1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong

Transcription

1 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong Proposed Kaufland Supermarket Planning Panels Victoria Date of Hearing: Starting 23 rd November, 2018 Date of Statement: 19 th November, 2018 Date of Inspection: 22 nd October & 8 th November, 2018 Prepared for the Applicant: Kaufland Australia Pty Ltd Instructed By: Planning & Property Partners Pty Ltd STATEMENT TO THE PLANNING PANEL APPOINTED BY THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING FOR THE PROPOSED KAUFLAND STORE AT 1 3 GLADSTONE ROAD, DANDENONG BY CHARMAINE DUNSTAN, TRAFFIC ENGINEER

2 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong Proposed Kaufland Supermarket Document Control Issue No. Type Date Prepared By Approved By 1 Final 19/11/2018 C. Dunstan/ L. Furness C. Dunstan Traffix Template Version 1.1 March, 2016 Our Reference: 25571A#1 (Dandenong) COPYRIGHT: The ideas and material contained in this document are the property of Traffix Group (Traffix Group Pty Ltd ABN , Traffix Survey Pty Ltd ABN , Traffix Design Pty Ltd ABN ). Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Traffix Group constitutes an infringement of copyright A#1 (Dandenong)

3 Executive Summary This evidence statement provides an assessment of the potential traffic engineering impacts of the proposed Kaufland Supermarket at 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong. My assessment is a peer review of the work undertaken by GTA Consultants, as instructed by Planning & Property Partners Pty Ltd on behalf of Kaufland Australia Pty Ltd. Kaufland Supermarkets will offer a larger format supermarket than current Australian Supermarkets. Kaufland propose stores in the order of 6,000m 2 (including attached shops/food hall), compared to approximately 4,000m 2 for a Coles or Woolworths supermarket. Kaufland supermarkets will include a full range of food and liquor, comparable to a traditional full line supermarket. In addition, the supermarkets are expected to offer a range of non food items such as crockery/cutlery, small scale electronics, stationary, clothing, tools, etc. I am instructed that Kaufland expect that the split between food and non food products sold to be in the order of 80/20, with the food offering including liquor (70/10 split of the 80% food). A Kaufland Supermarket will also include a Food Hall area serving food and drinks to patrons and two smaller tenancies that will be occupied by speciality retail or similar uses, but associated with Kaufland. My key opinions are set out as follows: a) The traffic impacts of the development can be accommodated by surrounding intersections and the nearby road network, subject to a review of the traffic signal phasing for Princes Highway/Gladstone Road and Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard. I am satisfied that no other mitigating works are required. b) The provision of car parking exceeds the minimum requirements of Clause of the Planning Scheme and will adequate accommodate the demands of the development. c) The provision of bicycle parking is satisfactory, subject to: i) The provision of secure and undercover bicycle parking for staff. ii) The provision of end of trip facilities for staff in accordance with Clause d) The design and layout of the carpark is satisfactory, subject to the provision of improved pedestrian connections through the carpark and to the external road network. e) The proposed loading arrangements will adequately service the proposed use and I am satisfied with the accessibility of the proposed loading bay by vehicles up to a 19m long semi trailer. f) Waste collection will be adequate accommodated within the loading bay. g) Having reviewed the relevant background material, I am satisfied that there are no reasons why the proposal should be refused, subject to appropriate conditions A#1 (Dandenong) Page i

4 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Statement of Witness Qualifications and Experience Project Team Scope of Work Key Tasks Experiments Reference Documents Proposal Existing Conditions Road Network Road Safety Review Existing Traffic Conditions Analysis of Existing Traffic Conditions Public Transport Traffic Impact Assessment Traffic Generation Rates Traffic Distribution Model Traffic Impact Analysis Car Parking Assessment Bicycle Parking Review of Carpark Design Review of Loading and Waste Collection Consideration of Third Party Submissions Response to VicRoads Submission Conclusions List of Tables Table 1: Road Safety Review Table 2: Summary of Existing Operating Conditions (GTA Consultants) Table 3: Nearby Public Transport Services Table 4: Estimated Traffic Generation Table 5: Post development traffic conditions (Source: GTA TIA, Table 6.3) A#1 (Dandenong) Page ii

5 Table 6: Statutory car parking requirement Clause , Column A Table 7: Statutory bicycle parking requirement Clause Table 8: Consideration of Third Party Submissions List of Appendices Appendix A: Development Plans 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page iii

6 1 Introduction Kaufland Australia Pty Ltd has requested the that Minister for Planning change the Planning Scheme provisions that apply to the land at 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong, to facilitate the development of a supermarket based store on the site. The Minister for Planning has referred the proposal for the Kaufland Stores in Victoria to an Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee is expected to: Undertake a strategic assessment of the use of each proposed store site, including an assessment against State and local policies, and, where relevant, recommend any required amendments to the existing Planning Scheme provisions applying to the site or to the land that is surplus to the Kaufland store and associated uses. Undertake an assessment of each of the proposed store developments, including consideration of amenity, traffic and access, built form, urban design and referral authority or statutory body requirements in sufficient detail to enable the Advisory Committee to recommend whether each development should be approved and the conditions of any such approval. Provide advice on the proposed introduction and form of an Incorporated Document in the schedules to Clause and Clause to each of the planning schemes to enable the use and development of the Kaufland stores, subject to conditions. The amendments to the Greater Dandenong Planning Scheme seek to facilitate the development of a proposed Kaufland supermarket store, via planning approval in the form of an incorporated document. The Amendment specifically proposes the following changes to the Planning Scheme: Apply the Specific Controls Overlay to the above land and update the schedule to the Specific Controls Overlay accordingly. List the proposed Kaufland supermarket development, 1 Gladstone Road, Dandenong incorporated document in the schedule to clause and clause as an incorporated document to the Greater Dandenong Planning Scheme. I have been instructed by Planning and Property Partners Pty Ltd, on behalf of Kaufland Australia Pty Ltd to provide expert evidence in relation to traffic issues related to the above proposal. My instructions specifically are to peer review the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) prepared by GTA Consultants (GTA) and relevant supporting background documents and provide my opinion on the same. I have also considered the issues raised in submissions to the Advisory Committee A#1 (Dandenong) Page 1

7 2 Statement of Witness 2.1 Qualifications and Experience My name is Charmaine Chalmers Dunstan. I am a Director of Traffix Group Pty Ltd practicing from Suite 8, 431 Burke Road, Glen Iris. My qualifications and membership of professional associations are as follows: Bachelor of Civil Engineering (honours), Monash University, Clayton Masters of Traffic, Monash University Member, Engineers Australia (IEAUST) Fellow, Victorian Planning & Environmental Law Association I have over 20 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. I have experience and expertise in traffic management, transportation planning, road safety planning and engineering, parking management and strategy development, and development impact assessment of a broad range of land use developments within established metropolitan, regional and growth areas. 2.2 Project Team Leigh Furness (Senior Associate, Traffix Group) assisted with site inspections, review and analysis of the application material and the preparation of this statement. 2.3 Scope of Work This report specifically reviews the traffic engineering implications of the proposed Kaufland Supermarket at 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong. My specific instructions are to review the supporting/background material and in particular the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) prepared by GTA (dated 12 th November, 2018) and provide a peer review of the proposal. I have reviewed the TIA in detail, including the traffic modelling completed as part of the assessment. As part of my review, I have had regard to submissions by third parties. 2.4 Key Tasks Based on the exhibited documents and planning history of the site, the scope of my engagement has included the following tasks: review of the site location and the surrounding transportation network, 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 2

