Supplementary Agenda of Local Traffic Committee Meeting

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

6 October 2016

Item No: T1016 Item 28

Subject: Union Street, Tempe - Proposed Traffic Calming Revised Design Plans
(Marrickville Ward/Heffron)

File Ref: 16/6022/111802.16

Prepared By: Emilio Andari - Civil Engineer, Marrickville

Authorised By: Joe Di Cesare - Manager Design & Investigation, Marrickville

SUMMARY

A presentation by a resident of Union Street, Tempe was made to Council at its meeting on 27 September 2016. A number of concerns and issues were raised as part of the presentation with regards to the traffic calming proposal in Union Street. It was resolved to refer the item back to the October Local Traffic Committee meeting in order to address the resident’s concerns.

The report below addresses the issues raised through the resident’s presentation and incorporates changes to the detailed design following consideration of these issues.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the detailed design plan for a raised pedestrian crossing, a raised threshold and an at-grade threshold (including kerb blisters) and associated signs and line markings in Union Street, Tempe (as per design plan No. 5912 ‘Amendment A’) be APPROVED.

BACKGROUND

Council is proposing to construct a raised pedestrian crossing, a raised threshold and an at-grade threshold (including kerb blisters) and associated signs and line markings in Union Street, Tempe adjacent to Tempe Public School between Unwins Bridge Road and School Lane.

The design plans have been revised following consideration of issues raised during a presentation by a Union Street resident at the September, 2016 Council meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Funding of $100,000 has been allocated by Council for these works under the 2016/2017 Capital Works Program.

OFFICER COMMENTS

Design plans

Following a review of the issues raised by the resident, the following amendments have been made to the design plan. The table below addresses the issues/concerns raised by the resident.

· The northern kerb blister island opposite to property no. 52 Union Street has been shortened from 9.4m to 5.0m to assist with turning movements of larger service vehicles. It should be noted that Council garbage vehicles do not turn right from School Lane into Union Street as the existing parking restrictions prevents them from being able to perform this turning manoeuvre; and

· The existing ‘No Stopping’ (left arrow) sign on the northern side of Union Street is 3.6m west of School Lane and is to be replaced with a ‘No Stopping’ (left & right arrow) sign. In accordance with the Australian Road Rules, a ‘No Stopping’ zone is mandatory for a distance of 10 metres from an intersecting road.

Residents’ Comments	Officer’s Response
1. Concerns were raised regarding the new raised pedestrian crossing and loss of two car parking spaces. The resident highlights that parking is a premium within the area especially with the nearby school and church in Union Street. 2. Concerns of new raised threshold with landscaped kerb islands in Union Street at Unwins Bridge Road as this will reduce the line of sight for turning motorists. 3. Concerns regarding the widening the footpath in Unwins Bridge Road and providing landscaped verges as this will reduce the line of sight for turning motorists. 4. Removing the speed hump in Union Street, between Edwin Street and School Lane, and constructing a new coloured threshold and landscaped kerb islands would hinder the ability for turning motorists to safely make the right turn without obstruction. 5. The construction of a new coloured, flat threshold in Edwin Street at Union Street not necessary. 6. Resealing the road at the intersection of Edwin Street at Union Street is not necessary. 7. Raised concerns for the ‘No Parking’ restrictions out front of properties 60 & 62 Union Street and cars parking on footpaths.	1. It is acknowledged that the proposed treatments will result in the loss of two (2) on-street parking spaces adjacent to the proposed raised pedestrian crossing in Union Street. In accordance with Australian Standard (AS1742.10-2009), the design requirements for a pedestrian crossing must consist of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on approach and departure to the crossing. This is to increase visibility for pedestrians and improve safety. In this case, the crossing is located adjacent to Tempe Primary School so it important to ensure that safety is not compromised. It should be noted that the existing ‘No Stopping’ restrictions associated with the existing at-grade crossing does not comply with either Australian Standards or Australian Road Rules. 2 & 3. The design plans addressed the visibility issues in Union Street at Unwins Bridge Road by ensuring the proposed landscaping in Unwins Bridge Road does not grow taller than 0.6m in height. Also, the extension of kerb and removal of approximately 8 metres of pedestrian safety fencing paneling along Unwins Bridge Road at Union Street will provide better sight lines for queuing motorists in Union Street at Unwins Bridge Road. Pedestrians will still be prevented from crossing Unwins Bridge Road at this point as the landscaping will act as a barrier and deterrent. 4. The existing speed hump is located too close to the proposed raised pedestrian crossing therefore it has been removed and replaced with an at-grade threshold treatment which will act as an entry treatment in this case. The design of the proposed kerb blister islands have been amended to accommodate the turning path of a 6.6m long small rigid vehicle turning out of School Lane into Union Street and an 8.8m long medium rigid vehicle (i.e. waste collection truck) turning into and out of Edwin Street from Union Street. The width of the roadway at the intersection of School Lane into Union Street and vehicles parked on the opposite side of the intersection make this turn very tight at present and it should be noted that Council garbage vehicles do not turn right from School Lane into Union Street as parked vehicles prevents them from being able to perform this turning manoeuvre. In the amended plans, the northern kerb blister island opposite to property no. 52 Union Street has been shortened from 9.4m to 5.0m to assist with turning movements of larger vehicles and to maintain the existing situation regarding possible turn movements. 5 & 6. The introduction of a stenciled at-grade treatment promotes visual and physical changes i.e. pavement and material to highlight change in traffic conditions. It was identified during site investigations that the road surface was in a poor condition and a decision was made by Council’s officer to resurface the pavement in order to accommodate the stencilling works. 7. It should be noted that there is currently a section of ‘No Parking’ restrictions on the southern side of Union Street in front of properties 60 & 62 Union Street. The design plan illustrates the relocation of the signs and stem with the inclusion of statutory ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at the intersection of Union Street and Unwins Bridge Road. The ‘No Parking’ restrictions are in place to provide a pick-up and drop-off area in close proximity to the church and school. Parking on the footpath is prohibited under the Australian Road Rules, though this is an enforcement issue. Council Rangers have been notified.

