Appendix C – Traffic Impact Assessment

GHD | Report for Montarosa Pty Ltd - Integrated Eco-Tourism Facility - Old Coach Road, Princetown, 31/33485

Appendix C – Traffic Impact Assessment

Montarosa Pty Ltd

Integrated Eco-Tourism Facility – Old Coach Road, Princetown

Traffic impact assessment

September 2016

GHD | Report for Montarosa Pty Ltd - Princetown Resort Development, 31/33485 | i

This report has been prepared by GHD for Montarosa Pty Ltd and may only be used and relied on by Montarosa Pty Ltd for the purpose agreed between GHD and the Montarosa Pty Ltd as set out in section 1.1 of this report.

GHD otherwise disclaims responsibility to any person other than Montarosa Pty Ltd arising in connection with this report. GHD also excludes implied warranties and conditions, to the extent legally permissible.

The services undertaken by GHD in connection with preparing this report were limited to those specifically detailed in the report and are subject to the scope limitations set out in the report.

The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this report are based on conditions encountered and information reviewed at the date of preparation of the report. GHD has no responsibility or obligation to update this report to account for events or changes occurring subsequent to the date that the report was prepared.

The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this report are based on assumptions made by GHD described in this report (refer sections 4 and 5 of this report). GHD disclaims liability arising from any of the assumptions being incorrect.

GHD has prepared this report on the basis of information provided by Montarosa Pty Ltd and others who provided information to GHD (including Government authorities), which GHD has not independently verified or checked beyond the agreed scope of work. GHD does not accept liability in connection with such unverified information, including errors and omissions in the report which were caused by errors or omissions in that information.

ii | GHD | Report for Montarosa Pty Ltd - Princetown Resort Development, 31/33485

Table of contents

1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose of this report........................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Structure of this report ......................................................................................................... 1

2. Existing conditions ......................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Existing development ........................................................................................................... 2

2.3 Existing road network........................................................................................................... 3

2.4 Existing pedestrian, cycling and public transport networks ................................................. 3

2.5 Existing traffic volumes ........................................................................................................ 3

2.6 Crash history ........................................................................................................................ 4

3. Proposed development .................................................................................................................. 5

3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 5

3.2 Development description ..................................................................................................... 5

3.3 Access arrangements .......................................................................................................... 6

4. Development traffic ........................................................................................................................ 7

4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 7

4.2 Trip generation ..................................................................................................................... 7

4.3 Trip distribution and assignment ........................................................................................ 11

4.4 Base traffic volumes ........................................................................................................... 12

4.5 Addition of future development traffic ................................................................................ 12

5. Traffic impacts .............................................................................................................................. 14

5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 14

5.2 Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection ............................................................. 14

5.3 Old Coach Road Bridge ..................................................................................................... 17

5.4 Parking ............................................................................................................................... 19

6. Summary and conclusions ........................................................................................................... 22

Table index

Table 1 Peak hourly volumes on Gt Ocean Road near Princetown (Jan 2016) ...................................... 4

Table 2 Lodge daily and peak trip generation forecasting process .......................................................... 8

Table 3 Cabin daily and peak trip generation forecasting process .......................................................... 9

Table 4 Recreational activities daily and peak trip generation forecasting .............................................. 9

Table 5 Restaurant GFA estimates ........................................................................................................ 10

Table 6 Restaurant daily and peak trip generation forecasting process ................................................ 11

Table 7 Development trip generation forecast summary ....................................................................... 11

GHD | Report for Montarosa Pty Ltd - Princetown Resort Development, 31/33485 | iii

Table 8 Level of service definitions ........................................................................................................ 14

Table 9 SIDRA results summary - Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road............................................... 15

Table 10 Likely on-site car parking provision ......................................................................................... 21

Figure index

Figure 1 Site location and overview ......................................................................................................... 2

Figure 2 Location of proposed development accesses ............................................................................ 6

Figure 3 Base turning volume estimates for 2016 and 2026 ................................................................. 12

Figure 4 Base plus development turning volume estimates for 2016 and 2026 .................................... 13

Figure 5 Basic left turn (BAL) treatment ................................................................................................. 16

Figure 6 Short channelized right turn (CHR(S)) treatment5 ................................................................... 16

Figure 7 Approach to Old Coach Road bridge ....................................................................................... 18

Figure 8 Locations of Old Coach Road and old Ocean Road bridges ................................................... 18

Figure 9 Old Ocean Road Bridge crossing near Rivernook ................................................................... 19

Appendices

Appendix A – Master plan

Appendix B – SIDRA outputs

GHD | Report for Montarosa Pty Ltd - Princetown Resort Development, 31/33485 | 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose of this report

Montarosa Pty Ltd (herein referred to as “Montarosa”) has commissioned GHD to undertake a

traffic impact assessment in relation to their proposed development on Old Coach Road, south

of Princetown (herein also referred to as “the site”).

The proposed integrated eco resort development comprises accommodation across lodge and

cabin formats, a 300 seat restaurant building and associated informal play equipment, shared

paths and provision for water based activities on Gellibrand River.

It is anticipated that construction will start in mid-2016 and continue for approximately 18

months. The opening date is therefore expected to be late 2017/early 2018.

1.2 Structure of this report

This report is structured as follows:

Section 2 – Existing conditions: An overview of the existing site conditions is provided,

along with the road network and traffic volumes.

Section 3 – Proposed development: Details such as the land use, scale and timing of the

proposed development are listed here.

Section 4 – Development traffic: Vehicle trips to and from the site are generated and

assigned to the local road network based on the proposed development.

Section 5 – Traffic impacts: Implications of the additional traffic generated as a result of

the proposed development are discussed.

Section 6 – Summary and conclusions: The main findings from this traffic impact

assessment are summarised here.

2 | GHD | Report for Montarosa Pty Ltd - Princetown Resort Development, 31/33485

2. Existing conditions

2.1 Introduction

This section provides information on some of the existing features of the site, the surrounding

road network and associated traffic volumes.

