3DUNLQJ DQG 7UDIILF $VVHVVPHQW...Our unique combination of acoustics, data, traffic and waste services is fundamental to the success of any architectural or development project. We

�

Parking Demand Study

Redcliffe Hospital

Metro North Hospital and Health Services

© ��8 - TTM Consulting Pty Ltd ABN 65 010 868 621

L�� 8� � �� G�� Brisbane 4003

Revision Record

No. Author Reviewed/Approved Description Date

1� R� Bradley DR�� R !"#$ 1%/11/2017

2� R� Bradley DR�� R !"#$(Updated)

0&/12/2017

3.

R� Bradley R� '($)"* �F+�, R !"#$ 22/01/2018

&� %�

About TTM -./ 34 567/9: ;6<=6 >66? 7@ @A6 B6?@/6 .C the

Australian development and infrastructure industry.

Our unique combination of acoustics, data, traffic

and waste services is fundamental to the success of

any architectural or development project.

We have over 50 staff, with an unrivalled depth of

experience. Our industry knowledge, technical

expertise and commercial insight allow us to deliver

an exceptional and reliable service.

T: (07) 3327 9500

F: (07) 3327 9501

E: [email protected]

��S E�HI��JJ� K��M�� - Parking Demand Study

E�J��I�S �N�EO��8P

Q

Contents

T Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 5

1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Scope ............................................................................................................................................ 5

2 Context ........................................................................................................................................................ 7

2.1 Location ........................................................................................................................................ 7

2.2 Surrounding Road Network .......................................................................................................... 7

2.3 Public and Active Transport .......................................................................................................... 8

3 Uospital Characteristics ............................................................................................................................. 11

3.1 Existing Capacity and Operations ............................................................................................... 11

3.2 Future Expansion ........................................................................................................................ 13

4 Parking InventoryV...................................................................................................................................... 14

4.1 On-Site Parking Inventory........................................................................................................... 14

4.2 Surrounding On-Street Parking Inventory .................................................................................. 18

5 Wxisting Parking Demands .......................................................................................................................... 21

5.1 On-Site Parking Demands ........................................................................................................... 21

5.2 On-Street Parking Demands ....................................................................................................... 25

5.3 Combined Total Parking Demands ............................................................................................. 31

6 Staff Travel Patterns .................................................................................................................................. 35

7 Parking Demand Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 38

7.1 Existing Relative Parking Demands ............................................................................................. 38

7.2 Parking Demand/Supply Benchmarking ..................................................................................... 40

7.3 Future Parking Requirements ..................................................................................................... 40

7.4 Sensitivity Testing for Bed Types ................................................................................................ 42

7.5 Additional Future Travel Considerations .................................................................................... 43

8 Multi-Storey Car Park Options Analysis ...................................................................................................... 46

9 Xite 7 Car Park High Level Traffic Review.................................................................................................... 48

9.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 48

9.2 Internal Layout ........................................................................................................................... 48

9.2.1 Access Arrangements ..................................................................................................... 48

9.2.2 Access Control ................................................................................................................ 49



Y

ZV[V\ Car Park Circulation and Routing .................................................................................... 49

9.2.4 Car Park Design .............................................................................................................. 50

9.3 External Traffic Considerations .................................................................................................. 50

9.3.1 Additional Traffic Movement Demands ......................................................................... 50

9.3.2 Access Configuration and Operations ............................................................................ 51

9.3.3 External Road Network Impacts ..................................................................................... 52

9.3.4 Future Approvals ............................................................................................................ 54

10 Summary and Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... ]5

Appendix A Existing Hospital Car Park Plan (Indicative Only) .......................................................................... 57

Appendix B On-Street Parking Inventory Map................................................................................................ 58

Appendix C On-Xite Parking Demand Survey Results Tables........................................................................... 59

Appendix D On-Street Parking Demand Survey Results Tables ....................................................................... 60

Appendix E Multi-Storey Car Park Site Options Assessment .......................................................................... ̂ 1

Appendix F Multi-Storey Car Park Design Concept ........................................................................................ 62

Appendix G Traffic Network Diagrams ........................................................................................................... 63

Appendix H Access Driveway Upgrade ConceptsV........................................................................................... 64

Table Index

_àbc [VTd efg`b hfì Ujck`kglm ......................................................................................................................... 8

Table 2.2: Local Translink Bus Route Timetable Information ........................................................................... 10

Table 4.1: Redcliffe Hospital On-Site Car Park Inventory Summary ................................................................. 18

Table 4.2: On-Street Parking Inventory within 500m Walking Catchment of Redcliffe Hospital ..................... 20

Table 5.1: Summary of On-Site Parking Demand Survey ................................................................................. 22

Table 5.2: Parking Duration Grouping for All Vehicles Recorded (On-Site) ...................................................... 24

Table 5.3: Estimated Total Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Site) .................................................. 24

Table 5.4: Estimated Total Visitor Parking Demands and Duration (On-Site) .................................................. 25

Table 5.5: Summary of On-Street Parking Demand Survey Results ................................................................. 26

Table 5.6: Summary of On-Street Parking Demand Survey Results (Assumed Reduced Extent) ..................... 28

Table 5.7: Parking Duration Grouping for All Vehicles Recorded (On-Street) .................................................. 29

Table 5.8: Estimated Total Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Street) .............................................. 30

Table 5.9: Estimated Hourly Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Street) ............................................ 30

Table 5.10: Estimated Total Visitor Parking Demands and Duration (On-Street) ............................................. 30

Table 5.11: Total Redcliffe Hospital Surveyed Parking Demands and Assumed Use ........................................ 31

Table 5.12: Parking Duration Grouping for All Assumed Redcliffe Hospital Vehicles (On-Site + On-Street) .... 33

Table 5.13: Estimated Total Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Site + On-Street) ............................ 33



n

_àbc ]VTod Wpqjr`qci _fq`b sjpjqfk t`kujvw xcr`vip `vi xyk`qjfv z{v-Site + On-Street) ............................. 34

Table 6.1: Benchmarking Method of Travel to Work for Redcliffe Hospital Staff ............................................ 37

Table 7.1: Total Assumed Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demands ....................................................................... 38

Table 7.2: Sensitivity Testing Bed Types for Future Parking Demands ............................................................. 43

Table 9.1: Peak Period Traffic Generation of Existing Main Car Park ............................................................... 50

Figure Index

|jwykc [VTd Xjqc bfg`qjfv Map Source: Queensland Globe ................................................ 7

Figure 2.2: Surrounding Road Context Map Source: Queensland Globe ......................................... 9

Figure 3.1: Redcliffe Hospital Campus Map Source: Queensland Health Website ................................. 12

Figure 4.1: Redcliffe Hospital – Car Parking Areas Map ................................................................................... 14

Figure 4.2: Streets within 500m Walking Catchment of Redcliffe Hospital Map Source:

Queensland Globe ........................................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 5.1: Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (On-Site)...................................................................... 23

Figure 5.2: Assumed Extent of Redcliffe Hospital Related Parking On-Street .................................................. 27

Figure 5.3: Assumed Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (On-Street) .................................................. 29

Figure 5.4: Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (On-Site vs On-Street) ................................................. 32

Figure 5.5: Total Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (Staff vs Visitor) .................................................. 32

Figure 7.1: Total Redcliffe Hospital Surveyed Parking Demand Profile ............................................................ 39

Figure 8.1: Multi-Storey Car Park Options Map Source: Queensland Globe ................................. 46

Figure 9.1: Recommended Upgrades to Signal Lantern at Anzac Avenue / Victoria Avenue ........................... 54



}

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

__~ �fvpybqjvw tqm eqi z__~� l`p accv cvw`wci am �yccvpb`vi Uc`bql� ~cqkf �fkql Ufp�jq`b `vi Uc`bqlServices (MNHHS) to conduct a Parking Demand Study for the Redcliffe Hospital.

The need for this study has arisen due to ongoing parking concerns at the Redcliffe Hospital over many past

years and recent announcements by the Queensland Government to construct a new Multi-Storey Car Park

on the hospital campus. The intent of this Multi-Storey Car Park is to alleviate existing parking shortfall and

also allow future expansion to hospital services.

This report summarises the process undertaken as part of the Parking Demand Study and key findings on

future parking needs. It is understood that this report will accompany a Business Case for the proposed

Multi-Storey Car Park.

1.2 Scope

_lc pgf�c f� qlc Parking Demand Study was set out by MNHHS as part of the Request for Quote and

included:

· �� ¡��-site”) and on the

surrounding streets within a 500m walk of the various pedestrian entry points (“on-street”).

· �fviygq �`kujvw icr`vi pyk¢cmp fv-site and on-street over a typical day of hospital operations to

establish base demands and validate existing concerns regarding parking shortfalls.

· �ategorise parking (based on duration of stay) as staff and visitor/patient demands.

· Wpqàbjpl qk`¢cb acl`¢jfyr habits of Redcliffe Hospital staff to compare against surveyed parking

demands.

· �y`vqj�m �uture parking needs for the Redcliffe Hospital to accommodate both existing demands and

future demands from expansion to capacity/services.

· £ppcpp �fqcvqj`b bfg`qjfvp �fk ` ~ybqj-Storey Car Park within the Hospital Campus and provide

commentary on suitability to assist selecting the preferred location.

· tkf¢jic ljwl-level traffic engineering advice on the design of the Multi-Storey Car Park and also identify

future considerations (both internal and external to the site) that will need to be considered as part of

the establishment of this new car park.

The following reference material was used throughout this Parking Demand Study:

· ~�UUX DRAFT Health Service Plan, Redcliffe Hospital, Stage 1 Redevelopment (September 2017).

· hcigbj��c Ufp�jq`b Xqk`qcwjg |`gjbjqm tb`v hc�fkq zXc�qcrack [¤T]� am xcpqk`¢jp ¥kfup.



¦

· �� §�� ¨�� ¨�� ª�� «��¬�� ¡®®¯°-Site-Revised Parking”, Version B,

September 2016).

· hcigbj��c Ufp�jq`b f�ck`qjfv`b jv�fkr`qjfv `vi pq`��jvw vyrackp �kf¢jici am ~�UUX �ckpfvvcbV



±

2 Context

2.1 Location

_lc Redcliffe Hospital is located approximately in the centre of the Redcliffe Peninsular (part of the Moreton

Bay Regional Council (MBRC) local government area) as shown in Figure 2.1. The site is formally identified as

106 and 108-130 Anzac Avenue, Redcliffe and comprises a total area of approximately 7.6 hectares. The site

is bound on the south side by Anzac Avenue, west side by Recreation Street and east side by adjacent

residential/commercial properties and Sheehan Street.

Figure 2.1: Site location Map Source: Queensland Globe

2.2 Surrounding Road Network

_lc ljck`kglm `vi gl`k`gqckjpqjgp f� qlc kfìp ²jqljv qlc jrrcij`qc ¢jgjvjqm f� qlc pjqc jp pyrr`kjpci jv

Table 2.1. Imagery showing the existing road network configuration and intersection treatments within the

immediate surrounds of the site is included Figure 2.2.

