurstville

 

Executive Summary

This report seeks the Committee’s approval to install “No Stopping” restriction across the vehicular crossing of St Vincent De Paul Society in Treacy Street Hurstville.

 

Background

 

1.   Council received representation from the store manager of St Vincent De Paul Society located on Treacy Street, Hurstville requesting that Council install a “No Stopping” restriction across their vehicular crossing on Treacy Street.

2.   St Vincent De Paul is located on the corner of Treacy Street and the railway overpass in a prime location within Hurstville’s busy shopping district.

 

3.   The store manager advised that due to the high demand for parking in Hurstville and especially in Treacy Street, on many occasions motorists have parked across the St Vincent De Paul Society vehicular crossing, blocking access to their loading area.

 

4.   The manager further advised that goods get dropped off and picked up from their shop at any time of the day and they require the vehicular crossing to be clear at all times.

 

5.   Accordingly the manager requested that a “No Stopping” restriction be installed across their vehicular crossing to avoid motorists utilising the driveway to drop off or pick up passengers or park across it.

 

     

 

         

 

Financial Implications

 

6.      Within budget allocation – RMS Traffic Facility Grant – approximately $350.  


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 51

Item:                   TAC085-17        Roberts Avenue, Mortdale - Request to Formalise Bus Stop 

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the existing bus stop at 60-62 Roberts Avenue, Mortdale be changed to a 28 metre ‘Bus Zone’ extending across the three driveways of 60-62 Roberts Avenue, Mortdale.

(b)     Further that Punchbowl Buses be advised of Council’s decision.

 

Executive Summary

1.      Council has received a representation from Punchbowl Buses requesting to formalise the existing bus stop outside 60-62 Roberts Avenue, Mortdale by installing a bus zone.

 

Background

2.      Punchbowl Bus Company made representation to Council requesting that the existing bus stop outside 60-62 Roberts Avenue be converted to a Bus Zone to help delineate the bus stop and prevent illegal parking.

3.      According to Australian Road Rules 2014, Part 12, Division 6, Rule 195,  A driver (except the driver of a public bus) must not stop at a bus stop, or on the road, within 20 metres before a sign on the road that indicates the bus stop, and 10 metres after the sign, unless the driver stops at a place on a length of road, or in an area, to which a parking control sign applies and the driver is permitted to stop at that place under these Rules.

4.      The distances outlined in Road Rule 195 allow buses to comfortably pull in and out of the bus stop without hindering passengers and other motorists.

5.      Punchbowl Buses has advised that cars regularly park within the statutory 30 metre bus stop identified above. Formalising the established bus stop would address illegal parking issues.

6.      Punchbowl buses will notify the impacted properties advising them of the proposed changes. No other bus stop infrastructure will be installed.

 

 

Financial Implications

7.      Within budget allocation. Estimated cost is $300

 

File Reference

D17/91953

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Roberts Ave, Mortdale - Proposed Bus Zone

 


Georges River Council - Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - Tuesday, 18 July 2017

TAC085-17             Roberts Avenue, Mortdale - Request to Formalise Bus Stop

[Appendix 1]          Roberts Ave, Mortdale - Proposed Bus Zone

 

 

Page 52

 


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 54

Item:                   TAC086-17        57-63 Pitt Street, Mortdale - Request to Remove No Parking Restriction 

Author:              Traffic Engineer

Directorate:      Assets and Infrastructure

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the existing ‘No Parking 8:30am to 6pm Mon-Fri’ restriction adjacent to 57-63 Pitt Street, Mortdale be removed.

(b)     That the existing ‘5 minute’ parking restriction adjacent to 57-63 Pitt Street, Mortdale be removed.

(c)     That 17.5 metres of existing driveway layback be removed and replaced with barrier kerb and gutter.

(d)     That 4.5 metres of existing driveway layback remain adjacent to the park maintenance gate.

(e)     Further that the resident be advised of Council’s decision.

 

Executive Summary

1.      Council has received a request from a resident to review the existing parking restrictions adjacent to 57-63 Pitt Street, Mortdale.

 

Background

2.      In August 2016, Council demolished Pasley House which housed the Mortdale Community Centre at 57-63 Pitt Street, Mortdale.

3.      Pasley House had 22 metres of kerb layback in front of the centre to allow off-street parking for visitors. A ‘No Parking 8:30am to 6pm Mon-Fri’ restriction extended across the kerb layback to allow residents to park outside of the centre’s opening hours.

4.      A ‘5 minute’ restriction was also installed near Pasley House to allow parents to drop off children at the childcare.

5.      57-63 Pitt Street, Mortdale is now the site of a park which does not require the existing parking restrictions.

6.      Removing the current no parking and 5 minute parking restrictions will provide residents of Pitt Street with approximately 6 all day parking spaces.  

7.      It is recommended that 17.5 metres of existing driveway layback be removed and replaced with barrier kerb and gutter to formalise the entire area.

 

Financial Implications

8.      Within budget allocation. Estimated cost of works is $4500

 

File Reference

ST2017/0165

 

 

 

     


Georges River Council – Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting -  Tuesday, 18 July 2017                                               Page 56

6.      General Business

7.      Next Meeting – Tuesday  15 August 2017 at 1.00pm.