canterbury traffic committee€¦ · signposted at the marked pedestrian crossings in campsie...

Canterbury Traffic Committee Venue: Function Room

2nd Floor 137 Beamish Street, Campsie

Date: Monday, 12 April 2010 Time: 9.30 a.m. Responsibilities • Local Road System • Traffic Management • Road Environment • Road Safety Attendance Councillor B. Robson, Councillor L. Eisler, Councillor K. Nam, Councillor K. Saleh, Director of City Works, Team Leader Traffic & Transportation, Road Safety Officer, Member for Canterbury, Member for Lakemba, Roads and Traffic Authority, State Transit Authority and Police.

Council's Goals/Core Values • Community Leadership • Technical Excellence • Quality Customer Service • Responsible Financial Control • Environmental Responsibility

Council's Mission To enhance our community's lifestyle by the provision of works and services

that are efficient, cost effective and accessible.

TRAFFIC COMMITTEE 12 APRIL 2010

MEETING NO: 3/10

The Canterbury Traffic Committee is constituted in accordance with a resolution of the Council and under the provisions of the Traffic Authority Act 1976. Voting rights on the Committee lie with the Council, Police Service, Roads and Traffic Authority representatives and the Local Members. Item No. Subject Page No.

PRESENT

APOLOGIES

1. MINUTES OF THE CANTERBURY TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON 1 MARCH 2010 .................................................................. 3

2. CAMPSIE 40 KM/H HIGH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY AREA – RTA TECHNICAL COMPLIANCE ISSUES.................................................................. 4

3. HAMILTON AVENUE AT EARLWOOD AVENUE, EARLWOOD – REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES..... ............... 13

4. BURWOOD ROAD AT CLARENCE STREET, BELFIELD – REQU EST FOR A MARKED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING.................................................... 18

5. GRACE AVENUE AT HALDON STREET, LAKEMBA – SIGNPOSTING OF NO STOPPING ZONES....................................................... 23

6. PIERSON LANE, CANTERBURY – REMOVAL OF SPEED HUMP ............... 29

7. CLUNES LANE BETWEEN PHILLIPS AVENUE AND WONGA STREET, CANTERBURY – INSTALLATION OF W ATTS PROFILE SPEED HUMPS...................................................................................................... 34


1. MINUTES OF THE CANTERBURY TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MEET ING HELD ON 1 MARCH 2010

FILE NO: L-50-3 PT3 Summary: The minutes of the Canterbury Traffic Committee meeting held on 1 March 2010 were considered by Council at its meeting on 25 March 2010. City Plan and Budget Implications: This report has no implications for the City Plan and Budget. It supports our City Plan long term goal of Transport Alternatives That Work. Report: It was resolved that the recommendations contained in the Canterbury Traffic Committee minutes be adopted. RECOMMENDATION: THAT the resolution of Council on 25 March 2010 regarding the Canterbury Traffic Committee minutes be noted.


2. CAMPSIE 40 KM/H HIGH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY AREA – RTA TECHNICAL COMPLIANCE ISSUES

FILE NO: N/A Summary: • Correspondence has been received from the RTA’s Acting Road Safety Manager

regarding technical compliance issues which arose from on-site inspections recently conducted by the Authority in the Campsie 40 km/h high pedestrian activity area.

• The Acting Road Safety Manager has requested that the “No Stopping” distances signposted at the marked pedestrian crossings in Campsie Street and North Parade be reviewed to ensure they meet the RTA’s Technical Direction 2002/12 and that all raised (wombat) pedestrian crossings in the 40 km/h area be painted with piano keys to meet the requirements of Technical Direction 2001/04.

• It is recommended that the work required by the RTA in the Campsie 40 km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area, to comply with their Technical Directions, proceed as shown on the concept plan included with the report.

City Plan and Budget Implications: This report has no implications for the City Plan and Budget. It supports our City Plan long term goal of Transport Alternatives That Work. Report: The RTA requested and funded the 40 km/h High Pedestrian Activity program for Campsie. All works were completed by Council in August 2009, in accordance with RTA instructions. Correspondence has now been received from the RTA’s Acting Road Safety Manager in the following terms: “The RTA recently conducted inspections of the Local Area Traffic

Management scheme supporting the introduction of a 40 km/h High Pedestrian Area in Campsie.

