Supplementary Agenda of Local Traffic Committee Meeting

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

5 June 2018

Item No: LTC0618 Item 19

Subject: 73 Mary Street, St Peters – S96 modification to amend Land and Environment Court Determination 2016/0030354 Condition 4 – Weekend Markets at ‘Precinct 75’

Prepared By: Jennifer Adams - Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services

Authorised By: John Stephens - Traffic and Transport Services Manager

SUMMARY

Council has received an application under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act to modify Land and Environment Court Determination Case No. 2016/0030354 dated 21 February 2017 to delete condition 4 of the determination which limits the period of consent to 12 months.

The application is referred to the Local Traffic Committee for consideration under State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 as the use constitutes a traffic generating development.

It is recommended that the comments of the Pedestrian, Cyclist and Traffic Calming Advisory Committee be referred to Council’s Development Assessment Section for consideration in determining the Development Application.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the findings of this report be received and noted.

BACKGROUND

‘Precinct 75’ is a light industrial complex consisting of 12 main buildings. It is noted that the site ‘Precinct 75’ is still currently under a planning proposal to rezone and temporary markets are an interim use on the weekends. History of the market applications to date is as follows.

On 23 December 2015 Council received a development application (DA201500743) to hold temporary weekend markets at 73 Mary Street, St Peters (‘Precinct 75’) up to 4 times a month on any given Saturday or Sunday for up to 80 stalls operating between the hours of 8.00am and 5.00pm. The markets were held without Council’s permission once in November 2015 and again in December 2015, as well as several times in early 2016. The application was withdrawn (on 30 March 2016).

A report went to the LTC on 10 March 2016 for the DA201500743 proposal. A site visit at that time revealed approximately 100 on-site parking spaces in total for ‘Precinct 75’ – 67 in the on-site car park area adjacent to Edith Street and the remaining 33 spaces spread throughout the site (the latter not being available for use during markets). It was estimated that at least 280 on-site spaces were required on market days for businesses (50), market stall owners (50) and visitors (180). It was recommended that the application be refused based on the information at hand and it was further recommended that the applicant supply a Transport and Traffic Impact Plan and a Stall Holder All Day Parking Arrangement Plan.

In May 2016 another development application was received (DA201600217) to hold similar weekend markets at 73 Mary Street, St Peters (‘Precinct 75’) monthly on Saturdays with consecutive Saturday and Sunday markets to be held quarterly during the calendar year with a capacity of 60 stalls operating between the hours of 8.00am and 5.00pm.

A report went to the LTC on 7 July 2016 for the DA201600217 proposal which was now for 60 stalls (ie. 20 less stalls) and on-site parking was stated as being 96 spaces. It was noted in that report that regardless of the number of stalls and/or market days previous traffic related concerns remained. Namely, there is insufficient parking on-site to contain the proposed activity and consequently, on any market day, there will be significant utilisation of the available on-street parking, thereby impacting directly on adjoining local residents.

A site inspection in May 2016 revealed approximately 98 vehicles parked in the Edith Street car park area and that the configuration of the carpark had changed and temporary line markings and markers were now present which did not fully conform to Australian Standards for off-street parking. It was noted that making the car parking spaces ‘smaller’ to squeeze more vehicles into the car park does not adequately address the overall lack of parking provision required for the sought market operations on the site. The off-street car park already operates at capacity on normal week days and it was estimated 85 of the proposed 96 spaces were workable. Further, a comprehensive loading/unloading plan had not been prepared for the markets.

A concern was also expressed that a clear unobstructed path of travel of not less than 4 metres wide for emergency vehicle access must be maintained throughout the site at all times to provide safe egress in case of fire or other emergency during ordinary operation of the Precinct as well as during any markets. Also, it was stated that even, with the amended application and less stalls, the markets will have a detrimental impact, especially in regards to parking as currently on-street parking in the locality on week days and weekends is at capacity with residential and local business parking.