2.2 Existing development

Currently the site is vacant with no existing development. The terrain of the site is flat and

relatively featureless. The northern part of the site is prone to flooding due to its topography and

proximity to the Gellibrand River.

The south-western corner of the site is adjacent to the Princetown Recreation Reserve, which

provides camping and caravan accommodation services.

A satellite image of the site and its location is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Site location and overview1

1 Image source: Google Earth Pro. Annotations by GHD.

N Proposed development site

Princetown Recreation

Reserve


2.3 Existing road network

The following sections describe the local road network around the site.

2.3.1 Old Coach Road

Old Coach Road is an unsealed two-way local access road running in a generally north-west to

south-east alignment. It crosses the Gellibrand River just south of Princetown by way of a 3.6 m

wide bridge which is sufficient only for a single lane of travel; therefore vehicles crossing the

bridge can do so only in one direction at a time. It is understood that the bridge has a 15 tonne

load limit.

Beyond the bridge, Old Coach Road is used to access the Princetown Recreation Reserve,

which is situated directly adjacent to the proposed development site. South of the site, there are

a number of unsealed tracks traversable only by four-wheel drive, which provide access to

nearby beaches and ultimately Great Ocean Road.

2.3.2 Great Ocean Road

The Great Ocean Road (B100) is a single carriageway sealed road with one lane in each

direction, running in a generally east-west alignment between Torquay and Allansford. It

provides access to many tourist destinations and towns along Victoria’s Shipwreck Coast and is

also a prominent scenic route. Great Ocean Road is a VicRoads Declared Road and is

classified as an Arterial Highway.

In the vicinity of Princetown and Old Coach Road, there are a number of sweeping bends with

limited visibility around some corners due to existing vegetation and the site topography. These

are signposted with warning signs, with advisory speed limits of 60 km/h. The speed limit of

Great Ocean Road in the vicinity of Old Coach Road is 80 km/h.

2.4 Existing pedestrian, cycling and public transport networks

As the site is in a predominantly rural area, there are no formal pedestrian or cycling facilities

along Great Ocean Road or Old Coach Road. The Great Ocean Walk, a coastal hiking trail

between Apollo Bay and the Twelve Apostles, can be accessed close to the site. It is

understood that there are plans for a walking and cycling trail (the Twelve Apostles Trail) along

the coast between Timboon and Princetown, similar to the existing Great Ocean Walk track, but

the construction timing for this is unknown.

The site is served by public transport via a V/Line coach service operating along Great Ocean

Road between Warrnambool and Apollo Bay three times a week. It stops at the nearby

Princetown turnoff at Post Office Road, approximately 500 m east of the Old Coach Road/Great

Ocean Road intersection. Onward connections to Melbourne, Geelong and other regional

centres are also available via the V/Line coach and rail network.

2.5 Existing traffic volumes

Data for the period 4 to 17 January 2016 for the Great Ocean Road west of Princetown Road

(approximately 3.6 km west of the project area) has been obtained from VicRoads. The average

daily two-way flow during this period was approximately 2,500 vehicles per day (vpd). The

average weekend day was slightly higher than the average day (and the average weekday) at

2,581 vpd. Trucks made up approximately 14% of daily volumes.

Volumes steadily increased throughout the day starting at around 08:00 hours to a peak at

around 17:00 hours. The peak hourly volumes are shown in Table 1.


Table 1 Peak hourly volumes on Gt Ocean Road near Princetown (Jan 2016)

Eastbound (17:00) Westbound Two-way

Average day 136 160 (15:00) 285 (16:00)

Average weekday 121 162 (15:00) 285 (15:00)

Average weekend day 145 172 (16:00) 307 (17:00)

The latest available traffic data for Old Coach Road is from 2008, when a daily volume of 66

vehicles was counted. No information was available in relation to commercial or heavy vehicle

volumes or proportions along Old Coach Road. It is understood that usage of Old coach Road

may have increased since 2008, but this cannot be confirmed without more recent traffic counts.

2.6 Crash history

The crash history of the study area has been downloaded from VicRoads’ publicly-accessible

crash database CrashStats. No crashes were recorded on Old Coach Road in the vicinity of the

site within a five year period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2013 inclusive. During the

same period, one crash was recorded on Great Ocean Road near the intersection of Post Office

Road between a station wagon and another vehicle of unspecified type, with two people in the

station wagon suffering minor injuries. The crash occurred on a Friday afternoon in clear

conditions.


3. Proposed development

3.1 Introduction

This section presents details of the proposed development, including land uses, scale and

access arrangements.

3.2 Development description

Montarosa proposes an integrated eco resort development composed of:

eco-lodge with 20 rooms with ancillary office, function rooms, pool and day spa.

eco-cabins (14 x 2-bed cabins and 6 x 3-bed cabins).

restaurant with a total capacity of 300 seats with ancillary souvenir sales, reception and

briefing facilities.

panoramic lookout structure.

informal recreation activities, including walking/cycling tours and trails, picnic areas,

wildlife viewing and kids playground.

water-based pleasure activities from proposed jetty pontoon including canoe, kayak,

stand up paddle board and small boat eco tours and hire.

The development is intended to serve tourists travelling along the Great Ocean Road, and

especially those visiting the Twelve Apostles, which are located approximately six kilometres to

the north-west of the site.

Construction is anticipated to commence in mid-2016 and continue for 18 months. Opening is

therefore expected to be in late 2017/early 2018.

Specific details of the proposed development are listed below. The master plan for the site is

included in Appendix A.

3.2.1 Lodge

One of two accommodation facilities proposed for the site, the lodge will consist of 20 rooms

that will cater for up to 60 guests in total. As part of this facility, a commercial kitchen, dining

room, lounge, day spa and pool will also be provided.

Accommodation will also be provided on-site for staff, most likely in a stand-alone building.

3.2.2 Cabins

The other proposed accommodation facility consists of 20 cabins (14 two-bed cabins and six

three-bed cabins) that will accommodate around 80 to 120 guests in total. These cabins are

likely to be self-contained, with each to have a balcony, kitchenette and bathroom.