£pproximate

Xite Location



³

Table 2.1: Local Road Hierarchy

Road Speed

Limit

Road Configuration Classification Road

Authority Reserve Road

Width

Lanes

�*´(µ �¶ *· ¸0¹!º »0¼ 22¼ �"·# $#(½½¾µ ¿(* ) À $·#*¾*Álanes, divided, kerbside parking

on both sides allowed

Â·ÃÄarterial Road

ÅÂ$($ -Controlled RoadÆ D�ÇR

R µ# ($¾"* Â$# $ ¸0¹!º »0¼ 1»¼ �È" $#(½½¾µ ¿(* )É ·*Ê¾¶¾Ê ÊÉkerbside marked parking/bus

stops on both sides

Â·ÃÄarterial Road ÇËRÌ

Âº º(* Â$# $ %0kph* 20¼ 11¼ �È" $#(½½¾µ ¿(* )É ·*¼(#¹ ÊÉkerbside marked parking on

both sides

,"µ(¿ Road ÇËRÌ

Â¾¿¶Í* Â$# $ %0¹!ºÎ 20¼ 10¼ �È" $#(½½¾µ ¿(* )É ·*¼(#¹ ÊÉ¹ #Ã)¾Ê ¼(#¹ Ê !(#¹¾*Á "*both sides

,"µ(¿ R"(Ê ÇËRÌ

Ï"#$È""Ê Â$# $ ¸0¹!º »0¼ 12¼ �È" $#(½½¾µ ¿(* )É ·*¼(#¹ ÊÉkerbside marked parking on

both sides

D¾)$#¾µ$ Ì"¿¿ µ$"# ÇËRÌ

Âµ(#Ã"#"·Áº R"(Ê ¸0¹!º »0¼ 1%¼ �È" $#(½½¾µ ¿(* )É ·*Ê¾¶¾Ê ÊÉkerbside marked parking/bus

stops (*Ê µÍµ¿ ¿(* ) on both

)¾Ê )


Ð¾µ$"#¾( �¶ *· ¸0¹!º »0¼ 1%¼ �È" $#(½½¾µ ¿(* )É ·*Ê¾¶¾Ê ÊÉkerbside marked parking/bus

stops (*Ê µÍµ¿ ¿(* ) on both

)¾Ê )


ÑÒ¿ Í �¶ *· ¸0¹!º »0¼ 22¼ �"·# $#(½½¾µ ¿(* ) À $·#*¾*Álanes, divided, kerbside µÍµ¿ ¿(* ) Ó Ã·) )$"!)�

Â·ÃÄarterial Road

ÅÂ$($ ÄÌ"*$#"¿¿ Ê R"(ÊÆ D�MR

DTMR = Department of Transport and Main Roads

*Default speed limit on unsigned roads within built-up areas in Queensland.

2.3 Public and Active Transport

Bus Services

_lc hcigbj��c Ufp�jq`b jp bfg`qci jv gbfpc �kfÔjrjqm qf ` vyrack f� bfg`b ayp pqf�p fv £vÕ`g £¢cvyc `viRecreation Street, as depicted in Figure 2.2.



Ö

Figure 2.2: Surrounding Road Context Map Source: Queensland Globe

_lc ayp pqf�p fv Anzac Avenue service Translink Routes 660 and 680. Route 660 runs two-way services

between Redcliffe and Caboolture Train Station servicing suburbs in between including Kippa Ring (including

the Kippa Ring Train Station), Rothwell, Deception Bay, Burpengary East, Burpengary, Morayfield and

Caboolture South. Route 680 runs two-way services between Redcliffe and Chermside Shopping Centre

servicing suburbs in between including Kippa Ring (including the Kippa Ring Train Station), Rothwell, Mango

Hill, Northlakes, Kallangur, Petrie, Lawnton, Strathpine, Bald Hills, Bridgeman Downs, Carseldine and Aspley.

The bus stops on Recreation Street service Translink Route 691, which runs two-way services between

Scarborough and Sandgate Train Station servicing suburbs in between including Redcliffe, Margate, Clontarf

and Brighton.

A summary of the service span and frequencies for each bus route is provided in Table 2.2.



×Ø

Table 2.2: Local Translink Bus Route Timetable Information

Bus

Route

Monday - Friday Weekends

Service Span

Number of

Services

(two-way)

Average Frequency Service Span

Number of

Services

(two-way)

Average

Frequency

ÙÙÚ ÛÜÝÛÞß-8:45pm ÛÙ àáâãäåáà ÝÚ ßäæçèáàéÜêÚÞß-5:15pm ëìÞèçâíÞîàïéÜÛÚÞß-5:30pm ëìçæíÞîàï

ÝÙ àáâãäåáà24 services

ÝÚ ßäæçèáà45 minutes

ÙðÚ ñÜÛ5am-10:35pm Ùò services

Ûó15 minutes ëôáÞõ ö÷çâø ôáÞõíäâáåèä÷æïÝÚ ßäæçèáà

(all other timesï

éÜÚÚÞßó8:00pm ëìÞèçâíÞîàïéÜÚ0am-7:00pm ëìçæíÞîàï

êê àáâãäåáà20 services

ò ö÷çâ1 hour

Ùùò ÛÜÝÚÞßó7:45pm Ûù àáâãäåáàòÛ ßäæçèáàëôáÞõ ö÷çâø ôáÞõíäâáåèä÷æïÝÚ ßäæçèáà

(Þll other times)

úûü úûü úûü

Train Services

_lc ýj��` hjvw _k`jv Xq`qjfv jp bfg`qci `��kfÔjr`qcbm [V\ur ²cpq f� qlc pjqc� `ggcppjabc ¢j` ²`bujvw zijkcgqbmalong Anzac Avenue) or transfer via bus routes 660 and 680. The Kippa Ring Train Station forms the terminus

of the Redcliffe Peninsular / Springfield Line. Transfer to other train lines within the QR South East

Queensland Train Network is available at Petrie Station, Northgate Station and most major Brisbane inner

city stations. The Redcliffe Peninsular / Springfield Line runs a significant volume of two-way services on all

days of the week, typically at 30-minute frequencies and increased 12-15 minute frequencies in weekday

peak hours in peak direction of travel.

Cyclist Provisions

|fkr`b gmgbc kfyqcp `kc bfg`qci on Recreation Street / Victoria Avenue and Anzac Avenue, which are

identified as Primary Active Transport Routes under the MBRC Planning Scheme. These roads provide wide

shoulders/kerbside parking lanes for cyclist movements on-carriageway. Portwood Street, Porter Street and

Oxley Avenue are also identified as Secondary Active Transport Routes. Oxley Avenue provides formal

kerbside bicycle lanes, whilst Portwood Street and Porter Street provide no formal on or off-road provisions.

It is understood the Redcliffe Hospital also has a dedicated cyclist parking area and end-of-trip facility

(including lockers and showers) which is located adjacent to the Clinical Measurements building.

Pedestrian Provisions

£bb kfìp jv qlc jrrcij`qc ¢jgjvjqm f� qlc pjqc �kf¢jie formal footpaths on at least one side of the road. Major

roads such as Anzac Avenue and Recreation Street provide footpaths on both sides. Formal crossing points

are provided across Anzac Avenue at signalised intersections whilst informal crossings on local roads is

facilitated by kerb ramps at corners/intersections.



××

3 Hospital Characteristics

3.1 Existing Capacity and Operations

_lc Redcliffe Hospital is a regional hospital, which has been operating for more than 50 years, providing

general and specialist services for the population of the Redcliffe peninsula and areas to the west including

Deception Bay, North Lakes and Brighton.

As advised by MNHHS personnel, the capacity and operational characteristics of the Redcliffe Hospital is

summarised as follows:

· _lc hospital currently has an existing built capacity of approximately 324 patient beds inclusive of

overnight beds, sub-acute beds, same-day beds, bed alternatives and emergency department beds/bays.

· þ�� ÿT�� ed Care Centre (MBICC)’ which is a multi-

level clinical/office building fronting Anzac Avenue which includes GP services, pharmacy, teaching

facilities and (more recently) oncology and renal services.

· Ivgbypj¢c f� qlc ~�I�� qlc lfp�jq`b g`mpus includes approximately 43,000m² of floor area spread across

numerous buildings throughout the site.

· £p f� £ywypq [¤TA� qlc lfp�jq`b cr�bfmp ` qfq`b f� �T�]¤¤ �ybb qjrc c�yj¢`bcvq z�qc� pq`�� qlkfywlfyq qlcvarious streams of administration, medical, nursing, operations, health professionals and trades/services.

Estimates from MNHHS personnel indicates that typically 1,200 fte staff work day shifts.

· Xqaffing rosters on-site are varied, but typically include:

- �ykpjvw ²`kip f�ck`qjvw Nlk plj�qp l`¢c gl`vwc f¢ck `q A`r� 3pm and 11pm (staggered slightly for

different wards).

- �ykpjvw ²`kip f�ck`qjvw T[lk plj�qp l`¢c gl`vwc f¢ck `q A`r `vi A�r zpq`wwckci�V - {�ck`qjvw qlc`qkcp l`¢c various shift lengths beginning at 7:30-8:30am and ending anytime from

8pm-midnight.

- x`m tkfgciure Unit shifts begin 2:30-3:00pm, ending around 8pm.

- {�ck`qjfv`b pck¢jgcp f�ck`qc Nlk plj�qp ²jql gl`vwc-over at 6am, 2pm and 10pm.

- {kijvary hospital business hours for most administration and health professional staff is 8am-5pm.

· {yq�`qjcvq gbjvjgp f�ck`te 8am-5pm.

· {�ck`qjvw qlc`qkcp gfrrcvgc N`rV · sjpjqjvw lfykp ¢`km pbjwlqbm between wards but generally are from 11am to 8pm.

A hospital campus map is shown in Figure 3.1.



×Q

Figure 3.1: Redcliffe Hospital Campus Map Source: Queensland Health Website



×Y

3.2 Future Expansion

~�HHS have plans for expansion to the Redcliffe Hospital to provide additional capacity into the future. For

the purposes of this Parking Demand Study, two future periods have been assessed:

1. Xhort Term Expansion: Already committed/funded expansions to the hospital as outlined in the DRAFT

Health Service Plan. Currently, this includes allowance for a total of 26 new beds (or bed-equivalents) on-

site, bringing the total site capacity to 350 beds. These works are planned to be completed during 2018

and as such the additional parking demands generated by this expansion are considered necessary to be

accommodated as part of the new Multi-Storey Car Park.

2. eong Term Expansion: The DRAFT Health Service Plan identifies future needs for the site up to an

indictive 2031-32 horizon. The Service Plan identifies a need for an increase in capacity of the hospital to

approximately 580 beds (or bed-equivalents). Whilst it is recognised that the new Multi-Storey Car Park

is not intended to cater for additional parking demands related to this more significant hospital

redevelopment, it was deemed necessary to quantify potential parking needs for the hospital up to this

point in time to inform future master planning exercises.