On 5 October 2016 the application was refused. It was found by Council’s Planning Section that the application did not comply with the controls contained in Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 (MDCP 2011) in relation to the provision of car and motorcycle parking. It was stated that the development would result in an intensification of the use of the site beyond what could reasonably be supported by the existing car parking arrangements on site and that the development would result in excessive parking demand on the nearby street network and will result in unreasonable traffic impacts. Consequently the application was considered unsupportable and in view of the circumstances, refusal of the application was recommended. On 18 October 2016 Council received notice that its refusal was to be challenged in the Land Environmental Court – Proceedings No. 16/303854.

It is noted that during the investigation of DA201600217 submissions identified that a potential breach of a condition imposed as part of Determination 12268 dated 4 May 1989 for ‘Precinct 75’ requiring a specific number of car parking spaces and the carpark to be paved and line marked. This resulted in a S96 application by the Applicant (DA201600389) to modify Condition 2 by reducing the number of car parking spaces from 136 to 119 spaces and to provide 2 motorcycle spaces, 30 bicycle spaces and 2 loading zones as well as to modify the sealing of the car park surface on the subject property. The application was subsequently refused on 16 January 2017 due to the current carpark surface being unsuitable as public as it does not provide ‘a suitably smooth riding surface for vehicles and safe walking surface for pedestrians and it was considered that the reduction in car parking and retention of the gravel car park in situ is not in the public interest’. Monitoring Services is presently following this up.

The Appeal by the Applicant on 12 October 2016 in the Land and Environment Court sought upholding of the appeal by granting development consent to hold weekend markets monthly on Saturdays with consecutive Saturday and Sunday markets to be held quarterly during the calendar year, with capacity for 60 stalls to operate from 8.00am to 5.00pm at 75 Mary Street, St Peters.

Notice of Orders made by the Land and Environment Court were released on 21 February 2017 which upheld the appeal to hold weekend markets for a maximum of 60 stalls once per month on a Saturday and quarterly on a Sunday being a total of 16 days per year. The period of consent was valid for 12 months from the first market held and a S96 application to modify this consent needed to be made thereafter. It stated that 86 off-street parking spaces clearly marked must be provided (one being a mobility space), 8 bicycle spaces and 4 motorcycle parking spaces along with some requirements for weekend Parking and travel mode surveys.

Attached to the Court’s determination was a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) and a car park plan showing 86 car parking spaces in the on-site carpark. Refer to the plan below.

In accordance with Condition 4 of the Court’s consent 2016/303854 Council was notified on Friday 3 March 2017 that the first market was scheduled for Saturday 18 March 2017.

On 21 December 2017 Council received an application under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act to modify Land and Environment Court Determination Case No. 2016/0030354 dated to 21 February 2017 to delete condition 4 of the determination which limits the period of consent to 12 months. This report reviews the current situation and also reviews the Traffic summaries of the required parking surveys that were submitted to Council on 21 December 2017 and 22 January 2018. The report will also update on recent relevant traffic and parking issues in the locality generally.

It is noted that in the interim period Council has, in January 2018, installed residential permit parking restrictions in the adjoining streets of Mary and Edith Streets, St Peters as a direct result of the impact of the Precinct 75 operations and markets.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil.

DISCUSSION

Site Location

The site is located at 73 Mary Street, St Peters (‘Precinct 75’) and has street frontages on both Mary Street and Edith Street. Vehicles may access the site from a single entrance on Mary Street and two entry points on Edith Street. There is an on-site parking area accessed by Edith Street. There are currently 11 existing buildings on the site of various heights ranging from one to three storeys as well as a cottage and three residential dwellings. The surrounding land use is predominately residential, characterised by one and two storey development.

Locality map – 73 Mary Street, St Peters

Unwins Bridge Road Mary Street Edith Street

Edith Street is a two-way local residential street running northwest-southeast between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway and carries around 650 vehicles per day. At present, unrestricted parking is permitted on the north side of Edith Street and on 17 January 2018 Residential permit parking (2P 8.30am-6pm Monday to Friday 8.30am-12.30pm Saturday M4

Permit Holders Excepted) restrictions were introduced on the south side of Edith Street between Unwins Bridge Road and the driveway opposite 65 Edith Street and between No.52 Edith Street and Roberts Lane.