At the time of the on-site inspections, a number of issues relating to technical

compliance were identified, which the RTA draws to the attention of Council as detailed below.

1. No Stopping Distances The inspection of pedestrian facilities identified that the pedestrian

crossings in Campsie Street and North Parade do not appear to meet the minimum stopping distance requirements as detailed in the RTA’s Technical direction “Stopping and Parking Restrictions at Intersections and Crossings” (TDT2002/12). The RTA requests that Council review the location of no stopping distances at each of these pedestrian crossings.


CAMPSIE 40 KM/H HIGH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY AREA – RTA TECHNICAL COMPLIANCE ISSUES

2. Road Hump Markings The RTA’s Technical Direction TDT2001/04 Use of Traffic Calming

Devices as Pedestrian Crossing illustrates the preferred road hump markings (commonly known as piano key markings) in NSW, referencing the Australian Standard 1742.13 for regulatory requirement. Council is requested to consider the application of speed hump markings on all raised thresholds within the 40km/h area, as the RTA’s preferred treatment in NSW.

Should you require any further information or clarification, please contact the Project

Manager, 40 km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area program (Sydney Region).” Road Hierarchy Beamish Street is a regional road and North Parade and Campsie Street are local roads. Comments • No Stopping Distances (Campsie Street and North Parade) According to the RTA’s Technical Direction TDT 2002/12, a marked pedestrian

crossing requires a 20m “No Stopping” zone on the approach to the crossing and a 10m “No Stopping” zone on the departure side. This distance can be reduced if a kerb extension (a blister island) is provided at the crossing.

• Campsie Street At Campsie Street a 2.0m wide blister island is provided (on the northern side) on the

approach to the crossing. The existing “No Stopping” zone is 3.3m. This “No Stopping” zone should be 10m adjacent to a 2.0m blister island. The existing “No Stopping” sign needs to be relocated as shown on the attached concept plan to comply with the RTA’s Technical Direction TDT2002/12. On the departure side of the crossing, the existing “No Stopping” zone is 8m (on the southern side) and therefore needs to be relocated to the 10m mark in accordance with the RTA’s Technical Direction TDT2002/12.

• North Parade (east of Beamish Street) In North Parade, east of Beamish Street, the existing “No Stopping” zones are 4.2m

and 5.5m, respectively. These need to be signposted at 10m distances from the crossing in accordance with the RTA’s Technical Direction TDT2002/12. Accordingly a sketch is provided to reflect the changes.

• North Parade (west of Beamish Street) The north side of North Parade currently has a “No Stopping” zone 4.95m in length

which needs to be increased to 20m. The installation of a 20m “No Stopping” zone, however, will reduce the existing Bus Zone from 33m to 13m which is inadequate as a Bus Zone requires a minimum of 22m. The installation of a 2.5m blister island within the existing “No Stopping” zone would permit a 10m “No Stopping” zone. To achieve this length the existing “No Stopping” zone would need to be extended 5.05m which is achievable.



The south side of North Parade currently has a “No Stopping” zone 6m in length, an

11.5m Loading Zone and 1-Hour Parking. These facilities can be adjusted to allow the 10m “No Stopping” zone required by the RTA Guidelines and as shown on the concept plan included with the report.

• Road Hump Marking (Piano Key Markings on Raised Pedestrian Crossings) As part of the 40km/h high pedestrian activity program, a total of 4 new marked

pedestrian crossings were provided and one existing pedestrian crossing was upgraded to a raised threshold. The locations are as follows: Campsie Street at Beamish Street (new raised pedestrian crossing) – requires piano key markings North Parade, east of Beamish Street (new raised pedestrian crossing) – requires piano key markings North Parade, west of Beamish Street (existing pedestrian crossing upgraded to a raised crossing) – requires piano key markings. Amy Lane at Amy Street (new pedestrian crossing not raised) - piano key markings not required. Amy Lane at Evaline Street (new pedestrian crossing not raised) - piano key markings not required.