Whilst it is recognised that bed numbers are not the only factor that can be used to assess capacity of a

hospital, given that bed numbers are the most readily available key metric outlined in the DRAFT Health

Service Plan, these have been used in this instance. These bed numbers have been used primarily to

calculate the expected proportional increase in hospital capacity for each period as follows:

1. Xhort Term Expansion: Increase from 324 beds to 350 beds = 8% increase to hospital capacity.

2. eong Term Expansion: Increase from 324 beds to 580 beds = 79% increase to hospital capacity.

For the purposes of this assessment it is presumed that all other key site metrics will grow by an equivalent

proportion for these two scenarios. This includes factors such as:

· Ivgkc`pcp qf pq`��jvw bc¢cbp zjvgbyijvw ìrjv� redical, nursing, operations, health professionals).

· Ivgkc`pcp qf fyq�`qjcvq pck¢jgcpV · Ivgkc`pcp qf py��fkq pck¢jgcp�jv�k`pqkygqykc pygl `p rcijg`b jr`wjvw� �`qlfbfwm� �l`kr`gm� cqgV

· Ivgkc`pc qf qfq`b ayjbijvw �bffk p�`gcV It is also assumed that there will be no significant change to the operations of the site (i.e. operational times

and shift rotations) or non-clinical related aspects of the hospital (i.e. a new research building).



×n

4 Parking Inventory

4.1 On-Site Parking Inventory

__~ �ckpfvvcb gfviygqci ` icqailed on-site parking inventory and walk around with Redcliffe Hospital

Engineering staff on Tuesday 24th October 2017. For these purposes, the Redcliffe Hospital campus was

divided into a number of zones identified as Areas “A” to “I”. The respective locations of each area are

shown in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1: Redcliffe Hospital – Car Parking Areas Map

£ pyrr`km f� qlc �`kujvw inventory and uses of each area is detailed as follows.



×}

Area A & B: Main Visitor/Staff Car Park

_ljp `kc` f� fv-site car parking is one of the most desirable areas for staff and visitor parking given the close

proximity to the main Redcliffe Hospital entry. There are currently no time restrictions or allocations in effect

within this area. This parking area provides:

· [[^ pq`vi`ki g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp

· T] tckpfvp ²jql xjpàjbjqjcp zt1x� g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp

· [41 parking spaces total

Area C: Overflow Staff/Visitor Car Park

_lc `kc` jp bfg`qci pbjwlqbm �ykqlck `²`m �kfr qlc r`jv hcigbj��c Ufp�jq`b cvqkmV _lckc `kc gykkcvqbm vf qjrcrestrictions or allocations in effect within this area. This parking area provides:

· T74 standard car parking ppaces total

Area D: Main Staff Car Park (Secured)

_lc `kc` jp pcgykci am rc`vp f� affr w`qc gfvqkfbp zf�ck`qci am g`ki kcìckp� `vi jp icpjwv`qci `p pq`��parking only. There are no time restrictions within this car parking area, although there are a number of

reserved parking spaces. This parking area provides:

· TTZ unreserved standard car parking spaces

· ] yvkcpck¢ci t1x g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp · Z kcpck¢ci pq`vi`ki g`k p�`gcp z�|bccq 9 Home Maternity Service)

· [[ kcpck¢ci pq`vi`ki g`k p�`gcp zkcpck¢`qjfvp vfq nominated)

· \ yvkcpck¢ci rfqfkgmgbc p�`gcp

· T58 parking spaces total

Area E: Eastern Car Park (Rehab & Palliative Care)

_ljp �`kujvw `kc` jp yvpcgykci `vi `¢`jbàbc �fk afql pq`�� `vi ¢jpjqfk �`kujvwV _lckc `kc vf qjrc kcpqkjgqjfvpwithin this car parking area, although there are a number of signs indicating usage by only authorised

vehicles. This parking area provides:

· [¤ yvkcpck¢ci pq`vi`ki g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp

· ° �� ¡��¬�� Palliative Car Permit Holders Only”)

· \ kcserved PWD car parking spaces (“Rehabilitation & Palliative Car Permit Holders Only”)

· £ pjvwbc �`k`bbcb �`kujvw Õfvc with capacity for 2 vehicles (“Rehabilitation Pick Up – Set Down Only, 5

Mins max)



×¦

· £v yvickgf¢ck �`kujvw `kc` ²jql g`�`gjqm �fk y� qf T] rftorcycles

· o9 parking spaces total

Area F: Northern Car Park (Antenatal, North Block & Hospital Facilities)

_ljp `kc` jvgbyicp ` rjÔqykc f� yvpcgykci �`kujvw �fk �`qjcvqp `vi pcgykci pq`�� `kujvw zgfvqkfbbci am affrgates with swipe car readers). There are also a number of maintenance vehicle bays and sunken loading

docks/bays for the services buildings on the south side of this parking area. This parking area provides:

· [\ unreserved standard car parking spaces within the secured staff parking area

· [ yvkcpcrved PWD car parking spaces within the secured staff parking area

· o kcpck¢ci pq`vi`ki g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp ²jqljv qlc pcgykci pq`�� `kujvw `kc` z�|bccq� · [\ standard car parking spaces signed for “Patient Parking only”

· [ PWD car parking space signed for “Patient Parking only”

· [ �`k`bbcb �`kujvw p�`gcp pjwvci �fk �`qjcvq ikf�-off only

· [ yvkcpck¢ci pq`vi`ki g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp

· T kcpck¢ci t1x g`k �`kujvw p�`gc

· ¯ �� ¡2�� ¨��

· [ rfqfkgmgbc spaces

· o �fkr`b bfìjvw ifgup�a`mp · ^7 parking spaces total

Area G: Central Car Park (Informal Parking & Emergency Department BOH)

_ljp `kc` gykkcvqbm �kf¢jicp ` pr`bb vyrack f� kcpck¢ci g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp `vi qlc Wrckwcvgm xc�`kqrcvqAmbulance bays. A large gravel area was also used for informal parking at the time of the site inspection,

however, it is understood this has recently been closed off to make way for a new building. Access to this

parking area is signed as being for authorised vehicles and ambulances only at the driveway from Recreation

Street. This parking area provides:

· o reserved standard car parking spaces (3 QFleet and 1 ED On-Call)

· [ yvkcpck¢ci pq`vi`ki g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp

· �� ¡2�� Vehicles Only”

· o `rayb`vgc a`mp




×±

Area H: MBICC Visitor & Basement Car Park

_ljp `kc` jp �lmpjg`bbm pc�`k`qci �kfr qlc kcpq f� qlc hcigbj��c Ufp�jq`b �`r�yp am ²`m f� �fkr`b affr w`qcp(operated by swipe card or ticket dispensing machine) at the main entry point. Beyond the boom gates an at-

grade visitor parking area is provided and basement staff parking area (secured by a further roller door). Exit

by visitor vehicles requires the parking tickets to be validated by GP Super Clinic or Pharmacy within the

MBICC. This parking area provides:

· To pq`vi`ki g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp ²jqljv qlc `q-grade visitor car park

· \ t1x g`k �`kujvw p�`gcp ²jqljv qlc `q-grade visitor car park

· T plfkq pq`m q`Ôj �`kujvw p�`gc ²jqljv qlc `q-grade visitor car park

· [6 parking spaces within the basement car park (allocation/reservations unknown)

· T t1x g`k �`kujvw p�`gc ²jqljv qlc a`pcrcvq gar park (allocation/reservation unknown)

· o5 parking spaces total

Area I: Main Block & Emergency Department Drop-Off Area

_ljp `kc` provides primarily parking bays and loading zones for passenger set down in close proximity to the

main entry. All parking is time restricted and/or reserved. This parking area provides:

· \ pq`vi`ki ikf�-off car spaces for the Emergency Department (2 minutes maximum)

· T t1x g`k p�`gc �fk ikf�-off for the Emergency Department (2 minutes maximum)

· £ �`k`bbcb ikf�-off zone (with capacity for 3 vehicles) outside the Emergency Department

· £ �`k`bbcb ikf�-off zone (with capacity for 3 vehicles) outside main building entry (5 minutes maximum)

· £ �`k`bbcb ikf�-off zone (with capacity for 2 vehicles) opposite the Dentistry Building (5 minutes

maximum)

· [ kcpck¢ci pq`vi`ki g`k p�`gcp ì�`gcvq qf qlc g`�� zt`qlfbfwm/QAS vehicles)

· £ ikf� f�� `kc` �fk qlc t`qjcvq Xck¢jgcp Transport vehicles opposite the transit lounge

· £ bfìjvw a`m ijkcgqbm f��fpjqc qlc pjqc cvqkm �kfr Xlccl`v XqkccqV


A summary of the parking breakdown/inventory for each area and cumulative total for the wider Redcliffe

Hospital campus is shown in Table 4.1.



×³

Table 4.1: Redcliffe Hospital On-Site Car Park Inventory Summary

Overall, the Redcliffe Hospital campus provides a total on-site parking supply of 764 spaces. Excluding

allowance for drop-off/setdown zones, motorcycle parking, ambulance parking, QAS/pathology vehicle

parking and loading bays the site provides a total of 715 car spaces for general staff, visitor and patient

parking.

An indicative map showing the various on-site parking areas (as provided by MNHHS) is included in Appendix

A. It is noted that the parking capacities for the various areas nominated on this plan are outdated; with this

plan being provided more for context of the existing on-site parking areas.

4.2 Surrounding On-Street Parking Inventory

xyc qf qlc cÔjpqjvw g`�`gjqm gfvpqk`jvqp fv-site, it is recognised that a large portion of parking associated

with the Redcliffe Hospital is accommodated on the surrounding streets. As such, an inventory of on-street

parking was also conducted as part of this parking demand study. As per the MNHHS brief, the on-street

parking within a 500m walking radius of all pedestrian access points to the Redcliffe Hospital campus has

been assessed. Based on the respective locations of the 10 pedestrian access points to the various road

frontages, the extent of streets which fall within this 500m walking catchment are shown in Figure 4.2.

�� 15 204

�� 3� 37

�� 174

�� 5 30 3 158

�� 9 3 2 15 49

�� 23 23 5 4 2 2 2 4 67

�� 4 4 4 14

�� 14 4 1 45

�� 2 11 1 1 16

!"#$% 4&4 169 46 33 40 16 20 5 6 5 764

* '()+,-'. �'/ 056�7 07�/ 8��:-'. ;�/0 <�-75�� 8��))�) 6� �'.)� 8��:-'.=S�(+��, 8��:-'.Indicative capacity for undercover area

P�7-�'7 >��'086�7 S��?-(�0 P��:-'.��68 6DD 08�(�Q S@P�756)6./ ?�5-()� 8��:-'.

