Agenda of Local Traffic Committee

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Minutes of Meeting held on 14 April 2025

Meeting commenced at 11:03 AM

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY BY CHAIRPERSON

I acknowledge the Gadigal and Wangal people of the Eora nation on whose country we are meeting today, and their elders past and present.

COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT

Victor Macri	Councillor –Midjuburi - Marrickville Ward (Chair)
Liz Atkins	Councillor – Damun - Stanmore Ward
Bill Holliday	Representative for Kobi Shetty MP, Member for Balmain
Miriama Tamata	Representative for Jenny Leong MP, Member for Newtown
Nina Fard	Transport for NSW (TfNSW)

NON VOTING MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE

Michael Takla	Representative for Transit Systems
Jason Scoufis	IWC’s Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager
Sunny Jo	IWC’s Coordinator Traffic Engineering Services (North)
George Tsaprounis	IWC’s Coordinator Traffic Engineering Services (South)
Christy Li	IWC’s Business Administration Officer

VISITORS

Rebecca Bestic	Public Speaker (Item 11)
Resident Of 26 Empire Street	Public Speaker (Item 12)
James Pullar	Public Speaker (Item 13)
George Piazza	Public Speaker (Item 13)
Bernhard Huber	Public Speaker (Item 14)
Jon Farry	Public Speaker (Item 14)

APOLOGIES:

Sgt Charles Buttrose	NSW Police – Leichhardt Police Area Command
Graeme McKay	Representative for Jo Haylen MP, Member for Summer Hill

DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:

Nil.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

That the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee held on Monday, 17 March 2025 be confirmed.

MATTERS ARISING FROM COUNCIL’S RESOLUTION OF MINUTES

Nil.

LTC0425(1) Item 1 Inner West LGA - Proposal for GoGet car share parking spaces (All wards, all electorates, all PACs)

SUMMARY

A request has been received from a GoGet Car Share representative for the installation of Fifteen (15) on-street dedicated ‘Car Share’ parking spaces for existing floating car share vehicles around the Inner West. Due to community feedback and opposition to one location only fourteen of the fifteen nominated car share spaces are recommended for installation.

Officers Recommendation:

That the following ‘No Parking Authorised Car Share Vehicle Expected, Area GOGET’ restrictions be approved:

1. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ restriction sign on the northern side of Albert Parade east of Frederick Street, Ashfield/

2. A 3.5m wide angled parking space on the western side of Nelson Street, Annadale, immediately south of the driveway of No.22 Nelson Street. To minimise the impact on the adjacent driveway, a small GoGet vehicle allocation is proposed.

3. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ restriction sign on the southern side of Alt Street west of Charlotte Street, adjacent to side boundary of No.92 Charlotte Street, Ashfield.

4. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign on northern side of Thomas Street east of Edwin Street, Ashfield (adjacent to side boundary of No.45 Edwin Street) after the kerb blister.

5. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ restriction sign on the eastern side of Burfitt Street south Allen Street, adjacent to side boundary of No. 102 Allen Street, Leichhardt.

6. A 6.6m restriction in the first legal parking space on the western side of George Street south of Treadgold Street Road, Leichhardt, adjacent to side boundary of No. 30-40 George Street, Leichhardt.

7. A 5.5m restriction in the first legal parking space on the western side of Justin Street south of O’Neill Street, Lilyfield, adjacent to side boundary of No. 29 O'Neill Street, Lilyfield.

8. A 5.5m restriction in the first legal parking space on the eastern side of Harrison Street north of Marrickville Road, Marrickville (adjacent to the side boundary of 343 Marrickville Road). The statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign will also be included 10m from the intersection of Harrison Street from Marrickville Road.

9. A 5.5m restriction in the first space after statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign on the eastern side of Wemyss Street south of Newington Road (adjacent to the side boundary of 70 Newington Road), Marrickville.

10. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ restriction sign on the western side of Station Street north of Enmore Road (adjacent to the side boundary of 47 Enmore Road, Newtown.

11. A 2.5m wide restriction in the first 90° angle parking space after the ‘Mobility’ parking space on the western side of Middleton Street north of Newington Road, Petersham.

12. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign on southern side of May Street east of Applebee Street, St Peters.

13. A 5.5m restriction in the first legal parking space on the first legal parking space on the western side of Bruce Street south of Albany Road, Stanmore (adjacent to the side boundary of 147 Albany Road). The statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign will also be included 10m from the intersection of Bruce Street and Albany Road.

14. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign on western side of Holt Street north of Cavendish Street (adjacent to boundary of No.16 Holt Street) after the kerb blister, Stanmore.

DISCUSSION:

The Chairperson tabled in some correspondence received from a resident regarding point 11 of the recommendation. The resident noted that they opposed the recommendation to have a GOGET carshare restriction in Middleton Street due to the existing parking issues and pressures on the street. The resident noted that there is already limited parking available on Middleton Street, and residents often compete for parking spaces with the students and teachers from the nearby Newington College. It was noted that the parking issues are often exacerbated during school sports days. The resident notes that although they have off-street parking, they often experience people parking across their driveway and are unable to access their property.

The Representative for TfNSW requested a copy of the correspondence sent in by the resident.

The Chairperson raised concerns regarding what processes are in place for carshare companies to follow before Council can approve a carshare space. The Chairperson questioned whether the process should be similar to Council’s requirements for Resident Parking Scheme (RPS) investigations, it was noted that the carshare companies do the community consultation themselves, and often, the response rates from the consultation are low.

Council Officers noted that as Resident Parking Schemes usually affect the whole street, Council requires a minimum number of responses to be received to determine what the majority of the residents of the street want. It was noted that with carshare proposals, it is usually just one parking space that is affected, which is why the response rate is usually lower as there is less direct impact to the people in the surrounding area. Council Officers also noted that the carshare operators also often do community consultation a little further than the required area as a marketing strategy to advertise their carshare business to the nearby residents. Council Officers noted that the guidelines for Resident Parking Schemes may not be required due to the lower impact of the proposal when compared with Resident Parking Schemes.

The Chairperson noted that his concerns regarding the consultation processes and questioned if Council oversees their processes. Council Officers advised that Council liaise with the carshare operators and review their draft letters before they are sent out to the residents. Council Officers noted that they provide guidelines on what needs to be reported back to Council, i.e. how many responses were sent and how many responses were received etc. as well as the consultation parameters. Council Officers also noted that the carshare operators also provide survey data regarding their proposed carshare spots.

The Chairperson noted that there should be a better system in place for the community consultation process for the proposed carshare spaces and suggested the possibility of the carshare operators doing community consultation via door knocking to ensure a clearer response is provided.

Council Officers questioned that if the surveys provide the details of the person undertaking the survey and whether they are directly impacted by the parking space. It was noted that survey submissions were submitted to a website, and the person providing feedback could either choose to supply their details or do so anonymously.

Councillor Atkins requested the proposed carshare space in Wemyss Street south of Newington Road be reviewed due to similar objections received as tabled earlier by the resident regarding Middleton Street.

The Chairperson suggested amending the recommendation to remove parts 9 and 11 in the officer's recommendation relating to the approval of the carshare space on the eastern side of Wemyss Street south of Newington Road (adjacent to the side boundary of 70 Newington Road), Marrickville and the carshare space on the western side of Middleton Street north of Newington Road, Petersham.

The Committee members agreed with the amended recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the following ‘No Parking Authorised Car Share Vehicle Expected, Area GOGET’ restrictions be approved:

1. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ restriction sign on the northern side of Albert Parade east of Frederick Street, Ashfield/

7. A 5.5m restriction in the first legal parking space on the western side of Justin Street south of O’Neill Street, Lilyfield, adjacent to side boundary of No. 29 O'Neill Street, Lilyfield.

9. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ restriction sign on the western side of Station Street north of Enmore Road (adjacent to the side boundary of 47 Enmore Road, Newtown.

10. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign on southern side of May Street east of Applebee Street, St Peters.

11. A 5.5m restriction in the first legal parking space on the first legal parking space on the western side of Bruce Street south of Albany Road, Stanmore (adjacent to the side boundary of 147 Albany Road). The statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign will also be included 10m from the intersection of Bruce Street and Albany Road.

12. A 5.5m restriction in the first parking space after the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ sign on western side of Holt Street north of Cavendish Street (adjacent to boundary of No.16 Holt Street) after the kerb blister, Stanmore.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 2 Cobar Street at Old Canterbury Road, Dulwich Hill – Proposed Kerb Extensions and Kerb Ramps - Design Plan 10334A (Djarrawunang-Ashfield Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West PAC)

SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety for pedestrians and other road users in Cobar Street, Dulwich Hill at its intersection with Old Canterbury Road by constructing kerb extensions and two kerb ramps. The works aim to improve pedestrian safety by better defining pedestrian crossing points and reducing the crossing width.

Officers Recommendation:

That the detailed design plan for the proposed new kerb extensions and kerb ramps in Cobar Street at its intersection with Old Canterbury Road, Dulwich Hill and associated signs and line markings (as per Design Plan No.10334A) be approved.

DISCUSSION:

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the detailed design plan for the proposed new kerb extensions and kerb ramps in Cobar Street at its intersection with Old Canterbury Road, Dulwich Hill and associated signs and line markings (as per Design Plan No.10334A) be approved.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 3 Gower Street, Summer Hill - Proposed Kerb Extensions (Djarrawunang-Ashfield Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Burwood PAC.)

SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety in Gower Street, Summer Hill, proposing both sides kerb extension, pits, and new stormwater pipelines along with a set kerb ramps in Gower Street at its intersection with Sloane Street. The proposal aims to improve pedestrian and motorist safety by better defining safe pedestrian crossing points and addresses pedestrian safety and driver behaviour at this location.

Officers Recommendation:

That the detailed design plan (10327) for proposed new kerb extensions to the corners of Gower Street at Sloane Street, with associated pram ramps, signs, line marking, and drainage (as shown in Attachment 1) be approved.

DISCUSSION:

The Representative for Transport for NSW requested that the BB line marking be modified to comply with the relevant delineation guidelines.

The Committee agreed with the amended recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 4 Mary Street, Lilyfield - Proposed Raised Pedestrian Crossing (Baludarri-Balmain Ward/Balmain Electorate/Leichhardt PAC

SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety for pedestrians in Mary Street, Lilyfield by constructing a new raised pedestrian crossing and kerb extensions in Mary Street at Perry Street. The proposal aims to improve pedestrian and motorist safety by formalising a pedestrian crossing point, improving pedestrian access to existing Bus Stop in Mary Street, and links to footpath to the Orange Grove Public School.

This project was identified as one of the priority projects in Council’s Capital Works program.

It is proposed to replace the existing raised threshold in Mary Street, Lilyfield and replace with a raised pedestrian crossing including landscaped kerb extensions near the crossing.

The proposed crossing will result in no loss of legal on-street parking.

Officers Recommendation:

That the attached detailed design plan (No.10336) for the proposed new raised pedestrian crossing and kerb extension on Mary Street, Lilyfield at Perry Street be approved.

DISCUSSION:

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the attached detailed design plan (No.10336) for the proposed new raised pedestrian crossing and kerb extension on Mary Street, Lilyfield at Perry Street be approved.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 5 Final Draft Annandale LATM Study (Baludarri-Balmain Ward/Balmain Electorate/Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

Council has prepared the final draft Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) study to address key community concerns about traffic, pedestrian and cycling facilities in the Annandale LATM precinct area.