8 2.4.1 Experiments review and analysis of traffic data, review of historical road safety data, review of supporting documentation and planning history, review of Council policies and other relevant documents, review of the parking implications and impacts of the proposal, review of the potential traffic impacts of the proposal, review of third party submissions, and preparation and giving of Expert Evidence in accordance with Planning Panels Victoria Guide to Expert Evidence. I have visited the site to observe traffic and parking activity within the nearby area. I have reviewed the electronic SIDRA files of the traffic modelling prepared by GTA Consultants Reference Documents The following key documents have been relied upon when preparing this report: Various Amendment documentation, including the exhibited plans and other material. Development plans prepared by Leffler Simes Architects (Revision ACP). Preliminary traffic engineering assessment prepared by GTA Consultants (dated 28 th June, 2018). Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by GTA Consultants for Kaufland (dated 12 th November, 2018). Relevant sections of the City of Greater Dandenong Planning Scheme. Relevant Australian Standards in relation to off street parking, loading for commercial vehicles, bicycle parking and parking for people with disabilities. The RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (2002). Third party submissions A#1 (Dandenong) Page 3

9 3 Proposal The proposal is for a Kaufland Supermarket on the site. My assessment is based on the plans prepared by Leffler Simes Architects (Revision ACP), a copy of which is attached at Appendix A. These plans include some relatively minor changes from a traffic engineering perspective compared to those exhibited (the Revision A plans). Kaufland Supermarkets will offer a larger format supermarket than current Australian Supermarkets. Kaufland propose stores in the order of 6,000m 2 (including attached shops/food hall), compared to approximately 4,000m 2 for a Coles or Woolworths supermarket. Kaufland supermarkets will include a full range of food and liquor, comparable to a traditional full line supermarket. In addition, the supermarkets are expected to offer a range of non food items such as crockery/cutlery, small scale electronics, stationary, clothing, tools, etc. I am instructed that Kaufland expect that the split between food and non food products sold to be in the order of 80/20, with the food offering including liquor (70/10 split of the 80% food). A Kaufland Supermarket will also include a Food Hall area serving food and drinks to patrons and two smaller tenancies that will be occupied by speciality retail or similar uses, but associated with Kaufland. The proposal for Dandenong will include the following areas: A 5,449m 2 LFA Supermarket, including administration and back of house areas. 672m 2 LFA of retail space, including the Food Hall, Outdoor Eatery and separate shop tenancies. Trading hours are proposed to be 7am to 12midnight, 7 days. The plans at Appendix A illustrate 425 car spaces on the site within an at grade carpark. Vehicle access to the on site carpark will be via 3 access points to Gateway Boulevard, which in turn connects to Gladstone Road (via traffic signals) and David Street (an unsignalised T intersection). An on site loading area is proposed with access to Gateway Boulevard. The loading bay is capable of simultaneously accommodating three 19m semi trailers and a waste collection vehicle up to 12.5m in length. Trucks accessing the loading bay will enter via Gladstone Road and exit via David Street. The proposed incorporated document that will apply to the subject site includes a number of conditions related to traffic engineering matters. These are listed below: Loading and unloading 6. Prior to the commencement of development, a loading management plan must be submitted to and be approved by the Responsible Authority. 7. Any loading and unloading of goods and all manoeuvring of vehicles must only be carried out within title boundaries of the land. Car parking 9. Prior to the commencement of development, a car parking and traffic management report by a recognised traffic consultant must be submitted to and be approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority A#1 (Dandenong) Page 4

10 10. All traffic mitigation works and management measures as recommended in the car parking and traffic management report must be implemented at no cost to the Responsible Authority, and must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 4 Existing Conditions The development site is located on the north east corner of the intersection between Princes Highway and Gladstone Road in Dandenong. A photograph of the site and a locality are provided at Figure 1 and Figure 2. The subject site is generally rectangular in shape and has a site area of approximately 30,607m 2. The site has frontages to Princes Highway, Gladstone Road and David Street. The site previously accommodated a Bunnings store. The site is currently vacant. All buildings on the site have been demolished and the former at grade carparking areas have either been removed or are in poor condition. Vehicle access to the site is via Gateway Boulevard, a private road. Gateway Boulevard provides connections to Gladstone Road (via traffic signals) and David Street (an unsignalised T intersection). The site is zoned Commercial 2 under the Greater Dandenong Planning Scheme as presented in Figure 3. Land use adjacent to the site is a mixture of industrial, commercial and residential land uses. Significant non residential land uses in the surrounding area include: To the east of the site along David Street lies Dandenong High School (550m), Dandenong North Primary School (750m), Dandenong Hospital and Chisholm Dandenong TAFE (1km). St Gerards Catholic School is located approximately 300m north of the site. EastLink is located approximately 1.1km north west of the site. Dandenong Metropolitan Activity Centre begins approximately 1.2km south east of the site A#1 (Dandenong) Page 5

11 Figure 1: Subject Site Subject Site Source: Nearmap Figure 2: Locality Map Reproduced with Permission of Melways Publishing Pty Ltd 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 6

12 Subject Site Source: Planning Schemes Online Figure 3: Land Use Zoning Map 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 7

13 4.1 Road Network Princes Highway is a VicRoads Arterial Road and Road Zone Category 1 under the Planning Scheme. Princes Highway is aligned in a north west to south east direction. Princes Highway, in the vicinity of the site typically provides 3 traffic lanes in each direction over a divided carriageway. Service roads are provided on both sides of the road. On street parking is permitted in the service roads. Princes Highway carries an average weekday traffic volume of 37,800 vehicles per day 1. An 80km/h speed limit applies to Princes Highway. Gladstone Road is a Council Arterial Road and Road Zone Category 2 providing a north south connection between Police Road in the north and Princes Highway in the south, where it continues south as Jones Road. Gladstone Road between Gateway Boulevard and Princes Highway provides two southbound lanes and a single, wide northbound lane within an undivided carriageway. In practice, drivers tend to travel in two lanes northbound. At its narrowest point in this section, Gladstone Road is approximately 11.2m wide, with the northbound and southbound traffic lanes being approximately 5.6m wide. Gladstone Road carries an average weekday traffic volume of 12,400 vehicles per day 2. A 60km/h speed limit applies to Gladstone Road. Jones Road is a Council Arterial Road and Road Zone Category 2 extending south from Princes Highway. A 50km/h speed limit applies to Jones Road. Jones Road typically provides a single traffic lane in each direction with limited on street parking. The intersection of Princes Highway with Gladstone Road/Jones Road is signalised. A 50km/h speed limit applies to Jones Road. David Street is a Council Collector Road extending in an east west direction between Princes Highway and a dead end east of Study Road. David Street in the vicinity of the site has a carriageway width of approximately 11m and provides a traffic lane and marked parking lane in each direction. At its intersection with Princes Highway, David Street is limited to left in/left out movements. GTA Consultants estimated that David Street adjacent to the site carries approximately 3,000 vehicles per day based on the GTA traffic counts and assuming a peak to daily traffic ratio of 10%. A 50km/h speed limit applies to David Street. Gateway Boulevard is a Private Road forming an L shaped link between Gladstone Road and David Street. Gateway Boulevard has a variable carriageway width in the order of 8 9m on the north south leg and 12 13m on the east west leg. Its intersection with Gladstone Road forms a 4 leg signalised intersection with Perkin Court. Access to David Street forms an unsignalised T intersection and all movements are permitted. 1 GTA sourced SCATS data for the 5 weekdays beginning 26 th February, GTA sourced SCATS data for the 5 weekdays beginning 26 th February, A#1 (Dandenong) Page 8