UB$%%"C$#EFCar Parking

G$HJKBL M%%"C$#K"BO$KB#EB$BCE

Vehicle

Parking

R"$FKBLBays/Docks

!"#$%V#$WW X$HParking

G$#KEB# X$HParking

GYZ X$HParking

[E\EH]EFCar Parking

ZH"^_`WWParking*

O"#"HCaC%EParking

Mbcd%$BCEParking



×Ö

Figure 4.2: Streets within 500m Walking Catchment of Redcliffe Hospital Map Source: Queensland Globe

_f g`bgyb`qc qlc fv-street parking capacity, the following techniques were used:

· xkj¢c²`mp� vf-standing/parking zones and bus stops were identified and excluded from usable kerbside

space for on-street parking.

· |fk pqkccqp ²ljgl gykkcvqbm l`¢c r`kuci �`kujvw a`mp ²jqljv qlc ypàbc uckapjic p�`gc� fvbm qlcpcparking bays were included in the inventory.

· |fk pqkccqp ²jql vf �fkr`b �`kujvw a`mp pcq fyq� qlc vyrack f� g`kp ql`q g`v �`ku ²jqljv ` wj¢cv pcgqjfvof kerbside space (i.e. between two driveways) was calculated by dividing the total kerbside length by

6m (average vehicle length of 6m). The number of cars able to park was then rounded down. For

example, a kerbside space of 15m can accommodate 2.5 vehicles @ 6m each, so a total parking capacity

of 2 vehicle was assumed.

· Iv�fkr`b �`kujvw ²jqljv ¢ckwcp ²`p cÔgbyici� even if observations showed that vehicles park in such

areas at present.



QØ

t`kujvw kcwyb`qjfv pjwv`wc ²`p `bpf kcgfkici fv `bb pqkccqp qf `bbf² �fk �`kujvw qf ac wkfy�ci jvqf qlcvarious categories.

A summary of the on-street parking capacity on each street (and components of streets) within 500m walk

of the site is given in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: On-Street Parking Inventory within 500m Walking Catchment of Redcliffe Hospital

Overall, the surrounding streets provide parking capacity for approximately 2,000 cars. Most kerbside

parking is unmarked and unrestricted, aside from a small amount of marked and time restricted parking on

the streets immediately adjacent to the Redcliffe Hospital campus.

A detailed graphical summary of the parking supply and allocations on all streets within the 500m walking

zone of the Redcliffe Hospital is included in Appendix B.

efghijgkljhm no pjqfmkfr(9pm-5am)

st(5am-9pm)

tuvkf(5am-9pm)

efghijgkljhm st wvxyz {q|x5pm)

ut wvxyz {q|x5pm)

}t wvxyz {q|x5pm)

~�� 26 30 56

Silvyn Street 24 31 24 79

Sheehan Street 30 30

Portwood Street 134 134

Anzac Avenue* 153 5 2 160

Lamington Drive 75 75

Hibiscus Avenue* 40 40

Victoria Avenue* 77 77

George Street* 30 30

Livermore Street 80 80

McAneny Street 64 6 70

Tilley Street 55 9 64

Percy Street 47 9 56

Knight Street 73 73

Monica Road 31 31

Gomersall Street 72 15 87

Scarborough Road* 117 117

Watt Street 62 62

Glenloc Street 41 41

Edwin Street 37 37

Cynthia Court 6 6

Wright Street 38 38

Orchid Street 83 83

Pinewood Street* 62 62

Macadam Street* 16 16

Sutherland Street 59 59

Porter Street* 100 100

Houghton Avenue 91 91

Esperanto Street 36 36

Aloomba Court* 24 24

Meerawa Street 22 22

Williams Street* 47 47

Cinnamon Court 28 28

TOTAL 1647 153 5 2 119 31 24 30 2011

*Only includes portion of street within 500m walk zone of hospital campus

pjghhj vqg�hm �ojq�ef|qg�hm



Q×

5 Existing Parking Demands

5.1 On-Site Parking Demands

{v-site parking demands were recorded between 6am and 6pm on Wednesday 25th October 2017. These

parking demands were derived using aerial drone imagery which was captured every 30 minutes for all

open-air car parking areas within the Redcliffe Hospital Campus. Through the use of the drone imagery, not

only was total on-site parking demands able to be recorded at 30-minute intervals, but approximate parking

durations of vehicles through detailed review of every car parking space on an individual basis. The

approximate parking duration was derived by recording whether each car space was occupied at each 30-

minute interval and whether this was the same vehicle as previous/future intervals. Based on the parking

duration of each vehicle, and also the arrival/departure times, each car was then categorised as being likely a

staff vehicle or patient/visitor vehicle. For example, cars which arrived/departed during known staff change-

over periods and which had long parking durations (i.e. +4 hours) were assumed to be staff vehicles.

Conversely, cars which arrived/departed outside of known staff change-over periods and typically of shorter

duration were assumed to be a patient/visitor vehicles. The location of the parking was also used to consider

likelihood of being either a staff or patient/visitor vehicle. This methodology is simplistic in that it does not

consider that some visitors may have been parked on-site for long duration (i.e. all day) or that staff may

have had short shifts only (and arrived at odd times of day). However, it is considered that the volume of

staff parking demands of short duration and patient/visitor demands of long duration would be comparable;

meaning the methodology used is considered to provide a reasonable level of accuracy.

It is also recognised that at present a large amount of ‘informal’ parking is experienced on-site (due to lack of

formal parking). This includes vehicles parking in grassy/gravel areas, median islands and general hardstand

areas not formally identified or marked as parking. These vehicles (and parking durations) were also

captured during the parking demand surveys.

The parking demands for the site were recorded/assessed using the same 9 parking areas as identified in

Section 4.1.

It is noted that due to survey limitations, a number of aspects of on-site parking demands were not able to

be fully captured and therefore excluded from the demand assessment. This included:

· _lc �`kujvw ²jqljv qlc a`pcrcvq g`k �`ku f� qlc ~�I�� (27 car spaces) could not be captured.

· t`kujvw icr`vip f� plfkq pq`m �`kujvw a`mp zjVcV £kc` I ikf� f�� a`mp� ²ckc vfq kcgfkici iyc qo

frequency of survey intervals (30 minutes) being unable to accurately identify parking demands and

durations. These vehicles are also not considered critical to overall parking supply calculations as they

are short term and vary considerably over the course of the day.

· efìjvw `vi `rayb`vgc a`mp ²ckc vfq jvgbyiciV



QQ

· ~fqfkgmgbc a`mp ²ckc vfq jvgbyici wj¢cv rfpq rfqfkgmgbc �`kujvw ²`p covered (within Area E) and

because parking demands for these vehicles are less sensitive (i.e. large volume of motorcycles can be

stored in small area) so can easily be retrofitted on-site in future if demands significantly increase.

· £ vyrack f� jv�fkr`b �`kujvw yvick b`kwc qkccp zjVcV vc`k qlc r`jv ayjbijvw cvqkm �kfr £vÕ`g £¢cvyc `vimaintenance shed in north corner of the site) were not recorded. However, within the parking demand

calculations in Section 7, additional allowance has been made to account for a small number of extra

vehicles representing unrecorded ‘informal’ parking.

· scljgbcp jv gjkgyb`qjfn on parking aisles, driveways and roadways on-site at each interval were excluded.

However, within the parking demand calculations in Section 7, additional allowance has been made for

the number of extra vehicles in circulation recorded at each survey interval.

· xyc qf qlc v`qykc f� �`kujvw icr`vip fv-site extending beyond the 12-hour survey period, there is

likely to be slight inaccuracy with duration information for vehicles recorded at start of survey (6am) or

end of survey (6pm). For example, a vehicle arriving at 5pm was assigned a duration of 1 hour (up to

6pm) even though that vehicle may have stayed on-site until later in the evening after the survey was

completed. TTM have attempted to normalise these parking demands as best as possible based on

information recorded.

A summary of the parking demands recorded on-site, and assumed categorisation of staff versus visitor, over

the 12-hour survey periods is shown in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1: Summary of On-Site Parking Demand Survey

A graphical representation of the on-site parking demand profile over the 12-hour survey period is shown in

Figure 5.1.

�� 6:00 AM 6:30 AM 7:00 AM 7:30 AM 8:00 AM 8:30 AM 9:00 AM 9:30 AM 10:00 AM 10:30 AM 11:00 AM 11:30 AM

�� ¡�¢¢£ ¤¥¥ 193 412 503 551 561 575 577 586 588 599 602

�� ¦�§�¡��£ ¨ 2 5 17 21 30 45 41 42 35 38 33

©�ª��« ¬�ª�®¯ °��±�«² ³´´ 195 417 520 572 591 620 618 628 623 637 635

µ ¶··¸¹��·º » ¼½µ 28% 61% 76% 83% 86% 90% 90% 91% 91% 93% 92%

¾�¢�� ¡�¢¢£ ½¿ 42 45 47 55 57 60 60 60 59 59 59

¾�¢�� ¦�§�¡��£ ¨ 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 4

À®��ª��« ¬�ª�®¯ °��±�«² ÁÂ 42 45 47 55 57 60 61 61 61 62 63

¡�¢¢ �� ¤¿Ã 235 457 550 606 618 635 637 646 647 658 661

¦�§�¡�� ¨ 2 5 17 21 30 45 42 43 37 41 37

��±�« ¬�ª�®¯ ³ÂÄ 237 462 567 627 648 680 679 689 684 699 698

Å ÆÇÇÈÉ�®Ç� Ê ËÌÅ 34% 67% 82% 91% 94% 99% 99% 100% ÂÂÅ 102% 101%

�� ³ËÍÎÎ ¬Ï ³ËÍÁÎ ¬Ï ³ÍÎÎ ¬Ï ³ÍÁÎ ¬Ï ËÍÎÎ ¬Ï ËÍÁÎ ¬Ï ÁÍÎÎ ¬Ï ÁÍÁÎ ¬Ï ÄÍÎÎ ¬Ï ÄÍÁÎ ¬Ï ´ÍÎÎ ¬Ï ´ÍÁÎ ¬Ï�� ¡�¢¢£ 610 613 620 625 634 627 607 523 437 402 316 318

Formal Parking (Visitor) 31 30 41 44 42 43 46 41 27 21 14 14

Formal Parking (Total) 641 643 661 669 676 670 653 564 464 423 330 332

% Occupancy * 93% 93% 96% 97% 98% 97% 95% 82% 67% 61% 48% 48%

Informal Parking (Staff) 62 62 72 74 76 65 65 60 42 38 34 34

Informal Parking (Visitor) 4 2 6 7 6 2 2 2 2 2 1 1

Informal Parking (Total) 66 64 78 81 82 67 67 62 44 40 35 35

Staff Parking 672 675 692 699 710 692 672 583 479 440 350 352

Visitor Parking 35 32 47 51 48 45 48 43 29 23 15 15

Total Parking 707 707 739 750 758 737 720 626 508 463 365 367

% Occupancy * 103% 103% 107% 109% 110% 107% 105% Â³Å 74% 67% 53% 53%

*Based on 688 formal car spaces on-site as per On-Site Car Park Inventory (excl. drop-off, motorcycle, ambulance, loading bays & MBICC basement)



QY

Figure 5.1: Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (On-Site)

£p g`v ac pccv jv Table 5.1 and Figure 5.1, the on-site parking demands are significant for the majority of the

day between 9am and 3pm. During these periods it is noted that drivers have difficulty finding vacant

parking spaces (either opting to park within ‘informal’ areas or follow other users who look to be leaving

parking spaces). Peak on-site demand occurs at 2pm, which generally aligns with shift change-over for a

number of staff units (i.e. nursing, operations, day procedure unit).