Conclusion It is recommended that works, to comply with the RTA’s Technical Direction (TDT 2002/12 and TDT2001/04) and Australian Standard (AS1742.13), proceed at the following locations: • Campsie Street at Beamish Street – the existing “No Stopping” zone be relocated as

shown on the concept plan included with the report. • North Parade, east of Beamish Street – the existing “No Stopping” zone be relocated

as shown on the concept plan included with the report. • North Parade, west of Beamish Street - the existing “No Stopping” zone be relocated

and a blister island be installed as shown on the concept plan included with the report. • The existing raised threshold pedestrian crossings in Campsie Street at Beamish Street

and in North Parade east and west of Beamish Street, be painted with piano keys. The installation of a 2.5m blister island in North Parade (north side and west of Beamish Street) will cost approximately $2,500 and will need to be voted from the Traffic Committee Allocation. RECOMMENDATION: THAT 1. The work required by the RTA in the Campsie 40 km/h High Pedestrian Activity

Area, to comply with their Technical Directions, proceed as shown on the concept plan included with the report.

2. The cost of the construction of a blister island in North Parade (north side and west of Beamish Street) of $2,500 be voted from the Traffic Committee Allocation.


3. HAMILTON AVENUE AT EARLWOOD AVENUE, EARLWOOD – REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES

FILE NO: N/A Summary: • Correspondence has been received from a resident of Hamilton Avenue, Earlwood

suggesting that additional traffic calming devices are required on the approaches to the Hamilton Avenue/Earlwood Avenue roundabout to address an accident and speeding problem at the intersection.

• The recorded accident history has revealed 5 intersection accidents during the most recent 5-year period (January 2004 - December 2008), however, no midblock accidents have been recorded in either street. The 85th percentile speeds recorded on the approaches to the roundabout are in the range of 35-49 km/h.

• It is recommended that the roundabout diameter be increased from 8.6m to 11.6m, as shown on the plan included with the report, subject to consultation with the affected residents. It is further recommended that the project, the cost of which is $10,000, be listed in a future works program.

City Plan and Budget Implications: This report has no implications for the City Plan and Budget. It supports our City Plan long term goal of Transport Alternatives That Work. Report: Correspondence was received late last year from a resident of Hamilton Avenue (corner of Earlwood Avenue) in the following terms: “…I live at (address identified). At the front of our home on Hamilton

Avenue, Council has placed rails to protect from accidents which frequently occur. In the last 6 months the rails have been damaged by vehicles involved in accidents and they need to be repaired. Another option would be to put speed humps close to the roundabout which will decrease the amount of accidents that are currently occurring, or install two stop signs north and south of Earlwood Avenue. Another option I suggest that would also help reduce accidents would be to install a no right turn sign except for residents at the beginning of Hamilton Avenue and Thompson Street.

This is a very important issue that needs to be resolved. I can be contacted

on my mobile (number supplied) to discuss the matter further at any time. Can someone please come and inspect the site and inform me so I am present

to explain this situation further. I am very concerned about the safety of my family and neighbours due to the amount of accidents that continue to occur.”

Road Hierarchy Hamilton Avenue and Earlwood Avenue are both local roads.

TRAFFIC COMMITTEE 12 April 2010

HAMILTON AVENUE AT EARLWOOD AVENUE, EARLWOOD – REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES

Existing Traffic Management • A roundabout exists at the Hamilton/Earlwood Avenue intersection. • Splitter islands and kerbside blister islands exist on all approaches to the roundabout • A guardrail exists on the northern-eastern side of the intersection outside 23 Hamilton

Avenue. Traffic Volume and Speed Survey

Date Location Direction Traffic Volume

veh/day

85th Percentile

Speed Km/ph

Nov 2009

Hamilton Ave east of the roundabout at Earlwood Ave outside No. 44

East bound West bound

Both directions

1685 1414 3100

47.0 39.0 44.0

Nov 2009

Hamilton Ave west of the roundabout at Earlwood Ave outside No. 48

East bound West bound

Both directions

2004 1772 3776

35.0 44.0 39.0

Nov 2009

Earlwood Ave north of the roundabout at Hamilton Ave outside No. 23

North bound South bound

Both directions

1218 803 2021

49.0 46.0 48.0

Nov 2009

Earlwood Ave south of the roundabout at Hamilton Ave outside No. 48

North bound South bound

Both directions

1030 647 1677

48.0 39.0 46.0

Accident History – 5-Year Period (Jan 2004 – Dec 2008)

# Location Year Rum Code

Accident Type Key

Direction Other

Direction Weather/Road

Surface

1 Earlwood Ave at Hamilton Ave

2004 10 Cross traffic West South Fine/dry

2 Earlwood Ave at Hamilton Ave 2004 10 Cross traffic West South Fine/dry

3 Earlwood Ave at Hamilton Ave 2005 6

On footpath/median South Pedestrian

Fine/dry


Cross traffic West South

Fine/dry


Cross traffic North West

Overcast/dry

The recorded accident history has revealed 5 intersection accidents during the most recent 5-year period, however, no midblock accidents have been recorded in either street. One accident in 2005 involved a motorist injuring a pedestrian. The Police have provided additional information about an accident in 2009, as follows: “A major accident occurred at the location on 31/07/2009; one vehicle failed

to give way at the roundabout. There were no other incidents.”