The carriageway in Edith Street at its western end is 7.9 metres wide and narrows down to 6.4 metres in width at its midpoint. At the southern end of Edith Street generally people park on the south side, however it has been noticed that since the introduction of the new residential

Edith Street looking north from Princes Hwy

Edith Street looking north where road narrows

Edith Street looking south from UB Rd

Edith Street looking s adjacent Precinct 75

Edith Street looking s where road narrows

Edith Street looking north to UB Rd

Permit parking restrictions some people have been parking on the north side blocking access in the street. This may in the future result in the banning of any parking on the northern side.

Mary Street is a narrow (6.4 metres) local street, operating “one-way” in a north-westerly direction from Princes Highway to Unwins Bridge Road. The street has mixed industrial and residential development and presently carries around 7,000 vehicles a day, the majority of which is through traffic from Canal Road. Some traffic calming measures in the form of light traffic (3 tonne) restrictions and three speed humps were installed in 1992 as part of the Sydenham LATM Scheme.

On the southern side of Mary Street there were 5 unrestricted parking spaces between the driveway of No.60 Mary Street and Albion Lane however these have now been converted on 17 January 2018 to ‘4P 8.30am-6pm Monday-Friday’ parking restrictions. The unrestricted parking between Rolfe Lane and the driveway to property No.71 Mary Street south side was also converted to “No Parking’. All unrestricted parking on the north side between Robert Lane and property No.71 Mary Street was also, on 17 January 2018, converted to Residential permit parking and restrictions “2P 8.30am-6pm Monday-Friday 8.30am-12.30pm Saturday – M4 Permit Holders Accepted’.

Mary Street looking south from U B Road

Mary St looking north – new 4 P parking L

Mary Street looking north from Rolfe Lane

Mary Street looking north from Princes Hwy

Unwins Bridge Road is a Regional road that generally runs in a north-south direction from May Street, St Peters in the north to Gannon Street, Tempe in the south. It has a posted speed limit of 50km/h and has one lane of traffic in each direction outside of am / pm restrictions when two lanes of traffic flow in the northerly direction for the morning peak (7am-9am) and two lanes in the southerly direction for the afternoon peak (4pm-6pm). Outside of the times specified unrestricted kerb side parking is allowed along both sides of the road. It carries around 21,500 vehicles per day.

Princes Highway is a RMS State Road that generally runs in a north-south direction and forms part of the link between Sydney in the north and the Victorian border in the south. Princes Highway carries approximately 33,800 vehicles per day and is subject to a 60km/h speed limit in the vicinity. It has two lanes in each direction with clearways allowing three lanes

between 6am and 10am northbound and between 3pm and 7pm southbound.

Public Transport

The site is located approximately 800m walking distance from Sydenham Station and 1.1km from St Peters Railway Station.

The proposal

On 21 December 2017 Council received an application under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act to modify Land and Environment Court Determination Case No. 2016/0030354 dated to 21 February 2017 to delete condition 4 of the determination which limits the period of consent to 12 months. The 12 month period was to allow an assessment of impacts prior to consent being extended or made permanent. Essentially, this means that the Court was asked to issue a development consent subject to conditions.

The development consent included the following general conditions and specific conditions:

· The consent is valid for 12 months from the date of the first market held. The applicant is required to lodge an application to modify the consent prior to the expiration of that time in order to continue holding markets beyond 12 months;

· The markets are permitted to occur once per month on a Saturday and quarterly on a Sunday being a total of 16 days per year (up to 60 stalls);

· Deliveries and erection of infrastructure and all other works associated with the preparation for each event being carried out between the hours of 7.30am and 9.30am on the day of the event;

· The hours of operation of each market being restricted to between the hours of 8.00am and 5.00pm;

· All dismantling, removal of infrastructure and cleaning of the area being completed by 6.30pm on the day of the event;

· During the operation of the markets the applicant is required to carry out parking and travel mode surveys to establish whether sufficient parking has been provided on site to service the tenants and customers of the markets (12 surveys in total);

· A minimum of 2 staff being employed to control the behaviour of persons attending each event and the dispersal of patrons from the area. The crowd control staff must be on duty between the hours of 7.30am and 5.30pm on the day of the event.