A breakdown of the parking duration information for every individual vehicle recorded parking on-site over

the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.2.



Qn

Table 5.2: Parking Duration Grouping for All Vehicles Recorded (On-Site)

Overall, a total of 1,364 unique vehicles were recorded parking on-site over the surveyed 12-hour period.

The majority of these vehicles parked on-site for long durations (50% more than 4 hours). Based on a formal

on-site parking supply of 688 spaces, this indicates that the average turnover of car parking spaces is 1.98

cars per space (although this is slightly skewed by the large number of vehicles parking within ‘informal’

areas). If informal parking is excluded, a total of 1,212 cars were recorded parked within the 688 formal

parking spaces indicating a turnover rate of 1.76 cars per space.

Based on the parking duration information, the estimated breakdown (of total vehicle parking) between total

staff and visitor parking over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.3

Table 5.3: Estimated Total Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Site)

The proportion of staff and visitor parking demand is generally consistent with TTM experience which

suggest that on average 2/3 of parking demands are staff related and 1/3 is visitor related.

Finally, based on the assumed visitor parking demands, the duration breakdown of these vehicles recorded

over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.4.

ÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ× No. of Vehicles %

30min-1hr 290 21.26%

1hr-2hr 191 14.00%

2hr-3hr 93 6.82%

3-4hr 84 6.16%

4-5hr 63 4.62%

5-6hr 53 3.89%

6-7hr 36 2.64%

7-8hr 79 5.79%

8-10hr 346 25.37%

+10hr 129 9.46%

TOTAL 1364

ØÓÒÙÕ×Ú ÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ× Û ÜÝÝ ÞßàÕáÝßâ

ãäåæ No. of Vehicles %

Staff 884 64.81%

Visitor 480 35.19%

Total 1364

çèéêëìéæí îìïðêñò óïæìðíôõñ



Q}

Table 5.4: Estimated Total Visitor Parking Demands and Duration (On-Site)

The visitor parking demands are typically of short term nature, with 75% of parking demands being less than

2 hours.

Further detailed information on the parking demand data and raw car park/vehicle parking records is

included in Appendix C.

5.2 On-Street Parking Demands

{v-street parking demands were undertaken in generally the same manner as the on-site surveys. These

were conducted between 6am and 6pm on Wednesday 25th October 2017. Due to the increased

geographical span of the surveys, however, only 1 hourly intervals were able to be recorded (compared to 30

minutes on-site). Due to this lesser degree of accuracy, the categorisation of parking demand durations was

less refined (i.e. durations less than 2 hours difficult to approximate).

A summary of the parking demands recorded on all streets within the 500m walking catchment of the

campus over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.5.

ö÷øùúûüý No. of Vehicles %

30min-1hr 232 48.33%

1hr-2hr 138 28.75%

2hr-3hr 54 11.25%

3-4hr 24 5.00%

4-5hr 21 4.38%

5-6hr 8 1.67%

6-7hr 2 0.42%

7-8hr 1 0.21%

8-10hr 0 0.00%

+10hr 0 0.00%

TOTAL 480

þÿúûEùú�� ûÿûúüø �ùø�ûý� ö÷øùúûüý



Q¦

Table 5.5: Summary of On-Street Parking Demand Survey Results

Detailed review of the hourly interval drone imagery showed that hospital related parking does not extend

fully out to the 500m limit of the streets surveyed. Based on the parking demand profiles of the vehicles

recorded on the streets, and times that street parking fills/vacates, TTM has been able to estimate with quite

reasonable accuracy that the limit of on-street parking related to the hospital is only up to 250m walk from

the Hospital Campus as is shown in Figure 5.2.

S�� 6�� 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM MaximumT ��

Unique Vehicles^

R�� 26 47 56 55 56 55 54 55 55 46 20 11 56 78

Silvyn Street 5 13 65 78 80 82 79 84 85 84 65 20 85 155

Sheehan Street 3 11 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 27 16 1 30 35

Portwood Street 2 7 45 77 77 77 70 70 73 68 58 15 77 110

Anzac Avenue* 0 4 37 54 57 65 62 62 64 51 36 20 65 105

Lamington Drive 0 0 0 3 13 12 9 7 5 5 1 1 13 16

Hibiscus Avenue* 2 2 5 7 7 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 7 11

Victoria Avenue* 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 3

George Street* 0 0 2 4 7 7 4 4 3 3 3 0 7 11

Livermore Street 5 4 5 8 14 16 15 13 12 13 13 13 16 32

McAneny Street 13 11 17 25 29 32 27 26 29 27 22 20 32 62

Tilley Street 5 13 35 44 47 48 48 45 43 39 24 14 48 72

Percy Street 3 8 22 27 25 23 24 22 21 21 16 6 27 53

Knight Street 4 4 6 7 5 7 8 9 7 9 6 8 9 22

Monica Road 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 2 4

Gomersall Street 1 1 10 14 14 14 14 12 12 9 11 3 14 22

Scarborough Road* 0 5 15 21 23 24 25 22 20 21 14 4 25 45

Watt Street 3 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 4 3 4 10

Glenloc Street 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 6

Edwin Street 8 6 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 1 8 14

Cynthia Court 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Wright Street 2 2 8 13 16 14 11 11 8 7 6 6 16 18

Orchid Street 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 5

Pinewood Street* 2 2 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 2 4 9

Macadam Street* 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2

Sutherland Street 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 3 6

Porter Street* 1 1 5 10 15 10 9 9 14 13 10 6 15 31

Houghton Avenue 3 5 19 29 32 34 36 36 36 37 31 9 37 58

Esperanto Street 3 2 4 3 4 2 2 3 4 4 3 3 4 11

Aloomba Court* 2 2 3 4 3 2 6 6 5 3 1 1 6 9

Meerawa Street 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Williams Street* 1 1 2 6 7 7 5 5 5 4 3 2 7 8

Cinnamon Court 6 5 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 4 3 4 6 13

TOTAL 103 163 408 534 578 582 556 550 549 510 382 186 1037

*Only includes portion of street within 500m walk zone of hospital campus

^Recorded over 12-hour period



Q±

Figure 5.2: Assumed Extent of Redcliffe Hospital Related Parking On-Street

1lcv gfvpjickjvw fvbm qlc pqkccqp ljwlbjwlqci jv Figure 5.2, a summary of the parking demands recorded

over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.6.



Q³

Table 5.6: Summary of On-Street Parking Demand Survey Results (Assumed Reduced Extent)

A graphical representation of the on-street parking demand profile of assumed Redcliffe Hospital related

cars over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Figure 5.3.

�� !!� "#$$%& 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM Maximum'(�)* +,-.! (/

Unique Vehicles^

0123145789 :53115 26 47 56 55 56 55 54 55 55 46 20 11 56 78

Silvyn Street 5 13 65 78 80 82 79 84 85 84 65 20 85 154

Sheehan Street 3 11 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 27 16 1 30 35

Portwood Street* 0 5 43 75 75 75 68 68 71 66 56 13 75 108

Anzac Avenue* 0 4 37 52 56 64 59 60 60 49 37 20 64 97

L4;79<589 =37>1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hibiscus Avenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Victoria Avenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

George Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

L7>13;831 :53115? 1 0 0 2 9 11 10 8 7 8 8 7 11 22

McAneny Street* 1 1 9 18 22 24 21 21 24 22 17 15 24 44

Tilley Street* 0 8 30 40 44 45 45 43 42 38 24 14 45 67

Percy Street* 1 6 20 22 20 20 21 20 18 19 14 6 22 45

K97<@5 :53115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monica Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Gomersall Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

:243A838B<@ 084C? 0 4 14 19 22 22 22 20 19 19 13 2 22 32

W455 :53115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Glenloc Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Edwin Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cynthia Court 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

W37<@5 :53115? 0 0 6 11 14 12 9 10 7 6 4 4 14 15

O32@7C :53115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pinewood Street* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Macadam Street* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sutherland Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

P83513 :53115? 0 0 4 8 13 9 8 7 13 12 10 4 13 26

Houghton Avenue* 1 3 18 26 31 32 33 32 34 33 27 4 34 47

DFG134958 :53115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Aloomba Court 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Meerawa Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

W7HH74;F :53115? 0 0 1 5 6 6 5 5 5 4 3 2 6 7

I7994;89 I8B35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

'J'%M 38 102 333 441 478 487 464 463 470 433 314 123 777

*Only includes portion of street likely to experience hospital parking demands, as per Figure 5.2.

^Recorded over 12-hour period

P43N79< =1;49CF Q38; 5@1F1 F53115F 8;7551C



QÖ

Figure 5.3: Assumed Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (On-Street)

£ akcùif²v f� qlc �`kujvw iyk`qjfv jv�fkr`qjfv �fk c¢ckm jvij¢jiy`b ¢cljgbc kcgfkici �`kujvw ²jqljv qlcpcstreets over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7: Parking Duration Grouping for All Vehicles Recorded (On-Street)

UVXYZ[\] No. of Vehicles %

0hr-2hr 153 19.69%

2hr-3hr 84 10.81%

3-4hr 75 9.65%

4-5hr 57 7.34%

5-6hr 34 4.38%

6-7hr 28 3.60%

7-8hr 34 4.38%

8-10hr 249 32.05%

+10hr 63 8.11%

TOTAL 777

^YX_[]` UVXYZ[\] a bcc def[gceh



YØ

�`pci fv qlc �`kujvw iyk`qjfv jv�fkr`qjfv� qlc cpqjr`qci akcùif²v zf� qfq`b ¢cljgbc �`kujvw� acq²ccv qfq`bstaff and visitor parking over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.8.

Table 5.8: Estimated Total Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Street)

The proportion of staff and visitor parking demand on-street is much more balanced than on-site, with

slightly more than half of on-street parking being likely visitor parking.

It is recognised, however, that due to the shorter-term parking nature of visitor cars at any given point in

time the majority of the on-street parking is likely to be related to staff. A comparison of assumed staff and

visitor parking demands for each hour of the 12-hour survey period is also shown in Table 5.9.

Table 5.9: Estimated Hourly Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Street)


from the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.10.

