Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
STATEMENT OF WITNESS
I have over 17 years experience as a Traffic Engineering and Transport Planning consultant with Traffix Group
Pty Ltd and formerly Turnbull Fenner Pty Ltd. My experience also includes a number of local government
appointments which involved acting in the role of Council’s Transport Co-ordinator or Senior Traffic Engineer.
These appointments include the City of Moreland, City of Whittlesea and the City of Darebin.
3. AREA OF EXPERTISE
I have experience and expertise in traffic management, road safety planning and engineering, parking
management and strategy development, and development impact assessment of a range of land-use
developments.
A copy of my CV is attached at Appendix A to this report.
5. EXPERIMENTS
I have visited the site to observe traffic, parking and pedestrian activity within the nearby area.
A detailed field inspection of the subject site and surrounds was undertaken by Matthew Woollard, Traffic
Engineer and Jason Bowring, Technical Officer, which included the preparation of a parking supply inventory of
the surrounding area.
Turning movement counts were also undertaken by Traffix Group/Traffix Survey at the following locations and
times:
x Swan Street & Byron Street intersection: 7am-9am & 4pm-6pm on Friday 6th May, 2011 and 11am-1pm on
Saturday 7th May, 2011, and
x Swan Street & Green Street intersection: 4pm-6pm on Friday 6th May, 2011 and 11am-1pm on Saturday, 7th
May, 2011.
6. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
I have reviewed the following documents as part of my assessment:
x Town Planning application plans prepared by Armsby Architects (dated, November, 2010),
x Department of Transport letter (dated 7th February, 2011),
x Email from VicRoads (dated 9th February, 2011),
x Agenda and Minutes of Special Meeting of Council – Volumes 1 & 2 (22nd February, 2011),
x Yarra City Council’s Notice of Refusal to Grant Planning Permit (dated 23rd February, 2011),
x Application for Review (dated 8th March, 2011),
x Internal referral by Council’s Traffic Engineer (dated 8th December, 2010 and 25th January, 2011),
12958A#1(final) Page 2
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
x Internal referral by Council’s Waste Management Officer (dated 21st January, 2011),
x Traffic Impact Assessment completed by O’Brien Traffic on behalf of permit applicant (dated November,
2010),
x Planning Report completed by Planned FX on behalf of permit applicant (dated November, 2010),
x Draft Swan Street Structure Plan (dated May, 2011),
x relevant sections of the Yarra Planning Scheme.
7. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
Refer to Section 13 of evidence.
8. OTHER MATTERS
Matters Covered By This Opinion
x Impact of the development traffic, particularly as it relates to the use of Byron Street and Green Street.
Provisional Opinions
Not relevant.
Other members of Traffix Group involved in the preparation of Evidence
Matthew Woollard (Traffic Engineer) assisted with the preparation of this statement, site inspections and parking
inventory, and
Jason Bowring assisted with site inspection, parking inventory and turning movement counts.
Report Completeness
Final report.
I have visited the site, made various assessments, perused relevant documentation and plans, and report as
follows.
9. THE PROPOSAL
The application plans considered by Yarra City Council for 140-160 Swan Street, Richmond (Dimmeys site)
propose a 10 storey mixed-use development accommodating residential, retail and various commercial uses and
associated car parking and access (plans prepared by Armsby Architects, dated November, 2010). The proposal
involves the part demolition of the existing Dimmeys building.
On-site car parking for the development is proposed within two separate basement carparks. Car parking for the
commercial uses is provided in Basement 1, which is accessed via Green Street and provides 74 spaces for staff
and customers. Car parking for the residential uses is provided in Basement 2, which is accessed via Byron
Street and provides 100 spaces for resident use only. No internal ramp connection is provided between the
basement carparks.
A breakdown of the development floor space, car and bicycle parking is provided in Table 1.
It is noted that the type or brand of supermarket is not nominated in the application documents.
12958A#1(final) Page 3
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
As detailed in the above table, 25 bicycle spaces for residents and 10 bicycle spaces for visitors are provided
within Basement 2. A further 8 bicycle spaces are provided for the commercial uses within Basement 1.
The main pedestrian access to the building is via Swan Street and Green Street.
An on-site loading bay is provided for the retail uses and is located at the rear of the site. The loading bay is
accessed via Green Street, adjacent the entrance to the ramp to the commercial carpark.
The proposal detailed in the application plans included roadworks along Green Street.
12958A#1(final) Page 4
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
(c) Provide an outline of the measures proposed to facilitate non-private vehicle transport use.
This must include, but not limited to:
x Welcome packs of information provided to staff and residents upon commencement of
employment/occupation of residence which includes:
x Tram, train and bus timetables relevant to the local area
x A plan depicting the location of bicycle parking and facilities available on the land
(d) Provision of a display in the entry lobby (or alternative location agreed by the Director of
Public Transport) which incorporates the following:
x A map depicting the site and the locations of key public transport stops (such as East
Richmond/Richmond Stations, tram stops on Swan Street and bus stops on Punt
Road etc).
x Details of the approximate distances and trip times to these stops.
x Pedestrian, cycling and public transport routes to key destinations (such as the MCG,
CBD, recreation areas, shopping precincts such as Bridge Road, Victoria Gardens
and Chapel Street etc)
x A plan showing the bicycle parking areas provided for use by staff/residents
x Where possible, multi-lingual information/brochures regarding transport timetables,
routes, destinations etc
75. Before the use of the land commences, the Green Travel Plan must be implemented, including the
provision of the entry display, to the satisfaction of the Department of Transport (Public Transport
Division).
76. The Green Travel Plan must not be amended without written consent of the Responsible Authority
following consultation with the Department of Transport (Public Transport Division).