Local Street Roundabouts (AUSTROADS Part 6 – Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice - Roundabouts) According to the AustRoads – Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice (Part 6) – Roundabouts, the major differences in the geometric treatment of local street roundabouts compared with roundabouts on more important traffic routes (i.e. collector and regional roads) arise from the differing design aims; generally narrower street widths, lower traffic speeds and smaller classes of vehicle use. Roundabouts are usually installed in the local street system as a traffic management device to improve safety and amenity by controlling vehicle speed. The traffic demand in local streets is usually low and capacity and delay calculations are not required. In most cases, if not all, only one entry lane (on each approach) and one circulating lane is provided. The control of vehicle speeds on entry through the roundabout remains an important objective as with roundabouts on arterial roads. Local street roundabouts are designed for much lower speeds (about 25 km/h) than arterial road roundabouts. Comment • The guardrail damaged by the most recent accident has already been repaired. • The resident had complained prior to the installation of the guardrail that his property

was damaged due to an accident at this intersection. The recent reported accidents, however, do not show that any of the accidents were speed related or that property damage had occurred.

• The existing roundabout already has kerbside blister islands built in as part of the kerb and gutter. These cannot be altered as the existing arrangements are required to allow large vehicles to manoeuvre through the roundabout.

• The 85th percentile speeds recorded on all 4 approaches to the roundabout at Hamilton/Earlwood Avenue are in the range of 35-49 km/h. These speeds need to be reduced to 25 km/h.

• The proposal to lower the speed of travel at the roundabout is to increase the diameter of the roundabout from 8.6m to 11.6m.

Conclusion Given the number of intersection accidents and the 85th percentile speed range of 35-49 km/h, it is recommended that the diameter of the roundabout be increased from 8.6m to 11.6m at the Hamilton/Earlwood Avenue intersection, as shown on the plan included with the report, subject to consultation with the affected residents. It is further recommended that the cost of the work, estimated to be $10,000, be listed in a future works program. RECOMMENDATION: THAT 1. The central island of the existing roundabout be increased from 8.6m to 11.6m at the

Hamilton/Earlwood Avenue intersection, as shown on the concept plan included with the report and subject to consultation with the affected residents.

2. The cost of the work, estimated at $10,000, be included in a future works program. 3. The resident be advised of the decision.


4. BURWOOD ROAD AT CLARENCE STREET, BELFIELD – REQU EST FOR A MARKED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

FILE NO: N/A Summary: • At the Traffic Committee meeting on 12 October 2009, a report was considered to

alter the existing median islands in Burwood Road north of Clarence Street to provide a pedestrian refuge. It was also proposed that the bus stop and shelter on the western side of the street be relocated to accommodate the refuge.

• The STA and RTA Representative requested that the matter be deferred for further consideration as there was a suggestion that the relocation of the existing bus stop and bus shelter could affect sight distance and a large tree would need to be heavily pruned to enable a bus to pull in and out at the proposed new bus stop.

• It is recommended that a pedestrian refuge be provided in Burwood Road south of Clarence Street, a bus zone be installed on the western side of Burwood Road and the “No Stopping” zones be signposted, as shown on the concept plan included with the report. It is further recommended that the cost of the work, estimated to be $15,000, be resubmitted to the July 2010 meeting to be voted from next year’s Traffic Committee Allocation.