Table 5.10: Estimated Total Visitor Parking Demands and Duration (On-Street)

The visitor parking duration profile recorded on-street different to that recorded on-site, with only 36% of

vehicles parking for less than 2 hours (compared to ~75% on-site). If adding together assumed visitor parking

demands both on-site (Table 5.4) and on-street (Table 5.10) this indicates that on average 60% of visitor

parking demands are 2 hours or less.

ijkl No. of Vehicles %

Staff 357 45.95%

Visitor 420 54.05%

Total 777

mnopqrols truvpwx yulrvsz{w

|}~� �� 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM

�� 29 78 239 287 298 302 302 308 312 291 215 81

Visitor Parking 5 14 60 110 132 137 115 109 111 99 68 30

Total Parking 34 92 300 397 430 438 418 417 423 390 283 111

�� No. of Vehicles %

0hr-2hr 152 36.19%

2hr-3hr 84 20.00%

3-4hr 71 16.90%

4-5hr 48 11.43%

5-6hr 26 6.19%

6-7hr 23 5.48%

7-8hr 15 3.57%

8-10hr 1 0.24%

+10hr 0 0.00%

TOTAL 420

��



Y×

|ykqlck icq`jbci jv�fkr`qjfv fv qlc �`kujvw icr`vi i`q` `vi k`² g`k park/vehicle parking records is

included in Appendix D.

5.3 Combined Total Parking Demands

_f �y`vtify the peak parking demand of the Redcliffe Hospital the surveyed on-site and on-street parking

demands were overlayed (which each have slightly different peak periods) to provide a resultant total peak.

For the purposes of this analysis it was assumed that 90% of the total on-street parking demands within the

streets nominated in Figure 5.2 were related to the Redcliffe Hospital. This allows for a small proportion of

on-street parking expected which is unrelated to the Redcliffe Hospital. This includes residents of the streets

and potential visitor cars (particularly relevant to the streets to the south of Anzac Avenue and north of

Recreation Street), and also staff/visitors to other commercial premises (particularly relevant to the streets

between the hospital campus and Portwood Street). This value is considered to provide a conservative

estimate that most on-street parking is actually related to the Redcliffe Hospital.

The resultant total Redcliffe Hospital parking demands for staff and visitors over the 12-hour survey period is

shown in Table 5.11. Given only hourly intervals were completed for on-street parking, the total parking

demand (on-site plus on-street) has also been considered on an hourly basis only.

Table 5.11: Total Redcliffe Hospital Surveyed Parking Demands and Assumed Use

A graphical representation of the on-site vs on-street (total) parking demand profile over the 12-hour survey

period is shown in Figure 5.4. A graphical representation of the staff vs visitor (total) parking demand profile

over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Figure 5.5.

¡¢£ ¤¥ ¦§¨ 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM

©ª«¬¬ «®¯°±² 194 457 606 635 646 658 672 692 710 672 479 350

Visitor Parking 0 5 21 45 43 41 35 47 48 48 29 15

Total Parking 194 462 627 680 689 699 707 739 758 720 508 365

Staff Parking 29 78 239 286 297 301 302 307 312 291 215 81

Visitor Parking 5 14 61 111 133 138 116 110 111 99 68 30

Total Parking 34 92 300 397 430 438 418 417 423 390 283 111

Staff Parking 223 535 845 921 943 959 974 999 1022 963 694 431

Staff Parking (%) 98% 97% 91% 86% 84% 84% 87% 86% 87% 87% 88% 91%

Visitor Parking 5 19 82 156 176 179 151 157 159 147 97 45

Visitor Parking (%) 2% 3% 9% 14% 16% 16% 13% 14% 13% 13% 12% 9%

Total Parking 228 554 927 1077 1119 1137 1125 1156 1181 1110 791 476

³´µ¶·¸££· ¹§¸º¡´»

³´µ¶¡·£ ¹§¸º¡´»

³´µ¶¡·£ §´¼ ³´µ¶·¸££· ½¤¢¾¡´£¼ ¹§¸º¡´»



YQ

Figure 5.4: Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (On-Site vs On-Street)

Figure 5.5: Total Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demand Profile (Staff vs Visitor)



YY

£ akcùif²v f� qlc �`kujvw iyk`qjfv jv�fkr`qjfv �fk c¢ckm jvij¢jiy`b ¢cljgbc kcgfkici �`kujvw fv-site and

on-street assumed to be related to the Redcliffe Hospital over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table

5.12.

Table 5.12: Parking Duration Grouping for All Assumed Redcliffe Hospital Vehicles (On-Site + On-Street)

Based on the parking duration information, the estimated breakdown (of total vehicle parking) between total

staff and visitor parking over the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.13.

Table 5.13: Estimated Total Breakdown of Staff and Visitor Parking (On-Site + On-Street)


from the 12-hour survey period is shown in Table 5.14.

¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆ No. of Vehicles %

0hr-2hr 619 29.98%

2hr-3hr 169 8.19%

3-4hr 152 7.34%

4-5hr 114 5.54%

5-6hr 84 4.05%

6-7hr 61 2.97%

7-8hr 110 5.31%

8-10hr 570 27.63%

+10hr 186 9.00%

TOTAL 2064

ÇÂÁÈÄÆÉ ¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆ Ê ËÌÌ ÍÎÏÄÐÌÎÑ

ÒÓÔÕ No. of Vehicles %

Staff 1206 58.43%

Visitor 858 41.57%

Total 2064

Ö×ØÙÚÛØÕÜ ÝÛÞßÙàá âÞÕÛßÜãäà

åæçèé êèëìíæîîè ïðñòæçóí - Parking Demand Study

êèîèôèõìèé ö÷øêùúûüý

Yn

Table 5.14: Estimated Total Visitor Parking Demands and Duration (On-Site + On-Street)

þÿD�� No. of Vehicles %

0hr-2hr 506 58.95%

2hr-3hr 130 15.10%

3-4hr 88 10.24%

4-5hr 64 7.48%

5-6hr 31 3.66%

6-7hr 23 2.65%

7-8hr 15 1.69%

8-10hr 1 0.12%

+10hr 0 0.00%

TOTAL 858

E�� D �D�� þÿD��



Y}

6 Staff Travel Patterns

A �� activities used to establish parking demands on-site, a questionnaire was

distributed to all Redcliffe Hospital staff (via email) to gain a better understanding for their travel habits. The

following key questions were asked as part of the questionnaire:

· H�� each staff member travelled to the Redcliffe Hospital on the day they completed the questionnaire.

· I� they travelled by car, where they parked (on-site or on-street).

· S�� -site and on-street parking.

· �� H� ��

· K�� being completed on the day of the questionnaire (i.e. day shift, night shift, business

hours).

Responses were gathered over an 11 day period from 11th – 22nd October 2017. A total of 348 responses to

the questionnaire were received which represented a response rate of ~23% (based on a total of 1,500 fte

staff).

A summary of the results of the questionnaire responses is provided as follows:

· T�� !�� "�� #��" �� H� �� "�� $�%

- 9&'(% (331 responses) by car, as driver

- ('0) *+ �� , $� ��- � passenger

- +'2) *. �� , $� ��- �� $� ��"��#��

- ('9) *2 �� , $� "��

- 1'+% (4 responses) by walk/cycle

- () *( �� , �� $�� '

· F�� !��/ $� �� !��- ��3�"�� &() �� ed on-site and 50% parked on-street.

· �� H� �� %

- 1'+) *4 �� , �� + ��

- 4'+) *14 �� , +-4 hours

- 7'.) *+0 �� , 4-6 hours

- .() *+07 �� , 0-10 hours

- 0'.) *+2 �� , 1( �� "�� '



Y¦

· T�� rs completed by staff was made up of:

· &1'9) *17. �� , �� $� ��

· 24'4) *11. �� , �� – day shift

· 9'9) *24 �� , �� – night shift

· 2'.) *12 �� , !��$��#��

The responses of the questionnaires are quite telling and support the results of the parking demand surveys

in a number of ways including:

· T�� /� �� !��/ �� !� �� /� �� / ��"�� -site and on-

street. The lack of travel by alternative transportation modes such as public transport is also reflective of

the current limited availability of such services (particularly such services aligned with work shifts of most

staff).

· T�� "�� $y respondents who parked on-street aligns generally with the observations

from the parking surveys; typically only within the zone depicted in Figure 5.2.

It is recognised, however, that there may be some sampling bias within the questionnaire responses given

the high portion of the respondents indicated they work ordinary hospital business hours. It is possible that

this is due to the fact that staff working such shifts (i.e. administration, health professionals) typically have

easy access to a computer to complete the survey. On the other hand, shift working staff (such as

medical/nursing/ operational) would likely have had less opportunity to complete the survey (i.e. no

computer available, limited time) and so are less represented in the pool of respondents. This is reflected by

the high proportion of staff indicating they park on street as opposed to on-site which is understood typically

occurs for staff arriving from 8am onwards (typical of staff working ordinary hospital business hours) once

on-site car park has been relatively filled. As such, it is expected that the response to this question is not

reflective of all staff and if more shift working staff completed the questionnaire it is likely there would have

been a higher proportion indicating they park on-site.

Regarding the staff travel mode share of the Redcliffe Hospital, for benchmarking purposes this has been

reviewed against the recently released ABS 2016 Census “Method of Travel to Work” data. Comparison has

been drawn to people working within the wider Redcliffe SA2 area and also the areas of other hospitals

within the MNHHS catchment including Caboolture Hospital (Caboolture SA2), Prince Charles Hospital

(Chermside SA2) and RBWH (Kelvin Grove – Herston SA2). A comparison of the travel to work mode shares is

shown in Table 6.1.



Y±

Table 6.1: Benchmarking Method of Travel to Work for Redcliffe Hospital Staff

As can be seen in Table 6.1, the mode split towards private car (as driver) for the Redcliffe Hospital is greater

than the averages for both the Redcliffe SA2 and other SA2 areas where MNHHS hospitals are located.

Chermside and Herston both have lower private vehicle mode of travel, mainly likely due to the greater

range of public transport options (and also disincentives for private vehicle travel, such as parking costs). The

mode shares for both the Redcliffe SA2 and Caboolture SA2 are very similar with a higher mode share to

private vehicle travel however some amount of public transport travel is still apparent.

It is recognised, however, that travel modes for hospital staff is typically weighted towards private vehicles

regardless given numerous factors such as

· L�mited public transport availability to cover non-standard working hours of staff (particularly shift

workers).

· P�� "�� !�� other than by private vehicles (particularly during evening

periods).

· N��-standard working hours leads to staff completing more personal activities on the way to and from

work, so private vehicle is the most convenient option.

As such, there is the expectation that travel modes specific to the hospitals in the above noted suburbs

would have higher private vehicle travel rates then the suburb averaged rates (which accounts for all people

working in the area). This is evidenced by the 10% difference in car mode share between the Redcliffe

Hospital and Redcliffe SA2 area.

Overall it is expected than any measures to be implemented aiming to reduce reliance on private vehicles for

the Redcliffe Hospital would only likely reduce the demands to a similar level of the Redcliffe SA2 as a best-

case scenario (i.e. 95% down to possibly 85%) unless there are fundamental changes to public transport

accessibility for the wider area.