6. Car parking

Eighty six (86) off-street car parking spaces must be provided, clearly marked and maintained at all times in accordance with the standards contained within Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 - Parking.

Reason: To ensure practical off-street car parking is available for the use of the premises.

7. Accessible car parking

One (1) of the eighty six (86) car parking spaces required under condition 7 of this consent must be provided and marked as disabled car parking space.

Reason: To ensure that disabled car parking spaces are provided and marked accordingly and that disabled persons are advised and directed to such parking.

8. Bicycle storage

Bicycle storage with the capacity to accommodate a minimum of eight (8) bicycles must be provided, paved and maintained at all times in accordance with the standards contained within Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 – Parking; as shown on the approved Plan. There must be a clear line of sight to the bicycle parking from the main car parking area and weather protection for the bicycle parking location is to be provided.

Reason: To ensure sufficient bicycle storage facilities are provided on the site and to provide adequate surveillance of the bicycle storage area

9. Motorcycle parking

A minimum of four (4) motorcycle parking spaces must be provided and maintained at all times as shown on the approved plan in accordance with the standards contained within Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 - Parking.

Reason: To ensure sufficient motorcycle parking is provided on the site.

10. Car park design

All parking spaces and turning areas thereto being provided in accordance with the design requirements set out within Part 2.10 of Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 - Parking, and must be used exclusively for parking and not for storage or any other purpose.

Reason: To ensure adequate manoeuvrability to all car parking spaces and that the spaces are used exclusively for parking.

17. Emergency vehicle access

The entry/exit point at Edith Street must be kept clear for emergency vehicles by parking attendants and crowd control staff during the events. This must be monitored by parking attendants and/or crowd control staff. Internal access roads must at all times be suitably wide to allow an emergency vehicle to travel over them.

Reason: To ensure the entry/exit point along Edith Street is kept clear for emergency vehicles in an emergency.

Principally, it has to be determined whether the impact(s) of the operation of the markets are now acceptable or not and whether on-site parking provision is adequate so as to not adversely impact local amenity by any excessive parking demand on the nearby street network.

Parking Provision Requirement

The site is located in Parking Area 3 under Part 2.10 of MDCP 2011. Parking area 3 is characterised by being located more than 400 metres from a railway station, not within a business centre and where parking is least constrained within the LGA. Whilst parking in the area is not constrained by timed or ticketed parking, there is considered to be a high demand for parking in the locality due to the nature of the residential typology.

‘Markets’ are not a land use specified in the parking provisions table under Control C1 of Part 2.10.5 of MDCP 2011. Notwithstanding, Control C2 of Part 2.10.5 of MDCP 2011 specifies the following for uses not prescribed in the parking provisions table:

“Calculation of parking provision for uses not specified in Table 1 above is to be undertaken on merit, guided by the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments rates reduced by 30%, 25% and 20% for Parking Areas 1, 2 & 3 respectively”

RMS’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments states a minimum parking provision of 2 spaces per stall (or a desirable rate of 2.5 spaces per stall), excluding stall holders. 60 stalls would therefore, alone, require a minimum of 120 spaces for visitors (and a desirable rate of 150 spaces). Adjusted in accordance with Control C2 above minimum parking provision would equate to 96 (desirable rate would be 120) on-site spaces for visitors to the markets.

It is noted that these rates are based on a mode split for cars of 0.80. The site is located approximately 800 metres from the nearest railway station, being Sydenham Station and approximately 320 metres from a regular bus service to the city located on Princes Highway. As such, it is considered likely that a high proportion of mode share of patrons to the site are likely to come by car.

It is also noted that, on any market day, in addition to market visitors, stall holders and helpers, security/ management/ traffic controllers some tenants of the light industrial / creative industries / retail uses within Precinct 75 (approx.13,000m²) as well as their customers may also be on site at the same time therefore any estimate of minimum parking provision requirements need to be inclusive.