City Plan and Budget Implications: This report has no implications for the City Plan and Budget. It supports our City Plan long term goal of Transport Alternatives That Work. Report: At the Traffic Committee meeting on 12 October 2009, a report was considered to alter the existing median islands in Burwood Road north of Clarence Street to provide a pedestrian refuge. It was proposed that the bus stop and shelter on the western side of the street be relocated to accommodate the pedestrian refuge. A request had been received to install a marked pedestrian crossing in Burwood Road at Clarence Street, however, the pedestrian and vehicle counts obtained at this location did not meet the RTA’s Guidelines for the installation. The STA representative requested the matter be deferred pending an inspection of the street tree adjacent to the proposed bus stop. It was suggested that it would need to be heavily pruned to accommodate buses entering and leaving the proposed new bus stop zone. The RTA representative also advised that there could be an issue with buses using the existing bus stop on the eastern side of Burwood Road with manoeuvring and sight distance issues; the turning template for vehicles turning right out of Clarence Street should also be checked. Road Hierarchy Burwood Road is a regional road and Clarence Street is a local road.


BURWOOD ROAD AT CLARENCE STREET, BELFIELD – REQUEST FOR A MARKED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

Bus Route Burwood Road between Canterbury Road and Punchbowl Road is part of the STA 415 bus route. Traffic Volume and Speed Survey

Date Location Direction Traffic Volume

Veh/day 85th percentile Speed km/hr

Nov 2002 Burwood Road (House No: 59) between Clarence / Joy Streets

North bound South bound Both directions

6747 6451 13198

58.8 59.5 59.2

Pedestrian/Vehicle Counts Pedestrian/vehicle counts were taken in Burwood Road and Clarence Street on Sunday 22 March 2009 during three one-hour periods with the following results.

22 March 2009 (Time)

Pedestrian movements

north & south Vehicles

PV (pedestrians x

vehicles)

RTA Warrant Met Yes/No

9.00 - 10.00 a.m. 78 739 57642 No 12.30 - 1.30 p.m. 56 564 23688 No 3.00 - 4.00 p.m. 27 374 10098 No

Before a marked pedestrian crossing can be installed, certain requirements specified by the Roads and Traffic Authority based on pedestrian and vehicle numbers must be met. A marked foot crossing should be considered for approval where: (a) the product of the measured pedestrian flow per hour (P) and the measured vehicular

traffic flow per hour (V), PV, is equal to or greater than 60,000; and

(b) the measured flows, P and V are equal to or greater than 30 and 500 respectively, and

(c) the measured flows apply for three periods of one hour in any day. The pedestrian movements and vehicle numbers obtained as well as the PV did not meet the RTA warrant requirements for a marked pedestrian crossing at this location. Comments • The Church and residents advised that Sunday is a high pedestrian activity day in

Burwood Road at Clarence Street and requested that consideration be given to installing a marked pedestrian crossing. Pedestrian and vehicle counts were therefore taken on a Sunday at various hours. The pedestrian and vehicle counts, however, did not meet the RTA Guidelines for the installation of a marked pedestrian crossing at this location.

• Upgrading the median islands in Burwood Road north of Clarence Street to provide a pedestrian refuge required relocating the existing bus stop and shelter on the western side of Burwood Road to provide the necessary “No Stopping Zone” distances adjacent to the device required by RTA Guidelines.

• The STA advised that a large tree would need to be removed, or trimmed, to accommodate the bus at the proposed new bus stop site.



• An on-site meeting was held with the STA Representative to discuss the issues raised.

It was decided that it may be better to install a pedestrian refuge in Burwood Road south of Clarence Street.

• Locating the pedestrian refuge in Burwood Road south of Clarence Street has now been investigated and it is possible to install a pedestrian refuge without affecting kerbside parking for the residents on the western side of Burwood Road. This location also satisfies the need for a pedestrian refuge in terms of sight distances while a bus is stopped to pick-up and drop-off passengers.

• A concept sketch of the new proposal is included with the report. The new location will not cause any sight distance problems and does not require relocating the bus stop or bus shelter. It also addresses the RTA’s concerns regarding right turn problems out of Clarence Street and the proximity of the bus stop on the eastern side of Burwood Road to the originally proposed site for the device.

• The existing bus stop and bus shelter on the western side of Burwood Road north of Clarence Street does not have a bus zone. As part of the proposed pedestrian refuge and the installation of a “No Stopping” zone, a bus zone will also be installed in front of the church.

Conclusion It is recommended that that a pedestrian refuge be provided in Burwood Road south of Clarence Street, a bus zone be installed on the western side of Burwood Road and the “No Stopping” zones signposted, as shown on the concept plan included with the report. It is further recommended that the cost of the work, estimated to be $15,000, be resubmitted to the July 2010 meeting to be voted from next year’s Traffic Committee Allocation (2010/2011). RECOMMENDATION: THAT 1. The existing median islands in Burwood Road south of Clarence Street be upgraded to

provide a pedestrian refuge, a bus zone be installed on the western side of Burwood Road and the “No Stopping” zones be signposted, as shown on the concept sketch included with the report.