14 An aerial photograph of the nearby road network is presented at Figure 4. Photographs depicting the surrounding road network are presented in Figure 5 to Figure 12. Subject Site Figure 4: Aerial Photograph of Subject Site and Local Road Network Source: Nearmap 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 9

15 Statement to the Planning Panel Proposed Kaufland Supermarket at 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong Figure 5: Princes Highway view north west Figure 6: Princes Highway view south east Figure 7: Gladstone Road view north Figure 8: Gladstone Road view south Figure 9: David Street view east Figure 10: David Street view west Figure 11: Gateway Boulevard view west to Gladstone Road 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Figure 12: Gateway Boulevard view north from David Street Page 10

16 Statement to the Planning Panel Proposed Kaufland Supermarket at 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong 4.2 Road Safety Review A review of road casualty crash statistics for the past 5 years of available data (1st July, 2012 to 30th June, 2017). The review included the area indicated in the figure below. REVIEW AREA SUBJECT SITE Reproduced with permission of Melways Publishing Pty Ltd Figure 13: Casualty Crash Review Area A summary of the reported casualty crashes is provided in the table below. A total of 7 casualty crashes were recorded, 5 of which occurred at Princes Highway/Gladstone Road/Jones Road intersection and 2 occur at Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard/Perkins Court. None of the casualty crashes at the Princes Highway intersection were of the same type, with the 2 right through crashes (DCA 121) involving vehicles travelling in opposite directions. Based on the above, I am satisfied that this intersection is not inherently unsafe and that the total number of crashes is generally consistent with arterial road intersections of similar size A#1 (Dandenong) Page 11

17 Table 1: Road Safety Review Location Date Time Severity Condition DCA Code Notes Mon 17/09/ :20 OI Dark, Clear 121 Right through crash between a north eastbound car turning right colliding with a south westbound car Princes Highway/ Gladstone Road/ Jones Road Thu 13/06/2013 Sat 19/10/2013 Sun 21/10/ :00 SI Dark, Raining 102 (P) 15:21 OI Day, Clear :00 OI Dark, Raining 116 Pedestrian hit far side by north east bound car Right through crash between a south westbound car turning right colliding with a north eastbound car Left near crash between two southbound cars Sat 15/09/ :55 OI Dark, Raining 173 South eastbound car departs Right off carriageway Gladstone Road/ Gateway Boulevard/ Perkin Court Fri 08/03/2013 Fri 04/10/ :47 OI Day, Dry :00 SI Day, Dry 113 Vehicle emerging from driveway strikes another vehicle Right rear. Car turning out of Gateway Boulevard collides with southbound car LEGEND: OI: Other Injury SI: Serious Injury F: Fatality (C): Bus/Coach (B): Bicyclist (M): Motorcyclist (P): Pedestrian (RT): Rigid Truck 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 12

18 4.3 Existing Traffic Conditions GTA Consultants undertook traffic counts of the following intersections: Princes Highway/Gladstone Road/Jones Road Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard/Perkin Court David Street/Gateway Boulevard The surveys were completed at the following times: Friday 20 th July, 2018 o 7am 9am o 4 6pm Saturday 21 st July, o 11am 1pm These dates were within the Stage Government school terms and I am satisfied that they are reasonable days to survey traffic conditions in the area. The Friday PM and Saturday counts are most relevant to the proposal as they correspond to the peak trading times for full line supermarkets. The volumes for the critical weekday PM and Saturday peak hours are repeated below in the following figures extracted from the GTA Report. It is evident from the counts that the current volume of traffic using Gateway Boulevard is very low, which is reflective of the site currently being vacant A#1 (Dandenong) Page 13

19 4.3.1 Analysis of Existing Traffic Conditions GTA Consultants used Sidra Intersection 8.0 to model the existing performance of the following intersections: Princes Highway/Gladstone Road/Jones Road Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard/Perkin Court The intersection capacity analysis allows estimation of key operating parameters such as intersection degree of saturation (DoS), average delay and 95 th percentile queue lengths, which are described below: 95 th Percentile Queue Length (m) one car represents a 7m queue Average delay no. of seconds delayed Degree Of Saturation (DoS) measure of intersection performance expressed as a ratio of demand/capacity. A DOS greater than 0.95 is generally regarded as unsatisfactory for a signalised intersection, as shown in the table below. Intersection Degree of Saturation Level of Service Unsignalised intersection Signalised Intersection A Excellent <= 0.60 <= 0.60 B Very Good C Good D Acceptable E Poor F Very Poor >= 1.0 >= 1.0 Table 2 below sets out the existing operating conditions of the intersection, as modelled by GTA (Table 6.2 of the TIA). The analysis indicates that: The Princes Highway/Gladstone Road/Jones Road intersection operates acceptably for a signalised intersection between a VicRoads Arterial Road (Princes Highway) and two Council managed arterial roads within metropolitan Melbourne. The highest DoS is 0.80 for Jones Road, which is a Good level of service and an intersection that is not operating near its capacity. The Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard/Perkin Court intersection operates very well with minimal delays and queues. This reflects the negligible level of traffic currently using this intersection A#1 (Dandenong) Page 14

20 Table 2: Summary of Existing Operating Conditions (GTA Consultants) 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 15

21 4.4 Public Transport The site has access to bus services located within walking distance of the site. Bus Routes 800, 814 and 848 operate directly past the site (and 2 Night Bus services). The Route 800 bus service provides a direct connection to Dandenong Railway Station. The site is not located within the Principal Public Transport Network (PPTN) area. The available public transport services within a convenient walking distance are presented in Figure 14, with a summary of services provided in Table 3 SUBJECT SITE Figure 14: Public Transport Map Source: PTV, A#1 (Dandenong) Page 16

22 Table 3: Nearby Public Transport Services Service Between Via Princes Highway past the site Bus Route 800 Dandenong & Chadstone SC Princes Highway, Oakleigh & Monash University Bus Route 978 (Night Bus) 1 Elsternwick & Dandenong Ormond, Huntingdale & Mulgrave Bus Route 979 (Night Bus) 1 Elsternwick & Dandenong Bentleigh, Clarinda & Keysborough Gladstone Road past the site Bus Route 814 Springvale South & Dandenong Waverley Gardens SC & Springvale Bus Route 848 Brandon Park SC & Dandenong Waverley Gardens SC James Street approx. 400m east of the site Bus Route 850 Dandenong & Glen Waverley Mulgrave & Brandon Park (1) Saturday and Sunday morning services only (approximately 12mid 6am) 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 17