3.2.3 Informal recreation activities

The development will offer tours and activities to groups of visitors, such as bush walking,

Segway tours, canoeing, paddle boarding, kayaking and small boat eco tours and hire.

Amenities will be provided on site to facilitate and complement these activities, including an

office, reception, storage area, retail shop, change rooms, toilets and showers.

3.2.4 Restaurants

Two dining styles are proposed as part of the development:


A la carte restaurant, offering a high-quality sit-down menu, and

Casual restaurant, offering pre-prepared and/or quickly cooked meals.

Both restaurants are anticipated to offer up to 150 seats each, for a total of up to 300 seats.

Alcohol and bar facilities are envisaged to be provided, along with outside seating areas (these

may or may not form part of the restaurants). Access to the restaurants shall be unrestricted

and will not be limited to patrons of the recreational activities or on-site accommodation.

In addition to the restaurant, there is a potential for a conference area to also be provided.

Toilets may also be shared between the recreation activities and the restaurants, depending on

their proximity.

3.3 Access arrangements

Old Coach Road will form the access route into and out of the site, with the vast majority of

traffic expected to turn off/onto Great Ocean Road. One or two site access points will be

provided on Old Coach Road, dependent on the layout of the development which is to be

finalised. These would be located on the south-west and southern boundaries of the site, either

side of the existing Princetown Recreation Reserve.

Locations of the proposed accesses to the development are depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Location of proposed development accesses2

2 Image source: Google Earth Pro. Annotations by GHD.

N

Proposed development site

Princetown Recreation

Reserve Proposed site access 1

Alternate site access 2


4. Development traffic

4.1 Introduction

This section describes the process and methodology used to derive the traffic generation

forecast to occur as a result of the proposed development.

4.2 Trip generation

The first step in the traffic forecasting process is to generate trips based on the land use and

scale of the proposed development. This is achieved by applying trip rates, which specify the

number of trips forecast to be generated for a particular unit of measure related to the

development, such as per 100 m2 of gross floor area (GFA), per hotel/motel room, per seat in a

restaurant, etc. Trip rates also relate to a measure of time, typically daily or per hour (during

peak periods).

The New South Wales RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (referred to as the RTA

guide in this report) provides trip rates for a number of land uses. For this development, the

most relevant of these include the following:

Motel3: 3 trips/unit (daily), 0.4 trips/unit (evening peak hour)

Restaurant: 60 trips/100 m2 GFA (daily), 5 trips/100 m2 GFA (evening peak hour)

Where the RTA guide does not provide trip rates for the land uses in relation to the

development, the trip generation has been derived from first principles.

The trip generation for each component of the development is described below. It is noted that

trip rates typically apply to standalone developments, and that there is a likelihood visitors to the

site will make use of more than one component of the development. To account for this, a

reduction factor will be applied to the trip generation resulting from each of the components.

This process (where applicable) is described under the respective development components

below.

4.2.1 Lodge

For a maximum capacity of 60 people, each of the 20 rooms in the lodge will accommodate a

maximum of three persons. Therefore, it is likely that each room will be occupied by one group

of people that travels together as a unit (such as an individual, couple or family). As a result,

each room in the lodge will likely attract one vehicle on average. Whilst there is the potential for

guests to arrive by bus (whether by public transport, a tour or privately hired vehicle), this

analysis will consider a scenario whereby all guests arrive by car, as this would result in a

conservative vehicular traffic generation that reflects a feasible balance of the above arrival

possibilities. It is expected that the day spa will be ancillary to the main function of the lodge and

will not generate discrete trips.

The RTA guide’s trip rate of three trips per unit per day assumes full (100%) occupancy of units.

Lodge guests are likely to make use of the recreation activities and/or restaurants on site, and

trips to surrounding tourist attractions are likely to be day trips (i.e. consisting of one departure

from and one arrival at the site). It is not likely that more than 50% of guests will make more

than two trips a day to the site and so a rate of three trips per unit is therefore considered to be

reasonable.

It should be noted that in this analysis, trips generated using the trip rates are assumed to be

exclusive of those made to the on-site restaurants and informal recreation, as guests would

3 Note that rates for hotels are not specified, so the motel rate has been used. The rate is used for comparison purposes only.


walk to these facilities. This provides a robust analysis as the trip rates typically do not consider

co-location with such ancillary facilities (i.e. all trips likely to be made by guests would be to

destinations off-site).

The trip generation for the lodge component of the development is summarised in Table 2.

Table 2 Lodge daily and peak trip generation forecasting process

Development Attribute Daily Peak Hour

No. of rooms 20

No. of people of maximum capacity* 70

Trip rate (per room) 3 0.4

Total no. of vehicle trips generated 60 8

* Includes 10 staff members

4.2.2 Cabins

For a maximum capacity of 120 people, each of the 20 cabins will accommodate on average six

people. If all cabins are occupied to maximum capacity, guests in each cabin would need to

travel in two cars (the maximum capacity of a car is typically five persons), assuming that they

travel as a collective unit. Whilst there is the potential for guests to arrive by bus (whether by

public transport, a tour or privately hired vehicle), this analysis will consider a scenario whereby

all guests arrive by car, as this would result in a conservative vehicular traffic generation that

reflects a feasible balance of the above arrival possibilities.

Two cars per cabin would represent a maximum usage scenario. It is more likely that a typical

usage scenario would have a lower average number of cars per cabin. It has been assumed

that there will be 1.5 cars per cabin on average in a typical usage scenario.

The RTA guide does not provide specific trip rates for cabins or similar accommodation oriented

towards large groups, therefore a trip rate based on first principles has been derived. Based on

the typical usage scenario described above whereby guests in a fully occupied cabin travel

using 1.5 vehicles, and assuming guests of 50% of cabins make two trips per day (i.e. three

trips per cabin) and the guests of the remaining 50% of cabins make four trips per day (i.e. six

trips per cabin)4, an average daily trip rate of 4.5 trips per cabin is obtained.