2. The cost of the work, estimated to be $15,000, be resubmitted to the July 2010 meeting to be voted from next year’s Traffic Committee Allocation (2010/2011).

3. The Korean Central Presbyterian Church and residents be advised of the decision.


5. GRACE AVENUE AT HALDON STREET, LAKEMBA – SIGNPOS TING OF NO STOPPING ZONES

FILE NO: N/A Summary: • Correspondence has been received from a resident of Haldon Street concerning the

number of accidents occurring at the intersection of Grace Avenue and Haldon Street, Lakemba. The resident has requested that consideration be given to the installation of a roundabout, a speed hump or a traffic mirror.

• The reported accident history of 6 accidents with 4 injuries over the most recent 5-year period would qualify this location to be considered under the Federal Government’s Blackspot Program for funding to install a traffic calming device.

• It is recommended that the 10m “No Stopping” zones around the Haldon Street/Grace Avenue intersection be signposted to improve visibility at the location. It is further recommended that the intersection be submitted to the Federal Government Blackspot Program to obtain funding to install a traffic calming device at the location to address the accident problem.

City Plan and Budget Implications: This report has no implications for the City Plan and Budget. It supports our City Plan long term goal of Transport Alternatives That Work. Report: Correspondence was received in August 2009 from a resident of Haldon Street in the following terms:

“ I am writing re the T section of Haldon Street and Grace Avenue in Lakemba. I have been living in this area for over three years now and in this time I have seen numerous car accidents occur at this intersection.

Vehicles waiting to turn out of Grace Avenue onto Haldon Street have the difficulty of judging whether it is safe to turn out or not, as with cars parked along Haldon Street, the view is unclear. As there are a school and a Reception Centre both on Haldon Street, the street becomes quite cluttered with vehicles, again making it difficult to see on coming traffic. I too have experienced this problem of trying to get a clear view of turning out of Grace Avenue.

I was hoping if something could be put in action to slow oncoming traffic along Haldon Street, such as a speed hump or round about, or traffic mirror etc, to help with this situation.

It is a concern, as I said I have seen quite a number of accidents occur here.” Further correspondence was received from the resident in early October 2009, in the following terms:

“Further to my concerns of the intersection of Grace Avenue and Haldon Street, there was another accident at this intersection last night; the police were called to the site.


GRACE AVENUE AT HALDON STREET, LAKEMBA – SIGNPOSTING OF NO STOPPING ZONES

This is becoming quite a concern, as you are aware, an Aldi Supermarket is being built just further up from the intersection, which means, once up and running, the traffic will increase, aside from the traffic of the school and the reception centre also located on Haldon Street, which could increase the volume of accidents on this intersection. I would hate for there to be a fatality before anything is done to correct this intersection.”

Road Hierarchy Haldon Street is a collector road and Grace Avenue is a local road. Existing Traffic Management The T-intersection has no traffic control devices. Accident History – 5-Year Period (Jan 2004 – Dec 2008)

# Location Year Rum Code

Accident Type

Key Direction

Other Direction

Weather/Road Surface

1 Haldon St at Grace Ave

2004 21 Right through

North South Raining/wet

2 Grace Ave 50m east of Haldon St

2004 2 Pedestrian West (Ped) Fine/dry



North South Fine/dry


2007 13 Right near West South Fine/dry


2007 13 Right near West South Raining/wet

6 Haldon St 40m north of Grace Ave


South North Raining/wet

Six (6) accidents have been recorded in Haldon Street at Grace Avenue in the most recent 5-year period January 2004-December 2008. The resident, however, has also reported additional accidents in 2009. Comment • An analysis of the reported accident history reveals 6 accidents in the most recent 5-

year period January 2004-December 2008. According to advice received from the resident, additional accidents have also occurred in 2009. 6 accidents with 4 injuries would qualify this location for consideration under the Federal Government’s Blackspot Program for funding to install a traffic calming device.

• Recent inspections have confirmed that illegal parking is constantly occurring around the intersection; probably due to the close proximity of the school and the opening of the new Aldi Store.