Thus, all users would include the 60 stall holders, plus their stall staff, who would require at least 35 spaces. The parking requirement for ‘Precinct 75’ alone is estimated to be around 130 spaces for the existing approved uses based on the parking requirement for light industries of 1 space per 200m² GFA for customers and staff and/or business premises of 1 car parking space per 50m² GFA (13,000m² GFA). The original development consent required 136 on-site parking spaces. Moreover, all businesses may not operate on the weekend Saturday so a realistic on-site parking provision to accommodate those tenants that do work, and their customers, could be say 30% of the minimum requirement, ie.39 spaces.

Stall visitors 96 spaces

Stall holders + staff 35 spaces

Tenants/customers Precinct 75 39 spaces

Therefore, on any market day the minimum on-site parking provision requirement would be around 170 spaces (96+35+39) so as to contain the generated parking demand on-site.

The available parking supply on-site during markets is 85 spaces, a shortfall of 85 spaces (100% more) which would have to be accommodated on the surrounding street network. That is, half of the generated parking demand for the Precinct 75 site while the markets are on would be able to be contained on-site.

Reducing the number of stalls would offset the spill over effect and may be acceptable. For example, using the above methodology and 45 stalls a parking provision of 137 spaces on-site would be required, a shortfall / spill over of 52 (60% more). This amount could be absorbed more readily into the surrounding on-street parking provision. It is noted that that it was said average take up of stalls was around 43 so this is not an unreasonable outlook.

Thus, as previously identified, any intensification of the use of the Precinct 75 site beyond what could reasonably be supported by the existing car parking arrangements on-site will result in excessive parking demand on the nearby street network impacting local traffic conditions and that is not satisfactory. 60 stalls create too much pressure on local residents.

Moreover, it is noted that the ‘M4’ residential parking permit scheme has recently been expanded in the streets surrounding Precinct 75 due to the high parking demand around the Precinct 75 site. This will be discussed further later in this report.

On-site Parking Provision

The ‘final’ car parking layout of the approved on-site car park, as it appears in the Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for Precinct 75 markets submitted to the Court, is reproduced in the diagram below. It shows 85 on-site parking spaces identified as being available on market days for all users.

Provisions as prescribed by the Land and Environment Courts’ conditions of consent for bicycle (8 spaces), motorcycle (4 spaces) and accessible parking (1 space) are acceptable provided they are available on site as required at all times during any market operation and in accordance with the standards contained within Part 2.10 of Marrickville DCP 2011 – Parking.

It is noted that the conditions set by the Court for the on-site car park required the spaces to be clearly marked and that to date, via observation of an aerial photograph taken on 11 April 2018, has not been completed.

Further, no specific stall holders parking management plan has been submitted allotting any of the on-site car parking provision solely to stall holders.

Supplied Traffic & Parking Surveys

Part of the conditions of consent for the markets to continue required that the applicant carry out parking and travel mode surveys to establish whether sufficient parking has been provided on site to service the tenants and customers of the markets. 12 surveys in total were required.

The applicant’s Traffic & Parking study report dated 22 January 2018 states that the required surveys have been completed, other than the survey of 2 Saturdays; being one market day and one non-market day. They also state “It is considered that the surveys completed to date provide adequate evidence…as presented previously…that the markets have no unacceptable impact on the on-street parking supply in the surrounds of the site.” They also state that the deficit in surveys is a result of inclement weather which resulted in the cancellation of a market day and no additional markets are planned at this time.

A site visit by a Council Officer on Friday 4 May 2018 checked the on-street parking inventory supplied for the Parking ultisation studies within 400 metres of the Precinct 75 site. The number of parking spaces on-street were surveyed and regulatory intersection10 metre statutory ‘No Stopping’ distances and driveway crossings/garages were taken into account and deemed as legally no parking areas. It was found that the survey area (not including the car park) contained 515 available spaces compared to 556 as per the applicants’ survey data.