As the daily trip rate is 50% higher than the RTA guide’s motel daily trip rate per room, the peak

trip rate for each cabin is assumed to also be 50% higher than the RTA guide’s motel peak trip

rate per room.

The trip generation for the cabin component of the development is summarised in Table 3.

4 Refer to section Error! Reference source not found. for an explanation of this assumption as applicable to units in the lodge.


Table 3 Cabin daily and peak trip generation forecasting process


No. of cabins 20

No. of people at maximum capacity* 130

Trip rate (per cabin) 4.5 0.6


* Includes 10 staff members

4.2.3 Informal recreation activities

The traffic generation of these activities is influenced primarily by the scale and number of

activities offered. Each activity will cater for groups of up to 12 guests.

The development as a whole will cater for up to 240 people per day. The following assumptions

have been used to determine the number of trips generated:

An average of three visitors per vehicle will arrive for activities

The activities themselves do not generate any vehicular traffic (e.g. as a result of

transiting to tour destinations)

10% of daily traffic generation occurs during the peak hour

The activities are likely to derive some of their patronage from guests staying at the lodge and

cabin accommodation, and also from the recreation reserve, who will walk from their

accommodation. This means not all of the trips generated by these activities would result in

vehicles travelling on the local road network. A 25% reduction therefore has been applied to the

trip generation of these activities to obtain the total number of vehicle trips generated, based on

the assumption that 25% of the development’s patronage is derived from guests staying at the

lodge and cabin accommodation facilities.

The total daily trip generation and peak trip generation for the recreational activities is

summarised in Table 4.

Table 4 Recreational activities daily and peak trip generation forecasting


Total no. of people per day (max) 240

No. of people per vehicle (on average) 3

No. of vehicles generated per day 80

No. of vehicle trips generated (in and out) 160 16

% of patronage from lodge/cabin guests 25% 25%


It should be noted that a number of people are expected to arrive by bus. As these volumes are

not fully understood it has been assumed that all recreational activity trips will be made by car

for analysis purposes. This creates a conservative analysis scenario.


4.2.4 Restaurant

As the development is currently in the conceptual design stages, floor areas for each of the

restaurants are not yet available. For the purposes of this analysis, the floor area of each

restaurant is estimated based on an average GFA of 2.1 m2 per seat, as surveyed by the RTA.

Based on this estimate, the RTA trip rates above can then be applied to obtain a trip generation

forecast for each restaurant, as shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Restaurant GFA estimates

Development Attribute A la carte Casual

No. of seats 150 150

GFA per seat (m2) 2.1 2.1

Estimated GFA (m2) 315 315

The restaurant trip rates provided in the RTA guide are indicative, average rates. It is noted in

the RTA guide that daily trip rates will be substantially higher if the restaurant also serves lunch.

However, the remoteness of the development’s location also needs to be considered, along with

the relatively low volumes of traffic along Great Ocean Road. Tourist attractions in the area such

as the Great Ocean Road and the Twelve Apostles are likely to be the primary generators of

traffic within the local region, and so the restaurants are likely to serve passing traffic only and

would therefore not generate much additional traffic on top of what is currently using Great

Ocean Road. In addition, it is anticipated that some of the restaurant’s patronage will be derived

from guests staying on-site at the accommodation facilities provided on site and at the

recreation reserve. Given these factors would limit the likely potential for traffic growth into the

development, it is considered that the trip generation rates provided in the RTA guide are

suitable for use even if the restaurants are open for lunch.

For restaurants, the trip generation can be influenced by the rate of customer turnover, which is

linked to the speed in which food is prepared, served and consumed. Hence, a casual

restaurant will generally experience a faster rate of customer turnover than a formal sit-down

restaurant, and will subsequently generate more traffic during a set time period. For the

purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the casual restaurant will turnover customers twice

as quickly as the a la carte restaurant and so the casual restaurant trip rate is double the a la

carte trip rate.

Each of the a la carte and casual restaurants are also likely to derive a substantial proportion of

their patronage from guests staying at the lodge and cabin accommodation provided on site and

also the recreation reserve, who will walk to the restaurants from their accommodation. This

means not all of the trips generated by the restaurants would result in vehicles travelling on the

local road network. A 25% reduction therefore has been applied to the trip generation of the

restaurants to obtain the total number of vehicle trips generated, based on the assumption that

25% of each restaurant’s patronage is derived from guests staying at the lodge and cabin

accommodation facilities.

The total daily trip generation and peak trip generation for both restaurants is summarised in

Table 6.


Table 6 Restaurant daily and peak trip generation forecasting process

Development Attribute A la carte Casual

Daily Peak Hour Daily Peak Hour

Trip rate (per 100 m2 GFA) 60 5 120 10

Trips generated based on trip rate 189 16 378 32

% of patronage from lodge/cabin guests 25% 25% 25% 25%

Total no. of vehicle trips generated 142 12 284 24

Alcohol is intended to be served at the restaurants (potentially through the provision of bar

service), however it is understood that this would be ancillary to the food service function of the

restaurants. Therefore, any traffic generated by the presence of a bar is not likely to be

significant and so this is assumed to be captured in the trip rates used above.

4.2.5 Summary of trip generation

The daily and peak hour trip generation for the development is summarised in Table 7.

Table 7 Development trip generation forecast summary

Development Component Daily Peak Hour

Informal recreational activities 120 12

A la carte restaurant 142 12

Casual restaurant 284 24

Lodge accommodation 60 8

Cabin accommodation 90 12


Up to 60 additional trips are expected when special occasions are being held. As previously

discussed, it is expected that some activity patrons will arrive by bus. As these volumes are not

currently understood, it has been assumed that all trips will be made by car for analysis

purposes. This therefore creates a conservative assessment scenario. Buses are considered

separately in the car parking assessment.

4.3 Trip distribution and assignment

The next step in the traffic forecasting process is to distribute the generated trips onto the local

road network.