The recommendations aim to align with Council policies and strategies, with an emphasis on improving pedestrian and cyclist movements, whilst retaining safe and acceptable traffic volume and speeds in local streets.

Officers Recommendation:

1. That the final draft Annandale Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Study be endorsed for community consultation.

2. The report be placed on Public Exhibition, providing a minimum 28 days for community feedback and the results be reported back to the Traffic Committee.

DISCUSSION:

Council Officers noted that they had received feedback from Transport for NSW advising that the Wells Street and Whites Creek Lane ‘Shared Zones’ will require a ‘Road Safety Audit’ to be undertaken and that the proposal for the 3-tonne load limit restriction in John Street, Hill Street and Emma Street will need to be approved by Transport for NSW prior to implementation.

Council Officers also noted that on page 67 of the agenda, the dot point ‘Request TfNSW install a 6-metre length of No Stopping 7am-10am, 3pm-6pm Mon-Fri,’ should read ‘Request TfNSW install a 6-metre length of No Stopping 7am-10am, 3pm-6pm Mon-Fri on the eastern side of Johnston Street, north of Piper Street South.’

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the final draft Annandale Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Study be endorsed for community consultation.

2. The report be placed on Public Exhibition, providing a minimum 28 days for community feedback and the results be reported back to the Traffic Committee.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 6 Darling Street at Nelson Street, Rozelle- Proposed Kerb Extensions & Relocation of Mobility Parking (Baludarri-Balmain Ward/Balmain Electorate/Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety by providing a new landscaped kerb extension and modify the existing accessible parking arrangements at the intersection of Darling Street and Nelson Street, Rozelle. The site is adjacent to the Hannaford Community Centre, which offers a range of welling and social activities for people 55 and over. The proposal aims to improve access to the Hannaford Centre and the surrounding retail shops, including road safety for pedestrians and motorists. This proposal was identified as one of the recommendations from the Rozelle North and Balmain Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) studies.

This proposal will result in the loss of approximately 3m length Motor bike Parking zone.

Officers Recommendation:

That the attached detailed design plan (Design Plan No.10322) for the proposed relocation of a mobility parking space, kerb extensions and associated signposting and linemarking on Darling Street at Nelson Street, Rozelle be approved.

DISCUSSION:

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 7 Allen Street, Leichhardt - Proposed Raised Pedestrian Crossing (Gulgadya-Leichhardt Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Burwood PAC)

SUMMARY

Council is planning to enhance pedestrian safety at the intersection of Allen Street and Norton Street by constructing a new Raised Pedestrian Crossing on Allen Street west of Norton Street with kerb blisters on both the approach and departure sides of the proposed crossing. The proposal aims to improve pedestrian accessibility along the Norton Street shopping area and improve safety for pedestrians and vehicle conflicts at this location.

Officers Recommendation:

1. That the installation of a raised pedestrian crossing on Allen Street at Norton Street, Leichhardt be supported in-principle and included in Council’s Capital Works program subject to detailed design investigations and community consultation.

2. That the detailed design for the proposed raised pedestrian crossing be brought back to the Traffic Committee for consideration.

DISCUSSION:

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

2. That the detailed design for the proposed raised pedestrian crossing be brought back to the Traffic Committee for consideration.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 8 Myrtle Street, Leichhardt - Proposed 10km/H Shared Zone and Line-Marked Parking Bays (Gulgadya -Leichhardt/Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

Council has prepared a detailed design plan for a 10 km/hr Shared Zone and marked footpath parking for Myrtle Street, Leichhardt (between Elswick Street and Ivory Street). The proposal aims to improve safety for pedestrians and motorists and was developed through previous community consultation to formalise parking on the footpath within marked parking bays, whilst maintaining a clear travel lane and improving pedestrian amenity.

Officers Recommendation:

1. That the attached detailed design plan (No. 10311) for the Proposed 10km/h Shared Zone and associated linemarking and signage in Myrtle Street between Elswick and Ivory Street, Leichhardt be approved, subject to TfNSW approval of the reduced speed limit.

2. That a review be undertaken 6 months after the implementation of the 10km/h Shared Zone in Myrtle Street, Leichhardt.

DISCUSSION:

The Representative for Transport for NSW advised that a Road Safety Audit will need to be undertaken as part of the project and submitted to TfNSW.

The Committee members agreed with the amended recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the attached detailed design plan (No. 10311) for the Proposed 10km/h Shared Zone and associated linemarking and signage in Myrtle Street between Elswick and Ivory Street, Leichhardt be approved, subject to TfNSW approval of the reduced speed limit and undertaking a Road Safety Audit and submitted to TfNSW.

2. That a review be undertaken 6 months after the implementation of the 10km/h Shared Zone in Myrtle Street, Leichhardt.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 9 Review of pedestrian crossings in various locations in Marrickville (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward/Inner West PAC/Summer Hill Electorate)

SUMMARY

This report presents findings from investigations completed in response to the Notice of Motion (C0924(1) Item 40) raised at the Council meeting on 22 October 2024. This Notice of Motion raised concerns in relation to motorists speeding through the pedestrian crossings in the Marrickville Town Centre along Marrickville Road and Illawarra Road.

A site assessment has been completed to assess the existing condition of the at-grade pedestrian crossing and works orders have been issued to address any deficiencies identified.

Officers Recommendation:

That the report be received and noted.

DISCUSSION:

The Chairperson questioned if Council could investigate potential treatments for motorists doing illegal right turns from Calvert Street into Illawarra Road. Council Officers advised they will investigate the matter and examine potential treatments such as additional signage.

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the report be received and noted.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 10 Elizabeth Street, Rozelle - Proposed 'No Stopping' Zone (Baludarri-Balmain Ward/Balmain Electorate/Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

Council has received concerns regarding parked vehicles near the intersection of Elizabeth Street and Catherine Street, Rozelle causing damage to property and impacting vehicle accessibility. It is proposed that a 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone is installed at the corner of this intersection to prevent damage to the adjacent property and improve vehicle accessibility.

Officers Recommendation:

That the proposed 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone at the corner of Elizabeth Street and Catherine Street, Rozelle be approved.

DISCUSSION:

Council Officers noted that during the community consultation for the proposed ‘No Stopping Zone’, Council had sent out 19 letters and received 7 responses, 1 in support and 6 against the proposal. Council Officer’s noted that although there was strong opposition for the proposal, it was recommended to proceed with the proposal due to there being inadequate space for vehicle access in Elizabeth Street with vehicles parked on both sides of the street.

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the proposed 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone at the corner of Elizabeth Street and Catherine Street, Rozelle be approved.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 11 Catherine Street, Leichhardt - Proposed 'No Stopping' Zone (Gulgadya-Leichhardt Ward/Balmain Electorate/Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

This report outlines the consultation undertaken for a 7m length ‘No Stopping’ zone adjacent to the driveway of No.233 Catherine Street, Leichhardt. Fire and Rescue NSW (FRNSW) has identified that the on-site 150mm large bore suction was installed in a position that does not facilitate fire brigade pumping appliance access and recommended that a hardstand 9.5m No Stopping zone be installed. Consultation was undertaken on a 7m No Stopping Zone, and due to concern received regarding loss of on-street parking, it is recommended that the 7m No Stopping zone on Catherine Street not be supported.

Officers Recommendation:

That the requested 7m ‘No Stopping’ zone adjacent the driveway for No.233 Catherine Street, Leichhardt not be supported.

DISCUSSION:

Public Speaker Rebecca Bestic entered the meeting at 11.06am

Ms Bestic noted she represented the owners of 233 Catherine Street, Leichhardt and opposed the recommendation to not support the proposed ‘No Stopping’ zone in Catherine Street. Ms Bestic advised that the development of 233 Catherine Street had previously been approved for 8 small industrial units across 2 levels with main street access from Catherine Street. It was noted that the parking criteria for the development was to provide 19 off-street parking spaces and that the developers had provided 28 off-street parking spaces onsite. Ms Bestic also noted that during the development, two driveways were removed, reinstating two on-street parking spaces back to the community and requested the ‘No Stopping’ zone to be granted for the purpose of allowing FRNSW to access their booster pumps.

Ms Bestic advised that it was originally intended for the fire truck could be positioned within the site across the driveway; however, due to an issue with high voltage substation, which had to be relocated onto the upper level of the development as requested by Ausgrid. As such the fire truck located onsite or at the driveway would make it non-compliant with FRNSW guidelines as they required a 10m distance from the high voltage substation.

Public Speaker Rebecca Bestic left the meeting at 11.12am

The Chairperson noted that due to the changes to the plan and having to move the substation as required by Ausgrid, it would be unfair to penalise the applicant. The Chairperson suggested that the 7m ‘No Stopping’ zone adjacent to the driveway for No.233 Catherine Street, Leichhardt be supported in principle, granted that documentation can be provided to show that all other options were exhausted due to unforeseen circumstances.

The Committee members agreed with the amended recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the requested 7m ‘No Stopping’ zone adjacent the driveway for No.233 Catherine Street, Leichhardt be supported subject to the applicant providing documentation and details justifying the inability to provide an alternate arrangement that did not result in the loss of on street parking, noting that this is not the desired outcome.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 12 Empire Street, Haberfield - Proposed Landscaped Island (Galgadya-Leichhardt Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Burwood PAC)

SUMMARY

A review has been undertaken regarding the obstructed driveway access from parking of vehicles between the driveways of No.24 and 26 Empire Street, Haberfield, which was previously considered at the Local Traffic Committee meeting on 9 December 2024.

At this meeting, a ‘Motor Bike Parking’ zone proposal was deferred by the Traffic Committee to allow officers to undertake investigation into other options.

After liaison with nearby residents, it is proposed to construct a narrow strip (2m x 1m) landscaped island between the two driveways to deter parked vehicles from encroaching on the driveway of No.26 Empire Street.

Officers Recommendation:

That the proposed landscaped island between the driveway of No.24 and No.26 Empire Street, Haberfield as shown in the attached concept plan be approved.

DISCUSSION:

Public Speaker Resident of 26 Empire Street entered the meeting at 11.13am

The resident of 26 Empire Street advised that they supported the recommendation as it will assist with safe access to both driveways at all times. They advised that the current proposal retains some parking outside No.24 without impeding access, as well as allowing for Motorbike parking as originally proposed by Council.

Public Speaker Resident of 26 Empire Street left the meeting at 11.22am

Council Officers tabled in correspondence from a resident noting they are not opposed to the proposed recommendation although it is not their preferred outcome. The proposed dimensions of the island provides 2.9m which is acceptable. The resident further requested the possibility of having the landscaped island width reduced by 0.5m so that it would lessen the negative impact whilst allowing for adequate planting.

Council Officers advised that reducing the width of the island could pose as a trip hazard and may be insufficient for planting.

The Chairperson suggested amending the recommendation to note that this is an exceptional circumstance and that the kerb space between the driveways of No.24 and No.26 is not deemed as a sufficient parking space by Council.

The Committee members agreed with the amended recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the proposed landscaped island between the driveway of No.24 and No.26 Empire Street, Haberfield as shown in the attached concept plan be approved.
That the proposed landscaped island is noted as an exceptional circumstance and that the 3.9 metre length space does not comply with a standard car parking space.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 13 Easter Street, Leichhardt - Proposed Parking Changes (Gulgadya-Leichhardt/Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

Council has received several concerns from businesses along Parramatta Road regarding the lack of on-street parking and the impact of the existing ‘No Parking’ zone in Easter Street on business operations. It is also understood that consistent illegal parking behaviour in Easter Street has prevented vehicular access to some residential properties along Easter Street.