The parking survey figures for Saturday 11 November 2017 at 11am indicated 64 vehicles were on-site (98% occupancy) and 503 vehicles in the whole survey area (79% overall occupancy or 85% occupancy using Council Officer’s on-street provision). Highest given occupancy rate in the applicant’s Traffic report dated 21 December 2017 was 74 off-street and 477 on-street which equates to an on-site occupancy of 113% and on-street occupancy of 86% (93% respectively).

It is noted that when any parking occupancy reaches 85% it is considered at its optimum level; once parking occupancy exceeds this level, many potential parkers struggle to find the remaining vacancies and will either leave an area or will circulate for an available parking space. Parking occupancy is a measure of the proportion of available on-street parking resources being utilised at a given point in time. The remaining amount of parking that is not utilised is the estimated spare capacity, which in residential areas impacts on local amenity if spare capacity is low.

Notwithstanding, It is noted that the applicant has fulfilled most of the Court’s instructions in regards to the required surveys however bottom line lies with the local residents and whether the operation of the markets continue to have an impact on their amenity. In general, the design of on-street parking supply in residential areas should aim to satisfy resident parking demands. This should be seen as an important element in broader objectives to maintain the amenity of residential areas.

Competition between resident parking and other local parking demand generators (retail / commercial / industrial / educational / sporting) should be considered in the management of residential parking supply in the context of imposing reasonable limits on residential parking entitlements in each zone.

As previously stated Council recently installed an expanded ‘M4’ residential parking permit scheme in the streets surrounding Precinct 75 subsequent to an identified high parking demand around the Precinct 75 site and a need as expressed by local residents. External consultants prepared the parking review report which will now be discussed.

Sydenham / St Peters Parking Implementation Review 2016/17

In 2017, Council developed a parking strategy for Sydenham / St Peters using feedback from the community and parking occupancy data. A report went to Council’s Local Traffic Committee (LTC) on 5 October 2017 and the recommendations of that report were adopted by Council on 24 October 2017. The improvements outlined in the strategy were implemented in January 2018. A number of recommendations approved related specifically to parking in the Precinct 75 / St Peters area including Mary Street, Edith Street and Roberts Lane, St Peters.

The relevant recommendations adopted by Council are listed below and shown in diagram form / map image:

Edith Street – proposed RPP restrictions

Mary Street – Proposed changes

Robert Street – proposed changes

In the consultant’s final report (‘Sydenham – St Peters Parking Review’ - September 2017) it was stated that resident parking restrictions proposed for Edith, Mary and Roberts Streets cover weekdays and Saturday to accommodate the impact of the Precinct 75 retail activity and Saturday markets. The proposed restriction for Edith, Mary and Roberts Streets is 2P Permit Holders Excepted 8:30am-6:00pm Monday to Friday and 8:30am-12:30pm Saturday – Area M4. All other proposed resident parking is for Monday to Friday consistent with the existing streets in proximity to those now further recommended for resident parking restrictions, being 2P Permit Holders Excepted 8:30am-6:00pom Monday to Friday – Area M4.

Chapter 11 of the consultants’ final report related specifically to ‘Precinct 75’. The report noted that the streets in the immediate proximity to Precinct 75 which are most impacted by its commercial outlets and weekend markets include Mary Street, Edith Street and Roberts Street and that the proposed resident parking restrictions in those streets will be aimed at reducing the day to day impact of Precinct 75 operations and market days.

Parking surveys were carried out on Wednesday 7 December 2016 however it was noted that the markets were not operating at that time so no counts were taken to determine their impact. However it was noted that the counts taken can form a baseline. The results to those surveys can be found in that report. Particulars regarding the individual streets are detailed as follows:

· Edith Street - Parking surveys undertaken in December 2016 showed that the southern side of Edith Street with a supply of 44 spaces was occupied at over 80% throughout the survey period and peaked at 98% at 12 noon. The parking survey results indicated there was a lower occupancy on the northern side throughout the day with about 50-60% occupancy peaking at 65% at 8am. The combined occupancy for both sides of the street is 74% or more throughout the day and this is deemed a reasonable level to recommend resident parking in Edith Street.