South of the site, the only significant destination along Old Coach Road is the nearby beach,

which is accessible to four-wheel drive vehicles only. As a result, it is likely that only a few

vehicles will travel south from the development along Old Coach Road each day. The vast

majority of development traffic is likely to originate from/exit onto Great Ocean Road. As traffic is

currently split roughly equally in both the westbound and eastbound directions on Great Ocean

Road, the generated traffic has been distributed 50/50 along Great Ocean Road east and west


of Old Coach Road. Based on this reasoning, the following assumptions have been adopted in

this analysis:

50% of development traffic enters from/exits onto Great Ocean Road west of Old Coach

Road, via Old Coach Road

50% of development traffic enters from/exits onto Great Ocean Road east of Old Coach

Road, via Old Coach Road

0% of development traffic enters from/exits onto Old Coach Road south of the

development

4.4 Base traffic volumes

The base (i.e. existing) traffic volumes for Great Ocean Road and Old Coach Road have been

estimated for each of the analysis years (2016 and 2026) by applying a 2% per year

compounding growth rate. In the absence of more detailed information, nominal peak hour

volumes for Old Coach Road for each analysis year were estimated by assuming the peak hour

volume is equal to 10% of the daily traffic volume, a 50% directional split (i.e. equal volumes) in

each direction along Old Coach Road, and by adopting a directional split based on the

VicRoads traffic data for Great Ocean Road.

A heavy vehicle proportion (HV%) of 14% has been adopted for this analysis based on the

number of commercial vehicles travelling on Great Ocean Road in 2016. A HV proportion of 2%

has been used for Old Coach Road.

The nominal peak hour base turning volumes used in this analysis are presented in Figure 3 for

the years 2016 and 2026.

Figure 3 Base turning volume estimates for 2016 and 2026

4.5 Addition of future development traffic

No growth rate was applied to the development traffic for each of the analysis years as the trip

generation is assumed to represent the extent of the proposed development.

For each of the 2016 and 2026 peak periods, the development traffic generated in section 4.2

has been distributed onto the road network as described in section 0. The resulting traffic

volumes are presented in Figure 4.


Figure 4 Base plus development turning volume estimates for 2016 and 2026


5. Traffic impacts

5.1 Introduction

This section discusses the impacts of the proposed development on the local road network and

any recommended mitigation measures, if required.

Two design years have been considered as part of the analysis:

Year of opening (assumed to be 2016)

10 years after opening (assumed to be 2026)

It is assumed that peak hour traffic volumes on Old Coach Road are equal to 10% of the daily

volumes, except for traffic generated using peak hour trip rates (refer section 4.2).

5.2 Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection

5.2.1 Intersection performance

The performance of the Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection has been assessed

using SIDRA Intersection 6.0. Intersection performance is typically described by the following

four parameters:

Degree of saturation (DoS). This is the ratio of demand to capacity and is a measure of

how busy, or ‘saturated’, an intersection is. In theory, a DoS of 1.0 means that the

intersection is operating at maximum capacity. However, a lower practical DoS is

normally used, depending on the intersection control type. For unsignalised intersections,

the practical DoS is 0.80. The aim is to have a DoS less than the practical maximum.

Average delay in seconds. This is the average amount of time it takes a vehicle to pass

through the intersection and takes into account congestion (i.e. queueing), signal delays,

crossing pedestrians and the physical size of the intersection. This is the most important

parameter as it is the most tangible to drivers.

Level of service (LoS). This is an alpha-numeric summary of the overall performance of

an intersection, ranging from A (excellent) to F (very poor). It is directly related to average

delay as shown in Table 8. A desirable LoS is C, but it is generally accepted in congested

urban environments that the realistic target is D.

95th percentile queue length in metres (95Q). This is the length of queue that is not

exceeded 95% of the time. Ideally, the 95Q should fit within provided turning lanes

without spilling into the adjacent through lanes.

Table 8 Level of service definitions

LoS A B C D E F

Delay (sec) ≤10 10-15 15-25 25-35 35-50 ≥50

A SIDRA analysis has been undertaken using the base traffic volumes (i.e. without the

development traffic), followed by the addition of the forecast development traffic to the road

network. A comparison is then made between the results of these two cases to determine the

impact of the proposed development on the Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection.

Without the development, the Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection is forecast to

operate well through the 2026 peak period with a LoS of A. With the additional traffic forecast to

be generated by the development, there are minimal changes to the performance of the


intersection. The DoS remains well below the practical maximum of 0.80 in all cases, and the

LoS is forecast to remain at A with or without the development. Minimal queueing is forecast at

the intersection and it is highly improbable that any accesses or intersections will be blocked by

generated traffic if the development were to proceed.

Table 9 summarises the results of the SIDRA analysis for the Great Ocean Road/Old Coach

Road intersection with and without the development traffic in the years 2016 and 2026. Full

SIDRA outputs are included in Appendix B.

It is noted that the 2026 with development scenario results in slightly less delay than the same

scenario in 2016, which is counter-intuitive. In this instance the performance improvement is 0.2

seconds, which is negligible, and is within the accuracy of the model.

Table 9 SIDRA results summary - Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road

Year/Peak Period DoS Av. delay (s) LoS 95Q (m)

2016 peak without development 0.097 0.2 A 0.1

2016 peak with development 0.106 1.4 A 1.1

2026 peak without development 0.117 0.2 A 0.1

2026 peak with development 0.127 1.2 A 1.2

5.2.2 Intersection treatments

Section 4.8 of the Austroads Guide to Road Design – Part 4A: Unsignalised and Signalised

Intersections specifies warrants for various left and right turn treatments leaving a major road.

These warrants consider the number of vehicles making the turning movement, the volume of

through traffic in one or both directions, and the design speed of the major road.

The left turn treatment is set by the volume of westbound traffic and the volume of traffic turning

left into Old Coach Road. These volumes are 197 vph and 19 vph respectively. This warrants a

basic auxiliary left (BAL) treatment, as depicted in Figure 5.

The right turn treatment is set by the combined east and westbound flows and the volume of

traffic turning right into Old Coach Road. These volumes are 374 vph and 19 vph respectively.

This warrants a short channelized right turn (CHR(S)) treatment, as depicted in Figure 6.