23 5 Traffic Impact Assessment 5.1 Traffic Generation Rates Kaufland Supermarkets will offer a larger format supermarket than current Australian Supermarkets. Kaufland propose stores in the order of 6,000m 2 (including attached shops/food hall), compared to approximately 4,000m 2 for a Coles or Woolworths supermarket. Kaufland supermarkets will include a full range of food and liquor, comparable to a traditional full line supermarket. In addition, the supermarkets are expected to offer a range of non food items such as crockery/cutlery, small scale electronics, stationary, clothing, tools, etc. I am instructed that Kaufland expect that the split between food and non food products sold to be in the order of 80/20, with the food offering including liquor (70/10 split of the 80% food). As a new entry into the retail market, there are currently no Kaufland supermarkets operating in Australia. Accordingly, there is no data available for Australian conditions in regards to the traffic generation of a Kaufland supermarket. I am instructed that from a retail sales perspective, the sales of a typical Coles or Woolworths is split approximately 95/5 food/non food products, with 10% of the food sales being associated with liquor. Effectively, the difference between a Kaufland supermarket and traditional Australian supermarket in terms of offering is the increased proportion of non food products sold up from 5% to 20%. The exact range of non food products expected to be sold has not been determined, but from the above it is expected to be a blend of a Kmart, Target and/or electronics retailer would offer. In this context, a hybrid traffic rate of a supermarket and department store in my view would be a reasonable estimation of the likely traffic generation rate of a Kaufland store. The RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (RTA Guide, 2002) is a widely used reference to traffic generation of various land uses in Australian conditions. The RTA Guide includes traffic generation rates for supermarkets and department stores. It provides two rates for department stores: Slow Trade stores this includes major department stores such as David Jones and stores which sell furniture, electrical and whitegoods. Faster Trade stores which includes discount department stores such as K Mart and Target. I am satisfied that the non food products offered by Kaufland are generally consistent with these types of retailers. GTA has adopted the following key assumptions when assessing the likely traffic generation of a Kaufland supermarket (see Section 6.1 of the GTA report for more information): GTA assumed that the food portion of the supermarket will generate traffic consistent with the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (RTA Guide, 2002) and the non food component will generate traffic at a rate consistent with a Department Store or Discount Department Store (whichever is higher). This results in the following rates being adopted: o Weekday PM Peak Hour (identified by the RTA as being 4:30pm 5:30pm): 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 18

24 Supermarket 13.8vph/100m 2 LFA Department / Discount Department Store 5.1vph/100m 2 LFA o Saturday Midday Peak Hour (identified by the RTA as being 11am 12pm): Supermarket 14.7vph/100m 2 LFA Department / Discount Department Store 3.8vph/100m 2 LFA Based on the information provided, I am satisfied with these assumptions, including conservatively adopting the higher of the Department/Discount Department Store rate for each time period. This makes sense in the context of the uncertainty around the products being sold and the popularity of a Kaufland store. The above traffic rates have been applied at a supermarket/discount department store ratio of 85/15 instead of the Kaufland product split of 80/20, to account for the 5% non food offering already contained in standard Australian major supermarkets. Application of the above as a weighted average equates to the following hybrid traffic generation rates for the supermarket component of the proposed development: o PM Peak Hour: 12.5vph/100m 2 LFA o Saturday Midday Peak Hour: 13.1vph/100m 2 LFA For the retail tenancies (including tenancy 1 and tenancy 2, food hall and outdoor eatery), GTA adopted the RTA rates for a shop use have been adopted, namely: PM Peak Hour: 5.6 vph/100m 2 LFA Saturday Midday Peak Hour: 10.7 vph/100m 2 LFA I agree with the above assumptions. In the absence of an Australian store to survey, I am satisfied that the above is a reasonable basis to assess a Kaufland supermarket. In particular, the adoption of a hybrid rate between a supermarket and discount department store and the separation of the shop floor space is appropriate in the context of information provided to me about the expected product ranges offered by Kaufland. It should be recognised by virtue of their larger floor areas (approximately 5,500m 2 for the supermarket floor space of a Kaufland store compared to approximately 4,000m 2 for Coles or Woolworths), that the above analysis has assumed that Kaufland stores will generate more traffic than a traditional Coles or Woolworths (notwithstanding the slightly lower overall traffic rate). The table below summarises the expected traffic generation for the subject site. Table 4: Estimated Traffic Generation Land Use Size/No. PM Peak Hour Traffic Generation Sat Peak Hour Traffic Generation Rate Veh/hr Rate Veh/hr Supermarket 5,449m trips/100m 2 LFA trips/100m 2 LFA 714 Retail 672m trips/100m 2 LFA trips/100m 2 LFA 72 Total A#1 (Dandenong) Page 19

25 5.2 Traffic Distribution Model GTA Consultants adopted the following assumptions in regards to traffic direction and splits: Entry movements: o From North 30% (100% via Gladstone Road access) o From South 10% (100% via Gladstone Road access) o From East 30% (70% via Gladstone Road access and 30% via David Street access) o From West 30% (50% via Gladstone Road access and 50% via David Street/Princes Highway) Exit movements: o To North 30% (100% via Gladstone Road access) o To South 10% (100% via Gladstone Road access) o To East 30% (40% via Gladstone Road access, 30% via David Street access to Princes Highway and 30% to David Street east) o To West 30% (100% via Gladstone Road access) 50%/50% split of in/out movements I am satisfied with these splits and assumptions, having regard to the likely catchment of the supermarket, the configuration of the arterial road network, existing intersections and proposed vehicle access points to the subject site. GTA has adjusted the traffic accessing the site to account for non link diverted trips, in accordance with Austroads Guidelines. In the context of this application, a non link diverted trip is where the driver was already travelling directly past the subject site (for instance on the way home from work) and chooses to visit the Kaufland store before continuing their journey (before continuing to their home). The Austroads Guide 3 indicates that 28% of the site generated traffic for a shopping centre of between 3,000 20,000m 2 is a non link diverted trip. GTA applied this reduction factor to traffic on Princes Highway only, and not to Gladstone Road traffic. I am satisfied that this presents a suitably conservative assessment. 3 Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 12: Traffic Impacts of Developments (2016) A#1 (Dandenong) Page 20