Conclusion It is recommended that the 10m statutory “No Stopping” zones be signposted around the Haldon Street/Grace Avenue intersection to keep the intersection clear and improve visibility. It is also proposed that the location be submitted to the Federal Government Blackspot Program to install a traffic calming device, such as a roundabout at the intersection, to address the accident problem.



RECOMMENDATION: THAT 1. The statutory 10m “No Stopping” zones around the Haldon Street/Grace Avenue

Lakemba intersection be signposted. 2. The intersection of Grace Avenue at Haldon Street Lakemba be submitted to the

Federal Government’s Blackspot Program for funding consideration to install a traffic calming device at the location to address the accident problem.

3. The resident be advised of the decision.


6. PIERSON LANE, CANTERBURY – REMOVAL OF SPEED HUMP FILE NO: N/A Summary: • Correspondence has been received from the owner of 71 Jeffrey Street (corner of

Pierson Lane) Canterbury, complaining of damage to his property caused by heavy vehicles using the lane. The resident has requested that “Trucks Prohibited” signage be installed in Pierson Lane or that a guardrail be constructed to better protect his property.

• It is not recommended that trucks be prohibited from using Pierson Lane or that a guardrail be installed along the side boundary of 71 Jeffrey Street. It is recommended that the bitumen speed hump be removed from Pierson Lane adjacent to 71 Jeffrey Street, as it appears that the device may be the contributing cause to the damage that is occurring to the property.

City Plan and Budget Implications: This report has no implications for the City Plan and Budget. It supports our City Plan long term goal of Transport Alternatives That Work. Report: Correspondence has been received from the owner of 71 Jeffrey Street (corner of Pierson Lane) Canterbury, in the following terms: “ I write to express my concern about the heavy vehicle use on Jeffrey Lane,

(Pierson Lane), Canterbury. My property is situated on the corner of Jeffrey Street and Jeffrey Lane,

parallel to the Aldi Store and the side of my property, which runs along Jeffrey Lane, has on many occasions been damaged by heavy vehicles using this laneway.

I have enclosed photographs of the most recent damage which was to my

gutters caused by a large truck using this laneway. I do not believe that Jeffrey Lane is wide enough to accommodate heavy

vehicles and request that council investigates this matter before further property damage occurs. I would appreciate the introduction of signage restricting the flow of heavy vehicles along Jeffrey Lane, however, following an investigation, should council consider the laneway appropriate for heavy vehicles then I would ask that a heavy safety guard be installed along the side of my property to prevent further damage.

I may be contacted (details supplied) and look forward to speaking with you

regarding my concerns and the current damage to my property.”


PIERSON LANE, CANTERBURY – REMOVAL OF SPEED HUMP

Road Hierarchy Jeffrey Street is a regional road and Pierson Lane a (a service lane) is classified as a local road. Comments • Pierson Lane adjacent to the side boundary of No. 71 Jeffrey Street and the Aldi

Supermarket has been inspected and the traffic flow observed on a number of occasions.

• Damage was evident to the southern guttering and window grille on the house (71 Jeffrey Street) and probably caused by a tall, closed in type truck.

• The delivery dock for Aldi exists on the other side of the store (off Jeffrey Street) and it is believed that most delivery trucks would ingress and egress from Jeffrey Street, rather than turn down the narrow lane.

• A site inspection revealed a speed hump in the laneway at the point where the house guttering is damaged. The kerb and gutter also at this point appears to have sunk adjacent to the house which could cause a tall truck or garbage compactor to tilt towards the residence while passing over the hump and collide with the roof guttering and/or the security window grille.

• The site inspection also revealed that the tight left hand-turn at the end of Pierson Lane forces vehicles to steer close to the right-hand kerb and gutter to better negotiate the bend.

• The carriage width of the lane is 2.480m (between the lip of the gutters) or 3.580m (between the face of the kerb). Recently the site was inspected and the owner of 71 Jeffrey Street has installed a new roof gutter.

• The resident’s suggestion to install signage to prohibit trucks cannot be enforced if there is a legitimate reason for the trucks to use the lane. Also, there is insufficient room to install a guardrail on the boundary with only 300mm of kerb and the location of stormwater pipes would also add to the difficulty.