Consideration should also be given to elements of the actual intersection location, such as

steep grades and sight distances. In particular, the alignment of Great Ocean Road in the

vicinity of the intersection is a concern, as there are sweeping bends and undulating

topography. As a result, there is limited visibility of the existing intersection in both directions.

With the increase in traffic volumes as a result of the development, there may be an increased

risk of a collision between mainline vehicles on Great Ocean Road and vehicles turning off or

onto Old Coach Road, and so channelizing the left turn movement from Great Ocean Road may

also be necessary from a road safety perspective.

Therefore, BAL and CHR(S) treatments are sufficient in terms of intersection capacity, however

channelization of the left turn may be necessary and should be assessed as part of the detailed

design phase, taking site conditions such as the limited visibility and road alignment into

account. The final form of intersection will need to be discussed with VicRoads.


Figure 5 Basic left turn (BAL) treatment5

Figure 6 Short channelized right turn (CHR(S)) treatment5

5.2.3 Bus access to the site

Is it understood that up to five small buses may access the site at any one time. This would

have implications on the design of the access (i.e. radius of turns) but not on the performance of

Old Coach Road.

Small buses may be able to cross the bridge, depending on weight, but it is likely that larger

buses would not. The ability for small buses to cross the bridge should be investigated. A drop-

off/transfer area will need to be provided to cater for buses that are too heavy to cross the

bridge. Suitable locations for visitors to transfer to small buses would need to be found, but

currently the following options are being considered:

The existing V/Line bus stop on the Great Ocean Road near the intersection with Old

Coach Road

The Twelve Apostles Visitor car park

The former would need to be agreed with V/Line and VicRoads, while the latter would need to

be agreed with Parks Victoria.

5.2.4 Sight distance

Austroads’ Guide to Road Design Part 3: Geometric Design and Guide to Road Design Part 4A:

Unsignalised and Signalised Intersections specify that the existing sight distances should

comply with a number of requirements, the key ones being:

Stopping sight distance (SSD), and

Safe intersection sight distance (SISD).

The Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection has limited visibility due to its location on a

sweeping bend, with existing vegetation and undulating topography other contributing factors.

Based on a design speed6 of 70 km/h, reaction time (RT) of 2.0 seconds and assuming a level

grade in the absence of additional information, Table 5.4 of Part 3 and Table 3.2 of Part 4A

provide the following minimum values for SSD and SISD respectively:

SSD: 81 m (minimum), 92 m (desirable)

5 Source: Austroads Guide to Road Design - Part 4A: Unsignalised and Signalised Intersections. 6 Assumed to be 10 km/h more than the advisory speed limit of 60 km/h through the area.


SISD: 151 m

Based on measurements taken from aerial photography it appears that there is approximately

150 m of visibility at the intersection entering Great Ocean Road. Care therefore needs to be

taken to ensure adequate sight distance is maintained at the intersection should any

intersection modifications be undertaken.

5.3 Old Coach Road Bridge

The existing Old Coach Road Bridge across the Gellibrand River (Figure 7) will be used as the

primary access to the development. It is approximately 3.6 m wide and permits one-way travel

only. An average of 66 vehicles used the bridge each day in 2008, and this is forecast to

increase up to 800 vpd with the development (i.e. an additional 700 vpd from the development).

It is not known whether there is a volume warrant for upgrading a one-lane bridge to a two-lane

bridge. However, if it is assumed that 10% of the daily volume occurs during the peak hour,

approximately 80 vph will use the bridge. This is one vehicle every 45 seconds on average. To

provide context, the bridge across the Murray River at Swan Hill is a one-lane bridge with

vehicles on the NSW side giving way to vehicles from Victoria. It is approximately 140 m long.

This bridge carries a mixture of light and heavy traffic and average weekday volumes in 2016

are approximately 3,500 vehicles per day (two-way)7.

It is considered likely that some vehicles will have to wait at one end of the bridge to allow

another vehicle to cross the river. However, it is unlikely that there would ever be more than a

couple of vehicles waiting. This is considered to be acceptable given the low importance of the

road. It may be appropriate to provide a Give Way sign indicating priority at one end of the

bridge.

In addition, the 15 tonne bridge load limit as well as the narrow width of 3.6 m may preclude

construction vehicles from accessing the site without a lengthy detour, as the bridge is the only

viable crossing of the Gellibrand River in the vicinity of the site. The closest alternative bridge

crossing is to the south-east of the site approximately 5 km by road on Old Ocean Road (refer

Figure 8). However, the southern bank of the river is fenced off, with an access track leading

away from the bridge (illustrated in Figure 9). Further discussions with the relevant landowners

may be necessary if this is proposed as a construction access.

The following strategy is proposed to facilitate construction access over the bridge:

1. Determine the actual capacity of the bridge.

2. Determine whether the bridge can be strengthened to meet the requirements of larger

construction vehicles.

3. Construction would be undertaken to maximise light weight construction techniques and

prefabricated components and minimise, for example, bulk concrete deliveries.

4. If construction loads cannot be restricted so as not to exceed the bridge capacity, it is

proposed to drop off materials at a staging point before the bridge and break down to

smaller loads as needed. Any agreement(s) required with landowners for the drop off

point would be obtained prior to construction.

5. Any heavy larger items that cannot be modularised or broken down would be craned

across the river

If not strengthened, the bridge is also likely to restrict certain classes of vehicles from accessing

the site (such as buses and some emergency and service vehicles). This may restrict the ability

to take deliveries, to access the site in an emergency and to dispose of waste and refuse.

7 Data provided by RMS.


Figure 7 Approach to Old Coach Road bridge

Figure 8 Locations of Old Coach Road and old Ocean Road bridges8

8 Image source: Google Earth pro. Annotations by GHD.

Old Coach Road bridge

Old Ocean Road bridge

Proposed development


Figure 9 Old Ocean Road Bridge crossing near Rivernook

5.4 Parking

As the development is currently in the conceptual design stage, no specific car parking

provisions have been made. An estimate of the likely number of car parking spaces that would

be required on site can be calculated using the car parking requirements outlined in Clause

52.06-5 of the Victoria Planning Provisions, as well as the assumptions that were applied during

the trip generation phase of this analysis.