26 5.3 Traffic Impact Analysis GTA Consultants modelled the following intersections using SIDRA 8 for the post development traffic conditions: Princes Highway/Gladstone Road/Jones Road, and Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard/Perkin Court These intersections were also linked in a network, to account for their proximity to each other (they are approximately 150m apart). I see no need to model the intersection of David Street and Gateway Boulevard. The traffic distribution model predicts that: Approximately 1 vehicle per minute turning left or right in to Gateway Boulevard during both the weekday PM peak and Saturday peak. Slightly over 1 vehicle per minute will turn left or right out of Gateway Boulevard. These volumes are opposed by only a modest amount of traffic on David Street with a two way volume of less than 250 vehicles per hour or around 4 vehicles per minute, which is not significant and I am satisfied that ample gaps are available for traffic turning to/from Gateway Boulevard. GTA Consultants adopted the following key assumptions in their SIDRA analysis: Intersection Diagnostic Monitor (IDM) data was sourced for these signalised intersections for the days of the traffic surveys and this data was used for the basis of the signal phase times. Traffic using the outer lanes of Princes Highway were observed to be primarily accessing the service roads, rather than merging back into the main carriageway and the model was adjusted to reflect this behaviour by adjusting the proportion of traffic in each lane and through the layout of the intersection. Gladstone Road between Princes Highway and Gateway Boulevard was modelled as two traffic lanes, however the formal line marking for two traffic lanes travelling northbound drops out between these two intersections even though it has the same carriageway width as the southbound side of the carriageway, where two lanes are line marked. In practice, drivers travel in two lanes through this section of Gladstone Road and I am satisfied with the model showing two traffic lanes in both directions. For the post development scenario, SIDRA was used to reallocate the phase times based on the existing cycle time. This was to account for the increased traffic volumes accessing both of these intersections. In practice, how the signal phasing currently operating at these two intersections may already be different to that which operated when Bunnings was present on the site. For instance, the lack of traffic exiting Gateway Boulevard may trigger these signals to activate less often then they did historically. I have been provided with the SIDRA files created by GTA to analyse the traffic impacts of the development and I am generally satisfied with these models. A summary of these outputs is provided in the tables below A#1 (Dandenong) Page 21

27 Table 5: Post development traffic conditions (Source: GTA TIA, Table 6.3) The results of the analysis found that the additional traffic generated by Kaufland can be readily be accommodated by both intersections, in particular: The Degree of Saturation for any movement at the Princes Highway/Gladstone Road/Jones Road intersection was not greater than This represents a Good level of service for a signalised intersection. This level of service is very good in my experience for a significant arterial road intersection, in metropolitan Melbourne during a peak hour. The Degree of Saturation for the Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard/Perkins Court intersection post development is very low (no greater than 0.36, representing an Excellent level of service). While the delays and queues increase substantially compared to existing conditions, these are also low in the context of a signalised intersection and this is simply a function of Gateway Boulevard carrying negligible traffic under existing conditions due to the subject site being vacant. Overall, I am satisfied with the assumptions made and the traffic models generally. However, I have a number of observations to make in regard to the approach taken to the post development signal phase times, where SIDRA was used to determine the optimal phase times based on the existing cycle times. I find this approach to be reasonable for the intersection of Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard/Perkin Court. The current traffic volumes accessing Gateway Boulevard are negligible and a review of the signal timing for this intersection is the logical approach to catering for the increased 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 22

28 demand at this intersection. I am satisfied that there is ample capacity at this intersection to accommodate the traffic generated by Kaufland. For the intersection of Princes Highway/Gladstone Road/Jones Road, this approach is slightly unusual. VicRoads usual practice in regards to signal phasing is to minimise delays on the arterial road (Princes Highway) by reducing the available green time to side road traffic as much as practically possible. In contrast, the SIDRA program automatically attempts to balance the queues and delays across all movements at the intersection when it is set to user defined phase time (as it was in the model). SIDRA will calculate green times that satisfy the practical degree of saturation for critical movements and result in balanced degrees of saturation across all critical movements. As a result, it is likely that a revision of the signal phasing in line with VicRoads general practice would prioritise Princes Highway and result in less queues and delays to traffic on Princes Highway than what is shown in the analysis, with higher (but still acceptable) queues and delays on Jones Road/Gladstone Road. I was provided with the GTA SIDRA files and ran a scenario where the signal phasing was not altered from existing conditions. My view found that compared to the scenario with the phasing adjusted by SIDRA: the through movements on Princes Highway improved. Gladstone Road and Jones Road become marginally worse. Some of the right turn movements reached their capacity, but did not exceed it (DOS around 0.95). I am satisfied that a review of the signal phasing is warranted, however it should be noted that minor change to the signal phasing is all that is likely to be required to increase the capacity of some right turn movements. It should also be noted that SCATS is a dynamic system, and the traffic signals may automatically adjust to accommodate the different traffic volumes post development. Ultimately, the future signal phasing adopted at this intersection is a matter for VicRoads to consider. However, I am fundamentally satisfied that there is ample existing capacity at this intersection based on this analysis to accommodate the development traffic and no physical works are required as a result of the development of a Kaufland Supermarket on this site, other than a review of the signal phasing A#1 (Dandenong) Page 23

29 5.4 Car Parking Assessment The proposed use of the subject land falls within the land use categories of supermarket and shop under Clause of the Planning Scheme. The Planning Scheme sets out the parking requirements for new developments under Clause The purpose of Clause is: To ensure that car parking is provided in accordance with the State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework. To ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car parking spaces having regard to the demand likely to be generated, the activities on the land and the nature of the locality. To support sustainable transport alternatives to the motor car. To promote the efficient use of car parking spaces through the consolidation of car parking facilities. To ensure that car parking does not adversely affect the amenity of the locality. To ensure that the design and location of car parking is of a high standard, creates a safe environment for users and enables easy and efficient use. The Food Hall area could be considered as a Food and Drink Premises, however the practical implication for the statutory carparking requirement is negligible given that both Shop and Food and Drink Premises have the same car parking requirement. The statutory requirements of the proposal are set out in the table below. The statutory parking requirements are set out at Clause of the Planning Scheme. The site is not located within the Principal Public Transport Network area and accordingly the Column A parking rates apply. Table 6: Statutory car parking requirement Clause , Column A Use Size / No. Statutory Parking Rate Parking Requirement (1) Supermarket 5,449m 2 5 spaces per 100m Shop 672m 2 4 spaces per 100m 2 26 Parking Provision Shortfall / Surplus TOTAL Notes: 1. Clause specifies that where a car parking calculation results in a requirement that is not a whole number, then number of spaces should be rounded down to the nearest whole number. The provision of 425 car spaces exceeds the statutory minimum requirement for 298 car spaces under Clause and a car parking reduction is not required. Direction 14(i) of the Kaufland Store in Victoria Advisory Committee requires Kaufland to provide justification of the propose car parking rates. I am satisfied that the Planning Scheme parking rate of 5 spaces per 100m 2 LFA for supermarket is an appropriate rate to be considered for this scale of supermarket A#1 (Dandenong) Page 24