In response, Council has investigated reinstating sections of permissible on-street parking spaces in Easter Street between Flood Street and National Street, Leichhardt. These spaces would not prevent vehicular access to all properties on Albert Street, Leichhardt.

Officers Recommendation:

That the proposed parking changes in Easter Street between National Street and Flood Street, Leichhardt as shown within the attached plan be not supported due to concerns received from residents.

DISCUSSION:

Public Speaker James Pullar entered the meeting at 11.23.

Mr Pullar advised that he partially supported the recommendation if parking is enforced by Council and driveways are not obstructed. Currently, with the signposting there are high levels of illegal parking in the street. Mr Pullar noted the businesses' needs for parking but did not want cars parking across his garage and impeding on access to residential properties. He suggested that additional No Parking signage may need to be implemented in the middle of the street to avoid confusion.

Public Speaker James Pullar left the meeting at 11.26am.

Public Speaker George Piazza entered the meeting at 11.27am.

Mr Piazza opposed the recommendation to not support the proposed parking changes in Easter Street as he would prefer to have the flexibility to park near his business without being penalised. Due to a bus zone in Parramatta Road, parking is not possible at the front of his business. Mr Piazza noted that there are limited parking options and is difficult to conduct business. Mr Piazza advised that his business does not obstruct access to properties and request that the proposed parking changes be supported.

Public Speaker George Piazza left the meeting at 11.39am.

The Chairperson asked if time restricted parking for the proposed parking spots should be considered to prevent long-term parking.

Council Officers also noted that during the consultation period, Council received a high level of anonymous submissions which made it challenging to understand resident’s views.

The Chairperson suggested deferring the item to allow Council to further consultation of nearby residents and businesses of a proposal to include a time limited parking restriction of the proposed parking in Easter Street.

The Committee members agreed with the amended recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the proposed parking changes in Easter Street between National Street and Flood Street, Leichhardt as shown within the attached plan be deferred to undertake consultation on a revised plan which includes time restricted parking of the proposed parking of spaces in Easter Street.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 14 Shepherd Street, Marrickville - Proposed '1P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M9' (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward/Inner West PAC/Summer Hill Electorate)

SUMMARY

Upon receiving a petition from residents of Shepherd Street, Marrickville. Council initiated an investigation for implementing residential parking restrictions in Shepherd Street, Marrickville.

A parking utilisation survey was carried out and it was found that there were high parking occupancies on Shepherd Street during the evening period.

Accordingly, Council officer’s proposed timed permit parking restrictions on the northern side of Shepherd Street, signposted as ‘1P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M9’, and consulted on this proposal with households and businesses. This report provides the results of this survey. Consultation with owners and occupiers in Shepherd Street indicated that there was sufficient support to implement the proposed ‘1P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M9’ restrictions.

Officers Recommendation:

That the proposed parking restrictions signposted as ‘1P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M9’ and ‘No Stopping’ on the northern side of Shepherd Street between Chapel Lane and Handley Street be approved.

DISCUSSION:

Public Speakers Bernhard Huber and Jon Farry entered the meeting at 11.40am

Mr Huber and Mr Farry supported the proposed recommendation, noting that the proposed restrictions will assist with the parking issues in the area. Mr Farry noted that with the success of local businesses in the area, residents often find themselves in competition for parking. Mr Farry advised that the proposed ‘1P 6pm-10pm’ parking restrictions will discourage people from misusing the parking spaces, whilst allowing the nearby businesses to utilise the spaces for their needs during business hours and allowing residents to find parking near their homes. Mr Huber and Mr Farry noted that there was broad support amongst the residents for the proposed changes and that they have also reached out to nearby businesses to ensure such changes will not adversely affect their operations.

Public Speakers Bernhard Huber and Jon Farry left the meeting at 11.47am

Councillor Atkins questioned if both businesses and residents were consulted regarding the proposal. Council Officers advised that both businesses and residents were consulted on either side of Shepherd Street.

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

That the proposed parking restrictions signposted as ‘1P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M9’ and ‘No Stopping’ on the northern side of Shepherd Street between Chapel Lane and Handley Street be approved.

For Motion: Unanimous

LTC0425(1) Item 15 Goodsell Street, St Peters - Proposed line marking of parking spaces (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward/Heffron Electorate/Inner West PAC)

SUMMARY

This report outlines current parking problems at the existing unmarked angle parking spaces on Goodsell Street, St Peters and proposes line markings to maximise the number of parking spaces. In addition, wheel stops are also proposed at the angle parking spaces on the northern side of Goodsell Street to improve stormwater flow and reduce flooding.

Officers Recommendation:

1. That the existing 90 degree parking spaces on the south side of Goodsell Street, St Peters be linemarked to better delineate the parking spaces.

2. That wheel stops be installed and linemarking of the 90 degree spaces be approved for the northern side of Goodsell Street between no.3 and no.15.

DISCUSSION:

Council Officers noted that the minimum standard for 90 degree parking spaces was 2.4 meters and that Council had tried to widen as much spaces as possible to 2.7 meters to allow for extra leeway for those using the parking spaces.

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the existing 90 degree parking spaces on the south side of Goodsell Street, St Peters be linemarked to better delineate the parking spaces.

2. That wheel stops be installed and linemarking of the 90 degree spaces be approved for the northern side of Goodsell Street between no.3 and no.15.

For Motion: Unanimous

General Business:

Item 16 – Review of Clearway restrictions on Parramatta Road

The Representative for the Member for Newtown advised that a constituent had written in to request an evaluation of the current clearway restrictions on Parramatta Road. It was noted that the constituent had reached out to the Local Members’ office regarding the Clearways from 6am to 10am and 3pm to 7pm between Phillip Street and Missenden Road, Petersham advising that the traffic flows do not necessitate these current restrictions being in place and that there is an impact to local businesses along Parramatta Road. The Representative for Transport for NSW noted the concerns raised by the Representative for the Member for Newtown and noted that there is currently a ‘Parramatta Road Integrated Transport Strategy’ being reviewed where the team will be looking at all the existing restrictions on Parramatta Road and how it benefits the local residents and through traffic on Parramatta Road. It was noted that the issues raised by the Representative of the Member of Newtown will be part of the review.

Item 17 – Request for enforcement of illegal parking in Hubert Street, Lilyfield

The Representative for the Member for Balmain noted that there have been instances of people illegally parking and blocking the footpaths and requested Council’s parking enforcement team to patrol the area. Council Officers advised they will pass on the information to the relevant team.

Item 18 – Update on the width of the angled parking spaces proposed for Elswick Street North and William Street Leichhardt

The Chairperson noted that he had received correspondence from a resident requesting an update on the width of the angled parking spaced proposed in the March LTC meeting; LTC0325(1) Item 2 - Elswick Street North and William Street, Leichhardt - Proposed Angle Parking and Raised Pedestrian Crossing. Council Officers advised they would follow up with the relevant team members and will provide an update to the Chairperson.

Item 19 – Request for additional speed limit signage along The Boulevarde, Lewisham

The Chairperson requested a review for additional speed limit signage along The Boulevarde, Lewisham and Dulwich Hill as there are a lot of motorists who speed down the street. It was also requested that Council investigate potential traffic counts to get some speed/traffic data along the street.

Meeting closed at 12.47pm.

CHAIRPERSON

Councillor Macri

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Item No: LTC0525(1) Item 1

Subject: 12 Month Review of Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy (All Wards / All Electorates / All PACs)

Prepared By: Zara Helal - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Jason Scoufis - Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

That the report be received and noted.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

Council resolved to undertake a 12-month review of the Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy adopted in 2024, including consideration of reasons for approvals and refusals.

A review has been undertaken and outlines 63 pedestrian crossing investigations that have been completed with consideration of the Policy from the December 2023 Traffic Committee to the April 2025 Traffic Committee.

53 of these sites have been approved for the installation of pedestrian crossing which will represent a significant improvement to pedestrian connectivity within the Inner West when construction is completed. It is therefore considered that the Policy is operating effectively in identifying and prioritising pedestrian crossing locations and no changes to the Policy are proposed.

BACKGROUND

In 2024, Council adopted a Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy as detailed in Attachment 1 to be used when assessing the suitability of locations on local and regional roads for pedestrian (zebra) crossings. This Policy sets out a warrant for the installation of a pedestrian (zebra) crossing on local and regional roads.

When Council, at its meeting held on 5 March 2024, considered the December 2023 Traffic Committee minutes recommending the adoption of the Policy, it was resolved to adopt the Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy with the following amendments.

4. The following amendments to LTC1223(1) Item 3:

a) that the clause on page 7 of the policy that allows for crossings to be provided at less than the numerical warrant be amended to read as follows:
‘A pedestrian (zebra) crossing may also be considered at locations where there is a deviation from meeting the warrant, such as where the pedestrian crossing would serve as an essential link to an overall network of pedestrian facilities, or for a vulnerable group such as children, the elderly or mobility impaired’; and

b) that a report be provided to Council 12 months after the adoption of the policy about any new pedestrian crossings that have been approved or refused under the new policy, with reasons for the approvals and refusals to be included in the report.

This report outlines the pedestrian crossing investigations undertaken, commencing from the December 2023 Traffic Committee (where the Policy was supported) to the April 2025 Traffic Committee.

A copy of the adopted Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy is attached.

DISCUSSION

The following table outlines the pedestrian crossings investigated following adoption of the Policy.

A total of 63 investigations have been completed through Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) studies as well as investigations that occurred as a result of resident requests or Council resolution. 53 of the sites were appropriate for a pedestrian crossing under the requirements in the Policy.