Car parking ratios applicable to each component of the development are described below:

5.4.1 Lodge

Clause 52.06-5 specifies a car parking ratio of 0.4 spaces per patron admitted for the hotel land

use, which is considered to be the most relevant for the lodge component of the development.

5.4.2 Cabins

No specific car parking ratios are available for cabin-style accommodation as proposed for the

development. therefore the hotel use has again been used, which is 0.4 spaces per patron

admitted.

5.4.3 Informal recreation

It is noted that there is no specific car parking rate stated in clause 52.06-5 for informal

recreation land use as proposed for the development, therefore the parking requirement has

been estimated from first principles. The total daily vehicle trips generated was 120, therefore

the total number of vehicles that would visit the activities is 60 (one vehicle is equivalent to two

vehicle trips). Assuming that all activities occur concurrently (i.e. no turnover of bays during the

day), a total of 60 spaces would be needed for informal recreation.

Even though the recreational activities can be considered to be an ancillary land use in relation

to the lodge and cabin accommodation components, no reduction has been applied to the car

parking provisions, as the total daily vehicle trips generated are already exclusive of trips

generated by lodge and cabin guests taking part in the activities.


5.4.4 Restaurant

Clause 52.06-5 specifies a ratio of 0.4 spaces per patron permitted at a restaurant. This ratio is

considered to be appropriate for the development.

The trip generation assumed 25% of restaurant patrons are likely to be guests from the cabin,

lodge and recreation reserve, therefore a 25% ancillary discount has been applied to the car

parking requirement for the restaurant.

5.4.5 Buses

It is understood that up to five small buses may be on site at any one time. Five spaces should

be provided for these vehicles.

5.4.6 Facility staff

Where the parking requirement has been calculated from the planning scheme rates (i.e. lodge

and cabin accommodation and restaurants), parking for staff has already been allowed for.

Where the rate has been derived from first principles, an additional allowance must be made for

staff.

There will be a total of 78 staff for the entire development. Staff will work in shifts and there will

be three shifts per day. Assuming an even distribution of staff per shift, there will be no more

than 26 staff members on site at any one time.

Assuming that each staff member will drive to work, an additional 26 spaces will be needed for

staff parking. Any overlap at shift start and end times would require additional spaces for a short

period of time, but as some land uses already have an allowance for staff parking (i.e. lodge and

cabin accommodation and the restaurants, where the requirements have been calculated from

the planning scheme rates) there is some degree of double counting in the calculations which

would cater for this temporary additional demand.


5.4.7 Summary of likely car parking requirements

The likely number of car parking spaces required for each component of the development is

summarised in Table 10. In addition to these, consideration should also be given to providing

bus or coach parking, as it is likely some of the patrons visiting the development will arrive via

these modes. Given that the site is relatively spacious, it is likely that there will be ample space

available to accommodate this many vehicles.

Table 10 Likely on-site car parking provision

Component Measure Car parking rate Ancillary discount

Spaces

Lodge 60 patrons 0.4 spaces per patron 0% 24

Cabins 120 patrons 0.4 spaces per patron 0% 48

Informal recreation 120 vehicle trips9 0.5 spaces per vehicle trip 0% 60

Restaurants 300 patrons 0.4 spaces per patron 25% 90

Buses 5 buses 1 space per bus 0% 5

Staff parking 26 workers 1 space per worker 0% 26

Total required 253

Hence the total parking requirement is 253 spaces. An area for overflow parking has been

provided on the master plan for occasions when there may be additional parking requirements.

9 Refer to section 4.2.3 for calculation details.


6. Summary and conclusions

This report presents the findings of the traffic impact assessment in relation to the proposed

Princetown Resort development on Old Coach Road, south of Princetown.

The proposed development broadly consists of on-site accommodation, along with two

restaurants and informal recreation intended to facilitate guided tours for visitors travelling to the

nearby Twelve Apostles and other tourist attractions. Currently, the site is vacant with no

existing development, with the south-western corner of the site being adjacent to the Princetown

Recreation Reserve.

A SIDRA analysis was undertaken to determine the impact of the traffic generated by the

development on the Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection. Without the development,

the Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road intersection is forecast to operate well through the

2026 peak period with a LoS of A, and there are minimal changes to the performance of the

intersection with the forecast development traffic.

Based on Austroads warrants, BAL and CHR(S) treatments are sufficient in terms of

intersection capacity, however channelization of the left turn may also be necessary on road

safety grounds and should be assessed as part of the detailed design phase, taking site

conditions such as the limited visibility and road alignment into account.

With the development traffic, up to 800 vpd in total are forecast to cross the 3.6 m wide Old

Coach Road bridge across the Gellibrand River. It is considered that this would not warrant

upgrading to a two-lane bridge (provided that some short delays can be tolerated). However, the

physical width (3.6 m) and strength (15 tonne limit) of the bridge may preclude access by

construction and service vehicles and may require alternative access routes to the site. This

should be discussed with Corangamite Shire, the construction contractor and relevant

landowners (if required).

Based on the site trip generation, approximately 253 car parking spaces will be required on-site,

however the size of the property means that there should be ample room to accommodate

these vehicles. Additional area will be provided for overflow parking when required.

It is expected that the volume of traffic generated by the operational phase of the development

(i.e. at full build-out) will not have a significant adverse impact on the road network.