30 Kaufland has made a commercial decision to, where possible, provide a high level of car parking for its stores. The purpose is to maximise customer convenience so that the customers experience is that there is always car parking available at Kaufland. The provision of additional car parking for the supermarket use above the minimum requirements is a commercial decision by Kaufland and is not precluded by the requirements of Clause apply to the site (i.e. sets minimum, not maximum parking rates) or the decision guidelines. Disabled Parking In addition to the statutory car parking requirements in the Planning Scheme, the Building Code of Australia (BCA) outlines requirements for the provision of car parking for people with disabilities. The BCA indicates the proposed supermarket and shops require the provision of disabled parking at a rate of 1 space for every 50 parking spaces provided, or part thereof. The provision of 10 DDA spaces for 424 car spaces satisfies this requirement (with a surplus of 1 space). Parking spaces for people with disabilities is included in the total number of spaces required by Clause of the Dandenong Planning Scheme. 5.5 Bicycle Parking The statutory bicycle parking requirements of the proposal are set out in the table below, as per Clause Table 7: Statutory bicycle parking requirement Clause Use Size / No. Statutory Bicycle Parking Rate Bicycle Parking Requirement Employee Customer Employee Customer Supermarket (included in a Shop use) 5,449m 2 1 per 600m 2, if >1,000m 2 1 per 500m 2, if >1,000m Retail, other than specified TOTAL 672m 2 1 per 300m 2 1 per 500m The statutory bicycle parking requirements are met on site through the provision of 36 spaces, including 22 employee (surplus of 11) and 14 customer spaces (surplus of 2). Accordingly, bicycle parking provision is satisfactory. All bicycle spaces are shown as open rails with dimensions that accord with AS for horizontal bicycle parking. In addition to the above requirements, 1 shower/changeroom is required for the first 5 staff bicycle spaces, with an additional shower/changeroom required for every 10 staff bicycle spaces after that. The requirement for 11 employee spaces requires 2 shower/changerooms. There are two relatively minor issues with the current plans: 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 25

31 There is no staff shower/changerooms area shown on the plans. The staff bicycle spaces are not secure. Staff spaces are required to be under cover and secure under Clause I note that GTA Consultants raised these same issues. I am satisfied that both these issues can readily be addressed by conditions of permit. There is ample space to accommodate an undercover bicycle shelter and no reason why end of trip facilities could not be provided within a building of this size. Subject to these 2 changes, I am satisfied with the bicycle parking provided. 5.6 Review of Carpark Design My assessment is based on the plans prepared by Leffler Simes Architects (Revision ACP), which understand incorporate some minor recommendations based on other consultants advice. These plans include only relatively minor changes from a traffic engineering perspective compared to those exhibited (the Revision A plans). I have reviewed the proposed parking layout under the following guidelines: Clause of the Planning Scheme (Design standards for car parking), and AS Part 1: Off Street car parking, where relevant. AS Part 1: Off Street car parking for people with disabilities. Overall, the carpark plan is similar to the previous Bunnings carpark layout, including with respect to the primary vehicle access locations. The key elements of the design include: Clause Design Standard 1 Accessways All accessways are shown as two way accessways with access aisles of at least 6.5m. Most aisles are 7m wide and the central east west accessway is 8m wide. Pedestrian sight triangles are not specifically shown on the plans, however each access point to Gateway Boulevard does not cross a public footpath and there are no apparent issues with pedestrian visibility at the site entrances. Clause Design Standard 2 Car parking spaces All car spaces meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the Planning Scheme, being 2.7m wide x 5.4m long with a 6.5m or 7.0m wide access aisle. The use of slightly larger than normal car spaces for a supermarket use is not uncommon and I am satisfied with the dimensions proposed. There are 14 Family and 6 Senior; spaces that have been widened to 3.5m wide. There is no specific standard for either of these types of car spaces it is a decision by Kaufland to provide a higher level of comfortable parking for parents with prams and the elderly. I have no issue with this decision. The 10 DDA spaces fully comply with AS A#1 (Dandenong) Page 26

32 Clause Design Standard 3 Gradients Grades across the site are minimal in the context of the site size and all parking areas will readily comply with the requirements of Clause and AS Consideration of Pedestrians In my view, the pedestrian network proposed on the site could be improved. In particular, the pedestrian connections externally to the site are not ideal. There are only two external pedestrian links shown. Additional connections should be provided along pedestrian desire lines. My recommendations are set out below and detailed in Figure 15 (nothing that these are based on the Revision ACP plans). It should be noted that these recommendations are not prescriptive and these links could be modified or varied to achieve the same outcomes. Shift the proposed link through to Gladstone Road to the south one row of car spaces in order to bring it closer to the Princes Highway/Gladstone Road intersection. Provide a footpath connection through the carpark to the bus stop on Gladstone Road. This link also provides a complementary/second link into the north west corner of the carpark by providing two links for pedestrians/prams/trolleys into the main carpark. An improved pedestrian link provided to the northern carpark. An improved pedestrian link provided to the south east corner of the carpark. A footpath connection along Gateway Boulevard to the signals at Gladstone Road/Perkin Court. Legend Proposed Footpath Recommended Additional Connections Pram/Trolley connection into carpark, away from intersection Connection into carpark Connection through carpark to bus stop Footpath connection to Gladstone Rd signals Move connection closer to Princes Hwy Figure 15: Recommended Pedestrian Connections These recommendations may result in a minor loss of car parking to accommodate these connections. I am satisfied that this is not significant in the context of a statutory surplus of 127 car spaces A#1 (Dandenong) Page 27

33 Other issues A Traffic Management Plan will be required in due course to detail signage, line marking and management of the carpark. This can be prepared as a condition of any permit issued. Based on the above, I am satisfied the proposed layout of car spaces and vehicle access arrangements are satisfactory and that the access arrangements for the site will provide for safe and efficient movements to and from the surrounding road network. 5.7 Review of Loading and Waste Collection Loading Clause of the Planning Scheme specifies that: Before deciding on an application or approval of a plan, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate: The adequacy of loading and unloading facilities and any associated amenity, traffic flow and road safety impacts. My assessment is based on the plans prepared by Leffler Simes Architects (Revision ACP), which do not include any significant changes to the loading arrangements from a traffic engineering perspective to those illustrated in the Exhibited Revision A plans. I am instructed that Kaufland will require the following deliveries to operate: Up to 10 semi trailers per day, one of which will occur outside of store hours (between 12am and 7am). 1 2 smaller trucks delivering fresh food. A number of smaller trucks and vans will service the shop tenancies. For the Supermarket, a loading dock is provided with 4 loading areas for trucks delivering to the site. Three of the loading docks are accommodate 19m semi trailers and each is independently accessible. The final loading dock space is designed for waste trucks and has been designed conservatively designed for a 12.5m long Heavy Rigid Vehicle (HRV). GTA has prepared swept path assessments for the 19m long semi trailer and 12.5m HRV and I am satisfied that these demonstrate adequate access to the loading bays. All trucks will enter the site via Gladstone Road and can exit to either back to Gladstone Road via a U turn within the loading bay or to David Street. Trucks will not reverse within Gateway Boulevard in order to access the loading bays (all reversing movements will occur within the site boundaries). Most deliveries will be confined to the hours of operation of the supermarket (7am 12midnight). One delivery will occur between 12am and 7am. A Loading Management Plan can be prepared as a condition of any permit issued. This is in contrast to the other industrial uses in the nearby area (including within David Street) that undertake loading in an unregulated manner. I am therefore satisfied that these facilities are adequate to accommodate the loading needs of the supermarket A#1 (Dandenong) Page 28