Residents’ Comments

Officer’s Response

1. Concerns were raised regarding the new raised pedestrian crossing and loss of two car parking spaces. The resident highlights that parking is a premium within the area especially with the nearby school and church in Union Street.

2. Concerns of new raised threshold with landscaped kerb islands in Union Street at Unwins Bridge Road as this will reduce the line of sight for turning motorists.

3. Concerns regarding the widening the footpath in Unwins Bridge Road and providing landscaped verges as this will reduce the line of sight for turning motorists.

4. Removing the speed hump in Union Street, between Edwin Street and School Lane, and constructing a new coloured threshold and landscaped kerb islands would hinder the ability for turning motorists to safely make the right turn without obstruction.

5. The construction of a new coloured, flat threshold in Edwin Street at Union Street not necessary.

6. Resealing the road at the intersection of Edwin Street at Union Street is not necessary.

7. Raised concerns for the ‘No Parking’ restrictions out front of properties 60 & 62 Union Street and cars parking on footpaths.

1. It is acknowledged that the proposed treatments will result in the loss of two (2) on-street parking spaces adjacent to the proposed raised pedestrian crossing in Union Street. In accordance with Australian Standard (AS1742.10-2009), the design requirements for a pedestrian crossing must consist of ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on approach and departure to the crossing. This is to increase visibility for pedestrians and improve safety. In this case, the crossing is located adjacent to Tempe Primary School so it important to ensure that safety is not compromised. It should be noted that the existing ‘No Stopping’ restrictions associated with the existing at-grade crossing does not comply with either Australian Standards or Australian Road Rules.

2 & 3. The design plans addressed the visibility issues in Union Street at Unwins Bridge Road by ensuring the proposed landscaping in Unwins Bridge Road does not grow taller than 0.6m in height. Also, the extension of kerb and removal of approximately 8 metres of pedestrian safety fencing paneling along Unwins Bridge Road at Union Street will provide better sight lines for queuing motorists in Union Street at Unwins Bridge Road. Pedestrians will still be prevented from crossing Unwins Bridge Road at this point as the landscaping will act as a barrier and deterrent.

4. The existing speed hump is located too close to the proposed raised pedestrian crossing therefore it has been removed and replaced with an at-grade threshold treatment which will act as an entry treatment in this case. The design of the proposed kerb blister islands have been amended to accommodate the turning path of a 6.6m long small rigid vehicle turning out of School Lane into Union Street and an 8.8m long medium rigid vehicle (i.e. waste collection truck) turning into and out of Edwin Street from Union Street. The width of the roadway at the intersection of School Lane into Union Street and vehicles parked on the opposite side of the intersection make this turn very tight at present and it should be noted that Council garbage vehicles do not turn right from School Lane into Union Street as parked vehicles prevents them from being able to perform this turning manoeuvre. In the amended plans, the northern kerb blister island opposite to property no. 52 Union Street has been shortened from 9.4m to 5.0m to assist with turning movements of larger vehicles and to maintain the existing situation regarding possible turn movements.

5 & 6. The introduction of a stenciled at-grade treatment promotes visual and physical changes i.e. pavement and material to highlight change in traffic conditions. It was identified during site investigations that the road surface was in a poor condition and a decision was made by Council’s officer to resurface the pavement in order to accommodate the stencilling works.

7. It should be noted that there is currently a section of ‘No Parking’ restrictions on the southern side of Union Street in front of properties 60 & 62 Union Street. The design plan illustrates the relocation of the signs and stem with the inclusion of statutory ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at the intersection of Union Street and Unwins Bridge Road. The ‘No Parking’ restrictions are in place to provide a pick-up and drop-off area in close proximity to the church and school. Parking on the footpath is prohibited under the Australian Road Rules, though this is an enforcement issue. Council Rangers have been notified.

As a result of the issues raised by the resident, the design plan has been amended where it could to address concerns. However, the proposed treatments will still result in the loss of two (2) legal on-street parking spaces in Union Street due to the proposed ‘No Stopping’ restrictions and footpath widening adjacent to the new raised pedestrian crossing. It is envisaged that these measures will improve pedestrian and student safety (refer to the attached design plan No. 5912 Amendment A). All current vehicular access to adjoining properties will be retained.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

An on-site meeting was held to discuss the resident’s concerns.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the design of the proposed traffic devices and associated signs and markings (as per the attached design plan No. 5912 ‘Amendment A’) be approved, to improve pedestrian safety and traffic conditions.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩

T0916 Item 1 Union Street, Tempe - Proposed Traffic Calming Design Plans
(Marrickville Ward/Heffron) - 1 September 2016