GHD | Report for Montarosa Pty Ltd - Princetown Resort Development, 31/33485

Appendices


Appendix A – Master plan


Appendix B – SIDRA outputs

SITE LAYOUT

Site: 2016 base peak - Great Ocean Old Coach

Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road2016 base traffic volumes - nominal peak periodGiveway / Yield (Two-Way)

SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: GHD SERVICES PTY LTD | Created: Wednesday, 18 May 2016 5:07:34 PMProject: G:\31\33485\Technical\Traffic\Great Ocean Road Old Coach Road rev E.sip6

MOVEMENT SUMMARY



Movement Performance - Vehicles

Demand Flows 95% Back of QueueMovID

ODMov

Deg.Satn

AverageDelay

Level ofService

Prop. Queued

Effective Stop Rate

AverageSpeed Total HV Vehicles Distance

veh/h % v/c sec veh m per veh km/hSouth: Old Coach Road

1 L2 2 2.0 0.004 6.1 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.29 0.55 57.2

3 R2 2 2.0 0.004 6.7 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.29 0.55 56.8

Approach 4 2.0 0.004 6.4 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.29 0.55 57.0

East: Great Ocean Road (east)

4 L2 2 2.0 0.097 7.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.01 73.6

5 T1 171 14.0 0.097 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.01 79.8

Approach 173 13.9 0.097 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.01 79.7

West: Great Ocean Road (west)

11 T1 153 14.0 0.087 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.01 79.7

12 R2 2 2.0 0.087 7.3 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.01 65.4

Approach 155 13.8 0.087 0.1 NA 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.01 79.5

All Vehicles 332 13.7 0.097 0.2 NA 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.02 79.2

Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (HCM 2000).

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement

Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.

NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not agood LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road movements.

SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: GHD SERVICES PTY LTD | Processed: Tuesday, 8 March 2016 2:22:04 PMProject: G:\31\33485\Technical\Traffic\Great Ocean Road Old Coach Road rev E.sip6

SITE LAYOUT

Site: 2016 base+dev peak - Great Ocean Old Coach

Great Ocean Road/Old Coach Road2016 base+development traffic volumes - nominal peak periodGiveway / Yield (Two-Way)


MOVEMENT SUMMARY





ODMov

Deg.Satn

AverageDelay

Level ofService

Prop. Queued

Effective Stop Rate



1 L2 20 2.0 0.037 6.1 LOS A 0.1 0.9 0.30 0.59 57.2

3 R2 20 2.0 0.037 6.9 LOS A 0.1 0.9 0.30 0.59 56.8

Approach 40 2.0 0.037 6.5 LOS A 0.1 0.9 0.30 0.59 57.0


4 L2 20 2.0 0.106 7.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.07 72.5

5 T1 171 14.0 0.106 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.07 78.5

Approach 191 12.7 0.106 0.7 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.07 77.9


11 T1 153 14.0 0.099 0.1 LOS A 0.1 1.1 0.08 0.08 77.8

12 R2 20 2.0 0.099 7.3 LOS A 0.1 1.1 0.08 0.08 64.1

Approach 173 12.6 0.099 1.0 NA 0.1 1.1 0.08 0.08 76.0

All Vehicles 403 11.6 0.106 1.4 NA 0.1 1.1 0.07 0.12 74.4








SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: GHD SERVICES PTY LTD | Processed: Tuesday, 17 May 2016 11:13:18 AMProject: G:\31\33485\Technical\Traffic\Great Ocean Road Old Coach Road rev E.sip6

SITE LAYOUT




MOVEMENT SUMMARY





ODMov

Deg.Satn

AverageDelay

Level ofService

Prop. Queued

Effective Stop Rate



1 L2 2 2.0 0.004 6.2 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.32 0.56 57.1

3 R2 2 2.0 0.004 7.1 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.32 0.56 56.7

Approach 4 2.0 0.004 6.6 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.32 0.56 56.9


4 L2 2 2.0 0.117 7.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.01 73.6

5 T1 207 14.0 0.117 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.01 79.8

Approach 209 13.9 0.117 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.01 79.8


11 T1 186 14.0 0.106 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.01 79.8

12 R2 2 2.0 0.106 7.4 LOS A 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.01 65.4

Approach 188 13.9 0.106 0.1 NA 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.01 79.6

All Vehicles 402 13.7 0.117 0.2 NA 0.0 0.1 0.01 0.01 79.3








SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: GHD SERVICES PTY LTD | Processed: Tuesday, 8 March 2016 2:22:50 PMProject: G:\31\33485\Technical\Traffic\Great Ocean Road Old Coach Road rev E.sip6

SITE LAYOUT




MOVEMENT SUMMARY





ODMov

Deg.Satn

AverageDelay

Level ofService

Prop. Queued

Effective Stop Rate



1 L2 20 2.0 0.039 6.3 LOS A 0.1 1.0 0.34 0.61 57.0

3 R2 20 2.0 0.039 7.3 LOS A 0.1 1.0 0.34 0.61 56.6

Approach 40 2.0 0.039 6.8 LOS A 0.1 1.0 0.34 0.61 56.8


4 L2 20 2.0 0.127 7.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.06 72.7

5 T1 207 14.0 0.127 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.06 78.8

Approach 227 12.9 0.127 0.6 NA 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.06 78.2


11 T1 186 14.0 0.118 0.1 LOS A 0.2 1.2 0.08 0.06 78.1

12 R2 20 2.0 0.118 7.5 LOS A 0.2 1.2 0.08 0.06 64.3

Approach 206 12.8 0.118 0.8 NA 0.2 1.2 0.08 0.06 76.5

All Vehicles 474 12.0 0.127 1.2 NA 0.2 1.2 0.06 0.11 75.1








SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.1 | Copyright © 2000-2015 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: GHD SERVICES PTY LTD | Processed: Tuesday, 17 May 2016 11:13:51 AMProject: G:\31\33485\Technical\Traffic\Great Ocean Road Old Coach Road rev E.sip6

GHD

180 Lonsdale Street Melbourne, Victoria 3000 T: (03) 8687 8000 F: (03) 8687 8111 E: [email protected]

© GHD 2015

This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

G:\31\33485\WP\247970.docx

Document Status

Rev No.

Author Reviewer Approved for Issue

Name Signature Name Signature Date

A D. Tseu C. Hall

B C. Hall T. Frodsham

C C. Hall T. Frodsham

D C. Hall T. Frodsham

E C. Hall T. Frodsham

F C. Hall T. Frodsham P. Thatcher

P. Thatcher 14/09/16

www.ghd.com

Documents

Appendix C – Traffic Impact Assessment