· Mary Street - Parking surveys across the area in December 2016 showed on the northern side of Mary Street where there is a supply of 34 spaces, the occupancy recorded throughout the day was at a maximum at 8am (91%) and reached 88% at 3pm, reverting back to 62% at 6pm. It was noted that if resident parking were to be considered, since it is largely one side of the street parking only, that would effectively restrict all but eligible permit holders from parking in the street including non-eligible residents. The residents of Mary Street have sought resident parking via the community survey, correspondence to Council and via a petition that included residents from Edith and Roberts Street. Considerations for implementing resident parking in Mary Street are that it is one way and there is parking only on one side of the street for a greater part of the street… There is little off street parking available to Mary Street residents with few driveways and no rear lane access.

· Roberts Street - Parking surveys undertaken on 7 December 2016 showed that there was capacity in Roberts Street throughout the day with occupancy varying between 50% and 70% and reaching 70% peak at 3pm and 6pm.

A quote from that report elaborates on the effects of the commercial operations of Precinct 75:

“Those residents who live in the closest proximity to Precinct 75 are impacted most directly and for the longest time periods as they are affected by business related parking. There are sections of some streets, and Mary Street and Edith Street in particular that are subject to impact from day to day activities within Precinct 75 and will be further impacted in the event of weekend markets. Proposed resident parking restrictions in Edith, Mary and Roberts Streets will be aimed at reducing the day to day impact of Precinct 75 operations and market days as well as other reported issues such as the impact of the Princes Highway businesses and long stay parkers accessing the airport.”

Subsequent to the report, as stated, Council adopted the final recommendations and the new residential permit parking restrictions were installed in early 2018.

Loading/Unloading

The Court’s conditions for loading and unloading, and timed bump-in and bump-out times prescribed appear very tight however are acceptable if abided by.

In relation to stall holders parking arrangements and loading operations the applicant’s TMP says:

“Parking within the Edith Street car park is available to all stall owners who utilise a private vehicle for the purpose of setting up their stall.

The Edith Street car park is a “first come first served” allocation (i.e. car spaces are not designated to any visitor, stall owner or tenant of Precinct 75), with the exception that parking spaces labelled as “Small Car” are to be allocated to stall owners only.” and

“Stall owners are to utilise either the 10 minute loading zone within the Edith Street car park or access the market area via either Mary Street or Edith Street between 7;30-9:30am.

The Mary Street access will be closed to vehicular movements from 9:30am to 5:00pm.

Stall owner vehicles are to be restricted to small trucks (equivalent to a 6.4m Small Rigid Vehicle (SRV)). Some stall holders will be permitted to park within the stall holders area either as part of their stall set-up or via a prior agreement with Market Day organisers.”

It is noted that it is preferable to have a specific stall holders all day parking management plan, which shows a specific dedicated area for stall holders to park their vehicles for the duration of the markets.

Further, it is unsure how the organisers of the markets will be able to police the requirement that stall owner vehicles be restricted to small trucks (equivalent to a 6.4m Small Rigid Vehicle (SRV) only.

Traffic Generation

RMS’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments gives the following rates for markets - 18 trips per stall between 8.00am – 3.00pm (open for 7 hours) and peak hour vehicle trips of 4 trips per stall. 60 stalls thus would generate approximately 1,080 vehicle trips daily and 240 peak hour vehicle trips.

It is noted that it was previously noted in Council’s Traffic report to LTC that 60 stalls generating 240 vehicle trips in the peak hour would most likely result in congestion on both Mary Street and Edith Street, St Peters and possibly extend beyond onto Unwins Bridge Road. In addition., the eastern end of Edith Street is narrow and vehicles’ trying to pass each other when vehicles are parked does raise safety concerns.

The applicant’s Traffic report dated 22 February 2016 reasoned that 1.65 trips per stall is an acceptable traffic generating rate and then peak hour vehicle trips would be some 99 vehicle trips (opposed to 240). The report went on to list the worst Level of Service (LoS), during the 13 February 2016 market day survey, at ‘C’ for the intersection performance of Unwins Bridge Road and Edith Street (for the right turn from Edith Street between 11.15am to 12.15pm).