77. Once approved the Green Travel Plan must form part of the planning permit and any ongoing
management plan for the land to ensure the Green Travel Plan continues to be implemented by
staff/residents to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
VicRoads is not a referral authority under Clause 52.29 of the Planning Scheme as access to Swan
Street (Category 1 Road Zone) is not altered. The application was referred to VicRoads as an
interested party, who offered the following comments as summarised in the Council officer’s report:
x The adequacy of Byron Street to cater for 2-way traffic does not comply with Planning Scheme and
Australian Standards. Given the operating width there is concern that this will impact on traffic and
tram movements along Swan Street.
x The impacts on the operation of Swan Street have not been adequately considered by the
applicant’s Traffic Consultant and greater analysis should be undertaken.
x Concern that no swept path drawings have been submitted to demonstrate adequate access for
delivery trucks into Green Street.
(p) A minimum of 52 on site bicycle parking spaces, including location and specification of bike
parking;
(q) Provision of 9 additional bicycle spaces for the commercial use to be provided at Basement
level 1 and/or along the frontage of the development to Swan Street;
(r) Provision for an on-site shower and change room facility for employees of the commercial uses.
12. Prior to the occupation of any part of the development, a Car Parking Management Plan prepared
by an appropriately qualified traffic consultant must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. When approved, the Car Parking Management Plan will be endorsed and
form part of this permit. The Car Parking Management Plan must address, but is not necessarily
limited to the following:
(a) An internal signage plan distinguishing permanent parking areas from visitor parking areas,
directional arrows and signage, informative signs indicating location of disabled bays, small
parking bays, bicycle parking, exits, restrictions, pay parking system etc;
(b) Mechanisms to ensure non-permanently allocated car parking spaces will only be available for
visitors to the site (with a minimum of 10 visitor car parking spaces for the residents);
(c) The number and location of the car parking spaces to each commercial tenancy and dwelling,
and the clear identification of dwelling or commercial uses without any car parking;
(d) The number and location of car spaces for shared use, including time of shared use;
(e) The management of visitor car parking spaces and security arrangements for occupants of the
development;
(f) Details of way finding, cleaning, security of end of trip bicycle facilities;
(g) Policing arrangements and/or formal agreements; and
(h) Details regarding the management of loading and unloading of goods and materials for the
commercial and residential uses;
13. The Car Parking Management Plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority. No alterations may be made without the prior written approval of the Responsible
Authority.
14. Within 12 months of the commencement of the development, details of the Shared Zone for the
length of Byron Street must be prepared by an independent and suitably qualified professional in
consultation with and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and submitted to the
Responsible Authority. The Shared Zone must include various methods to control traffic and speed
to allow for safe pedestrian movement and to manage the potential conflicts between traffic
generation, bicycles and pedestrians using Byron Street.
15. All works associated with the provision of a Shared Zone as set out in condition 14 of this permit
must be undertaken prior to the use commencing at the cost of the permit holder and thereafter
maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible.
16. Prior to the commencement of the development, the permit holder must make a contribution to
Council for the cost of works associated with the reconstruction and upgrade of Green Street
between Railway Place and Swan Street. The one-off payment of approximately 50% of the total
cost of works will be no more than $175,000.
22. Unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority, no fewer than 174 car parking
spaces (including no less than 2 disabled compliant, car parking spaces) and 52 bicycle parking
spaces must be provided on the land at all times, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
23. The area set aside for the parking of vehicles, together with the associated access lanes as
delineated on the endorsed plan must:
(a) be designed, provided and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to
the commencement of the development hereby permitted;
(b) thereafter be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;
12958A#1(final) Page 6
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
(c) be made available for such use at all times and not used for any other purpose;
(d) be properly formed to such levels that it can be used in accordance with the endorsed plan; and
(e) be drained and sealed with an all weather seal coat.
24. Bicycle access must at all times be clearly signed and marked, to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority.
25. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, car parking must be allocated in accordance with the Car
Parking Management Plan (condition 12).
26. The development must provide for a minimum of 1 shower and change room for use by all
employees of the commercial components of the development, to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority.
27. All loading and un-loading must be carried out within the confines of the property boundaries (other
than the small retail components) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
28. The loading areas must be maintained in a clean and tidy manner at all times to the satisfaction of
the Responsible Authority.
29. Loading movements at the Green Street loading dock are restricted to between the hours of 6am
and 10pm, seven days a week, unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
30. Trucks delivering goods to the commercial uses via Green Street are limited to no greater than 12.5
metre Heavy Rigid Vehicles, unless with the further written approval of the Responsible Authority.
12958A#1(final) Page 7
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Development Site
Subject Site
12958A#1(final) Page 8
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Subject Site
12958A#1(final) Page 9
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Byron Street is a local road which extends in a north-south direction between Swan Street to the north
and terminates at a dead end at the railway line to the south. The length of this street is approximately
70m. On-street parking is prohibited in Byron Street by No Stopping restrictions.
Byron Street currently provides vehicle access to the Dimmeys site (although currently disused), the rear
of commercial properties fronting Swan Street and a mixed-use development at 2-8 Byron Street.
Byron Street has a road reservation width of 6.1m, which accommodates a pavement width of 4.2m with
narrow footpaths on each side as depicted below.
12958A#1(final) Page 10
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Green Street is a local road which is aligned in a north-south direction between Swan Street in the north
and Railway Place in the south.
Green Street has a pavement width of approximately 8.7m, which provides for a shared traffic lane and
marked kerbside parking on both sides as depicted below.
On-street parking in Green Street is restricted to 1P Ticket parking, applying 8am-5pm Mon-Sat along
the west side and 8am-5pm Mon-Fri, 8am-5:30 Sat along the east side.
Green Street has been identified as a cycling route in the draft Swan Street Structure Plan.
The default urban speed limit of 50km/h applies to Green Street.
12958A#1(final) Page 11
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Figure 14: Railway Place (view east) Figure 15: Railway place (view west)
A review of road casualty crash statistics for the past 5 years of available data (1st June, 2005 to 31st
May, 2010)1 has been undertaken for the nearby area. The crash investigation area is shown in Figure
16.
1 Casualty crash data is contained in the VicRoads’ Crashstats Internet Database and includes all reported casualty crashes (i.e. injury crashes), which are classified
into Fatal Injury, Serious Injury and Other Injury (i.e. minor injury) crashes. Property damage only or non-injury crashes are not included in the database.
12958A#1(final) Page 12
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Survey Area
The review indicates that there have been 14 casualty crashes reported within the review area. A
summary of the reported casualty crashes is provided in the table below.
The review identifies a number of casualty crashes on Swan Street at local street intersections. These
do not highlight a discernable crash pattern and a number of the reported crashes were not ‘intersection
type’ crashes.
The rate of casualty crashes at this location is more a function of higher exposure (with high traffic
volumes and higher pedestrian volumes on Swan Street), rather than any fundamental safety concerns
with these intersections.
Accordingly, the casualty crashes do not highlight any discernable crash pattern or any particular road
safety concerns along local streets within the review area.
Table 2: Casualty Crash History
Type
Location Year Time Severity Type of Accident
(DCA code)
Intersection of Swan Street Vehicle stopped at traffic signals opened car door
2008 15:40 SI 163 (B)
and Carroll Street and cyclist travelling east collided with door.
12958A#1(final) Page 13
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Type
Location Year Time Severity Type of Accident
(DCA code)
A peak hour turning movement count was conducted by Traffix Group at the intersections of Byron
Street and Green Street at Swan Street. Pedestrian movements along the footpath on the south side of
Swan Street (i.e. crossing Byron Street) and along Byron Street were also recorded.
The counts were conducted between the hours of 4-6pm on Friday 6th May, 2011 and 11am-1pm
Saturday 7th May, 2011, which represent the typical peak periods for retail/commercial traffic. The
counts at Byron Street also included an AM peak period count between 7-9am on Friday 6th May, 2011
7-9am.
A summary of the recorded AM and PM peak hour and Saturday lunch time volumes are presented in
Figure 17.
This figure indicates that Byron Street carries the following traffic levels:
x AM peak hour: 4 vehicles and 7 pedestrians per hour
x PM peak hour: 7 vehicles and 3 pedestrians per hour
x Saturday lunchtime period: 3 vehicles and 4 pedestrians per hour
12958A#1(final) Page 14
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Swan Street
3 (20) [28] 0 (16) [19]
0 (5) [1] 1 (0) [1] n/a (24) [21] n/a (9) [13]
89 (332) [463]
4 0 0 n/a n/a
Subject Site (16) (3)
7 (1) (1) (0)
[0] [1] [0] [23] [6]
(3)
[4]
Byron Street Green Street
Figure 17: Existing Traffic and Pedestrian Volumes – Friday 6th May, 2011 & Saturday 7th May, 2011
12958A#1(final) Page 15
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
2 Suitable parking spaces are defined as spaces that would be usable by residents, staff and visitors of the development and excludes ‘No
Stopping’ areas, ‘Clearways’, ‘Permit Zones’ ‘Work Zones’ etc, during the relevant enforcement periods.
12958A#1(final) Page 16
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
Legend
Subject Site
Survey Area
Off-street parking
3 Note, these spaces would still be reasonably accessible via the lifts as the residential lift lobby and commercial lift lobby are nearby
each other.
12958A#1(final) Page 17
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
The application documents indicate that the existing floor area of the Dimmeys building is approximately
6,100m2. The use was stated to operate 7 days a week (typically 9am to 5/5:30pm and until 7pm on
Fridays).
While I am unable to confirm the accuracy of the floor area figure and actual use of all floor area, I
accept that given the limited availability of on-site parking (approximately up to 6 were observed parking
in the rear loading areas) and a two-level building occupying the majority of the 4,034m2 site area, that
the existing use operates with a significant parking credit.4
This credit calculated on a statutory or empirical basis would exceed the short-fall sought by the current
application and provide a strong ground for parking dispensation.
There is a reasonable opportunity to share short-term visitor/customer parking between the residential
and commercial uses, due to a variation in the peak demand times for these uses.
This site is well serviced by public transport, including East Richmond Railway Station located
approximately 150m east of the site, Tram Route 70 running past the site in Swan Street and Tram
Routes 78 & 79 operating along Church Street approximately 250m east of the site.
There is publically available on-street and off-street parking areas in the nearby area.
4 The Council officer’s report calculates that the main building occupies the full site frontage (approx. 56m) and extends for a depth of approx. 56m along Byron and
Green Streets. This suggests a building footprint of approximately 3,136m2.
12958A#1(final) Page 18
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
The O’Brien Traffic Report (dated November, 2010) did not include any surveys of available parking in
the nearby area, relying largely on an empirical assessment of parking demand and the site’s parking
credit.
I would expect that on-street and off-street parking in this area experiences high demands at times,
however, I accept that the level of parking overflow from this site is unlikely to exceed the demand
historically generated by the Dimmeys store.
The Advisory Committee Report (dated August, 2007) for the Review of Parking Provisions in the
Victoria Planning Provisions has recommended the following rates applying to the relevant uses in
‘Activity Centres’:
x Shop: 3.5 spaces per 100m2 of leasable floor area
x Supermarket: 5.0 spaces per 100m2 of leasable floor area
x Office: 3.0 spaces per 100m2 of net floor area
x Dwelling (1 and 2 bedroom): 1 space per dwelling, with no on-site visitor parking
The O’Brien Traffic Report (dated November, 2010) relies on varying case study, concluding that the
applicable parking rate should be in the order of 2.5 to 3 spaces per 100m2 for the retail floor space
(supermarket and small retail).
Whilst some of this data in not well substantiated or necessarily relevant in the document5, other
available case study data generally supports a reduced rate for a supermarket use in inner city locations
within the nominated range.6
The development provides on-site parking at a rate of 1 space per dwelling and has the capacity to also
provide 1 space per loft (minimum).
Given this rate of parking provision, combined with the available parking credit (in part or full), I am
satisfied that an adequate number of spaces is provided on the site to support the proposed
development.
5 For example, the validity of the interview survey results of the existing Swan Street supermarket is be highly dependent on where the interview surveys were
conducted from (Swan Street or carpark entrance)) and the sample size. The Aldi survey results are not particularly relevant unless the store is proposed to be an
Aldi.
6 For example, case study data documented in the of Port Phillip Sustainable Transport Policy and Parking Rates report (prepared by Ratio Consultants, Mar 07)
includes surveys of several supermarkets in the City of Port Phillip. The parking rates recorded for larger supermarkets were (noting that the data also included
smaller IGA/Foodworks stores):
x Coles Supermarket (2,590m2) in Carlisle Street, Balaclava – 2.2 spaces per 100m2
x Safeway Supermarket (1,640m2) in Carlisle Street, Balaclava – 1.8 spaces per 100m2
x Safeway Supermarket (2,225m2) in Acland Street, St Kilda – 1.3 spaces per 100m2
12958A#1(final) Page 19
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
The proposal provides 25 bicycle spaces for residents and 10 bicycle spaces for residential visitors
within Basement 2. A further 8 bicycle spaces are provided for the commercial uses within Basement 1.
Accordingly, there is a need to provide additional parking in this development to satisfy Clause 52.34 as
a minimum requirement.
The Council officer’s recommendation included the following conditions with respect to bicycle parking
provision:
1(p) A minimum of 52 on site bicycle parking spaces, including location and specification of bike
parking;
(q) Provision of 9 additional bicycle spaces for the commercial use to be provided at Basement
level 1 and/or along the frontage of the development to Swan Street.
(r) Provision for an on-site shower and change room facility for employees of the commercial
uses.
These conditions are supported and should represent the minimum level of provision for this
development. It is also recommended that some provision for on-street bicycle parking also be made to
cater for retail customers.
This assessment indicates that the residential carpark ramp does not have sufficient length (and or
grades) to reach the nominated basement floor level. The shortfall is 720mm which is a significant error
that would need to be rectified. This change will potentially involve a combination of steepening and
lengthening of the ramp and will have consequential headroom implications to the ground floor loading
area directly above this ramp.
Aside from this issue, I am unable to determine at this stage whether the ramp provides for sufficient
headroom clearance above the ramp as a section drawing of the ramp is not provided within the plans. I
note that the O’Brien Traffic Report does not confirm that adequate headroom clearance is actually
achieved, concluding that “it should be ensured that minimum headroom clearance of at least 2.3m is
provided throughout the basement carparks”.
12958A#1(final) Page 20
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
I recommend that if a permit were to issue for this application that amended plans be prepared, which
show ramp designs which generally accord with AS2890.1-2004 including a section drawing along the
ramp showing a minimum headroom clearance of 2.2m.
Commercial Ramp (to Green Street)
A similar issue has been identified for the commercial carpark access to Green Street however this was
not significant as the ramp grades were steeper than required and the difference was only 230mm. This
is not a significant design issue, and the reduced grades can be accommodated within the plans, subject
to the required headroom clearance being achieved.
The grades shown on the application plans, beginning at the street level at Green Street are:
Section Length Nominated Grade Fall
4.0m 1:30 (3.33%) 0.13m
6.0m 1:7 (14.3%) 0.86m
6.0m 1:7 (14.3%) 0.86m
6.5m 1:50 (2%) 0.13m
FALL 1.98m
Nominated RL at street level 7.65m
Calculated RL at basement 5.67m
Nominated RL at basement 5.9m
(0.23m surplus along ramp)
I am also unable to determine whether the ramp provides for sufficient headroom clearance as a
sectional drawing of the ramp is not provided within the plans. It would appear that there is potentially a
headroom clearance issue along this ramp as the floor to floor level along the ramp is lower than 2.5m at
the critical point.
A permit condition addressing this issue is also required if a permit were to issue.
Provision of Adequate Manoeuvring and Sight Lines
When exiting the commercial carpark the bulk of drivers are expected to exit through the access aisle for
spaces 20-37 and turn left onto the ramp to Green Street. When performing a left hand turn onto the
ramp, a driver may not necessarily be able to see another vehicle which is entering the carpark from this
ramp. This situation may cause conflicts as the exiting car could swing too wide and they may turn into
the path of an oncoming vehicle travelling down the ramp.
Accordingly, I recommend that a clear sight triangle and splay be provided on the corner as shown in
Figure 19 to ensure that an exiting car will be able to see an entering car.
A pedestrian sight triangle (2.0m wide, by 2.5m deep) for exiting vehicles from this carpark onto Green
Street is also necessary.
These can be included as conditions of permit.
12958A#1(final) Page 21
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
2.5m
2.5m
Column Locations
I note that a number of columns on the commercial carpark level are not correctly located. These
include columns within spaces 45-60 & spaces 70-74.
I recommend that if a permit were to issue, columns should be located within the design envelope as
specified in Figure 5.2 of AS2890.1-2004 (i.e. located within 0.25m-1.25m from the open end of the car
space, modified for a 4.9m long space) as a condition of permit.
Disabled spaces
I note that a more appropriate provision of disabled parking for the commercial carpark is 2 spaces as
opposed to 1 disabled space shown on the plans.
The disabled spaces should be provided in accordance with AS2890.6-2009, which requires a space
width of 2.4m wide with a shared area between the two spaces of 2.4m wide. A headroom clearance of
2.5m is required above the disabled spaces.
This requirement should be included as a condition of permit.
Other Comments
Headroom Clearance
The section plans of the building do not detail the headroom clearance or slab depths, other than to
show a floor to floor level of 2.6m. Accordingly, the headroom clearance within each of the basement
carparks cannot be accurately determined at this stage.
The minimum requirement for headroom clearance within the basement levels is 2.2m as per AS2890.1-
2004, which should be included as a condition of permit.
Pedestrian Accessibility
When accessing the commercial carpark from the commercial lift, pedestrians are required to walk
between car space 45 and a column. This width is approximately 1.75m and does not provide an
12958A#1(final) Page 22
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
adequate width when considering that many pedestrians are likely to have a trolley with them. In
addition to this, there are likely to be conflicts between pedestrians travelling in opposite directions within
this area.
I recommend that more adequate provisions (i.e. a larger width between the car space and the column)
for pedestrians is provided within this area in order to create a more efficient and convenient pedestrian
thoroughfare. This should be addressed as a condition of permit.
The applicant’s Waste Management Plan (WMP), prepared by Leigh Design (dated 18th November,
2010) indicates that:
x Residential waste collection will occur via Council’s municipal services. Bins will be stored in Green
Street.
x Commercial waste collection will occur via a private contractor. Collection will occur via Green
Street.
A commercial bin storage area is located in the supermarket back-of-house area, which is accessed via
the loading dock.
Residential bin storage areas are located in the commercial carpark (Basement 1) and at ground level.
The collection of residential bins is proposed to occur kerbside along the site’s frontage in Green Street,
in a location in front of the residential lobby. The WMP indicates that a Council rear-lift 10.24m long
truck will be used and that a mechanical tug and bin trailer is likely to be required to assist with the
transfer of the bins to and from the street.
The collection of commercial bins is proposed to occur on-site within the loading bay accessed via
Green Street. The WMP indicates that:
x a rear-lift truck (nom. 10.24m long) will be used to collect the plastic wheelie bins, which requires an
operational height of 4m,
x a front-lift truck (nom. 11.5m long) will be used to collect steel bins, which requires an operational
height of 6.5m, and
x a hook-lift truck (nom. 11.0m long) will be used to collect compactor container, which requires an
operational height of 4.5m (approx.).
The application plans indicate that the floor level of the loading bay is an RL of 7.3m (TP104). The floor
level of the structure above this area which houses an ‘equipment area’ is detailed at an RL of 13m
(TP105) and the balance of the structure above this area is detailed at an RL of 14m (TP105). This is
also reflected in the TP301 indicates that the floor to floor distance (not including the structure depth) is
only 5.7 to 6.7m.
It is noted that neither clearance is sufficient to accommodate the functional headroom requirement for
the nominated front-lift truck used to collect the steel bins from within the confines of the site (which
requires an operational height of 6.5m as per the WMP). It is also not clear given the swept path
diagrams presented in Appendix B of the O’Brien Traffic Report (dated November, 2010) how a front
loading vehicle is expected to access the site as these diagrams only show reversing movements (refer
also to comments in Section 12.4.2 regarding accuracy of plans).
Accordingly, further consideration of the waste collection arrangements (and/or nominated collection
vehicle) is required to ensure that all commercial waste bins are collected from within the confines of the
site. A supermarket of this scale generates regular waste collection requirements and it is essential that
these can be undertaken from within the confines of the site as described in the application material so
as to minimise the impact on existing road users in Green Street as well as vehicles accessing the
commercial parking area of this site (i.e. adjacent access).
12958A#1(final) Page 23
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
It is noted that the internal referral by Council’s Waste Management Officer (dated 21st January, 2011)
was satisfied with the proposed waste collection arrangements, subject to the removal of on-street
parking along Green Street being approved.
The issue of whether on-street parking is retained along Green Street is a broader issue to be resolved
by Council for any roadworks along this road. The level of traffic generated by this development,
potential for greater demands on any parking placed in this location (due to proximity to the new
supermarket) combined with the loading requirements of this development, is likely to mean that it will
be impractical to retain on-street parking on both sides of Green Street into the future.
An on-site loading bay is provided for the supermarket use, which is accessed via Green Street near the
southern site boundary and Railway Place.
Clause 52.07 of the Planning Scheme specifies that:
No building or works may be constructed for the manufacture, servicing, storage or sale of goods or
materials unless:
x Space is provided on the land for loading and unloading vehicles as specified in the table
below.
x The driveway to the loading bay is at least 3.6 metres wide. If a driveway changes direction or
intersects another driveway, the internal radius at the change of direction or intersection must be
at least 6 metres.
x The road that provides access to the loading bay is at least 3.6 metres wide.
FLOOR AREA OF BUILDING MINIMUM LOADING BAY DIMENSIONS
2,600 sq m or less in single occupation Area 27.4 sq m
Length 7.6 m
Width 3.6 m
Height Clearance 4.0 m
For every additional 1,800 sq m or part Additional 18 sq m
The combined floor area of the proposed retail tenancies is 3,191m² and accordingly, a loading bay of at
least 45.4m2 in size is required under this Clause. The plans denote a loading bay area of 182m2, which
exceeds the Clause 52.07 requirements. The dimensions of the loading bay area, including a 4m
(minimum) headroom clearance also satisfy this standard.
The Traffic Report (dated November, 2010) by O’Brien Traffic indicates that the loading bay has been
designed to accommodate a 12.5m long truck. Swept path diagrams of the required movements are
provided in Appendix B of the O’Brien Traffic Report. These detail that the 12.5m long truck enters and
exits via Green Street onto Swan Street and involves a reversing movement from Railway Place into the
loading bay.
These plans do not accurately show the kerb arrangements in Railway Place, the underpass location or
the location of guide posts/bollards, etc, which are likely to affect the potential manoeuvring
arrangements. Note, vehicle swings south of the site’s southern property boundary, however, in reality
this is not possible (see figures below).
Although it is accepted that larger trucks circulate through this area at present, given the loading
frequency of the proposed use it is necessary that this plan be prepared on an accurate survey base to
confirm the adequacy of the proposed loading arrangements which involve a reversing movement in this
narrow section of road.
12958A#1(final) Page 24
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
12958A#1(final) Page 25
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
The report does not necessarily establish whether a 12.5m long truck is the largest delivery vehicle that
would be reasonably required by the supermarket operator, noting that many supermarkets require
deliveries via semi-trailers as a standard practice.
The report does not indicate the frequency of loading activities, however, for a supermarket of this size
these would be expected to include multiple daily deliveries via larger trucks (dry and cold good, etc) as
well as multiple daily deliveries via small to medium sized trucks or vans (bread and other specialty
goods).
The report states that the smaller retail tenancy will be reliant on on-street loading in the nearby area,
including Loading Zones along Swan Street.7
Condition 27 of Council’s recommendation requires that loading must be carried out within the confines
of the property (other than the small retail component) to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
Condition 29 limits the hours of loading activity to between 6am and 10pm (7 days a week) and
Condition 30 limits the maximum size of loading vehicles to a 12.5m long Heavy Rigid Vehicle. These
conditions are appropriate as it is important that loading vehicles do not block road and/or footpath at
any time.
7 Loading Zones are located on the south side of Swan Street, just west of Byron Street and between Shakespeare Place and Church Street. Restrictions apply
between 9:15am-5:30pm Mon-Sat.
12958A#1(final) Page 26
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
The O’Brien Traffic assessment adopted a separate office and residential traffic generation figure for the
lofts (assuming approximately 50% of the floor area is used for office and 50% for residential). If these
uses also use the 18 spaces provided in this carpark, the additional traffic would be 9 vehicle trip ends in
the peak hour (based on a combination of office and residential uses) under the O’Brien Traffic
assessment.
This equates to a total additional traffic volume of 25 vehicle trip ends in the commuter peak hours.
In the case of a single lane roadway such as Byron Street, where no passing opportunities are available
(i.e. laneway example), the environmental capacity of a two-way road is generally limited to 30 vehicles
per hour or 300 vehicles per day. Accordingly, allowing for the existing traffic volume, this level of
development traffic will achieve or exceed the environmental capacity of Byron Street.
In my view, the adoption of the traffic volume is potentially too low, particularly in the context of
assessing the suitability of Byron Street (at 4.2m wide) in its current form to accommodate the
development traffic.
The O’Brien Traffic Report references the typically accepted traffic generation range of apartment
buildings “in the order of 4 trips per day for 1 bedroom apartments and 5 to 6 trips per day for 2 bedroom
apartments for suburban apartments”.
This development comprises predominantly 2 bedroom dwellings and includes an allocation of 1
resident car space per dwelling. Some of the 1 bedroom dwellings also include an enclosed study,
albeit small in size for a bedroom.
In any assessment of case study data, particularly as it relates to traffic generation, there needs to be
some recognition that there can be some variation across sites and locations and accordingly, the
assessment should conservatively allow for this.
Case study data relied on by O’Brien traffic in cases within larger activity centres (Principal Activity
Centres) and with similar or higher levels of public transport accessibility have reported higher traffic
generation rates for residential uses.
These include developments in Prahran South Yarra Principal Activity Centre, which were used to
assess the traffic impacts of an apartment building at 227 Toorak Road, South Yarra.8 The case study
data relied on in this assessment included:
x Alexandra (85 Alexandra Avenue, South Yarra , 44 apartments, some larger):
AM peak hour: 0.39 vehicle trip ends/dwelling
PM peak hour: 0.36 vehicle trip ends /dwelling
x SY21 (800 Chapel Street, South Yarra , 84 apartments, 1 & 2 bedroom only):
AM peak hour: 0.27 vehicle trip ends/dwelling
PM peak hour: 0.18 vehicle trip ends /dwelling
Note, the O’Brien Traffic assessment of the development at 227 Toorak Road, South Yarra ultimately
adopted a traffic generation rate of 0.3 vehicle trip ends per dwelling. This development included 388
dwellings with predominantly studio, 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings and a small number of 3 bedroom
dwellings (3% of total dwellings). The rate of parking provision was 0.86 spaces per dwelling (i.e. less
than 1 space per dwelling).
Applying this rate to the proposed Dimmeys development (which I still consider to be relatively low by
normal standards (usually 0.4-0.5 vte/dwelling)) results in the following additional peak hour traffic
generation in Byron Street:
x 82 dwellings @ 0.3 vehicle trip ends per dwelling: 25 vehicle trip ends
x 7 lofts @ 0.3 vehicle trip ends per dwelling: 2 vehicle trip ends
8 Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Mr Andrew O’Brien of O’Brien Traffic for 227 Toorak Road, South Yarra (dated June, 2010).
12958A#1(final) Page 27
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
The environmental capacity of Byron Street is 300 vehicles per day (or 30 vehicles in the peak hour),
based on a classification as an ‘Access Lane’ under Clause 56.06-8 of the Planning Scheme.
Clause 3.2.2 of AS2890.1-2004 also provides guidelines for the provision of passing areas along low
volume driveways and connecting roadways, which provides some guidance on determining the need
for a vehicle passing area where an accessway connects to a local street. This clause states:
As a guide, 30 or more movements in a peak hour (in and out combined) would usually require
provision for two vehicles to pass on the driveway, (i.e. a minimum width of 5.5m).
Where access is to a main road, two-way passing opportunities are expected to be provided for higher
volume roads.
Whilst it is accepted that the above guidelines relate to private accessways and not public roads, it is
also reasonable that a lesser standard should not apply for a public road.
Given the scale of this development and carpark size, length of roadway (70m) and location of the
access at the end of this roadway, I do not consider that it is appropriate to accept an on-going scenario
for a public road which has been variously described as:
Whilst the width of Byron Street can only accommodate simultaneous two-way movement at
very low speeds, the modest increase in traffic associated with the residential component of the
development is unlikely to result in the need for two vehicles to pass each other on Byron
Street during the peak hour except on rare occasions. (page 27, O’Brien Traffic Report)
The effective carriageway width of Byron Street varies between 4.1 metres and 4.4 metres, and
would function similar to a Right of Way. In the event that two on-coming vehicles are
traversing along Byron Street, it is probable that one vehicle may come to rest whilst the other
vehicle passes – given the absence of a physical passing area. (point (I) Council’s Engineering
Services Comments in the Council officer’s report)
As noted previously, the 4.2m wide pavement width is generally not sufficient to accommodate
simultaneous two-way traffic flow (minimum of 5 to 5.5m is usually required). By example, AS2890.1-
2004 requires a 5.5m wide roadway, where 300mm clearances are provided to low kerbs and Clause
56.06-8 (Table C1) specifies a carriageway width of 5.5m for an ‘Access Lane’ or ‘Access Place’. These
standards provide guidance on the minimum width required for two opposing vehicles to pass, where a
low kerb is provided on either side.9
9
In context, the width of the AS2890.1-2004 B85 design car is 1.87m wide (B99 is 1.94m) which does not include the side mirrors that usually extend beyond this
dimension. As per AS2890.1-2004, an assessment of vehicle accessways should be based on the B99 vehicle and not the B85 vehicle (as opposed to access to
individual parking spaces where B85 is used).
A B99 vehicle passing a B85 vehicle (the standard approach), where a low kerb is provided on either side and a ‘circulation clearance’ of 600mm (required for speeds
of greater than 10km/h), requires an absolute minimum functional width of at least 4.41m. This is not available and needs to be considered in the context that
AS2890.1-2004 actually requires a 5.5m wide roadway, where 300mm clearances are provided to low kerbs.
12958A#1(final) Page 28
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
For this reason, combined with the observations that Byron Street is used to provide pedestrian access
to nearby properties, I support Council’s Condition 14 and 15 which require works in Byron Street to
provide a Shared Zone as follows:
14. Within 12 months of the commencement of the development, details of the Shared Zone for the
length of Byron Street must be prepared by an independent and suitably qualified professional in
consultation with and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and submitted to the
Responsible Authority. The Shared Zone must include various methods to control traffic and speed
to allow for safe pedestrian movement and to manage the potential conflicts between traffic
generation, bicycles and pedestrians using Byron Street.
15. All works associated with the provision of a Shared Zone as set out in condition 14 of this permit
must be undertaken prior to the use commencing at the cost of the permit holder and thereafter
maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible.
This would generally result in a 6m wide pavement generally being available, which will cater for passing
vehicles and pedestrians to an acceptable standard in a low speed environment. This widening would
also address VicRoads’ concerns with respect to the Byron Street/Swan Street intersection (see
photograph below) as a passing opportunity would also be available at this point.
The O’Brien Traffic Report (dated November, 2010) predicts that the development will generate the
following traffic onto Green Street associated with the commercial uses:
x 232 vehicle trip ends per hour (split evenly between entering and exiting movements as per
Figure 4 of the report).
This assessment is reliant on parking being prohibited along one side of Green Street to ensure that
simultaneous two-way traffic is accommodated.
The existing traffic volumes in this street are in the order of 52 vehicles per hour in the PM peak hour
and 63 vehicles per hour in during the Saturday lunchtime peak hour (relating to vehicles accessing the
off-street carpark near Coles via Railway Place).
Whilst this is a significant increase above existing volumes, subject to the removal of parking on at least
one side of Green Street I am satisfied that given my site observations and the location of nearby traffic
12958A#1(final) Page 29
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
signals that adequate gaps are available to accommodate the development traffic at this intersection.
There is also the potential that some vehicles will use Railway Place to exit the area, thereby further
distributing the development traffic.
13. CONCLUSIONS
Having visited the site and reviewed the application, I am of the opinion that:
a) an appropriate level of car and bicycle parking provision is provided for the site, subject to:
i. 18 car spaces provided in the residential basement are made available for the lofts,
ii. additional bicycle parking is provided in accordance with Council’s recommended conditions,
b) the parking layout and access arrangements require further design review to address the following
deficiencies:
i. ensuring the ramps are designed generally in accordance with AS2890.1-2004 including providing
adequate 2.2m headroom clearance,
ii. ensuring columns are located between 0.25m to 1.25m from the open end of the car space,
iii. providing a clear sight triangle and splay on the corner of at the base of the access ramp for
Basement 1 (Commercial Carpark) as shown in Figure 19,
iv. providing a pedestrian sight triangle (2.0m wide, by 2.5m deep) for exiting vehicles from the ramp in
Basement 1 onto Green Street,
v. providing 2 disabled bays in the commercial carpark in accordance with the design standards
specified in AS2890.6-2009,
vi. addressing the issues identified with the loading and waste collection assessment as set out in
Section 12.4 of this statement,
vii. adequate pedestrian provisions are made within the commercial carpark to create a more efficient
and convenient pedestrian thoroughfare between the commercial lift and the carpark,
viii. Byron Street being developed as a Shared Zone providing a pavement width in the order of 6m to
allow passing opportunities.
I have made all inquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and there are no matters of significance
which I regard as relevant which, to the best of my knowledge, have been withheld from the Tribunal.
12958A#1(final) Page 30
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
VCAT Ref. No. P623/2011
APPENDIX A
CV
12958A#1(final) Page 31
CHARMAINE DUNSTAN
Position: Director
Qualifications: Bachelor of Civil Engineering (Honours,
1st Class) Monash University, 1995
Masters of Traffic, Monash University, 2002
Masters of Transport (50% complete)
Professional Affiliations: Member, Institution of Engineers, Australia
Member, VPELA
CURRICULUM VITAE
Perform the role of project manager and act as the primary contact
for the client and the community.
Study areas include residential as well as mixed use areas
(industrial and commercial areas) within both new and established
road networks. The local areas typically including 300 to 6,000
properties.
Projects involve the identification of key issues and community
concerns from a broad range of information and inputs and the
development of appropriate engineering, enforcement and other
strategy options.
Studies involve extensive community consultation in the form of
public meetings, community and stakeholder workshops, reference
committees and face to face community consultation with affected
parties.
Studies often involve difficult negotiations with bus companies,
trader associations, major businesses, emergency services and
other stakeholders.
Road Safety Studies
Prepared Municipal Road Safety Strategies for Local
Government. These strategies involved:
- Detailed review of road crash patterns
- Identification of high-risk groups and behaviour based on
available research and other factors (eg. demographics)
- Facilitating Key Stakeholder Workshops involving Council
officers, VicRoads, Victoria Police, Public Transport and
Emergency Services, schools/early childhood services, aged
care services, traders and road user groups
Road safety planning and evaluation studies for VicRoads,
including:
- Pedestrian Safety Projects Strip Shopping Centres: Crash
Investigation and Issue Identification Studies of several centres
as part of WalkSafe Program
- Evaluation Study of “Speed Advisory Trailer”
Road safety engineering projects for Local Government and
VicRoads, including:
- Road Safety Audits and Reviews
- Scoping of Blackspot & Potential Blackspot/length Projects
CHARMAINE DUNSTAN (CONT.)
Areas of Expertise (cont.):
Traffic Surveys
Design, co-ordination, analysis and documentation of major traffic and
parking surveys including:
Austroads Travel Time Surveys & Kerblane Management Surveys
Origin-Destination Surveys for Shopping Centres, Arterial Road
CURRICULUM VITAE
APPENDIX B
Parking Inventory
12958A#1(final) Page 32
140-160 Swan Street, Richmond
Parking Surveys
ON-STREET CARPARKING
BOTHERAMBO STREET
West
East
West
10m north of Swan Street to SB # 318 1/4P 8am - 5pm Mon - Sat 3 2
East
1P disabled
di bl d 1 -
10m north of Swan Street to NB Post Office
1/4P 8am-5pm Mon-Fri 3 1
NB Post Office to Speed Hump 2P Angle Ticket 8am-5pm Mon-Fri, 8:30am-5pm Sat 10 9
Capacity 17
Total Number of Cars Parked 12
Lennox Street
Total Number of Vacant Spaces 5
Percentage Occupancy 71%
CARROLL STREET
West
1P Disabled 1 1
NB # 70 to NB # 311
2P 7:30am-6pm Mon-Fri, Permit Zone All Other Times 1 1
East
STANLEY STREET
West
East
NB # 55 to SB # 37 Permit Zone 12 4
Capacity 38
Total Number of Cars Parked 35
Stanley Street
Total Number of Vacant Spaces 3
Percentage Occupancy 92%
DANDO STREET
West
opposite NB # 60 to opposite SB # 50 2P 7:30am - 6pm Mon - Fri, Permit Zone All Other Times 4 2
East
NB # 60 to SB # 50 No Stopping - -
Capacity 8
Total Number of Cars Parked 5
Dando Street
Total Number of Vacant Spaces 3
Percentage Occupancy 63%
CLIFTON STREET
West
2P Disabled 1 -
10m north of Swan Street to NB # 56
2P Angle 7:30am - 11pm 14 14
East
2P 7:30am - 9:30pm 1 1
SB # 41 to SB # 27 Permit Zone 11 5
WAVERLEY STREET
West
East
West
East
West
NB # 24 to NB # 16 2P 7:30am - 9pm 2 2
East
NB # 173-175 to NB # 23 No Stopping - -
BYRON STREET
West Side
East Side
North Side
South Side
West Side
10m north of Railway Place to 10m south of Swan Street 1P Ticket 8am-5pm Mon-Sat 10 1
East Side
10m north of Railway Place to 10m south of Swan Street 1P Ticket 8am-5pm Mon-Fri, 8am-5:30 Sat 7 0
East Side
10m south of Swan Street to 30m south of Swan Street 2P 7am-7pm Mon-Fri 3 3
West Side
SWAN STREET
South Side
Capacity 59
Total Number of Cars Parked 28
Swan Street (South Side)
Total Number of Vacant Spaces 31
Percentage Occupancy 47%
SWAN STREET
North Side
OFF-STREET CARPARKING
4P Disabled Only 6 0
Capacity 123
Total Number of Cars Parked 28
Total
Total Number of Vacant Spaces 95
Percentage Occupancy 23%
SECURE PARKING OFF-STREET CARPARK - RAILWAY PLACE