M568 5: ;<=>8? @5B5<C G=<Jas driver~

G=<J =Opassenger#

M5@5<QRQ?8 Train Bus Cycle Walk Other Total

UVWXYZ[[V \]^_ZàYb95.0% 2.9% 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.9% 0.0% 100%

UVWXYZ[[V cdef84.3% 6.8% 0.8% 0.4% 1.8% 1.2% 3.4% 1.2% 100%

gah]]YìjV cdef87.5% 6.0% 0.8% 1.5% 0.7% 0.5% 1.9% 1.0% 100%

gkVjl^ZWV cdef79.5% 6.6% 1.0% 1.3% 6.4% 0.6% 3.9% 0.7% 100%

mVYnZo pj]nV q \Vj^`]o cdef64.6% 5.5% 1.7% 7.0% 12.0% 2.6% 5.3% 1.2% 100%

bUVWXYZ[[V \]^_ZàY cà[[ riV^`Z]ooaZjV^2016 ABS Census Data, Place of Work

~Including truck

#Including drop off and taxi



st

7 Parking Demand Assessment

7.1 Existing Relative Parking Demands

u� �� -site and on-street parking demand surveys, the parking demands have been

estimated and correlated to the ‘as-built’ capacity of the Redcliffe Hospital to provide an equivalent parking

demand rate. In this instance, the parking demand rate was related to the number of beds (or bed

equivalents) and also total floor area.

Due to the fact that the parking demand survey methodology used resulted in a number of minor data

capture limitations, when determining current ‘assumed’ parking demands the following was also included

(as previously discussed in Section Figure 5.1)

· �� !�� / �� vuIww $� �"�� *�� $� ��!��,' T�� !��

a capacity for 27 cars. Similar to other staff parking areas, it was assumed this parking area would fill up

and reach full capacity over the critical 9am-3pm period.

· A�� "�� / ��-site which was not captured by the drone surveys. An indicative

maximum allowance of 10 cars was assumed over the critical 9am-3pm period.

· A�� !�� / areas at the time of each survey

interval. These were derived directly from the aerial drone images and typically ranged from 5-10 cars

across the wider site.

Once adding these additional parking demand allowances to the survey data shown in Section 5, the total

assumed Redcliffe Hospital parking demands is shown in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1: Total Assumed Redcliffe Hospital Parking Demands

A graphical representation of the assumed Redcliffe Hospital parking demand profile is shown in Figure 7.1.

xyz{ |} ~�� 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM

�� 447 605 650 660 674 672 696 713 682 486 346

�� 47 60 68 72 73 76 89 97 78 53 39

�� 494 665 718 732 747 748 785 810 760 539 385

�� 69% 93% 100% 102% 104% 105% 110% 113% 106% � � 54%

¡¢��£ �� Demand^

�¤ 92 300 397 430 438 418 417 423 390 283 111

Total 244 586 965 1115 1162 1185 1166 1202 1233 1150 822 496

% of Peak Parking Demand 20% 48% 78% 90% 94% 96% 95% 97% 100% 93% 67% 40%

*Based on 715 formal car spaces on-site as per On-Site Car Park Inventory (excl. drop-off, motorcycle, ambulance & loading bays)

^Based on assumption that 90% of parking demands on streets within Figure 5.2 are related to the hospital

¥¦§ÿ©{ ª�«¬y¦ ~{z�¦®¯

¥¦§¨©«{{© ª�«¬y¦ ~{z�¦®¯



s°

Figure 7.1: Total Redcliffe Hospital Surveyed Parking Demand Profile

A �� $� �� Table 7.1 and Figure 7.1, the assumed peak parking demand for the Redcliffe Hospital

occurred at 2pm with an assumed total of 1,233 cars parked both on-site and on-street. It is also worth

noting that this peak parking demand is relatively consistent over a significant portion of the day, with the

parking demand being more than 90% of the peak between 9am and 3pm.

Based on the existing as-built capacity of the Redcliffe Hospital, this equates to a peak parking demand rate

of:

· 1-+22 �� ÷ 324 beds = 3.81 cars per bed

· 1-+22 �� ÷ 43,000m² GFA = 2.87 cars per 100m² GFA



±²

7.2 Parking Demand/Supply Benchmarking

T�� / ��"�� S�� 7.1 have been compared to other known parking demand

rates and industry accepted practice. The following comments are provided with respect to this:

· T�� general ‘rule of thumb’ is that hospitals typically generate parking demands in the order of 3-4 cars

per bed and 2-2.2 cars per 100m² GFA. As such, on a per bed basis the surveyed demand rate for the

Redcliffe Hospital appears to be logical (be it on the higher end of the range), whilst on a per 100m² basis

it is likely higher than usual. Both of these are as to be expected given the high mode share to private

vehicles as discussed previously in Section 6 when compared to other hospitals. The higher parking

demand on a per 100m² is likely attributed to the fact that the historical floor space constraints of the

hospital have resulted in significant replanning of internal building layouts to maximise floor space

efficiency for clinical services. As such, it is likely that the existing Redcliffe Hospital has a higher than

average bed vs floor area ratio.

· T�� ""�� / �� /� �� / ��

completed Sunshine Coast University Hospital was 3.6 space per public hospital bed and/or 3.15 spaces

per public hospital day bed. The demand rate for the Redcliffe Hospital appears to align with the general

public hospital rate (although once again slightly higher).

· T�� u�� $�� w�� w�� Brisbane City Plan 2014 planning scheme recommends parking supply for

hospitals be calculated by application of the following rate: 0.5 spaces per bed plus 0.8 spaces per staff.

Based on a 324 bed capacity and 1,200 fte staff demand (day shift) this equates to a parking requirement

of 1,122 car spaces. This is within 10% of the peak surveyed demand rate of the Redcliffe Hospital.

· T�� vu�w ��/ ��"� ��""�� / �� $� �� $� � �� 7

spaces per 100m² GFA. Based on a 43,000m² GFA capacity at present this equates to a parking

requirement of ~3,000 car spaces. This is considered extremely excessive in light of the parking demand

rates derived from these surveys. For the proposed site, however, within the Redcliffe Kippa-Ring Local

Plan an acceptable parking supply range for hospital related uses is between 2-3.33 spaces per 100m²

GFA (Part J, PO18 of the Local Plan Code). This would relate to an acceptable parking supply within the

range of 860-1,420 spaces which is considered more appropriate.

The above information indicates that overall the parking demand rates derived as part of the surveys are

considered to be logical, be it on the higher end of respective ranges from other sources.

7.3 Future Parking Requirements

u� �� / ��"�� !�� assessment, the future parking

demand expectations for the Short Term and Long Term hospital expansion scenarios (rounded to the

nearest 50 cars) are as follows:

· Short Term Expansion: 350 beds x 3.81 cars per bed = 1,350 cars

· Long Term Expansion: 580 beds x 3.81 cars per bed = 2,200 cars



±³

T�� 3�� / ��"�� "��/ �� "�´�� /� �� !�� "�� !� �� '

It is recognised that as part of a new Multi-Storey Car Park on the Redcliffe Hospital campus, paid parking is

to be implemented across all on-site parking. As such, when considering the necessary future parking supply

needs for the Hospital Campus the critical factors in this will be:

· T�� !�� /��/ �� $� �"��"�� for staff and visitor parking on-site. This will influence how

many persons travelling to the site will change travel modes (i.e. from car to bus) based on perceived

costs and convenience of each option.

· T�� !�� / �� / �� ' Without proper control of on-

street parking, introduction of paid parking on-site will inevitably lead to parking demands being shifted

from on-site to on-street; potentially to an extent even greater than experienced at present due to the

capacity constraints on-site.

As such, for the purposes of assessing the future parking needs of the site the following assumptions have

been made:

· T�� / �� $� �/�� /� �/�� "�� "

private vehicle travel due to the considerations previously outlined in Section 5. It is understood the level

of charging for staff parking will be set at approximately $8.00 per day. Whilst it is recognised that paid

parking may convert some staff to different travel modes, the improved reliability of on-site parking (i.e.

staff being able to find parking immediately rather than allow extra time before shifts to find a car park)

may have a comparable effect of encouraging other staff back to private vehicle travel. Furthermore,

based on the proposed daily parking cost of $8.00, this would be only slightly more than the comparable

cost of a two-way bus or train fare from within the Redcliffe Peninsular ($6.40, assuming travel at peak

times) and comparable with a fare from outside the Redcliffe Peninsular if needing to cross 2 zones of

the Translink network ($7.80). As such, it is expected that most staff would be unlikely change their

mode of travel due to the comparative costs and greater convenience of driving.

· L� �� !� �� - �� "��"�� !� � �/�� /� �� !��

parking demands. It is understood that at present there is a relatively high ‘failure to show’ rate for

outpatient and follow up services due to current difficulties experienced in finding suitable parking on-

site (or close by). By improving on-site capacity, this may result in reduced ‘failure to show’ rates

potentially increasing visitor parking demands. Once again, this could offset any mode shift changes of

visitors discouraged from private vehicle travel due to any new parking costs implemented.

· P�� / �� ""�� !�� H� �� w�"�� *�'�' �� +&(" �� µone

shown in Figure 5.2) are restricted to short term parking (i.e. 1 -2 hours maximum) and enforced by

MBRC to ensure appropriate compliance.

Regarding the latter point, given that a significant volume of parking is short duration visitor demands (< 2

hours), even with strict parking controls it is considered likely that there will be some proportion of hospital

related cars parking on street in the future.



±¶

T�� " �� / ��-site incurs costs whilst on-street parking doesn’t, as there will

always be a proportion of visitors willing to walk extra distance even if to avoid small parking costs. On this

basis, it is assumed that parking within at least the immediate streets surrounding the site which are

currently time restricted at present (Recreation Street, Anzac Ave, Silvyn Street, Sheehan Street) will

continue into the future. Reviewing the parking inventory data, these streets currently provide capacity for

approximately 250 cars.

As such, for forecasting future parking needs of the Redcliffe Hospital it is presumed that at least 250 cars of

the parking demand will be accommodated on-street. On this basis, the required on-site parking supply

would be:

· Short Term Expansion: 1-2&( �� total demand – 250 cars on-street = 1,100 car spaces on-site

· Long Term Expansion: 2,200 cars total demand – 250 cars on-street = 1,950 car spaces on-site

The capacity of the Multi-Storey Car Park to be delivered as part of the Short Term expansion should

therefore be selected to ensure a total parking supply of 1,100 car spaces is achieved on-site.

Once this Multi-Storey Car Park is established, it is then expected that a future 850 car spaces will need to be

delivered to satisfy parking demands associated with the Long Term Expansion.

7.4 Sensitivity Testing for Bed Types

I� � �� !�� /��/ whether hospital capacity (and therefore parking

supply) should be based either including or excluding day beds. The historical theory behind excluding day

beds from hospital capacity is that these beds are expected to generate reduced parking demands given less

demand for visitors. It is TTM’s view, however, that this is offset by the higher turnover of patients (each

patient potentially generating parking demands) and potentially higher levels of staffing to keep day beds

turning over. As such, determining future parking needs based on total number of beds (including day beds)

is considered acceptable.