34 A Tenancy Loading Zone is provided as an indented parking bay along the central accessway through the site and adjacent to the building entrance. This area is approximately 2.1m wide x 18m long. This smaller loading bay is intended to service the smaller non supermarket spaces. I am satisfied that this arrangement is appropriate given the size of the smaller tenancies, however I recommend that the loading area is widened to 2.6m wide to comply with AS Whilst this standard is not technically applicable (it applies to on street, public parking), in my view it is appropriate to apply here as many small trucks are up to 2.5m wide. This width could be taken from the vehicle accessway, which if reduced from 8m to 7.5m wide would continue to provide more than adequate width to accommodate two traffic lanes into and out of the site. Waste Collection The proposed incorporated document for the site includes the following waste requirements: Waste 4. Prior to the commencement of use, a waste management plan for the development must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 5. Provision must be made on the land for the storage and collection of garbage and other solid waste. Waste collection will occur from the rear loading dock. As discussed above, this area accommodates trucks up to 12.5m long, which easily accommodates the largest commercial waste collection vehicles. I am satisfied that waste collection is not a significant issue from a traffic engineering perspective and these conditions can readily be satisfied A#1 (Dandenong) Page 29

35 6 Consideration of Third Party Submissions The following table sets out my comments in relation to the traffic engineering related issues raised by third party submitters relating to this application. Table 8: Consideration of Third Party Submissions Submission No. D01 Traffic Engineering Matter Raised What will the changes to Gateway Boulevard be? Will large trucks use this road for overnight parking? Major works will be required to upgrade nearby intersections to accommodate the proposal. Response No significant changes are proposed to Gateway Boulevard. I am satisfied that no changes are required in the context of this road already being designed for and servicing an industrial/commercial area. The swept path diagrams prepared by GTA demonstrate that this road can accommodate 19m long semi trailers. No trucks associated with Kaufland will park on Gateway Boulevard. I am satisfied that the traffic impacts of the proposal can be accommodated, as set out in Section There is ample capacity under existing conditions for all directly impacted intersections to accommodate the development traffic expected. D03 Concern regarding lack of safety pedestrian access through the carpark D04 Pedestrian access to the site is inadequate. Traffic lights should be installed at David Street/Gateway Boulevard. Car parking off Gateway Boulevard is being deleted and was used for truck parking by other tenancies in Gateway Boulevard, raising concerns about trucks parking on David Street. I agree that the pedestrian connections within the carparking areas need improvement. I am satisfied that pedestrians can move safely around the carpark, provided my recommendations at Figure 15 are adopted. These changes provide enhanced pedestrian links along all key pedestrian desire lines. See my response to D03. Traffic signals at this location are unnecessary based on the traffic volumes expected, see Section 5.3. The volumes of traffic accessing David Street and travelling on David Street currently are too low to warrant traffic signals. This parking was within site boundaries (i.e. on private land) and there is no need for this site to provide truck or car parking for other uses within Gateway Boulevard. The management of truck parking in David Street is an enforcement matter for Council, noting that street signs within David Street already specifically prohibits the parking of trucks over 4.5 GVM A#1 (Dandenong) Page 30

36 Submission No. D05 VicRoads D08 Transport for Victoria (TfV) D09 Greater Dandenong City Council (GDCC) Traffic Engineering Matter Raised There are currently nearby businesses using the Kaufland site for car parking. Truck access to David Street is dangerous, with trucks taking up the full width of Gateway Boulevard to access the loading bay. There are no bicycle end of trip facilities provided. VicRoads has requested that additional conditions be placed within the incorporated document see section below TfV has requested that conditions be imposed to require the upgrade of the bus stop on Gladstone Road to be a fully DDA compliant bus stop with shelter and a number of other standard conditions in relation to the protection of public transport services during construction. GDCC has raised the following: Raised issues in relation to the adequacy of pedestrian access to the site. Requested an integrated bicycle path be provided through the site to provide safe access for cyclists. Requested further traffic analysis of the proposal. The use of the eastern service road (Gateway Boulevard) for access to Response This informal parking will not be permitted postdevelopment, the ramifications of which are for Council to manage. I disagree. The requirement for 19m semi trailers to use the full width of Gateway Boulevard to access the loading bay is not unreasonable and common practice within the local road components of commercial/industrial areas. I also note that the semi trailer will always travel in a forward direction when entering/exiting the site boundary onto Gateway Boulevard. I agree, bicycle parking and end of trip facilities should be provided in accordance with Clause of the Planning Scheme. I am satisfied that these can readily be provided. See my response to VicRoads submission in Section 6.1 below. I am satisfied that all of the conditions requested by Transport for Victoria are reasonable. As per my more detailed response to this issue in regards to submission D03 above. I agree that the current plans are deficient in this respect and have recommended additional pedestrian connections as shown at Figure 15. This is unnecessary. I am satisfied with cyclists sharing the road network through the carpark, as they do with many similarly sized carparks and other public roads. The TIA provided by GTA provides detailed traffic analysis, which I have peer reviewed in detail and I am satisfied with the findings of this analysis. The use of Gateway Boulevard for loading is appropriate and consistent with the industrial nature of this road. Reversing movements to access 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 31

37 Submission No. Traffic Engineering Matter Raised the loading bay, especially for reversing movements. Response the loading bays only occur within the site boundaries, which is acceptable. 6.1 Response to VicRoads Submission VicRoads has requested that the following conditions be included within the incorporated documents for Kaufland: Prior to the commencement of development, a Transport Impact Assessment Report (TIAR) prepared by a VicRoads prequalified traffic consultant must be submitted to and be approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and VicRoads. The TIAR is to give consideration to the following: Providing a separate left turn slip lane from the signalised Gateway Boulevard Gladstone Road access to Gladstone Road. A widening of Gladstone Road carriageway into the nature strip along the east side, to provide for two south bound lanes and two north bound lanes along Gladstone Road, between Princes Highway and the Gateway Boulevard/Perkin Court intersection. With respect to the left turn slip lane at the Gateway Boulevard/Gladstone Road intersection, it is my view that this is unnecessary. This intersection will operate under excellent conditions postdevelopment without it (Degree of Saturation no more than 0.36 for any movement). While it would naturally improve the ability of drivers to be able to turn left out of the site, it is not necessary in the context of the intersection that is expected to operate very well in its current configuration. Figure 16 illustrates the location of the widening required to provide 2 full traffic lanes in each direction along Gladstone Road. In my view, the nexus between these works and Kaufland are limited. The traffic analysis indicates that this upgrade is not warranted for traffic carrying capacity reasons and upgrade would only provide a modest safety benefit. It should be noted that this section of Gladstone Road carries many times more traffic per day than Kaufland will generate and that these works were also not required for the former Bunnings on the site. Based on the above, it is my opinion that VicRoads conditions should be deleted A#1 (Dandenong) Page 32

38 Location of Widening Figure 16: Gladstone Road potential widening 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 33