Conclusion It is not recommended that trucks be prohibited from using Pierson Lane or that a guardrail be installed along the side boundary of 71 Jeffrey Street. It is recommended that the bitumen speed hump be removed from Pierson Lane adjacent to 71 Jeffrey Street and that the situation be monitored. RECOMMENDATION: THAT 1. The bitumen speed hump be removed from Pierson Lane adjacent to 71 Jeffrey Street,

as shown on the concept plan included with the report, and the situation monitored. 2. The resident and Aldi be advised of the decision.


PIERSON LANE, CANTERBURY – REMOVAL OF SPEED HUMP


7. CLUNES LANE BETWEEN PHILLIPS AVENUE AND WONGA ST REET, CANTERBURY – INSTALLATION OF WATTS PROFILE SPEED HU MPS

FILE NO: N/A Summary: • The Traffic Committee on 1 February 2010 recommended that two Watts profile

speed humps be installed in Clunes Lane between Wonga Street and Phillips Avenue and that “No Stopping” signs be installed in Phillips Avenue at the Clunes Lane intersection, subject to public consultation.

• On 5 March 2009, 15 questionnaires with concept plans were posted to the affected residents and non-residential owners of properties in Phillips Avenue and Canterbury Road inviting them to comment on the proposal.

• One reply was received in favour of the proposal. • It is recommended that 2 Watts profile speed humps be constructed in Clunes Lane

between Phillips Avenue and Wonga Street, Canterbury and that the intersection of Phillips Avenue/Clunes Lane be signposted “No Stopping”, as shown on the concept plan included with the report. It is further recommended that the cost of the work, estimated to be $2,500, be voted from the Traffic Committee Allocation.

City Plan and Budget Implications: This report has no implications for the City Plan and Budget. It supports our City Plan long term goal of Transport Alternatives That Work. Report: The Traffic Committee on 1 February 2010 considered a report regarding the speed of traffic using Clunes Lane and illegal parking around the intersection of Phillips Avenue/Clunes Lane. It was recommended that two Watts profile speed humps be installed in Clunes Lane between Wonga Street and Phillips Avenue and that “No Stopping” signs be installed in Phillips Avenue at the Clunes Lane intersection to address illegal parking. The recommendation was subject to consultation with the affected residents. Public Consultation On 5 March 2009, 15 questionnaires with concept plans were posted to the affected residents and non-residential owners of properties in Phillips Avenue and Canterbury Road inviting them to comment on the proposal prior to 19 March 2010. One response was received in favour of the proposal by the due date. Late Responses 3 belated responses were received between 26-29 March; 2 were in favour of the proposal and one requested that Clunes Lane be closed at Phillips Avenue and the speed hump be repositioned away from the resident’s window.


CLUNES LANE BETWEEN PHILLIPS AVENUE AND WONGA STREET, CANTERBURY – INSTALLATION OF WATTS PROFILE SPEED HUMPS

Comments • Closing Clunes Lane is not an option. The lane has been re-inspected and the position

of the speed hump nearest to Phillips Avenue will be moved away from the resident’s window (2 Phillips Avenue).

• The 85th percentile traffic speed of 39 km/h in Clunes Lane is a little high for a service lane with a narrow width of 4.9m. (Previously, two Watts profile speed humps were installed in Clunes Lane between Gould and Wonga Streets to address a similar problem).

• Previous inspections of the intersection of Phillips Avenue at Clunes Lane have also revealed illegal parking within the statutory 10m “No Stopping” zones (both sides of the street).

Given the result of the consultation it is recommended that the 2 Watts low profile speed humps be constructed in Clunes Lane and the signposting of the “No Stopping” zones at the intersection of Phillips Avenue/Clunes Lane, proceed. (The speed hump nearest to Phillips Avenue will be positioned away from the resident’s window at 2 Phillips Avenue). It is further recommended that the cost of the work, estimated to be $2,500, be voted from the Traffic Committee Allocation. RECOMMENDATION: THAT 1. 2 Watts profile speed humps be constructed in Clunes Lane between Phillips Avenue

and Wonga Street, Canterbury, as shown on the concept plan included with the report. 2. The cost of the work, estimated to be $2,500, be voted from the Traffic Committee

Allocation. 3. The 10m “No Stopping” zones at the intersection of Phillips Avenue/Clunes Lane be

signposted, as shown on the concept plan.



Western side of Phillips Ave near Clunes Lane - outside house no.2

canterbury traffic committee€¦ · signposted at the marked pedestrian crossings in campsie...

Documents