Regardless, sensitivity testing has been completed to show what impact (if any) omitting day beds from

parking demand calculations would make. A further scenario was also testing assessing also the exclusion of

Emergency Department beds/stations has also been conducted.

The results of this this sensitivity assessment is outlined in Table 7.2.



±s

Table 7.2: Sensitivity Testing Bed Types for Future Parking Demands

As can be seen in Table 7.2, if day beds or Emergency Department beds are excluded from parking demand

calculations this would increase the ‘per bed’ existing parking demand rate up to 4-4.5 cars per bed.

However, when considered in the context of the future Short Term and Long Term expansion periods this

would have minimal impact on future parking demands overall. A parking demand of 1,350 cars would still

be expected as part of the Short Term Expansion scenario and 2,200 cars would be the ‘worst case’ for the

Long Term expansion scenario.

On this basis, adopting the rate of 3.81 cars per bed (inclusive of day beds and emergency department beds)

for forecasting future parking demands/needs is still considered appropriate.

Notwithstanding the above, it is recognised that the forecasted future parking demands for the Long Term

expansion is likely to be many years away (15 years based on an indictive 2031-32 horizon). Given the large

potential for changes in personal mobility to occur over this time (i.e. due to emerging technologies, change

in peoples travel habits, car ownership) the parking demands indicated should be treated as indicative only.

It would be prudent to reassess parking demands (through similar studies to this) as the Redcliffe Hospital

progressively expands over the coming years to ensure demands are accurately reflected and in particular to

quantify impacts of the parking/travel demand strategies (if implemented) as is discussed in Section 7.5.

7.5 Additional Future Travel Considerations

A ��!�� - �� $�!� �� / ��"�� "�� $� �� $��/ �� /�� /�

to travel mode to the site which could potentially impact parking demands (either increase or decrease). It is

recognised that, as part of good transport planning practice for any future expansion to capacity of the

Redcliffe Hospital, options should be considered to reduce private vehicle travel reliance.

·¸¹º»¹¼½

Count Count % Inc Count % Inc

Overnight Beds 274 300 448

Same Day Beds 15 15 32

Medical Day Beds - - 16

Emergency Department Beds/Stations 35 35 69

Emergency Department Beds/Stations (Child) - - 15

Overnight Beds Only 274 300 9.5% 448 63.5%

Overnight + ED Beds Only 309 335 8.4% 532 72.2%

Total (All Beds) 324 350 8.0% 580 79.0%

Existing Parking Demand 1233

Parking Demand Per Bed (O'Night Only) 4.5

Parking Demand Per Bed (O'Night + ED Only) 3.99

Parking Demand Per Bed (Total) 3.81

*All Bed Numbers derived from Tables 21 and 27 of the DRAFT Stage 1 Health Services Plan

¾¿ÀÁ

¾¿¿Â

¾¿¿Ã

ÃÁ¾Ä

Ã¾Ã¿

ÃÃÁÂ

ÅÆÇÈ» ÉÊÈË ·¸ÌÍ¼º¹Ç¼ ÎÇ¼½ ÉÊÈË ·¸ÌÍ¼º¹Ç¼

ÏÇÈÊÐÍº» ÏÑ»ÑÈÊ ÒÍÈÓ¹¼½ ÔÊÊÕº



±±

T�� ultimately flow on to reducing the parking demands and therefore burden placed on parking

infrastructure into the future. It would be unsustainable to continue to expand parking capacity infinitely

into the future to account for future increases to hospital capacity.

With regards to this, it is recognised there are limitations to achieving such reductions in parking demands.

In particular:

· T�� / ��!�� Ö�� / ��"�� H� ��

currently sustained over the majority of a typical weekday period. As such, it is unlikely that any changes

to site operations (i.e. staggering shift change-overs further) will have a notable reduction to peak

parking demands.

· T�� H� �� !�� ns means that encouraging

significant mode shift away from private vehicle travel is unlikely to occur. There is currently a very high

private vehicle mode split of ~95% (as shown in Section 6) which compares to the Redcliffe SA2 average

of ~85%. This suggest that even if mode shift away from private vehicles is can be encouraged for

Redcliffe Hospital staff, this would likely only work to the extent of reducing mode split to a level

consistent with the average Redcliffe working population (i.e. 95% to 85%). Greater reductions to private

mode split travel would likely require fundamental changes to travel habits of people working in the

Redcliffe SA2 area (such as through significantly increasing range of alternativity transportation options)

which is something outside of the control of the Redcliffe Hospital itself. Even if, as a best-case scenario,

a 10% reduction to private vehicle mode share for staff was achieved to align with the Redcliffe SA2, this

would only potentially translate to a 7-8% reduction in on-site parking demands given the proportion of

parking generate by visitors also. Reducing visitor private vehicle travel is considered just as difficult to

achieve (if not more) than for staff travel due to the nature patients typically being vulnerable or of ill-

health and therefore unlikely to opt for alternative transport options such as walking, cycling or public

transport.

Regardless of the above, potential ways to promote travel mode shift away from private vehicles for the

Redcliffe Hospital could be encouraged. The following initiatives therefore would be worth exploring as part

of any future travel and parking management reviews:

· × ��$�� / � �� $� �� !�� the Redcliffe Peninsular and provide staff with a

safe, convenient and cheap alternative for travel to/from work which aligns with the respective shift

change-overs. It is understood that a large proportion of Redcliffe Hospital staff live within the Redcliffe

Peninsular and so such a service could be financially advantageous.

· P��!��/ � �� H� �� #�� / �� /�� / �� /

and/or ride-sharing for staff working similar shifts.

· I"��!� �� $�� the Kippa Ring Train Station though either a dedicated hospital shuttle bus (for

both staff and patients) or encouraging Translink to expand the frequency and timing of existing bus

Routes 660 and 680 to align with staff shift times and train arrival/departure times.



±Ø

· ×��/��/ "�� /� �� "��!�� -of-trip provisions, potential

cycle memberships (i.e. which allow access to free laundry services or bike mechanics) and salary

sacrificing benefits for cycle travel.

· F�� / �� H� �� /�� "��/��/ ��/��

as driverless cars, mobility-on-demand services and ride/car-sharing services.

· A��/� �� vNHHS �� H� �ital, planning for land uses in the local area

to allow for increased population density, allowing for a greater proportion of staff to live in close

proximity to the site and therefore walk or cycle rather than commute by car.

The following other options are also worth consideration as part of future on-site parking provisions to

maximise car parking availability and efficiency:

· w�� "��"��/ !�� / ��"� �� #�� !� �� $� ��$��

parked or parked in tandem. This would also assist with any influx in parking demands at shift change-

over periods by providing temporary capacity to cater for short spikes in on-site parking demand.

· w�� "��"��/ "�� / � ��" �� "�3�"� � �� f staff

parking areas. As these parking demands are by regular users and of long duration car stacking is an ideal

solution for such parking demands.

· �� "�� / *�� "�� /, �� "��"��/ ��

encourage staff to use smaller vehicles. Small car parking occupies less space than traditional parking so

can increase efficiency in parking areas.

· ×�� !�� /��/ �� /�� /� �� !�� '

· P�� r off-site parking for staff at nearby locations with only seasonal or limited parking demands.

For example, parking within the Redcliffe Showgrounds when no events are occurring and connection to

the Redcliffe Hospital Campus by shuttle bus. Such options would be worth considering particularly for

temporary parking, such as during construction of new buildings which results in the loss of on-site

parking.



±Ù

8 Multi-Storey Car Park Options Analysis

A �� P�� / ��"�� S��- � total of 8 potential site locations/options were reviewed for the

proposed Multi-Storey Car Park. From these 8 options, 4 were selected by the project team for further

detailed consideration. As shown in Figure 8.1, these included:

· Úption 1: The northern corner of the site, partially within the footprint of the existing North Block.

· Úption 4: Purchase of the adjacent property at 102 Anzac Avenue, increasing the land holding of the

Redcliffe Hospital Campus, and construction of a new “L-Shaped” car park around the existing MBICC.

· Úption 7: The western corner of the site generally over the existing footprint of car park Area C.

· Úption 8: Purchase of a nearby parcel of land at 26-36 Portwood Street for a new off-site car park.

Figure 8.1: Multi-Storey Car Park Options Map Source: Queensland Globe

ÛÜÝÞßà á

ÛÜÝÞßà â

ÛÜÝÞßà ã

ÛÜÝÞßà ä



±å

TTv � � �� based on the scoring system and criteria put forward by the project team. A copy

of this scoring sheet and comments on traffic aspects of each option is included in Appendix E.

From a traffic engineering and accessibility perspective it was determined that Option 7 is the most

appropriate location for the Multi-Storey Car Park. This fact was echoed by the project team and hence was

adopted as the preferred option moving forward.



±t

9 Site 7 Car Park High Level Traffic Review

9.1 Introduction

T�� ´�� "’s architect (GHD Woodhead) has prepared a concept design of the proposed Multi-Storey

Car Park in the Option 7 area of the site. The capacity of this Multi-Storey Car Park has been resolved based

on:

· T�� equired parking supply to meet the short term need of 1,100 car spaces total within the Redcliffe

Hospital Campus.

· A�� car spaces through reconfiguration of internal access and

parking areas on-site deemed necessary to support a new Multi-Storey Car Park.

The design concept prepared by GHD Woodhead is for a 4-level Multi-Storey Car Park with a total capacity

for 603 car spaces. To facilitate this car park, it is expected that a total of 200 existing at-grade car spaces

(within Areas A, B and C of the site) will be removed. As such, at the completion of this car park the on-site

parking supply will include:

· 972 �� A�� A- u- w (Multi-Storey Car Park) and D which is the ‘main’ car park for the site.

This represents a formal increase of 400 car spaces compared to the current provision within this area of

the Redcliffe Hospital Campus.

· 14& �� the remaining Areas E, F, G, H and I of the Redcliffe Hospital Campus.

· 1,118 car spaces total within the Redcliffe Hospital Campus

To provide sufficient flexibility for allow future easy expansion to parking capacity, the design of the Multi-

Storey Car Park will also allow for a ‘typical’ floor plate and ramping system which can be replicated with

additional levels on top of the proposed 4-level design.

A copy of the GHD Woodhead design concept plans is included in Appendix F.

Further discussion on high level internal and external traffic engineering considerations related to the

provision for this new Multi-Storey Car Park (and associated changes to rest of the on-site parking within the

Redcliffe Hospital) is provided as follows.

9.2 Internal Layout

9.2.1 Access Arrangements

T�� Multi-Storey Car Park will gain access via the existing driveways to Recreation Street (all

movements entry and exit) and Anzac Avenue (left-turn entry and exit only).

Documents

3DUNLQJ DQG 7UDIILF $VVHVVPHQW...Our unique combination of acoustics, data, traffic and waste services is fundamental to the success of any architectural or development project. We