39 7 Conclusions This report provides a peer review of the potential traffic engineering impacts of the proposed Kaufland Supermarket at 1 3 Gladstone Road, Dandenong, as assessed by GTA Consultants. My opinions are set out as follows: a) The traffic impacts of the development can be accommodated by surrounding intersections and the nearby road network and mitigating works are not required, with the exception of a review of the traffic signal phasing for Princes Highway/Gladstone Road and Gladstone Road/Gateway Boulevard. b) The provision of car parking exceeds the minimum requirements of Clause of the Planning Scheme and I am comfortable with the level of car parking proposed. c) The provision of bicycle parking is generally satisfactory, subject to: i) The provision of secure and undercover bicycle parking for staff. ii) The provision of end of trip facilities for staff in accordance with Clause d) The design and layout of the carpark is generally satisfactory, subject to the provision of improved pedestrian connections through the carpark and to the external road network. e) The proposed loading arrangements will adequately service the proposed use and I am satisfied with the accessibility of the proposed loading bay by vehicles up to the 19m long semi trailer. f) Waste collection will be adequate accommodated within the loading bay. g) Having reviewed the relevant background material, I am satisfied that there are no reasons why the proposal should be refused, subject to appropriate conditions. 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 Panel. CHARMAINE CHALMERS DUNSTAN B.E. (Civil) Hons., Masters of Traffic, M.IEAust., F.V.P.E.L.A 25571A#1 (Dandenong) Page 34

40 Proposed Kaufland Supermarket Appendix A Development Plans 25571A#1 (Dandenong)

41 THIS DRAWING AND DESIGN IS SUBJECT TO COPYRIGHT AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTENCONSENT OF LEFFLER SIMES PTY LTD 1 TP-08 2 TP-08 3 TP-08 ISSUE AMENDMENT DATE CHK'D ACP AC PANEL 08/11/2018 SJE TP BOUNDARY PROPOSED KAUFLAND STORE ACOUSTIC FENCE TO ENGINEERS DETAILS BOUNDARY ACOUSTIC FENCE & SLIDING GATES TO ENGINEERS DETAILS. SITE DESCRIPTION NAME AREA 1 4 TP-08 D C TP-06 4 B A BOUNDARY PROPOSED KAUFLAND STORE BOUNDARY GROUND FLOOR - Scale: 1 : 500 SPRINKLER STORAGE TANK SPRINKLER PUMP ROOM COMMON USE SERVICE ROAD RL WATER TANK 718 EXIT ONLY EX.RL ADMINISTRATION 1 239m² ARMCO BARRIER COVERED STAFF BIKES 22 SPACES BLACK STEEL SHROUD AROUND WINDOWS. PR.RL CUSTOMER ENTRY/EXIT - TRUCK ENTRY FH FH PR.RL EX.RL M PYLON SIGN TYPE CONCRETE FOOTPATH BLACK STEEL SHROUD AROUND WINDOWS. TIMBER PLANTER 2849 C L3554 TROLLEY ENCLOSURE CONCRETE FOOTPATH LIQUOR 354m² ADMINISTRATION 2 68m² 1 TP-08 SERVICES 169m² 6000 EXISTING SPOON DRAIN TENANCY 1 224m² PUBLIC TOILETS 83m² FH LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE 4A SUPERMARKET 3610m² FFL EXACT LEVEL TO BE CONFIRMED BY CIVIL ENGINEER. FOOTPATH TIMBER PLANTER TP-06 MALL AREA 343m² 5A 5B CONCRETE FOOTPATH FOOD HALL AREA 278m² OUTDOOR EATERY 136m² 6A 6B 7A 7B 2 TP-08 BACK OF HOUSE 1178m² TP ENTRY 53m² TROLLEY STORE 247 CONCRETE FOOTPATH CONCRETE PLANTER 1733 EASEMENT CUSTOMER BIKES 14 SPACES RETAINING WALL FH CANOPY OVER SHOWN DASHED CONCRETE PLANTER SHARED ZONE COLOURED CONCRETE LOADING AREA G L A D S T O N E R O A D FH TENANCY LOADING ZONE SHARED ZONE COLOURED CONCRETE 2700 TYP. TROLLEY ENCLOSURE 5400 TYP. SERVICE ROAD TENANCY 2 34m² FOOTPATH FH PR.RL PEDESTRIAN CROSSING EX.RL PR.RL PR.RL RL TROLLEY ENCLOSURE EX.RL PR.RL FH EX.RL EX.RL TROLLEY ENCLOSURE PR.RL PR.RL EX.RL FAMILY CARPARK 14 SPACES 2xWASTE BINS 2x1100L RUBBISH BINS CANOPY OVER SHOWN DASHED ACCESSABLE CARPARK 10 SPACES 8M PYLON SIGN TYPE 1 FOOTPATH PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OUTDOOR PLAZA PLANTER OUTDOOR BENCH M PYLON SIGN TYPE 2 FOOTPATH FOOTPATH D A V I D S T R E E T P R I N C E S H I G H W A Y 8M PYLON SIGN TYPE TP-06 A2 A1 4 TP-08 SITE LEGEND PROPERTY BOUNDARIES EASEMENTS EXISTING CAR SPACES PROPOSED CAR SPACES PROPOSED PROVISION FOR ELEC. VEHICLE CHARGING EXISTING LANDSCAPE EXISTING SITE 30,607 m² AREA ANALYSIS - SITE (GFA) NAME AREA PROPOSED KAUFLAND STORE (GFA) 6,680 6,769 m² PARKING SCHEDULE SPACE TYPE NO. OF PARKS ACCESSIBLE 10 EXISTING 18 FAMILY 14 GENERAL 377 SENIOR 6 TOTAL: 425 BIKE PARKING SCHEDULE NAME NO. OF BIKES CUSTOMER 14 STAFF 22 TOTAL: 36 KAUFLAND RETAIL AREA NAME AREA LIQUOR 354 m² SUPERMARKET 3,610 m² TOTAL AREA 3,964 m² LEASEABLE FLOOR AREA NAME AREA ADMINISTRATION m² ADMINISTRATION 2 68 m² BACK OF HOUSE 1,178 m² FOOD HALL AREA 278 m² OUTDOOR EATERY 136 m² TENANCY m² TENANCY 2 34 m² TOTAL AREA 2,157 m² NON LEASEABLE AREA NAME AREA ENTRY 53 m² MALL AREA 343 m² PUBLIC TOILETS 83 m² SERVICES 169 m² TOTAL AREA 648 m² PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PROPOSED PLAZA EX.RL+ PR.RL+ FH EXISTING LEVELS PROPOSED LEVELS FIRE HYDRANT LEFFLER SIMES PTY LTD ABN WEB: SYDNEY MELBOURNE BRISBANE 7 YOUNG ST NEUTRAL BAY NSW 2089 LEVEL LT BOURKE ST VIC BOUNDARY ST SPRING HILL QLD 4004 T: T: T: SCALE :500 PROPOSED KAUFLAND STORE 1-5 GLADSTONE ROAD, DANDENONG, VIC 3175 NOTE: FOR ALL LANDSCAPING REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS. JOB NO: DATE: DRAWN: 4415 LSA DWG NO. REV. TP-04 ACP PROPOSED SITE & GROUND FLOOR PLAN