Level of Service ‘C’ indicates generally restricted flow that remains stable but with significant interactions with others in the traffic stream. The general level of comfort and convenience declines noticeably at this level. It remains however, that even with a rate of 1.65 peak hour trips per stall – 99 vehicle trips added to an already congested intersection just lengthens the inherent delay experienced by the most disadvantaged movement.

Thus, any additional vehicles (whether 240 or 99 in the peak hour) in and out of the Unwins Bridge Road and Edith Street intersection will impact its operational capacity and longer delays will occur reducing amenity. It is noted that no improvements were forthcoming and/or detailed to improve intersection performance.

A review of the last 5 years of Roads and Maritime Services’ (RMS) recorded crash data (July 2012 to June 2017) revealed four crashes (3 injury) at the intersection of Unwins Bridge Road and Edith Street and four crashes (3 injury) at the signalised intersection of Unwins Bridge Road and Mary Street, St Peters. As it stands, both intersections could be regarded as being ‘eligible’ Blackspot intersections, that is they both fit the criteria of 3 injury crashes each.

Emergency Access

A clear unobstructed 4 metre wide path of travel throughout the site is recommended to be maintained at all times for emergency vehicle access, in order to provide safe egress in case of fire or other emergency.

To date, no plan has been sighted outlining that a 4 metre wide path through the market site area can be achieved while the market operations are on. The TMP supplied mentions the Emergency vehicle procedure however concern remains over the capacity of the site, with

market stalls in place, to allow a 4 metre wide access path throughout the site for emergency vehicles for the duration of any market event.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Consultation/notification regarding the proposal would normally be undertaken by Council's Development and Planning Services as part of the development application process.

CONCLUSION

Concerns remain that with 60 stalls (in addition to ordinary Precinct 75 operations on any market day) insufficient on-site parking is available to contain the market activity (and/or ‘pop-up stall’ operations) and consequently there is significant over spill of parking into adjoining streets utilising any available on-street parking, thereby impacting directly on the amenity of local residents.

Even with the recent Council installed resident permit parking restrictions in surrounding local streets adjacent to Precinct 75 any over spill will add further pressure on any parking demand generated by the markets in that visitors to the markets / stall holders / tenants / patrons wishing to park in local streets may be pushed further afield to secure parking and/or park unlawfully.

To a degree the new resident permit parking restrictions protect local residents from any inherent over spill parking demand, however, concerns remain also about the impact the market operations have on the adjoining road network. The intersection of Unwins Bridge Road and Edith Street suffers from unacceptable traffic congestion now and the influx of additional traffic into the area may escalate safety in the locality. This intersection already has a poor crash record and intersection performance levels show it’s at capacity now, add market activity and traffic congestion escalates. No improvements to this intersection have been suggested or forthcoming.

Thus, the proposal to continue the markets with 60 stalls is not supported because of the following issues:

· the market operations do not comply with Council’s parking requirements;

· the markets result in an intensification of the use of the site beyond what could reasonably be supported by the existing on-site car parking arrangements;

· the markets result in an excessive parking demand on the adjoining street network and add to localized traffic congestion;

· the existing on-site car park had not been, to date, “clearly marked” out;

· no stall holders all day parking management plan has been submitted; and

· it is uncertain whether a clear unobstructed 4 metre wide path of travel is achievable through the site, when the stalls are in place, for the duration of the market operations.

Clearly, there is insufficient on-site parking to contain the use and consequently, on any market day, neighbouring streets are parked out at the detriment of local residents. However, in acknowledging that the markets are a temporary use (until the site is redeveloped) and restricted to 16 days in one year it is considered reasonable to say that if stall numbers were reduced to 45 it would sufficiently reduce the parking impact and in combination with the recently introduced residential permit parking restrictions would be considered satisfactory.

It is recommended that the above traffic related comments be forwarded to Council’s Development Assessment Section.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil.