Agenda of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee

TO BE HELD ON Thursday, 28 February 2019 AT 9.00am

Ante Room - Level 3

Agenda

** ** ** ** ** **

NOTE: For Full Details, See Council’s Website –

www.kmc.nsw.gov.au under the link to business papers

APOLOGIEs

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Confirmation of Reports to be Considered in Closed Meeting

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

Minutes of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee

File: CY00022/10

Meeting held 18 May 2018

Minutes numbered KTC01 to KTC08

GENERAL BUSINESS

GB.1 General Matter - Traffic & Transport Policy

File: S02527

Ward: None

Electorate: None

To update Council’s Traffic & Transport Policy, which was last updated in 2015

Recommendation:

That the updated Traffic and Transport Policy be adopted.

GB.2 General Matter - 10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan - Update

File: S02527

Ward: None

Electorate: None

To consider adoption of the updated 10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan.

Recommendation:

That the draft 2019-2028 Traffic and Transport Plan be adopted by Council.

GB.3 Roland Avenue, Wahroonga

File: TM11/11

Ward: Wahroonga

Electorate: Ku-ring-gai

To consider the installation of traffic calming devices along Roland Avenue, Wahroonga.

Recommendation:

That two lane angled slow points be installed at four locations along Roland Avenue.

GB.4 Link Road/Stanley Street/Horace Street, St Ives

File: TM9/11

Ward: St Ives

Electorate: Davidson

To consider the replacement of the roundabout at the intersection of Horace Street, Link Road and Stanley Street with traffic signals.

Recommendation:

That Council seek funding from the RMS to replace the existing roundabout with traffic signals.

GB.5 Tryon Road, Lindfield

File: TM6/11

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

To consider widening Tryon Road on both sides of Archbold Road to allow sufficient width to provide right turn bays.

Recommendation:

That subject to available funding, a detailed design be carried out for the proposed widening of Tryon Road at Archbold Road.

GB.6 Archbold Road, Lindfield

File: TM6/11

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

To consider measures to improve safety at several unsignalised intersections along Archbold Road, Lindfield.

Recommendation:

That full time ‘Left Only’ restrictions be introduced on the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road.

GB.7 Park Avenue, Roseville

File: TM8/11

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

To consider the installation of ‘No Stopping 8am-9.30am, 2.30pm-4pm School Days’ restrictions on the northern side of Park Avenue near Archbold Road.

Recommendation:

That ‘No Stopping 8am-9.30am School Days’ restrictions be installed on the northern side of Park Avenue near Archbold Road.

GB.8 Ortona Road, Lindfield

File: TM6/11

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

To consider the installation of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on all four legs of the intersection of Ortona Road and Eton Road, Lindfield.

Recommendation:

That ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed on all four legs of the intersection of Ortona Road and Eton Road, Lindfield.

GB.9 Acron Road, St Ives

File: TM9/11

Ward: St Ives

Electorate: Ku-ring-gai

To consider the installation of a median island and additional ‘Stop’ sign and markings in Acron Road, on the southern side of Douglas Street.

Recommendation:

A. That the BB lines in Acron Road on the northbound approach to Douglas Street, St Ives, be extended to a distance of 20 metres south of Douglas Street, as shown in Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19.

B. That a short median island be installed in Acron Road, five metres south of Douglas Street, as shown in Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19, with an additional ‘Stop’ sign mounted in the median.

C. That Mr S Schaefer, of 50 Hayle Street, St Ives, be informed of Council’s decision.

General Discussion

Member for Davidson

1. Intersection of Balfour Street & Pacific Highway, Lindfield.

2. Intersection of Tryon Road and Lindfield Avenue, Lindfield.

3. Intersection of Pacific Highway and Beaconsfield Parade, Lindfield.

4. Archbold Road at Owen Street, Roseville/Lindfield.

** ** ** ** ** **

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.1 / 5

Item GB.1	S02527

General Matter - Traffic & Transport Policy

Ward: None

Electorate: None

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PURPOSE OF REPORT:	To update Council’s Traffic & Transport Policy, which was last updated in 2015

background:	Council has a Traffic & Transport Policy, which is regularly updated. The policy provides a strategic framework to assist in dealing with traffic and transport issues. Updates are proposed to reflect new policies and other State and Council changes.

comments:	Some minor changes are proposed, as works on the Northconnex have commenced since the most recent update. Several other minor changes are proposed.

recommendation:	That the updated Traffic and Transport Policy be adopted.

Purpose of Report

To update Council’s Traffic & Transport Policy, which was last updated in 2015

Background

In March 2015, Council released its most recent update of its Traffic & Transport Policy. Regular updates to the policy are made approximately every 3 years in order to keep up with changes to practice, and any new strategies adopted by Council during that time.

Comments

Council’s Traffic and Transport Policy is an important strategic document, guiding many of Council’s decision and practices regarding on-road and related issues. This document is not intended to be prescriptive nor address other issues.

A number of editing and other changes are proposed. Significant changes include;

· Policy Scope – In the 4^th paragraph, reference is made to the proposed construction of a tunnel linking the M1 Motorway to the M2. This will be altered to note that the NorthConnex tunnel linking the M1 and M2 Motorway’s is currently under construction, and is due to open in 2020. Reference is also made to the proposal by the RMS to improve the capacity of the Pacific Highway as part of its Pinch Points and Clearways Programs.

· Policy Responsibilities – Demographic data is changed, based on ABS 2016 Census QuickStats available for Ku-ring-gai.

· Road Hierarchy (Section A) – Telegraph Road has been added to the list of collector roads which could be considered to be approaching regional road in function.

· Traffic Calming (Section E) – Although it is not Council policy to install new speed humps or raised thresholds, speed cushions may be considered on approaches to intersections, including roundabouts. Speed cushions may also be considered at mid-block locations that are not adjacent to residential properties.

Council has been in practice of using rumble bars at intersections and at mid-block locations where there are no adjacent residential properties. The continued use of this traffic device is now proposed to be included in the revised Traffic & Transport Policy.

· Traffic Facilities (Signs and Lines) (Section F) - The first paragraph has been amended to discuss Council’s proposal to replace existing street name and community signs with anew design.

At the Council Meeting of 18 June 2015 Council resolved to amend the eligibility requirements for ‘No Parking’ restrictions outside multi-residential developments, so that developments on roads with over 2,000 vehicles per day would be eligible.

· On-Street Parking (Section G) – The final paragraph refers to the RMS considering implementing Clearway restrictions along Pacific Highway and possibly on other State Roads. In 2018 the RMS implemented Clearway restrictions on sections of Mona Vale Road and Pacific Highway.

· Council Controlled Car Parks (Section H) – Council will carry out a risk assessment of 90 degree parking adjacent to footpaths in its car parks, in relation to pedestrian safety.

· Resident Parking Schemes (Section I) - Additional information has been provided regarding the feasibility of providing permits allowing Ku-ring-gai residents to park for extended periods in commuter car parks.

· Heavy Vehicles (Section N) – This has been amended as S112 of the Roads Act has been repealed. Under Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL) introduced in February 2014, Council is the Road Manager for roads under its control to provide access permits for vehicle larger than general access.

· Development Proposals (Section O) – Comment has been added regarding provision for larger delivery vehicles to be able to load and unload in the access driveway to multi-dwelling residences, without restricting driveway access for residents.

It is also recommended that new developments with 4 or more dwellings which has its driveway on a road that carries over 2,000 vehicles per day should provide ‘No Parking’ restrictions for 6 metres on either side of the driveway.

· Special Events/Planned Disruptions to Traffic (Section Q) – The 2^nd last paragraph was removed, as DCP 46 is no longer relevant.

· State Roads and Other State Responsibilities (Section R) – Comments have been updated to note that the NorthConnex is now under construction and is due for completion in 2020.

Additions to the updated draft policy document (attached), other than minor editing changes, are highlighted.

It is proposed that this policy be reviewed and updated at intervals of about three years.

While this item is not a formal Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee item, as it does not relate to Roads and Maritime Services delegations to Council, it is referred to this Committee as part of the consultative process.

Financial Considerations

There are no direct financial implications in adopting the proposed policy changes. The policy gives strategic direction to the organisation and the community in relation to traffic and transport issues.

Community Consultation

The policy refers to consultations to be undertaken by Council when proposing changes to facilities.

Referring this policy review to the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee as an informal item provides opportunities for further consultation and feedback.

Internal Consultation

Consultation was carried out with the Development & Assessment Services Manager and Team Leader Development Engineer, regarding the amendments to Section 4.O Development Proposals.

Summary

Council’s Traffic and Transport Policy was last updated in 2015. A number of minor changes are recommended.

Recommendation:

That the updated Traffic and Transport Policy be adopted.

Michael Foskett

Team Leader Traffic

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:

A1 ⇩

Traffic and Transport Policy - Version 2 - DRAFT

2019/045082

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.2 / 45

Item GB.2	S02527

General Matter - 10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan - Update

Ward: None

Electorate: None

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider adoption of the updated 10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan.

background:	An objective in Council’s current Delivery Program is the implementation of the 10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan. The inaugural 10 year Traffic and Transport Plan was developed and adopted by Council in 2011. Since its adoption, the Plan has formed the basis for future funding allocations and implementation in a transparent way. Due to updates in the ranking of sites identified for traffic management works, new data and revised priorities resulting from Council’s major urban renewal projects, the need to revise the plan has come about.

comments:	While this plan shows Council’s updated priorities and the basis for those priorities, actual projects undertaken will still depend in some cases, on funding from external sources and Council exercising discretion, where there has been previous commitment. Priorities may also change, as traffic and other data changes over time. It is proposed to continue to update this plan approximately every five years, as priority rankings and traffic data are updated.

recommendation:	That the draft 2019-2028 Traffic and Transport Plan be adopted by Council.

Purpose of Report

To consider adoption of the updated 10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan.

Background

The 10 year Traffic and Transport Plan document links Council’s policies, data which has been collected, as well as outcomes of our studies and local centres proposals. It is useful to many sections of the Ku-ring-gai community and includes the rationale for proposing and prioritising traffic management works for a 10 year period.

Due to changes in the ranking for sites, new data and revised priorities resulting from Council’s major urban renewal projects, the need to revise the plan has come about.

While this plan shows Council’s priorities and the basis for those priorities, actual projects undertaken will still depend in some cases, on funding from external sources and Council exercising discretion, where there has been previous commitment. Priorities may also change, as traffic data changes over time.

It is proposed to continue to update this plan approximately every five years, as priority rankings and traffic data are updated.

Comments

All parts of the current 10 year Traffic and Transport Plan were revised to reflect updated local state and federal administrational issues. The sections receiving the most focus include:

· Strategic Context;

· Funding;

· Ranked Projects and Project Funding in Individual Programs;

· 10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan; and

· Attachments.

Governance Matters

Not applicable

Risk Management

Not applicable

Financial Considerations

Updating projects and priorities in the 10 year plan will assist in prioritising and forecasting future projects and their expenditure. The updated plan will continue to assist with determining future traffic management works.

Social Considerations

Not applicable

Environmental Considerations

Not applicable

Community Consultation

No community consultation has been undertaken in the preparation of this plan. However, the information to be provided in the plan will inform the community regarding traffic and safety issues and proposed future funding and programs that are based on criteria adopted by Council.

Internal Consultation

Discussions have been held between Traffic Operations staff and Strategy & Environment Department staff in the preparation of the Plan.

Summary

The inaugural 10 year Traffic and Transport Plan was developed and adopted by Council in 2011. Since its adoption, the Plan has formed the basis for future funding allocations and implementation in a transparent way.

Due to updates in the ranking of sites identified for traffic management works, new data and revised priorities resulting from Council’s major urban renewal projects, the need to revise the plan has come about.

While this plan shows Council’s updated priorities and the basis for those priorities, actual projects undertaken will still depend in some cases, on funding from external sources and Council exercising discretion, where there has been previous commitment. Priorities may also change, as traffic and other data changes over time.

Recommendation:

That the draft 2019-2028 Traffic and Transport Plan be adopted by Council.

Joseph Piccoli

Strategic Traffic Engineer

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:	A1⇩	DRAFT Traffic & Transport Plan 2019-2028		2018/249749
	A2 ⇩	10 Year Traffic and Transport Plan - 2019-2028 - Figures 1 - 22		2019/040758

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.3 / 100

Item GB.3	TM11/11

Roland Avenue, Wahroonga

Ward: Wahroonga

Electorate: Ku-ring-gai

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider the installation of traffic calming devices along Roland Avenue, Wahroonga.

background:	Council has received numerous complaints from local residents about excessive traffic volumes and speeds using local streets between Kissing Point Road and Fox Valley Road.

comments:	Traffic counts have indicated that excessive speed is a problem on Roland Avenue. The counts also indicated a large amount of non-local traffic using Roland Avenue as part of a route to avoid traffic congestion on Pacific Highway and The Comenarra Parkway.

recommendation:	That two lane angled slow points be installed at four locations along Roland Avenue.

Purpose of Report

To consider the installation of traffic calming devices along Roland Avenue, Wahroonga.

Background

Council has received numerous complaints about the speed and volume of traffic using local roads between Kissing Point Road and Fox Valley Road. Due to congestion on Pacific Highway and The Comenarra Parkway during peak periods, many motorists use Roland Avenue and other local streets as an alternative.

Council has received requests from some local residents requesting road closures to prevent through traffic between Kissing Point Road and Fox Valley Road via Monteith Street, Rothwell Road and Roland Avenue. This matter was considered by Council’s Traffic Committee at its Meeting on 18 May 2018. The Traffic Committee recommended that Rothwell Road not be closed at Roland Avenue, as it would severely restrict local residents in their daily local travel. It would also lead to increased traffic volumes on adjacent local streets.

Traffic counts were undertaken in August 2018 in Roland Avenue between Fox Valley Road and the bend. Counts were then undertaken in October 2018 in Roland Avenue between Berilda Avenue and Monteith Street, as well as in Mildred Street, Berilda Avenue, Monteith Street and Rothwell Road. The counts showed that a significant increase in northbound traffic volumes during the afternoon peak period on both Rothwell Road and Roland Avenue, compared to other times.

The 85^th percentile traffic speed, (the speed at which 85% of vehicles travel at or below) was found to be 59km/h on Roland Avenue. This is significantly above the speed limit of 50km/h.

Comments

Council staff investigated possible traffic calming measures in Roland Avenue and Rothwell Road, in order to reduce speeds and discourage non-local traffic. It was found that it would not be feasible to introduce traffic calming measures in Rothwell Road between Finlay Road and Roland Avenue. This is due to the narrow roadway and changes in grade which restrict visibility to oncoming vehicles.

Council also has a policy of not installing any new speed humps on its roads. This is due to complaints about noise, as well as discomfort to motorists. Instead, horizontal deflection devices in the form of angled slow points are being proposed at five locations along Roland Avenue. The slow points would reduce traffic speeds and discourage through traffic, while imposing minimal inconvenience on local residents. They would however, result in the loss of several on-street parking spaces.

Under the proposal, one slow point would be installed in Roland Avenue between Fox Valley Road and the bend. Another three devices would be installed between Mildred Street and Rothwell Road. The devices would be two lane angled slow points, as it was considered that traffic volumes were too high for single lane slow points.

Similar devices were installed at two locations in Grosvenor Road, Lindfield several years ago. From observation, these devices appear to be effective in reducing vehicle speeds to approximately 40km/h as they pass through them. There is no record of any complaints about these devices.

The RMS is proposing to make improvements to traffic flow on Pacific Highway between Turramurra and the start of the M1 Motorway, as part of its Pinch Points Program. These works would involve widening Pacific Highway to three lanes in each direction between Kissing Point Road and the start of the M1 Motorway. These improvements would improve traffic flow on Pacific Highway, which should have some impact on reducing the amount of traffic using local streets between Kissing Point Road and Fox Valley Road.

However it is probable that many motorists will continue to use these local streets to avoid congestion on Pacific Highway and The Comenarra Parkway. Therefore it is recommended that traffic calming measures be implemented in Roland Avenue.

Residents of Roland Avenue were consulted for their views on the proposed slow points. Approximately 110 properties were consulted, with 58 responses being received. Of those 58 respondents, 34 (59%) were in favour with 24 (41%) opposed to the slow points. The major concerns from those opposed to the proposal were loss of on-street parking (10 respondents), and increased noise (5).

Roland Avenue is used as a bus route, and the devices have been designed to accommodate a 14.5m long bus. However it was noted that the proposed device outside #9 would need to be modified or not constructed, due to a tree which has a bent trunk which extends out into the roadway. Given that seven residents living in close proximity to the location of the proposed device objected to the proposal, it is recommended that this device not be constructed.

However it is recommended that detailed designs be prepared for the other four devices to be constructed, as the majority of residents supported the proposed slow points.

Community Consultation

As noted above, residents of Roland Avenue have been consulted for their views on the proposed slow points. Approximately 110 properties were consulted, with 58 responses being received. Of those 58 respondents, 34 (59%) were in favour with 24 (41%) opposed to the slow points

Summary

Council has received complaints about the speed and volume of traffic using local roads such as Monteith Street, Rothwell Road and Roland Avenue to avoid traffic congestion on Pacific Highway and The Comenarra Parkway.

It is proposed that 2 lane angled slow points be installed at four locations along Roland Avenue in order to reduce traffic speeds and discourage non-local traffic.

Recommendation:

That a detailed design be carried out for two lane angled slow points at four locations along Roland Avenue, as shown in Plan Roland/KTC/02/19.

Michael Foskett

Team Leader Traffic

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:

A1⇩

Plan No. Roland/KTC/02/19 A&B

2019/031824

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.4 / 106

Item GB.4	TM9/11

Link Road/Stanley Street/Horace Street, St Ives

Ward: St Ives

Electorate: Davidson

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider the replacement of the roundabout at the intersection of Horace Street, Link Road and Stanley Street with traffic signals.

background:	Concerns have previously been raised about pedestrian safety at this intersection. At the Traffic Committee Meeting of 20 November 2017 it was recommended; That Council carry out an assessment of the intersection of Horace Street, Link Road and Stanley Street, St Ives, at Council’s expense, to determine the feasibility of replacing the roundabout with traffic lights, and submit the results, if warranted, to RMS for its approval in principle.

comments:	Council engaged traffic consultants TAR Technologies to carry out an assessment on the feasibility of replacing the roundabout with traffic signals. The study found that traffic signals would lead to increased delay times at the intersection. However the signalised intersection would perform to a satisfactory level and improve pedestrian safety.

recommendation:	That Council seek funding from the RMS to replace the existing roundabout with traffic signals.

Purpose of Report

To consider the replacement of the roundabout at the intersection of Horace Street, Link Road and Stanley Street with traffic signals.

Background

In 2017 the then Councillor Citer raised concerns about pedestrian safety when crossing Link Road at the roundabout intersection with Horace Street and Stanley Street. He raised concerns in particular about the safety of students attending nearby Masada College. There are also bus stops on both sides of Horace Street to the south of the roundabout, and it is currently difficult for pedestrians to cross Horace Street.

Council’s crash data shows that there have been three recorded crashes at the roundabout during the 5 year period to the end of June 2018. None of these crashes involved pedestrians. The number of pedestrians crossing Link Road and Horace Street at this intersection is low, as many pedestrians do not feel safe crossing the road in the vicinity of the roundabout.

It was considered that traffic signals would improve pedestrian safety, however there were concerns about the impact that traffic signals would have on traffic flow.

This matter was considered by the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee at its Meeting of 20 November 2017, where it was resolved;

That Council carry out an assessment of the intersection of Horace Street, Link Road and Stanley Street, St Ives, at Council’s expense, to determine the feasibility of replacing the roundabout with traffic lights, and submit the results, if warranted, to RMS for its approval in principle.

Comments

In May 2018 Council engaged traffic consultants TAR Technologies to undertake a traffic study to determine the feasibility of replacing the roundabout with traffic signals. The report was completed in June 2018, and a copy of the report is attached.

The study looked at three options for signalised phasing at the intersection. The first option was for split phasing, where each leg of Stanley Street would have a separate phase. This would be the cheapest of the three options as it would not require any road widening. However modelling using the SIDRA program showed that this option would lead to major delays and queue lengths.

The 2^nd option was for a 2 phase system, where there would be a single phase for both legs of Stanley Street. This would require some road widening in Stanley Street to accommodate short right turn bays on both legs. This option provided the best performance in terms of delay times and queue lengths. However it was not the most desirable option in terms of pedestrian safety, as pedestrian movements would oppose right turn movements.

The 3^rd option was for diamond phasing, which would provide dedicated phases for right turn movements. This would be the most expensive of the 3 options, as it would require road widening on all four legs to accommodate the right turn bays. This option would provide reasonable performance in terms of queue lengths and delays, but would be the most desirable in terms of safety for motorists and pedestrians.

The study found that traffic signals would lead to increased queue lengths and longer delays at the intersection. However, the signalised intersection would still operate at a satisfactory standard, and would improve safety for pedestrians. Therefore, it is recommended that Council seek funding opportunities to replace the roundabout with traffic signals, as per the 3^rd option listed in the traffic study.

Financial Considerations

The cost of replacing the roundabout with traffic signals would be in the region of $1 million. Therefore, Council would need to seek funding from the RMS to complete these works.

Summary

Council engaged traffic consultants TAR Technologies to carry out an assessment on the feasibility of replacing the roundabout with traffic signals. The study found that traffic signals would lead to increased delay times at the intersection. However the signalised intersection would perform to a satisfactory level and improve pedestrian safety.

Therefore, it is recommended that Council seek funding from the RMS to replace the roundabout with traffic signals.

Recommendation:

That Council seek funding from the RMS to replace the roundabout on Stanley Street at Horace Street/Link Road with traffic signals.

Michael Foskett

Team Leader Traffic

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

Attachments:

A1⇩

Traffic Report - Intersection Analysis

2019/033107

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.5 / 128

Item GB.5	TM6/11

Tryon Road, Lindfield

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider widening Tryon Road on both sides of Archbold Road to allow sufficient width to provide right turn bays.

background:	There are several intersections along Archbold Road which have an accident history involving turning vehicles. If right turn bays could be provided in Tryon Road, it would encourage more road users to turn right from this signalised intersection. This would be a safer option than turning right from the other unsignalised intersections.

comments:	In order to provide sufficient width for right turn bays, Tryon Road would need to be widened by one metre on both approaches to Archbold Road. These works would also require traffic signal relocation. The RMS has estimated the cost of the signal relocation to be in the vicinity of $170,000.

recommendation:	That subject to available funding, a detailed design be carried out for the proposed widening of Tryon Road at Archbold Road.

Purpose of Report

To consider widening Tryon Road on both sides of Archbold Road to allow sufficient width to provide right turn bays.

Background

There are several unsignalised intersections along the length of Archbold Road between Boundary Street and Tryon Road. Many of these intersections have sub-standard sight distance for road users turning onto or crossing Archbold Road. Many of these intersections also have a crash history, with numerous crashes occurring involving turning vehicles.

The intersection of Archbold Road and Tryon Road is signalised. However on both legs of Tryon Road there is only one travel lane for vehicles to queue in. This limits the number of vehicles that are able to exit from Tryon Road. It also discourages many road users from using this intersection, who instead use the less safe unsignalised intersections.

Comments

Tryon Road is 9.2 metres wide on the western leg of the intersection, and 9.8 metres wide on the eastern leg. The entry lane on both legs is 4.7 metres wide. This width needs to be maintained to allow left turns into Tryon Road from Archbold Road. This leaves an exit lane width of 4.5 metres on the western leg of Tryon Road, and an exit lane width of 5.1 metres on the eastern leg. Therefore in order to provide a dedicated right turn bay on both legs of Tryon Road, the road would need to be widened by 1 metre on both legs.

The proposed changes are shown in the attached Plan Tryon/KTC/02/19. It is proposed that a 30 metre long right turn bay be created on both legs of Tryon Road, with a 25 metre long transition. This means that a 55 metre length of kerb on both legs of Tryon Road would need to be removed and replaced. It is proposed that the widening take place along the southern kerb of Tryon Road, as it has a wide nature strip, and would not require the removal and reconstruction of footpath or the removal of any trees.

The proposed road widening would also require the relocation of 2 traffic signals plus a signal box on the southern side of Tryon Road. A power pole on the south eastern corner of the intersection would also need to be moved back approximately 1 metre.

The proposed works would come at a significant cost. It is therefore recommended that subject to available funding, a detailed design be carried out.

Financial Considerations

The RMS has estimated that the cost of relocating the signals and the signal box to be approximately $170,000. Additional costs would include removal and replacement of kerb and gutter along the southern side of Tryon Road, plus the relocation of a power pole.

Summary

There are several intersections along Archbold Road which have an accident history involving turning vehicles. If right turn bays could be provided in Tryon Road, it would encourage more road users to turn right from this signalised intersection. This would be a safer option than turning right from the other unsignalised intersections.

In order to provide sufficient width for right turn bays, Tryon Road would need to be widened by one metre on both approaches to Archbold Road.

Recommendation:

That subject to available funding, a detailed design be prepared for the widening of Tryon Road at Archbold Road.

Michael Foskett

Team Leader Traffic

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:

A1⇩

Plan No. Tryon/KTC/02/19

2019/033009

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.6 / 132

Item GB.6	TM6/11

Archbold Road, Lindfield

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider measures to improve safety at several unsignalised intersections along Archbold Road, Lindfield.

background:	There are several intersections along Archbold Road which have an accident history involving turning vehicles. Many of the intersections have sub-standard sight distance for motorists exiting side streets.

comments:	Sight distance to approaching vehicles on Archbold Road from the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue is particularly poor, due to the crest.

recommendation:	That full time ‘Left Only’ restrictions be introduced on the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road.

Purpose of Report

To consider measures to improve safety at several unsignalised intersections along Archbold Road, Lindfield.

Background

In late 2018 Council introduced ‘No Right Turn 6am-10am Mon-Fri’ restrictions on the western leg of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road. The primary reason for the restrictions was to prevent rat-running along Chelmsford Avenue during the morning peak period. A secondary reason was that sight distance is restricted when looking north along Archbold Road due to the crest.

Shortly after Council proposed the right turn restrictions, Council also received requests from residents on the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue for right turns to be banned. Council staff investigated the site, and found that sight distance was poor when exiting the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue due to the crest. Therefore, it was proposed that ‘Left Only’ restrictions be introduced on the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue.

Residents of Chelmsford Avenue to the east of Archbold Road were consulted about the proposal. Of the 37 properties surveyed about the proposal, there were 15 responses. Of the 15 respondents, 13 were in favour of the proposal, with 2 opposed. Despite the strong resident support for the proposal, the Chair of the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee opposed the proposal following representations from Councillor Ngai.

Cllr Ngai also requested that Council consider banning right turns out of Dudley Avenue due to concerns about sight distance.

Comments

Archbold Road is a 4 lane road with several unsignalised intersections along its length. Although Archbold Road is straight, it has several changes in grade which impact sight distance for motorists entering from side streets.

Sight distance is restricted when exiting the following streets due to a crest on Archbold Road between Middle Harbour Road and Chelmsford Avenue;

· Middle Harbour Road (left & right in, left out)

· Chelmsford Avenue (am peak No Right Turn, western leg)

Sight distance is restricted when exiting the following streets due a large dip in the road between Dudley Avenue and Park Avenue;

· Dudley Avenue (no restrictions)

· Roseville Avenue (left in/left out only)

· Earl Street (left in, left & right out)

· Lord Street (no restrictions)

· Park Avenue (pm peak No Right Turn)

The table below gives a summary of the intersections where multiple accidents have been recorded during the 5 year period to the end of June 2018.

Table 1. Crash sites along Archbold Road - 5 years to end June 2018

Intersection	No. of Crashes	injury crashes	Towaway Crashes	Main Crash Type	Comments
Middle Harbour Rd	9	6	3	6xRUM 21	2 crashes from illegal right turns out of MH Rd. 3 southbound RUM 21, 3 northbound RUM 21
Tryon Rd	8	7	1	3xRUM 21	no clear pattern
Clanville Rd	6	4	2	2xRUM 21, 2xRUM 13	2 RUM 21 during pm peak. 2 RUM 13
Chelmsford Ave	5	3	2	2xRUM 13, 2xRUM 21	2 RUM 21 turning right into E leg of Chelmsford during pm peak. 2 RUM 13 turning right out of W. leg of Chelmsford during am peak
Carnarvon Rd	4	3	1	2xRUM 21, 2xRUM 32	All crashes involve a vehicle turning right into Carnarvon Rd
Bancroft Ave	4	2	2	2xRUM 13	no clear pattern
Woodlands Rd	2	2	0	2xRUM 32	both between 9.30-10am
Lord St	2	1	1		no clear pattern

The table shows that the vast majority of accidents have occurred along the section of Archbold Road between Tryon Road and Clanville Road. Over 70% of recorded accidents on this section of Archbold Road involved a right turning vehicle. However of the 45 recorded accidents along Archbold Road, only 7 involved vehicles turning right onto Archbold Road. These accidents occurred at Clanville Road (2), Chelmsford Avenue (2), Bancroft Avenue (2), and Lord Street (1).

The majority of accidents (24) involved vehicles turning right from Archbold Road into side streets. This included 17 RUM 21 accidents involving a right tuning vehicle colliding with a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction, and 7 RUM 32 accidents involving rear-end collisions with a vehicle waiting to turn right. The solution to reduce these accidents would be to provide dedicated right turn bays. However, there is insufficient road reserve width to provide dedicated right turn bays without reducing the number of travel lanes. Traffic volumes on Archbold Road are too high to consider reducing the number of travel lanes.

Of the sites listed in table 1, the intersections with Middle Harbour Road, Chelmsford Avenue and Lord Street all have sub-standard sight distance for motorists turning right onto Archbold Road or crossing Archbold Road. At these intersections the gap sight distance, based on a design speed of 70km/h, does not meet the minimum requirement as specified in Table 3.5 of Austroads Guide to Road Design – Part 4A: Unsignalised and Signalised Intersections. It was also found that sight distance for motorists turning right out of Dudley Avenue was sub-standard.

The intersection at Middle Harbour Road has the highest number of accidents, despite the exits from both legs of Middle Harbour Road being restricted to left only. Two of the accidents involved illegal right turns. Another 6 accidents involved vehicles turning right from Archbold Road into Middle Harbour Road. It would be difficult to ban right turns into Middle Harbour Road, as buses need to turn right into the western leg of Middle Harbour Road as part of the route for the 558 bus.

The intersection of Tryon Road and Archbold Road is signalised. This intersection is being dealt with as a separate Traffic Committee item.

There were also a high number of accidents recorded at the intersection of Clanville Road and Archbold Road. Of these, 3 involved southbound vehicles on Archbold Road turning right into Clanville Road. Another 2 accidents involved vehicles turning right out of Clanville Road. This is somewhat surprising, given that sight distance is good in both directions when exiting Clanville Road.

Several accidents were recorded at the intersection with Chelmsford Avenue. Three of these involved northbound vehicles turning right into Chelmsford Avenue. Two accidents involved vehicles turning right out of the western leg of Chelmsford Avenue during the morning peak period. Council will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the ‘No Right Turn 6am-10am Mon-Fri’ restrictions.

Sight distance is limited at this intersection, although it is worse on the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue. In 2003 the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee recommended that seagull islands be constructed on both legs of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road to restrict movements to left in/left out only. However this recommendation was not adopted by Council.

It is recommended that due to the poor sight distance for motorists exiting the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue, that ‘Left Only’ restrictions be introduced. The proposed changes are shown in the attached Plan Chelmsford/KTC/02/19. There was strong resident support for these restrictions when they were proposed by Council in October 2018, with 13 of the 15 respondents supporting the proposal. However, one of the voting members of the Traffic Committee opposed the proposal.

There were 4 recorded accidents at the intersection of Archbold Road and Carnarvon Road. All 4 accidents involved vehicles turning right into Carnarvon Road, with 2 involving vehicles being rear-ended while waiting to turn right. Two similar crashes were also recorded at the intersection with Woodlands Road. In 2003 the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee recommended that a length of concrete median be approved and installed in Carnarvon Road and Woodlands Road to restrict turning movements to left in/left out. Again, this recommendation was not adopted by Council.

There were no recorded accidents at the intersection with Dudley Avenue. It should also be noted that Council has not received any complaints about the intersection of Archbold Road and Dudley Avenue. Sight distance when exiting Dudley Avenue was observed to be similar to sight distance when exiting the western leg of Chelmsford Avenue. It is recommended that Council carry out further monitoring at this intersection.

Community Consultation

Residents of Chelmsford Avenue to the east of Archbold Road were consulted about the proposal to introduce ‘Left Only’ restrictions when exiting Chelmsford Avenue. Of the 37 properties surveyed about the proposal, there were 15 responses. Of the 15 respondents, 13 were in favour of the proposal, with 2 opposed.

Internal Consultation

Despite the strong resident support for the proposal, the Chair of the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee opposed the proposal to introduce ‘Left Only’ restrictions in Chelmsford Avenue following representations from Cllr Ngai.

Cllr Ngai also requested that Council consider banning right turns out of Dudley Avenue due to concerns about sight distance.

Summary

There are several intersections along Archbold Road which have an accident history involving turning vehicles. Council recently introduced ‘No Right Turn 6am-10am Mon-Fri’ restrictions on the western leg of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road, mainly to reduce rat-running during the morning peak period. Further monitoring should be carried out to determine the effectiveness of the restrictions.

It is also recommended that full time ‘Left Only’ restrictions be introduced on the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road, due to poor sight distance. If future funding is available to widen Tryon Road at Archbold, thereby increasing its capacity, then consideration could be given to introducing full time ‘Left Only’ restrictions out of both legs of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road.

The majority of reported accidents occurred in the section of Arhcbold Road between Tryon Road and Clanville Road, with most of these accidents involved right turning vehicles. However only a relatively small number of these accidents (7), involved vehicles turning right out of side streets onto Archbold Road.

There have been no recorded accidents at the intersection of Archbold Road and Dudley Street, and Council has not received any complaints about this intersection. Therefore it is recommended that turning restrictions not be introduced, but the intersection continue to be monitored.

Recommendation:

That ‘Left Only’ restrictions be introduced on the eastern leg of Chelmsford Avenue at Archbold Road, as shown on Plan No. Chelmsford/KTC/02/19.

Michael Foskett

Team Leader Traffic

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:

A1⇩

Plan No. Chelmsford/KTC/02/19

2019/033072

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.7 / 138

Item GB.7	TM8/11

Park Avenue, Roseville

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider the installation of ‘No Stopping 8am-9.30am, 2.30pm-4pm School Days’ restrictions on the northern side of Park Avenue near Archbold Road.

background:	Council has received representations from two residents of Park Avenue about safety concerns when exiting their driveway, due to parked vehicles restricting visibility. There have been regular complaints about speeding traffic on Park Avenue.

comments:	Site inspections have confirmed that cars parked in Park Avenue outside No. 33 Archbold Road obstruct the visibility of eastbound traffic, and that cars turn into Park Avenue at excessive speed and accelerate up the grade.

recommendation:	That ‘No Stopping 8am-9.30am School Days’ restrictions be installed on the northern side of Park Avenue near Archbold Road.

Purpose of Report

To consider the installation of ‘No Stopping 8am-9.30am, 2.30pm-4pm School Days’ restrictions on the northern side of Park Avenue near Archbold Road.

Background

There have been regular complaints to Council about the speed of traffic in Park Avenue. Edge lines were installed in 2013 in an attempt to reduce speeds, and the feasibility of installing chicanes and rubber speed cushions has also been considered.

Concerns about traffic, parking and pedestrian safety in the area shown in the attached plan were raised again in early 2018 by Mrs Amber Edwards, of 33 Archbold Road (on the corner of Park Avenue). TDA 54/18 was prepared to address her concerns: the excessive speed of cars entering Park Avenue; parked cars (especially from the Airbnb opposite) obstructing the view of approaching traffic when exiting from her Park Avenue car port; and parents crossing Park Avenue, taking children to and from Roseville Public School, in dangerous traffic conditions.

TDA 54/18 proposed the introduction of full time ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on the northern side of Park Avenue between Archbold Road and the driveway to #33 Archbold Road. It did not proceed due to objections about the loss of on-street parking from the representative for The Member for Davidson..

Mrs Jill Nicholson lives at No. 2 Park Avenue, and has lodged similar complaints. She states that parked cars are a major traffic hazard (again mentioning the Airbnb) and the visibility of approaching traffic is restricted by parked cars when exiting her property. She notes that her driveway is also used by other residents [three houses on Earl Street] and all experience difficulties exiting No. 2. Mrs Nicholson says that “For the safety of everyone concerned there should be no parking in this area near the intersection”.

Comments

The attached Plan No. Park/KTC/02/19 Rev 1 shows the intersection of Park Avenue and Archbold Road, Roseville. Park Avenue is used by peak period traffic to avoid congestion on nearby State Roads and is the main way of accessing the Roseville Chase area from Roseville railway station and shops. This section of Park Avenue is 9.8 metres wide, kerb to kerb, and is on a six percent uphill gradient from Archbold Road.

Site inspections have confirmed the previous findings that cars parked in Park Avenue outside No. 33 Archbold Road obstruct the visibility of eastbound traffic; and that cars turn into Park Avenue at excessive speed and accelerate up the grade. The inspections also showed that the visibility of traffic turning into Park venue was obstructed by shrubs growing in the nature strip. These have since been removed by Council, but the visibility of approaching traffic is still obstructed when cars are parked between No. 2 and Archbold Road.

To address these issues, it is proposed to install a part-time ‘No Stopping’ restriction in Park Avenue, on the northern side between Archbold Road and the driveway to No. 2 Park Avenue.

The proposed signage is shown in the attached Plan No. Park/KTC/02/19 Rev 1. At this stage, it is proposed that the ‘No Stopping’ restriction would operate only at school drop-off and pick-up times. This coincides with the general morning peak traffic period on the busiest days near schools, when the risk of crashes is highest.

At site inspection it was noted that the majority of motorists turning right into Park Avenue were crossing over the double centre lines (BB lines) at the intersection. It is therefore proposed to adjust the BB lines at the intersection to give a wider entry angle. This will give the BB lines a more perpendicular alignment with Archbold Road, rather than the current angled alignment, as also shown in the attached Plan No. Park/KTC/02/19 Rev 1.

Governance Matters

This matter was considered by the voting members of the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee under TDA 188/18. The RMS representative and the two ward Councillors did not object to the proposal. However, the representative for the Member for Davidson has objected to the proposed ‘No Stopping 8am-9.30am, 2.30pm-4pm School Days’ restrictions. He believes that there is no evidence of speeding in this section of Park Avenue, and that the sight lines from the two affected driveways are no worse than any other driveway in the street.

Community Consultation

Council consulted with the residents of #2 Park Avenue and #33 Archbold Road. The resident of #2 Park Avenue supported the proposal, while the resident of #33 Archbold Road did not respond.

Internal Consultation

Council’s Open Space Department were requested to clear a large shrub which was obstructing visibility. These works have since been carried out.

Summary

Council has received representations from 2 residents of Park Avenue about safety concerns when exiting their driveway, due to parked vehicles restricting visibility. There have been regular complaints about speeding traffic on Park Avenue.

Site inspections have confirmed that cars parked in Park Avenue outside No. 33 Archbold Road obstruct the visibility of eastbound traffic, and that cars turn into Park Avenue at excessive speed and accelerate up the grade.

Recommendation:

A. That ‘No Stopping 8am-9.30am, 2.30pm-4pm School Days’ restrictions be installed on the northern side of Park Avenue near Archbold Road, as shown in Plan Park/TDA/188/18 Rev 1.

B. That the double centre lines in Park Avenue at Archbold Road be modified, as shown in Plan Park/KTC/02/19 Rev 1.

C. That residents of No. 2 Park Avenue, 33 Archbold Road and Council’s Team Leader Regulation be informed of Council’s decision.

Michael Foskett

Team Leader Traffic

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:

A1⇩

Plan No. Park/KTC/02/19 Rev 1

2019/031711

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.8 / 143

Item GB.8	TM6/11

Ortona Road, Lindfield

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider the installation of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on all four legs of the intersection of Ortona Road and Eton Road, Lindfield.

background:	Council’s Senior Parking Ranger has received representations from a local resident stating cars on Ortona Road are parked too close to the intersection of Eton Road, impeding visibility for motorists.

comments:	Council staff observed that parents collecting children from Lindfield Public School are illegally parking within 10 metres of the intersection.

recommendation:	That ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed on all four legs of the intersection of Ortona Road and Eton Road, Lindfield..

Purpose of Report

To consider the installation of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on all four legs of the intersection of Ortona Road and Eton Road, Lindfield.

Background

Council has received complaints about illegal parking at the intersection of Ortona Road and Eton Road. There are ‘No Stopping’ restrictions in place on both legs of Eton Road at the intersection. However Ortona Road does not have any signage on either leg of the intersection.

Parents from the nearby Lindfield Public School are regularly parking within 10 metres of the intersection on Ortona Road. Some vehicles have been observed to be parking right up to the corner. This is obstructing visibility for motorists at the intersection and creating a safety hazard.

Comments

Council’s Traffic staff carried out an inspection during the afternoon school pick-up time. It was observed that many parents were parking within 10 metres of the intersection, thereby impeding visibility for other motorists and pedestrians.

According to Australian Road Rule 170 (3) – “A driver must not stop on a road within 10 metres from the nearest point of an intersecting road at an intersection without traffic lights.”

In order to reinforce the 10 metre rule, it is proposed to install ‘No Stopping’ signs on both Ortona Road legs of the intersection with Eton Road. Due to the location of driveways in Ortona Road, it would be possible to extend the ‘No Stopping’ restrictions slightly further in some instances without any loss of on-street parking. The proposed changes are shown on the Plan Ortona/KTC/02/19.

The introduction of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions would reinforce the road rules and prevent drivers from parking too close to the intersection which would result in safer traffic conditions.

Governance Matters

This matter was considered by the voting members of the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee under TDA 186/18. The RMS representative did not object to the proposal. However, the representative for the Member for Davidson has objected to the ‘No Stopping’ restrictions extending any further than the standard 10 metres. He is concerned that allowing increased lengths of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions would set a precedent. However in this instance, the proposal would not result in the loss of any on-street parking spaces, so there is no disadvantage from extending the restrictions beyond the standard 10 metres.

Community Consultation

Because the proposal would not result in the loss of any on-street parking spaces, residents were not consulted about the proposal.

Summary

Council has received complaints about vehicles parking too close to the intersection with Eton Road on Ortona Road, particularly during school pick up and drop off times. At present there are ‘No Stopping’ signs on Eton Road, but not on Ortona Road.

In order to resolve this issue, it is proposed that ‘No Stopping’ signs be installed on both Ortona Road legs of the intersection. It is proposed that the ‘No Stopping’ restrictions extend slightly further than the statutory 10 metres at 3 of the 4 locations. This will provide improved visibility at the intersection, without the loss of any on-street parking spaces.

Recommendation:

A. That ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed on Ortona Road at Eton Road, as shown in Plan Ortona/KTC/02/19.

B. That Council’s Team Leader Regulation be informed of Council’s decision.

Michael Foskett

Team Leader Traffic

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:

A1⇩

Plan No. Ortona/KTC/02/19

2019/031501

Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee - 28 February 2019	GB.9 / 147

Item GB.9	TM9/11

Acron Road, St Ives

Ward: St Ives

Electorate: Ku-ring-gai

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To consider the installation of a median island and additional ‘Stop’ sign and markings in Acron Road, on the southern side of Douglas Street.

background:	A resident has reported numerous crashes and “near misses” due to northbound traffic in Acron Road failing to stop and give way to traffic in Douglas Street.

comments:	Council staff have noted, from site inspections and from crash records, that northbound drivers in Acron Road may have limited awareness of the intersection with Douglas Street and the ‘Stop’ control.

recommendation:	A. That the BB lines in Acron Road on the northbound approach to Douglas Street, St Ives, be extended to a distance of 20 metres south of Douglas Street, as shown in Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19. B. That a short median island be installed in Acron Road, five metres south of Douglas Street, as shown in Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19, with an additional ‘Stop’ sign mounted in the median. C. That Mr S Schaefer, of 50 Hayle Street, St Ives, be informed of Council’s decision.

Purpose of Report

To consider the installation of a median island and additional ‘Stop’ sign and markings in Acron Road, on the southern side of Douglas Street.

Background

A resident has reported numerous crashes and “near misses” due to northbound traffic in Acron Road failing to stop and give way to traffic in Douglas Street.

Comments

Priority at the intersection is given to traffic in Douglas Street, with ‘Stop’ signs and lines requiring traffic in Acron Road to stop and give way. The ‘Stop’ control has been in place for over 40 years.

In Acron Road south of Douglas Street, and on the southern side of Douglas Street, there is no kerb and gutter and there are no buildings, just bushland and a grazing paddock. In Acron Road 40 metres south of Douglas Street there is a crest, which for northbound traffic restricts the view ahead.

These factors, and the fact that most of the known crashes were in daylight, suggests that some northbound drivers in Acron Road may have a limited awareness of the fact that they are approaching an intersection.

The same concerns were raised by another local resident in 2017, and were addressed at that time by the installation of BB lines under TDA 67/17. However, it appears that near-misses have continued to occur since then, and site inspections have shown that the BB lines are not highly visible until a northbound vehicle has passed the crest in Acron Road.

In order to increase driver awareness of the intersection, and of the ‘Stop’ control facing northbound traffic, it is proposed to extend the BB lines in Acron Road south of the intersection to 20 metres from the stop line at Douglas Street, and to install an additional ‘Stop’ sign on a short median island. These proposals are shown in Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19.

Governance Matters

Council’s Director Operations has authority, under delegation from Council, to approve the installation of a median island and additional ‘Stop’ sign, as recommended in this report.

Risk Management

Concerns about crashes and “near misses” at the intersection have now been formally brought to Council’s attention twice by local residents. Council has an obligation to consider the public safety risks at the intersection and determine what measures, if any, are needed to reduce risks.

Financial Considerations

Funding is available from the RMS block grant to Council for traffic facilities and from internal funds.

Social Considerations

Nil.

Environmental Considerations

Nil.

Community Consultation

No residents at the intersection will be adversely affected by the proposal in terms of loss of residential amenity, loss of access to property or loss of on-street parking. Consultation is therefore considered not necessary.

Internal Consultation

The proposal will not affect the operations of other sections of Council or the facilities and infrastructure they manage. Internal consultation is therefore considered not necessary.

Summary

Complaints to Council and analysis of available crash data indicate that northbound drivers in Acron Road, St Ives, may have limited awareness of the fact that they are approaching the intersection with Douglas Street and that they must stop at Douglas Street and give way to traffic in Douglas Street.

The installation of an additional ‘Stop’ sign on a median island in Acron Road, and extension of the double dividing (BB) lines south of Douglas Street, are proposed to address this issue.

Recommendation:

A. That the BB lines in Acron Road on the northbound approach to Douglas Street, St Ives, be extended to a distance of 20 metres south of Douglas Street, as shown in Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19.

B. That a short median island be installed in Acron Road, five metres south of Douglas Street, as shown in Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19, with an additional ‘Stop’ sign mounted in the median.

C. That Mr S Schaefer, of 50 Hayle Street, St Ives, be informed of Council’s decision.

Deva Thevaraja

Manager Traffic & Transport

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Attachments:

A1⇩

Plan No. Acron/KTC/02/19

2019/037562