Pedestrian Crossing Location	Outcome	Reason
Liberty Street at Railway Parade, Stanmore	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Grove Street at Lilyfield Road	Not Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes
Mary Street at Perry Street, Lilyfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Carrington Road at Renwick Street, Marrickville	Supported	Numerical warrant met, issues with road geometry issues to be investigated
Lilyfield Road at Ryan Street, Lilyfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Lilyfield Road at Ryan Street, Lilyfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
William Street, Leichhardt	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Evans Street between Napoleon Street and Mansfield Street, Rozelle	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Beattie Street west of Mullens Street, Balmain	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Beattie Street east of Darling Street, Rozelle	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Darling Street south of Merton Street, Rozelle	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Wellington Street, south of Terry Street, Rozelle	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Terry Street, west of Wellington Street, Rozelle	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Curtis Road at Darling Street, Balmain	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Curtis Road at McDonald Street, Balmain	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Brighton Street between Wentworth Street and The Avenue, Petersham (Petersham Pk)	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Palace Street, north of Andreas Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Andreas Street, west of Palace Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Brighton Street, east of Railway Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Railway Street, south of Brighton Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Brighton Street, east of Palace Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Brighton Street, west of Palace Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Palace Street, south of Brighton Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Terminus Street east of Palace Street, Petersham	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – Considered essential link
Alice Street west of Pearl Street, Newtown	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Brighton Street west of The Avenue, Petersham	Not supported	Too close to other proposed pedestrian crossing
Palace Street north of Brighton Street, Petersham	Not supported	Road geometry constraints. Doesn’t meet warrant.
Alice Street west of Walenore Avenue, Newtown	Supported	Numerical warrant met
The Avenue at Brighton Street, Petersham	Not supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle and pedestrian volumes
Terminus Street west of Railway Avenue, Petersham	Not supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes
Edgeware Road south of Bedwin Road, Newtown	Supported	Pedestrian volumes met. Considered essential link.
Renwick Street at Illawarra Road, Marrickville	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Murray Street at Edinburgh Road, Marrickville	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Victoria St, Seaview St to Harland Ave, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Prospect Rd near Norton Street, Summer Hill	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Victoria Street & Seaview Street intersection, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Seaview Street at Yeo Avenue, Ashfield	Not supported	Numerical warrant not met
Queen Street at Seaview Street & Hillcrest Avenue, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Queen Street at Clissold Street, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Clissold Street and Victoria Street, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Smith Street east of Henson Street	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Clissold Street at Holden Street, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Robert Street at Holden Street, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Drynan Street at Prospect Road, Summer Hill	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Henson Street at Smith Street, Summer Hill	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Victoria Street at Robert Street, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Holden Street and Palace Street, Ashfield	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Allen Street at Norton Street, Leichhardt	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Styles Street at Whites Creek Lane, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Piper Street at Whites Creek, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Brenan Street at Whites Creek (between White Street and Railway Parade), Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Piper Street west of Annandale Street, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Styles Street, Leichhardt at the Leichhardt Street/Mackenzie Street/Styles Street intersection	Supported	Numerical warrant met
Piper Street South immediately west of View Street, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Trafalgar Street (southern leg) at Albion Street, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Trafalgar Street between Piper Street South and Piper Street North, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Piper Street North at Johnston Street, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met – low vehicle volumes - Considered essential link
Annandale Street north of Rose Street, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met - Considered essential link
Rose Street east of Annandale Street, Annandale	Supported	Numerical warrant not met - Considered essential link
Bayview Crescent at Prichard Street, Annandale	Not Supported	Numerical warrant not met – Continuous footpath proposed
Piper Street North, west of View Street, Annandale	Not Supported	Numerical warrant not met – kerb extensions proposed
Piper Street South, east of Johnston Street, Annandale	Not Supported	Numerical warrant not met – geometric constraints
Collins Street east of Trafalgar Street, Annandale	Not Supported	Too close to pedestrian crossing at western leg of intersection.

It should be noted that for the purposes of assessment, pedestrian crossings which provide ‘essential links’ have been defined as being a connection along a pedestrian corridor, connections to schools or connections to support a significant land use change. These assessments have generally been established through completed Local Area Traffic Management studies.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications associated with the implementation of the proposed recommendations outlined in the report.

The construction of the approved raised pedestrian crossings are being progressively constructed under Council’s Traffic Facilities capital works program and submitted for grant funding opportunities where relevant.

CONCLUSION

It is considered that the Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy is operating effectively noting the significant number of sites determined to be appropriate for pedestrian crossings.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩

Attachment - Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Item No: LTC0525(1) Item 4

Subject: Schwebel Street, Marrickville - Traffic Study Report for a proposed one-way treatment at Schwebel Street between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road (Midjuburi - Marrickville Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West PAC)

Prepared By: Daniel Li - Student/Graduate Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Jason Scoufis - Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the following traffic study report at Schwebel Street be received and noted by Council.

2. That traffic management proposals within this report be approved in principle and that community consultation be undertaken on the proposals within this report

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A notice of motion was raised at Council’s meeting on the 3^rd of December 2024 to investigate the eastbound one-way conversion of Schwebel Street from Illawarra Road to Carrington Road. To determine the feasibility of the proposed one-way treatment in Schwebel Street, Council’s Traffic Engineering team has undertaken a technical analysis into the traffic implications of the proposal via a traffic study report.

This traffic study report considers three options to address resident concerns and provides an analysis into the traffic redistribution of westbound traffic into surrounding streets, likelihood of increased vehicle speeds and non-compliance of the proposed one-way. Having considered the traffic safety report, it is recommended that Council support the three proposed options for community consultation.

BACKGROUND

At the Council meeting on 3 December 2024, a Notice of Motion was raised with Council’s Traffic and Transport Planning team to investigate the following:

1. That Council progress plans to make Schwebel Street one-way in a west to east direction from Illawarra Road to Carrington Road.

2. That Council report to the Local Traffic Committee no later than May 2025 with:

a) plan, indicative budget and timeline to develop and design road treatments to make Schwebel Street one-way and to undertake community consultation;

b) an assessment of whether Schwebel Street is suitable for new active transport connections and opportunities to upgrade and improve lighting on the stairs between Schwebel Street and Charlotte Avenue; and

c) Consideration of improvements at the intersection of Illawarra Road and Schwebel/Warburton Streets.

DISCUSSION

Former Studies in Marrickville Area

Marrickville Council has previously undertaken a review of Schwebel Street and has provided various proposals as part of the South Marrickville Local Area Traffic Management Scheme in 2012. Table 1 below summarises previous traffic management strategies to mitigate the traffic issues found along Schwebel Street.

Year of Proposal	Proposal Description	Outcome
August 1999	Parking restrictions along one side of Schwebel Street.	Not supported as very few residences have any form of off-street parking and are reliant on on-street parking. The loss of parking would not be strongly supported by residents.
August 1999	Speed humps to reduce traffic speeds	Insufficient support for the proposal and to be considered for future Local Area Traffic Management studies.
April 2008	Road carriageway widening	Not supported as it was cost prohibitive and would result in an unacceptable narrowing of footpaths. It would also require the relocation of existing power poles and utility services.
May 2011	Proposed one-way (eastbound) from Illawarra Road to Carrington Road	Insufficient support for the proposal. The proposal at the time only had a 7% support rate (26 of the quantifiable votes).

Table 1. Historical summary of Schwebel Street traffic management strategies

Existing Conditions

Schwebel Street is a residential street running east-west between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road with varying road widths as shown in Table 2. Despite Schwebel Street between Station Street and Junction Street being incapable of accommodating concurrent two-way traffic movements, Schwebel Street currently operates as a two-way road where drivers are expected to utilise driveways and parking areas to pass oncoming vehicles.

Street Name	Schwebel Street
Carriageway width (m) kerb to kerb	· Between Station Street and High Street – 7.3m · Between High Street and Junction Street – 6.8m · Between Junction Street and Carrington Road – 12.8m
Carriageway type	Two-way with vehicles utilising driveways and parking areas to pass oncoming vehicles
Classification	Local
Speed Limit (km/h)	50
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)	· Between Leofrene Avenue and Ivanhoe Street – 3,784 · Between High Street and Junction Street – 3,927
85^th percentile speed (km/h)	· Between Leofrene Avenue and Ivanhoe Street – 41.6 · Between High Street and Junction Street – 46.8
Parking Arrangements	· ‘2P 8.30am – 6pm Mon-Fri, 8.30am – 12.30pm Sat, Permit Holders Excepted’ on the southern side of Schwebel Street between Leofrene Avenue and Ivanhoe Street. · Unrestricted parking on the northern side. · Unrestricted parking east of Ivanhoe Street to Carrington Road

Table 2. Road Network Detail

Accident History

Traffic accident data collected from the Transport for NSW crash registry for the 5-year period from 2020 – 2024 are shown in the crash locations below. From October 2014, the NSW Police has ceased reporting towaway accidents with the exception where there are any persons killed or injured, or where a driver fails to swap details, or where a driver is suspected to be under the influence of drug or alcohol.

Figure 1. Recorded crashes at Schwebel Street between 2020 – 2024.

Street	Crash ID	Year	Crash Type	Road User Movement Code (RUM)
Schwebel Street	1244888	2020	Non-casualty (towaway)	71 (Left off carriageway into object – parked vehicle)
Schwebel Street	1320727	2023	Non-casualty (towaway)	93 (Parked vehicle run away into object / parked vehicle)
Schwebel Street	1323550	2023	Moderately Injured	73 (Off road right – object on road)

Table 3. Crashes at Schwebel Street between 2020 – 2024 and listed RUM Code.

Based on the traffic accident history between 2020 – 2024 as seen in Table 3, only three (3) traffic incidents were officially recorded with the Transport for NSW crash registry. Amongst the three recorded crashes, the two crashes between Station Street and Ivanhoe Street had a Road User Movement code (RUM) of 71 and 93 which indicates vehicle side swiping. Despite the low amount of recorded traffic accidents within Schwebel Street, Council has received numerous resident requests, suggesting a higher rate of non-recorded vehicle side swiping incidents after October 2014.

Traffic Management Options for Schwebel Street

Option A: One-way Traffic Proposal in Schwebel Street between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road

In 2011, the South Marrickville LATM proposed an eastbound one-way system on Schwebel Street from Illawarra Road to Carrington Road to compliment the westbound one-way along Warren Road. Following community feedback, Council was unable to proceed with the above proposal due to low support rates with residents commenting on the longer driving times to arrive at their intended destination as seen in attachment 1.

In general, converting a two-way road to one way traffic would result in an improvement to congestion and a likely reduction of traffic volume. However, the change will have wider impacts as existing traffic movement in the opposing direction of the one way will be diverted to adjacent streets and increased travel distances for residents and visitors under this arrangement. The wider carriageway for one way travel could also result in minor non-compliance of the one way for drivers. A concept plan of the proposed one-way between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road can be seen in Figure 2.

Notwithstanding, while it is anticipated that a proposed one-way will increase traffic speeds, to facilitate a one-way system in Schwebel Street between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road, the following would also be required:

· Speed cushions outside number 38 Schwebel Street and 52 Schwebel Street;

· Installation of ‘No Entry’ and ‘No Left Turn’ restrictions at Leofrene Avenue, Station Street, Ivanhoe Street, High Street and Junction Street;

· Installation of approximately 11 ‘One-Way’ signs throughout Schwebel Street (as seen in the signage plan in Attachment 2);

· Installation of approximately 6 pavement arrows;

· A Traffic Management Plan for the one way proposal to be approved by TfNSW;

· Secondary Local Traffic Committee report with community consultation results; and

· Public advertisement of the one way as required by the Roads Act for 28 days.

Figure 2. One Way Concept Plan in Schwebel Street between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road

Option A: One Way Traffic Eastbound in Schwebel Street between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Localised congestion is minimised compared to a two-way traffic through narrow road space

· No loss of on-street parking spaces

· Overall traffic volume may decrease

· Reduced likelihood of vehicle side swiping

· Residents will travel longer distances to travel to and from their homes

· Prevailing traffic flow will be diverted to adjacent streets, likely Warren Road (one-way) or Grove Street

· Vehicle speeds will likely increase

· Drivers could disobey road rules and drive against the one way to avoid travelling around, particularly to and from destinations at each end of the street.

Table 4. Advantages and disadvantages of a one-way system between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road

Option B: One-way Traffic Proposal in Schwebel Street between Leofrene Avenue/Station Street and Junction Street

Noting community feedback, instead of a one-way system being proposed for the entirety of Schwebel Street, a proposed one-way at Schwebel Street between Leofrene Avenue/Station Street and Junction Street would be a more suitable solution to address the narrow sections which are unable to facilitate two-way traffic movements.

In comparison to Option A, this option will enable kiss and ride users of Marrickville Railway Station to exit onto Illawarra Road without needing to travel eastbound along Schwebel Street. Additionally, a one-way system in Schwebel Street between Station Street and Junction Street will provide sufficient notice to westbound traffic from Carrington Road to react/adapt to the proposed road network changes whilst diverting onto Junction Road or undertaking a U-turn manoeuvre to exit onto Carrington Road as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. One Way Concept Plan in Schwebel Street between Station Street and Junction Street

At the time of the initial one-way proposal in 2011, relevant traffic counts conducted in November 2006 provided traffic volumes of 1,470 vehicles per day and an 85^th percentile speed of 51km/h. In comparison, the traffic counts collected in February 2025 indicate that the traffic volumes have since doubled to approximately 3,800 vehicles per day (2,000 eastbound and 1,800 westbound), simultaneously reducing the 85^th percentile speed to 41.5 km/h between Leofrene Avenue and Ivanhoe Street and 46.8 km/h between Junction Street and Carrington Road, both within the signposted speed limits of 50 km/h.

Notwithstanding, while it is anticipated that a proposed one-way will increase traffic speeds, to facilitate a one-way system in Schwebel Street between Leofrene Avenue/Station Street and Junction Street, the following would also be required:

· Speed cushions outside number 38 Schwebel Street and 52 Schwebel Street;

· Installation of ‘No Entry’ and ‘No Left Turn’ restrictions at Ivanhoe Street, High Street and Junction Street (as seen in the signage plan in Attachment 3);

· Installation of approximately 8 ‘One-Way’ signs throughout Schwebel Street;

· Installation of approximately 5 pavement arrows ;

· A Traffic Management Plan for the one way proposal to be approved by TfNSW;

· Secondary Local Traffic Committee report with community consultation results; and

· Public advertisement of the one way as required by the Roads Act for 28 days.

An examination of the peak hour traffic flow and the road network indicate that with a one-way eastbound arrangement in Schwebel Street, the majority of the westbound traffic flow would most likely be diverted to Warren Road or Grove Street during the AM and PM peak hours. Figure 4 shows the peak AM and PM traffic volumes in Schwebel Street and the surrounding space.

Figure 4. Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volume in Schwebel Street and surrounding roads

The projected traffic redistribution results in a minor increase of approximately 117 vehicles in the morning peak hours into Grove Street and Warren Road. Assuming a redistribution rate of 70% and 20% into Warren Road and Grove Street respectively, the traffic redistribution will result in an increase of 74 westbound vehicles into Warren Road, 21 vehicles into Grove Street and 11 vehicles into Schwebel Street. Such a low amount of traffic being redistributed would have minor impacts to the surrounding road network. A traffic redistribution diagram can be seen in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Projected redistribution of AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes in Schwebel Street and surrounding roads

Option B: One Way Traffic Eastbound in Schwebel Street between Leofrene Avenue/Station Street and Junction Street

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Localised congestion is minimized compared to a two-way traffic through narrow road space

· No loss of on-street parking spaces

· Overall traffic volume may decrease

· Reduced likelihood of vehicle side swiping

· Allows kiss and ride users to exit onto Illawarra Road without travelling eastbound into Schwebel Street.

· Allows westbound traffic from Carrington Road to adequately react to the one-way and divert onto Junction Street.

· Residents will travel longer distances to travel to and from their homes

· Prevailing traffic flow will be diverted to adjacent streets, likely Warren Road (one-way) or Grove Street

· Vehicle speeds will likely increase

· Drivers could disobey road rules and drive against the one way to avoid travelling around, particularly to and from destinations at each end of the street.

Table 5. Advantages and disadvantages of a proposed one-way between Station Street and Junction Street

Option C: Provide Passing Bays in Schwebel Street between Station Street and High Street

This arrangement in Schwebel Street proposes short sections of ‘No Parking’ zones in regular spacing to provide two way passing opportunities for vehicles approaching in opposing directions. This option provides a balance between traffic flow and resident’s need to retain on-street parking in Schwebel Street.

The passing bays would be signposted as full time ‘No Parking’ with an option for a part time ‘No Parking 8.30am – 6pm Mon – Fri’ and ‘No Parking 8.30am – 12.30pm Sat’ zone consistent with the existing parking conditions situated on the southern side of Schwebel Street. A concept plan of the proposed passing bays can be seen in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Proposed concept plan of passing bays in Schwebel Street

Option C: Provide Passing Bays in Schwebel Street between Station Street and High Street

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Some improvement to two-way traffic flow in Schwebel Street

· Minimal traffic diverted to neighbouring streets

· Vehicle speeds to remain low or unchanged, appropriate for pedestrians and cyclists in a residential road.

· Loss of 5 on-street parking spaces in Schwebel Street with a loss of 3 on-street spaces from Statutory ‘No Stopping’

· Schwebel Street may be used as a street to bypass traffic signals along Illawarra Road.

Table 6. Advantages and disadvantages of a proposed passing bays between Station Street and High Street

Active Transport Connections

It is not recommended that Schwebel Street be considered for active transport connections. The narrowness and high traffic volumes of Schwebel Street in conjunction with existing two-way traffic movements would increase the risk of collision with active transport users. Even if Schwebel Street was to be converted into a one way, the narrower sections of Schwebel Street would make it difficult to introduce an active transport corridor.

Notwithstanding, as part of the Sydney Metro project and the Southwest Link, Leofrene Avenue has been temporarily designated as an active transport connection from Sydenham Station to Hurlstone Park via Dulwich Hill and Marrickville. Given that Leofrene Avenue provides much lower traffic volumes in comparison to Schwebel Street, Leofrene Avenue is more suitable for potential active transport projects. It should be noted that an active transport link as part of EWPCL is being constructed along the back of Leofrene Street (adjacent to the railway line) and this route will connect to both Sydenham Station and beyond to the east and Dulwich Hill Station and beyond to the west.

Intersection Improvements at Illawarra Road and Schwebel Street / Warburton Street

In July 2012, a proposal was submitted by former Marrickville Council to Roads and Maritime Services (currently Transport for NSW) to install traffic signals at the intersection of Illawarra Road and Schwebel Street.

This proposal was not supported by Transport for NSW at the time due to the following:

· Section 2.5 of the Traffic Signal Design Guide stating that signalised mid-block crossings must be avoided within 130 meters of an adjacent signalized intersection. The proposed location for traffic signals is approximately only 65 metres from the current signalised mid-block crossing on the bridge at the entrance to Marrickville Railway Station.

· At the time of the proposal, the traffic volumes for the intersection of Illawarra Road and Schwebel Street did not meet the warrants of Transport for NSW.

While traffic volumes have increased since the initial proposal in 2012, the proposed traffic signals are still within proximity of the midblock traffic signal at the entrance to Marrickville Railway Station. Furthermore, between 2020-2024, only two traffic accidents have occurred with 1x cross traffic (RUM 10) and 1x pedestrian nearside (RUM 0) and therefore does not meet the warrants for a traffic signal and further intersection improvements.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The financial costs associated with the eastbound one-way proposal at Schwebel Street (option A and B) is approximately $27,000 and $20,000 respectively. This is inclusive of all required signage and line marking installations, public advertisements and the asphalt speed cushions to reduce vehicle speeds to the sign posted speed limit of 50 km/h. Contrastingly, the financial costs associated with the proposed passing bays (Option C) is approximately $5,000 to install the required signage and no parking restrictions.

CONCLUSION

Having considered the above traffic report, Council officers are able to support all proposals in this report subject to community consultation and Council support for preference of the traffic treatment in Schwebel Street. It is therefore recommended that Council note and support the proposed recommendations and provide approval for community consultation to be undertaken in the Marrickville South area. Following the conclusion of the community consultation, a supplementary traffic report will be submitted to the Local Traffic Committee for support of preferred proposal from residents.

ATTACHMENTS.

1.⇩	Summary of Schwebel Street one-way proposal in South Marrickville LATM 2011
2.⇩	Signage plan of proposed eastbound one-way on Schwebel Street between Illawarra Road and Carrington Road
3.⇩	Signage plan of proposed eastbound one-way on Schwebel Street between Station Street and Junction Street

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Item No: LTC0525(1) Item 6

Subject: Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville – Traffic safety Investigation (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward /Summer Hill Electorate /Inner West LAC)

Prepared By: Jennifer Adams - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Jason Scoufis - Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

That the report be received and noted.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council at its meeting held on 3 September 2024 raised a Notice of Motion for the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville which involved the consideration and determining whether any additional traffic calming measures (such as a roundabout) are required at the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville (Item C0924(1) Item 48), Part 2 and Part 3). This report provides an assessment of the safety of the intersection and feasibility of a proposed roundabout at this location along with a summary of any local resident feedback in relation to the intersection.

BACKGROUND

At the Council Meeting held on 3 September 2024, Council resolved the following:

1. That Council note that residents report a several accidents and incidents at the intersection of Hill Street and Livingstone Road, Marrickville.

2. That Council investigate the installation of a roundabout at the intersection to improve safety at the intersection.

3. That Council formally review safety at the intersection, including surveying local residents, and report back to the Local Traffic Committee by the end of 2024

This report provides an assessment of the safety of the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville and discusses whether any additional traffic calming measures (such as a roundabout) are required at the intersection. It also highlights local resident feedback in relation to the intersection and any concerns that have been raised in relation to the intersection.

DISCUSSION

Local road network

Hill Street is classified as a local road and between Beauchamp Street and Livingstone Road, it has an average daily traffic volume of 2,136 vehicles per day and an 85^th percentile speed of 42.1km/h.

Hill Street has priority at its intersection with Livingstone Road. The road alignment of Hill Street through the intersection is curved which naturally tends to slow drivers down when travelling through Hill Street section of the intersection.

Livingstone Road is classified as a local road between Harnett Avenue and Hill Street, it has an average daily traffic volume of 3,096 vehicles per day and an 85^th percentile speed of 50.4km/h. STOP controls are in place on Livingstone Road at Hill Street, Marrickville. Livingstone Road has a slight curve on the northern leg of its intersection with Hill Street. The roadway also slopes downward north to south.

Recent traffic and pedestrian works completed

The intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street was previously investigated as part of a Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Scheme for the area – Riverside (Area 18). The LATM Scheme was approved by Council in 2014. The proposal which Council implemented included the construction of pedestrian refuge islands and kerb blister islands on the western, northern and southern legs of the intersection. The proposal was aimed at improving safety of pedestrians as well as reducing vehicle speeds. Given the relatively low traffic volumes along this section of Livingstone Road and Hill Road, this proposal was seen as the optimum proposal to address the issue of pedestrian safety whilst reducing the speed of traffic on approach to the intersection. It also made the intersection more visible on approach. Speed humps were also placed before the curves on Hill Street to assist in reducing speeds along Hill Street.

The design plans for this proposal were endorsed by Local Traffic Committee in May 2015 and Council in June 2015. Works were completed in February 2016.

Crash history / road safety investigation

The latest Centre for Road Safety crash data reveals that there were no reported crashes at this intersection in the last 5 years of data ending June 2023.

Current intersection performance

SIDRA model analysis and results for the intersection of Hill Street and Livingstone Road, Marrickville reveal that generally the intersection on all legs operates at a Level of Service (LoS) of A. That is, currently the intersection on all legs represents free-flow traffic conditions with high mobility and low delay. The intersection is thus operating at optimum.

Very similar results are achieved for SIDRA analysis for a roundabout at the intersection. Thus, affectively, at this time, there would be no benefit for the cost to justify the installation of a roundabout.

Copies of both SIDA model analyses are reproduced at the end of this report.

Roundabout

Generally, roundabouts are installed where there is a crash history involving a number of cross traffic incidents and it is often used to treat blackspot locations as a result of this type of crash history. Although there may have been near misses at the intersection, this cannot be used as justification for such treatments. It should be noted that Council can only focus on the recorded data provided by TfNSW.

In accordance with the Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 8 – Local Area Traffic Management (LATM), one key consideration for the provision of a roundabout relates to crash history. The guide states that it is only appropriate to consider a roundabout at intersections where the crash history indicates a high number of right-angle and right-turn-through crashes. Based on this and the data summarised above, there is currently no warrant for the introduction of a roundabout at the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville.

The Guide also notes that traffic volume data, along with crash history, is important when investigating whether a particular intersection is suitable for a roundabout treatment. It states suitable intersections ideally would have approximately equal traffic flow from all approaches and be local streets in residential areas that have a high volume of unnecessary through traffic. Noting also that locations with marked uneven flows of traffic are unsuitable for roundabouts. This criterion also supports that there is currently no warrant for the introduction of a roundabout at the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville.

There is no single preferred treatment for safely accommodating cyclists and pedestrians at roundabouts and each case requires careful consideration before committing to a course of action. There are potential dangers for cyclists and pedestrians at roundabouts if they are not appropriately designed and which is one of the main disadvantages of the installation of a roundabout.

The previous works completed at the intersection of Livingstone and Hill Street (pedestrian refuge islands and kerb blister islands on the western, northern and southern legs of the intersection) appears to have adequately addressed past pedestrian safety issues whilst reducing the speed of traffic on approaches to the intersection.

Consultation

A review of Council’s system revealed that there is a very limited history of complaints (i.e. only complaints from one resident) regarding safety at the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville. In the 2013-14 Riverside LATM Strategy review Hill Street was only second to Livingstone Road in relation to community complaints and the majority of complaints were regarding vehicle speed which had been addressed within the LATM review.

Consultation has now been conducted in the local area surrounding the subject intersection. The letter noted that Council is reviewing road safety, walking and cycling in the area of Hill Street and Livingstone Road, Marrickville and asked the residents for their views on walking, cycling and driving in their neighbourhood. The localised study area is detailed on the plan below.

The consultation period was from 27 February 2025 to 28 March 2025. In total 270 letters were distributed. There were 13 responses a return rate of 4.8%.

It is noted that four (4) additional responses came in well after the consultation period had finished and all raised similar concerns and did not have any resident details listed so have been discounted in this assessment.

The main issues raised by residents are grouped below and Council officers’ response to issues raised is detailed below each grouped issue.

Speeding

· Vehicles drive too fast up and down Hill Street

· poor visibility at the intersection and vehicles speeding in all directions

· motorist’ use Livingstone road, between Hill and Warren try to break the land speed record

· the current speed humps do nothing to deter cars

· Safety - speeding cars along Livingstone Rd cutting to or from Illawarra Road via Wharf Rd.

· Traffic has increased drastically, Illawarra Rd to Livingstone Rd has become a racetrack

Officer Comments: The existing speed cushions in Hill Street and Livingstone Road were installed as recommended in the 2013/14 Riverside LATM Review to slow motorists along those roads. It is acknowledged that 85^th percentile speeds of 42.1km/h on Hill Street and 50.4km/h on Livingstone Road are around the present 50km/h urban speed limit and satisfactory for local streets. It is nevertheless envisioned that when Council finishes implementing the InnerWest@40 proposal which seeks to reduce the speed limit from 50 km/h to 40 km/h on local streets this will improve overall road safety of the intersection and along the adjoining streets.

Intersection

· There is a high level of vehicle non-compliance with stop signs in Livingstone Road making it dangerous for pedestrians and drivers crossing both streets.

· Lane delineation at the intersection of Hill St and Livingstone Road is vague.

· Any modifications to the intersection would only cause more safety and parking issues to the already busy area

· a roundabout with crosswalks should be created to help slow down the traffic.

· A roundabout would be the most effective way to manage traffic flow, providing a clear right of way and naturally slowing vehicles - particularly those coming downhill from Dulwich Hill

Officer Comments: The STOP control on Livingstone Road at Hill Street was installed in August 1986 so has been in place many years. Non-compliance at a STOP control is an enforcement issue. The Livingstone Road and Hill Street intersection does not have straight legs and due to slope and curvature issues there are inherent lateral sight distance restrictions which residents may perceive to be vague lane delineation. It is noted that when the current safety improvement works of 3 pedestrian refuges and kerb blisters were implemented in 2015 at the Livingstone Road and Hill Street intersection the original design plan was rejected by residents due to the potential loss of up to 9 on-street parking spaces subsequently the design was modified, and on-street parking loss was reduced to 4 spaces.

Pedestrians

· extremely dangerous for pedestrians crossing Hill Street because the speeding vehicles

· tricky spot to cross the road for pedestrians as the hill decline promotes speed,

· The distance pedestrians have to travel across Hill Street from Livingston Road on both sides is large. It’s a busy street that could use a pedestrian crossing and kerb blisters, especially adjacent to the bus stop.

· Ped crossing is required at this location to assist school children

Officer Comments:

The 3 pedestrian refuges and the traffic islands that were installed in 2015 at the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street were designed in compliance with relevant standards. The purpose of the blister traffic islands is to reduce traffic lanes and thus to slow vehicles speed at the intersection which in turn improves safety for pedestrians with shorter distances to cross.

The provision of pedestrian zebra crossings which can operate safely necessitates certain criteria to be met including sufficient pedestrian volumes. Marked crossings tend to be poorly respected by drivers if there is relatively low pedestrian usage throughout the day. A much safer pedestrian treatment in such environments is the provision of pedestrian refuge islands as provided. Thus, at this time there are no plans to introduce further crossing facilities at this intersection.

Parking

· parking has increased in difficulty since spaces were removed,

· parking supply must be increased, 45 deg angle parking. Parking gradually getting worse

· Street parking - lack of street parking

Officer Comments: Council acknowledges that it is difficult to find parking in some areas and Council continually seeks to take a balanced approach to ensuring that the needs of residents are balanced with other users such as visitors, business and commercial users. As noted when the current safety improvement works of 3 pedestrian refuges and kerb blisters were implemented in 2015 at the Livingstone Road and Hill Street intersection the original design plan was rejected by residents due to the potential loss of up to 9 on-street parking spaces subsequently the design was modified, and on-street parking loss was reduced to 4 spaces. Angle parking was also raised a number of times in the 2014 consultation process and considered not viable.

Buses

· Hill Street is dangerous for regular bus services as it is too narrow, forcing buses to cross centre lines

· the busses are extremely loud

· The bus traffic has become concerning due to the speed and frequency of buses travelling along the road

Officer Comments: During the current T3 shutdown period for the Sydney Metro upgrade works replacement buses are using Hill Street. TfNSW has stated that Hill Street is used for TTP bus operations due to its relatively direct path between Marrickville and Dulwich Hill, width, and ability to accommodate both inbound and outbound bus movements. It is one of the only streets between the Marrickville and Dulwich Hill suitable for bus movements. TfNSW notes also alternate options for bus movements in the area are very limited due to several factors including narrow road widths, on-street parking, tree canopy coverage and numerous one-way streets. Both Wharf Street and Warren Road, were deemed unsuitable for TTP bus operations. Once the Sydney Metro line is open the bus movement issues will no longer be significant.

Cyclists

· cycle lanes or modifications added to this proposed area would only create the same safety and parking issues that are currently happening further down the road now

· It would also be great to see cycle infrastructure, although parking is already tight

Officer Comments: At this time, the Livingstone Road cycleway (Local Route 3) from Randall Street to Marrickville Park, Marrickville is complete and will not be extended to the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street. Local routes aim to connect residential streets with local destinations, such as schools and local shops, and regional bicycle routes. It is noted that loss of parking was raised as one of the main concerns related to the Livingstone Road cycleway. The concept plan was subsequently amended in response to community concerns to significantly reduce proposed parking impacts on Livingstone Road between Marrickville Park and the Bankstown Line rail corridor. The final constructed plan proposed an overall gain of 7 on-street parking spaces (6 of which were in Enfield Street created by providing angled parking in the section west of Livingstone Road).

Conclusion

Both the speed and traffic volumes in Hill Street and Livingstone Road, Marrickville are within acceptable limits for local roads and there are no TfNSW recorded crashes within the last five years. Therefore, currently there is no warrant or cost benefit at this time for the introduction of a roundabout at the intersection of Livingstone Road and Hill Street, Marrickville. It is noted that Council has treated this intersection successfully in the past through construction of median island stop treatments which has improved both control and delineation of this intersection and reduced the previous significant crash history.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil.

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Item No: LTC0525(1) Item 8

Subject: Marrickville Road, part of Seaview Street and Durham Street, Caves Lane, Marrickville – Temporary full Road Closures for Dulwich Hill Village Fair – Sunday 21 September 2025 (Djarrawunang-Ashfield Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West PAC)

Prepared By: Jennifer Adams - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Jason Scoufis - Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the proposed temporary full road closure of Marrickville Road (between New Canterbury Road and Fairfowl Street), part of Seaview Street (between Marrickville Road and south of the entrance to the car park south of Herbert Street), Durham Street (between Marrickville Road and Durham Lane), Caves Lane, and the Seaview Street car park (car park adjacent to Caves Lane), Dulwich Hill for the ‘Dulwich Hill Village Fair’ Event on Sunday 21 September 2025 between the hours of 3:00am and 9:00pm be approved as per the submitted TMP and TGSs;

2. That a Road Occupancy License application be obtained from the Transport Management Centre;

3. That notice of the proposed event be forwarded to the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Transit Systems, the NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Services;

4. That all residents and businesses in and around the affected area are to be notified of the temporary road closure in writing by the applicant in advance (at least 7 days prior to the event) with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders;

4. That a minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section; and

5. That the occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

‘Dulwich Hill Village Fair' is an annual event and this year it will be held on Sunday 21 September 2025. As per previous years the event will necessitate the temporary full road closure of Marrickville Road (between New Canterbury Road and Fairfowl Street); part of Seaview Street (between Marrickville Road and south of the entrance to the car park south of Herbert Street), Caves Lane, and the Seaview Street car park (car park adjacent to Caves Lane), Dulwich Hill.

BACKGROUND

Council's Events Coordinator has advised that this year's annual 'Dulwich Hill Village Fair' will be held on Sunday 21 September 2025 and has submitted a request for some temporary road closures between the hours of 3:00am and 9:00pm on the day of the event.

The Dulwich Hill Village Fair is a local event celebrating the growth of bars and eateries sprouting on the hill. The fair provides family entertainment mixed with food fair such as cheese plates and artisan bakery offerings. markets displaying eco-friendly clothing, handmade jewelry, gifts and locally made items. There will also be music, a martial arts display, dance acts and a kids play area.

This year’s Dulwich Hill Village Fair will run between 11:00am and 4:00pm on Sunday 21 September 2025, however, the temporary full road closures are required from 3:00am and 9:00pm on Sunday 21 September 2025 for bump in and bump out activities:

OFFICER COMMENTS

Temporary full road closures are planned for the following locations (refer to the site map below):

· Marrickville Road (between New Canterbury Road and Fairfowl Street),

· Durham Street (between Marrickville Road and Durham Lane)

· Seaview Street (between Marrickville Road and south of the entrance to the car park south of Herbert Street),

· Caves Lane, and The Seaview Street car park (car park adjacent to Caves Lane).

The event is classified as a Class 2 event under the TfNSW’ Special Events Guide where it impacts local traffic and transport systems but does not impact major traffic and transport systems and it disrupts the non-event community in the area around the event but not over a wide area. The event requires the involvement of Police and Local Council and a detailed Transport Management Plan (TMP).

Council barricades will be used to affect the closures and a 4-metre-wide emergency vehicle access will need to be maintained through the area during the course of the street fair. Appropriate advance notice signs will be strategically installed at least two weeks prior to the event to alert motorists of the proposed closures. In addition, 'No Parking - Special Event' signs will be affixed over all existing parking restriction signs within the closed roads on the afternoon of the day prior to the event - Saturday 20 September 2025.

Adequate vehicular traffic control shall be provided for the protection and convenience of pedestrians and motorists including appropriate signage and flagging. Workers shall be specially designated for this role (and carry appropriate certificates), as necessary to comply with this condition. This is to be carried out in accordance with the Australian Standard AS 1742.3 - Traffic Control Devices for works on roads.

Traffic Management Plan and Traffic Guidance Schemes

A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) has been supplied by CATO Location Services, the scope of which includes the provision for the safe movement of vehicular traffic in and out of the event areas at the Dulwich Hill Village Fair on Sunday 21 September 2025. The TMP is attached at the end of this report. The Traffic Guidance Schemes (TGS) are reproduced below.

Authorised traffic controllers will install barricades and signage and maintain closure points as per the Traffic Guidance Schemes.

It is noted that there will be a slight modification to existing signage at the traffic lights at New Canterbury Road and Marrickville Road where there is a right hand turn arrow. Multiple signs have been planned to warn motorists to ignore the signal.

Impacts on traffic

Access around the event area will involve detours. Traffic will have to be directed to Wardell Road and Frazer Street or Beach Road and Durham Street during the closure. Refer to the detour plan below.

The traffic diverted from Marrickville Road and Seaview Street as a result of the proposed road closures, does not coincide with the peak traffic, as the Fair will be held on a Sunday when much lower than weekday traffic volumes are expected. There should be no impact to heavy vehicles. At present there should not be any construction works that will be impact the event. There are no traffic calming devices or traffic generating developments along the route.

It is envisaged that the traffic generated as a result of the proposed festival will not have a major impact on the surrounding traffic network during the event. Furthermore, the arrival and departure of attendees of the Fair is expected to be staggered as in previous years when this event took place.

Impacts on buses

At present, bus services use Marrickville Road and cross New Canterbury Road then turn around in Dulwich Street. The temporary closure of Marrickville Road at its intersection with New Canterbury Road will require buses to use a different route during the closure. Bus amended route changes ae detailed below:

Buses will be diverted off Marrickville Road and Canterbury Road using Frazer Street and Wardell Road as a detour.

The following arrangements apply to the applicable service routes for the event date.

The TMP states that “All other services around the Inner West Council area will not be affected by the road closures. The bus service provider will advise public transport users via their websites, bus stop flyers and smart phone applications. Advice will also be provided on the event page on Council’s website and social media platforms.”

The following stops will be closed during the event and reopen at the completion of the event:

Services heading East - Dulwich Hill, Marrickville Road Nr New Canterbury Rd Stop 220317 Dulwich Hill, Marrickville Road Nr Fairfowl Street Stop 220339 Dulwich Hill Marrickville Road Nr Wardell Street Stop 220340.

Services heading West - Dulwich Hill, Marrickville Road Nr Macarthur Parade Stop 220341 Dulwich Hill, Marrickville Road Nr New Canterbury Road 220342

Transit Systems & Transdev - Trains

It is anticipated that there will be no impact on Sydney Trains, its services, passengers and stations. The nearest train station is Dulwich Hill train station located southwest to the event location.

Light Rail Services

It is anticipated that there will be no impact on Sydney Light Rail, its services, passengers and stations. The nearest light rail stations are Dulwich Hill, Dulwich Grove and Arlington located west to the event location.

Taxi and Rideshare providers

Taxis and ride-share providers will continue to have access to the road network around the closures as per other road users. No additional drop off or pick up standing zones will be arranged for these providers.

Special Event Clearways

No Special Event Clearways are proposed for the event. Council will install NO-STOPPING signage around the area (including 20 spaces in Seaview St carpark) to warn of the upcoming event.

Detailed letter box drops and communications will be forwarded to local resident and commercial operators advising of the road closures, and parking management arrangements.

There are sufficient street parking spaces available and local carparks outside the event road closures for patrons to access, however it is anticipated majority of patrons will arrive on foot, by public transport or Taxi / rideshare.

Impacts on Parking

“No Stopping” signs will be used to reserve parking spaces within the road closure area prior to the road closure time. Council will install “No Stopping Authorised Vehicles Only” in 20 parking bays of the southern Seaview Street carpark for VIP, Performer, Staff and Contractor parking. This will be done by Council officers.

Emergency Lane

A minimum 4 metre emergency lane will be maintained along the entire closure. Traffic controllers will be onsite to assist emergency vehicle through the closure points.

Hostile Vehicle mitigation strategies may be undertaken within the road closure in accordance with the event risk assessment and NSW Police direction.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

The proposed road closure has been advertised on Council’s website in accordance with the Roads Act 1993.

The applicant is to notify all affected residents and businesses in writing at least 7 days prior to the commencement of works. A copy of the draft notification letter is attached below.

The Traffic Management Plan is to be submitted to TfNSW for consideration and approval and a Road Occupancy License application is to be submitted to the Transport Management Centre by CATO Location Services.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Funding of $105,100 has been allocated by Council for organising the ‘Dulwich Hill Festival event under the 2025/2026 Major Community Events Program.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council support the temporary full road closure on Sunday 21 September 2025 subject to complying with the recommendations stated in this report along with all standard conditions for temporary full road closures as detailed in Condition 10 of the S68201800008 development consent for the event.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩

2025 TMP_inc_TGS_Dulwich Hill Festival

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Item No: LTC0525(1) Item 9

Subject: Marrickville Road, Marrickville – Temporary full road closure for Marrickville Music Festival – Sunday 12 October 2025 (Midjuburi - Marrickville Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West PAC)

Prepared By: Jennifer Adams - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Jason Scoufis - Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the proposed temporary full road closure of Marrickville Road (between Illawarra Road and Victoria Road), Central Lane (between Victoria Road and Meeks Road), Seymour Lane (between Garners Lane and Garners Avenue and between Frampton Avenue and Garners Lane), Garners Lane (north of Seymour Lane) along with short sections of Silver Street, Garners Avenue, Gladstone Street, and Frampton Avenue where these streets intersect with Marrickville Road, Marrickville be APPROVED for the purpose of holding the ‘Marrickville Music Festival’ Event on Sunday 12 October 2025 between 01:30am and 11:00pm as per the submitted TMP and TGSs and subject to the following conditions and all standard Council conditions for temporary full road closures.

2. That a Road Occupancy License application be obtained from the Transport Management Centre.

3. That notice of the proposed event be forwarded to the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Transit Systems, the NSW Fire Brigades and the NSW Ambulance Services.

5. That a minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed sections.

6. That the occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Inner West Council is presenting Marrickville Music Festival on Sunday 12 October 2025 from 12:00noon until 6:00pm. The event will feature multiple outdoor live music stages across the festival site. Including activation of Marrickville laneways through music and art. As part of the event there will be a temporary full road closure of Marrickville Road and Central Lane. This will require some road detours and bus diversions in surrounding streets. Event bump in will occur from 01:30am and bump out will conclude by 11:00pm. It is recommended that Council agree to the temporary full road closures subject to all standard Council conditions for a temporary full road closure.

BACKGROUND

Marrickville Festival is an annual event successfully held over numerous years. This year Marrickville Music Festival will be another celebration of live music in the Inner West. The event will run on Sunday 12 October 2025 from 12noon to 6pm and will feature multiple outdoor live music stages across the festival site.

Stages will be set up across the event site including the activation of Marrickville laneways through music and art. The Marrickville Music Festival will be a showcase of music talent from the Inner West, with over 40 acts to play in the one-day event. Stages will host both established and up and coming bands from the Inner West. Music venues in Marrickville will be also encouraged to participate in the festival program to highlight the vibrant array of venues that reside in the Marrickville area.

As part of the Marrickville Music Festival site furniture will be set up within the space created by the temporary road closure, allowing patrons to purchase food from local Marrickville businesses and enjoy the atmosphere while supporting local businesses and enhancing economic activity over the day. Visitors to the festival will be encouraged to engage with local businesses within their retail spaces increasing footfall, and as such experience the true Marrickville and embrace the precinct for its vast array of unique businesses and food experiences.

The Marrickville Music Festival will also host an Inner West Brewery showcase, with local breweries setting up stalls so patrons can taste Inner West offerings. Food and art stalls will be located in pockets around the site to showcase local Inner West product and creativity. Programming for families will be available along with cultural experiences from local creatives.

As part of the event there will be a partial road closure of Marrickville Road and Central Lane. This will require some road detours and bus diversions in surrounding streets. To facilitate the event the following roads will be affected from 01.30 hours to 23.00 hours Sunday 12 October 2025:

· Marrickville Road between Illawarra Road and Victoria Road

· Silver Street between Marrickville Road and 25 metres north of Marrickville Road

· Garners Avenue between Garners Avenue Carpark and Marrickville Road

· Seymour Lane between Garners Lane and Garners Avenue

· Frampton Avenue between Seymour Lane and Marrickville Road

· Gladstone Street between Marrickville Road and Marrickville Lane

· Silver Street between Sydenham Road and 25 metres north of Marrickville Road (Resident Access Excepted)

· Garners Avenue between Illawarra Road and Garners Avenue Carpark (Resident Access Excepted)

· Seymour Lane between Frampton Avenue and Garners Lane (Resident Access Excepted)

· Garners Lane north of Seymour Lane (Resident Access Excepted)

· Central Lane between Victoria Road and Meeks Road

· Victoria Lane between Sydenham Road and Central Lane (Resident Access Excepted)

OFFICER COMMENTS

The event area will be on Marrickville Road between Illawarra Road and Victoria Road (refer to the site map below – Marrickville Music Festival Area). This year Council’s Event Coordinator has appointed ‘Who Dares Pty Ltd’ to prepare the Traffic Management Plan (TMP) and Traffic Guidance Schemes (TGS) for the event. A copy of the TMP and TGSs are attached at the end of this report.

Site map

Access around the event site will be maintained by a detour. The detour loop will include Illawarra Road, Sydenham Road, Victoria Road and Calvert Street.

No special event clearways will be installed for this event. Inner West Council will instead install No Stopping signage throughout the event precinct prior to the event. Any remaining vehicles will be towed and parked in a nearby location on the morning of the event.

This event is classified as a Class 2 event under the TfNSW’ Special Events Guide where it impacts local traffic and transport systems but does not impact major traffic and transport systems and it disrupts the non-event community in the area around the event but not over a wide area. The event requires the involvement of Police and Local Council and a detailed Transport Management Plan (TMP).

Impacts on buses - Transit Systems & Transdev NSW Buses amended route changes

Transit Systems services 418, 423, 423X, 425 & 426 & Transdev NSW N40 service will all be impacted by the event road closures. These services will be detoured around the event precinct. Council will arrange for signage will be placed at impacted bus stops to direct passengers to the nearest stop. Refer to Annex 1 of the attached TMP for Transit Systems and Transdev Bus detour maps at a larger scale and to Annex 2 for Bus Stop signage.

Impacts Sydney Trains

The closest train station is Sydenham Station. It is approximately 680 metres walk from the event precinct.

The extension of Sydney Metro services from Sydenham to Bankstown will now be completed in 2026. During this time there is a temporary closure of the T3 Bankstown Line - Sydenham to Bankstown. Fare free Southwest Link buses are replacing trains between Sydenham and Bankstown.

The SW1, SW2 & SW3 routes are impacted by Marrickville Music Festival. Bus detour reroutes to be determined in conversation with Sydney Metro and will be included in a subsequent version of this TMP. For public transport information please visit https://transportnsw.info/

Impacts on pedestrians and cyclists

There will be no major effect to pedestrians in the area. Pedestrians will be able to use the existing pedestrian paths outside of and within the event area.

There are no cycleways directly impacted by this event. Cyclists entering the event site will be requested to dismount.

Impacts on Parking

Parking will only be available in surrounding residential streets and a few small public carparks around the event site. Parking will as such be limited, and the event organiser will be recommending public transport to all event patrons.

Impacts on traffic

The traffic diverted from Marrickville Road as a result of the proposed road closures, does not coincide with the peak traffic, as the festival will be held on a Sunday when lower than weekday traffic volumes are expected. Therefore, the traffic generated because of the proposed festival will not have a major impact on the surrounding traffic network during the event. Furthermore, the arrival and departure of attendees of the festival is expected to be staggered as it is every year when this event takes place.

At present, there is no indication of construction works that will be impact the event. There are no traffic calming devices or traffic generating developments along the route.

Heavy vehicles may experience slight delays due to increased traffic around the event precinct. Heavy vehicles should follow signposted detours.

A minimum four (4) metre emergency lane will be maintained along the entire closure. Traffic controllers will be onsite to assist emergency vehicles through the closure points.

Hostile Vehicle mitigation strategies may be undertaken within the road closure in accordance with the event risk assessment and NSW Police direction.

Traffic Management Plan and Traffic Guidance Schemes

An accredited Who Dares Traffic Manager will oversee implementation of the Traffic Guidance Schemes, including road closures.

Temporary traffic control signage, barricades and equipment as per the supplied Traffic Guidance Schemes must be installed by TfNSW or SafeWork accredited traffic controllers with a current “Implement Traffic Control Plan” certificate. Any person operating a Stop/Slow bat onsite must hold a current “Traffic Controller” certificate.

A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) has been supplied by Who Dares Pty Ltd, the scope of which includes the provision for the safe movement of vehicular traffic in and out of the event areas at the Marrickville Festival on Sunday 12 October 2025. The TMP and Traffic Guidance Schemes (TGS) are reproduced in full at the end of this report.

TGS 01A Sydenham Road, Illawarra Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 01B Sydenham Road, Illawarra Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 01C Sydenham Road, Illawarra Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 02A Marrickville Road & Illawarra Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 02B Marrickville Road & Illawarra Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 02C Marrickville Road & Illawarra Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 03A Marrickville Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 03B Marrickville Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 03C Marrickville Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 03D Marrickville Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 03E Marrickville Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

TGS 04 Calvert Street, Illawarra Road & Victoria Road MARRICKVILLE

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

The proposed temporary full road closures have been advertised in accordance with the Roads Act 1993.

Advice of the proposed event must be forwarded to all the appropriate authorities, including emergency services. A copy of the draft notification letter is attached at the end of this report.

The TMP states that: “All affected residents will be notified of the event through:

• Letterbox drop will be conducted for impacted residents within and near the road closure precinct at least two weeks prior to the event.

• Date & time specific corflute “Special Event – Road Closed” signs to be placed around the event precinct 14 days prior to the event.”

There is no VMS placement for this event

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Funding of $178,000 has been allocated by Council for organising the Marrickville Music Festival under the 2025/2026 Major Community Events Program.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council agree to the temporary full road closures on Sunday 12 October 2025 subject to complying with the recommendations stated in this report along with all standard conditions for temporary full road closures.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩	Marrickville Music Festival 2025 - TMP -
2.⇩	Marrickville Music Festival 2025 - TGS - Version 1.2

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Item No: LTC0525(1) Item 11

Subject: Warham Lane, Marrickville – Notice of Motion – Parking traffic plan for Henson Park events (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward /Summer Hill Electorate /Inner West LAC)

Prepared By: Jennifer Adams - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Jason Scoufis - Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

That a 15-metre length of “No Parking’ restrictions along with statutory 10 metre ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed on the section of Warham Lane between Carew Lane and Malakoff Street, Marrickville in order to improve access to resident’s off-street parking.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

At the Council Meeting held 12 November 2024 a Notice of Motion (NoM) for ‘Parking traffic plan for Henson Park events’ (C1124(1) Item 20) was resolved. Part 2 was for consideration of consulting local residents of Sydenham Road to determine whether ‘No Parking’ restrictions were required in Warham Lane. This report provides the outcome of the local consultation conducted.

BACKGROUND

At the Inner West Council meeting of 12 November 2024, Council acknowledged outcomes resulting from recent sporting events at Henson Park.

It was noted that the popularity of the Sydney Swans Women’s and Giants AFL at Henson Park attracts fans from all over Sydney. Many prefer to drive which is impacting surrounding residents due to limited parking. Game days start at 10am continuing through to 6pm, creating traffic and parking issues during these times.

The properties opposite Henson Park on Sydenham Road have rear lane access in Warham Lane but are often unable to enter/exit their properties on game days as spectators park in the lane, opposite their garages, obstructing access.

Subsequently, Council resolved the following:

That Council consult the residents of Sydenham Road (Warham Lane) that are impacted by the parking in the rear lane impeding access to their garages by signposting no parking signs.

Separately, in relation to this NoM, it is noted that Council has also requested that AFL ACT/NSW undertake the following:

1. Provide a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to close Centennial Street north to all traffic except for residents and Tennis Court/Restaurant users only, on game days (a TMP was provided for the same issue in nearby Woodlands Street in 2024).

2. Collaborate with Transport for NSW (TfNSW) to investigate options to provide shuttle bus services between Henson Park and both Sydenham Station and Stanmore Station to encourage patrons to travel by public transport

Additionally, Council is also exploring options with Marrickville High School to allow pay-parking for spectators within the school grounds on game days.

This report, however, provides an outcome of the requested consultation survey conducted of the residents on Sydenham Road backing onto Warham Lane, Marrickville.

DISCUSSION

Warham Lane is a narrow lane 166 metres in length and 4.9 metres kerb to kerb. It runs north south parallel to Sydenham Road between Northcote Street and Despointes Street and is bisected mid-way by Malakoff Street on the western side, with each section being further bisected with Carew Lane and Convent Lane respectfully. It provides access to residential properties fronting Sydenham Road.

In 2021 Council received concerns of illegal parking at the intersection of Warham Lane and Convent Lane, Marrickville, resulting in access issues for waste collection vehicles and damage to private property. Community engagement at that time revealed that rear lane off-street parking issues were experienced by some residents, therefore additional restrictions were recommended to alleviate issues. The following recommendations were proposed and installed (refer to diagram below):

• A 10m statutory ‘No Stopping’ zone on southern side of Warham Lane, Marrickville, west of its intersection with Convent Lane,

• A 10m statutory ‘No Stopping’ zone on western side of Convent Lane, Marrickville, south of its intersection with Warham Lane,

• A 10m statutory ‘No Stopping’ zone on southern side of Warham Lane, Marrickville, east of its intersection with Malakoff Street, and

• A 15m ‘No Parking’ zone on southern side of Warham Lane, Marrickville, between Malakoff Street and Convent Lane.

Consultation

As part of the investigation into parking requirements related to events at Henson Park consultation was conducted between 27 March 2025 and 18 April 2025. A letter outlining a proposal to install ‘No Parking’ restrictions on the southern side of Warham Lane, Marrickville between Northcote Street and Despointes Street (not including the already ‘No Parking’ section between Malakoff Street and Convent Lane) to improve access to off-street parking for adjacent residents was sent to residents / businesses in the immediate locality. (Refer to the consultation plan below).

A total of 17 letters were distributed. There were three (3) responses a return rate of 18%. Resident’s responses are discussed below.

Residents’ Comments	Officer Comments
I am a resident of Sydenham Road, Marrickville, where I have lived since 2017. Throughout this time, I have consistently parked my vehicle behind my house on Warham Lane. My property has two garage doors; however, these are not used for vehicle storage, so direct garage access is not a priority for me. That said, I have an arrangement with my neighbours, who do utilize their garages, to ensure there is sufficient space for them to enter and exit their parking areas without obstruction. Parking in the lane is particularly important to me, as the increasing use of Henson Park for events has significantly impacted the availability of on-street parking. Warham Lane has consistently provided a reliable parking option, which I rely on. If any parking restrictions are being considered, I believe they should be limited to event days, with exemptions for local residents to ensure continued access. I appreciate your time and consideration of this matter. Please let me know if any further information is required.	Comments noted.
Resident wants to know if Warham Lane is going to be designated No Parking/ No Stopping. Resident says that he didn't receive notification and it is going to affect him badly as he lives alongside this lane.	Noted. The subject section of Warham Lane adjacent the resident’s property is already designated ‘No Parking’ along with statutory 10 metre “No Stopping’ restrictions.
In addition to having 'No Parking' restrictions on the Southern Side of Warham Lane, is it possible to also have 'No Parking' restrictions on the Northern Side of Warham Lane? I ask this because as a resident, I use Warham Lane to access my car spot on my property via Warham Lane - however, on occasions, especially when there is a sporting event at Henson Park - people have parked in front of my garage and left it there for the day. When contacting police and council - their response is 'But does it say 'No Parking'? (I would assume having a garage there would mean no parking ???)	The subject section of Warham Lane between Carew Lane and Malakoff Street is at present unrestricted parking and ‘No Parking’ restrictions will be installed within this section along with statutory ‘No Stopping’ restrictions. Due to garages being along the northern side it is advocated that the restrictions at this time will only be on the southern side (opposite garages).

Conclusion

At this time, it appears that some residents are impacted by parking in the laneway associated with events at Henson Park however there was no decisive endorsement for ‘No Parking’ restrictions along the whole southern side of Warham Lane, between Northcote Street and Despointes Street (not including the already ‘No Parking’ section between Malakoff Street and Convent Lane).

For the section of Warham Lane between Carew Lane and Malakoff Street it is recommended to install a 15-metre length of “No Parking’ restrictions along with statutory 10 metre ‘No Stopping’ restrictions. (as per the diagram below) in order to improve access to resident’s off-street parking.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil.

Local Traffic Committee Meeting

19 May 2025

Item No: LTC0525(1) Item 12

Subject: The Esplanade/Markham Place, Ashfield-Proposed bicycle contra-flow facility (Djarrawunang-Ashfield Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Burwood PAC)

Prepared By: Boris Muha - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Jason Scoufis - Acting Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

That the design plan (Option 3) of a contra-flow facility in the Esplanade/Markham Place, Ashfield, between Brown Street/Fox’s Lane and Markham Lane with signs and markings along the road and use of a section of footway as shared path (as shown in Attachment 3) be approved.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council is proposing a bicycle contra-flow facility in the one-way section of The Esplanade/Markham Place, Ashfield, to allow for bicycle path movement in the back lane areas of the Ashfield CBD from Liverpool Road/Cavill Avenue to Brown Street/Ashfield Station.

The contra-flow facility will prevent the un-safe need for cyclists to travel down Liverpool Road through the CBD to reach either Fox’s Lane or Hercules Street to reach Brown Street or Ashfield Station.

BACKGROUND

A contra- low facility in the Esplanade/Markham Place has been requested by the Bicycle Users Group as part to providing various improved bicycle facility treatments throughout the Inner West Council.

The Esplanade/Markham Place (between Brown Street/Fox Lane and Markham Lane) measures

in road width from approximately 3.7 along the Esplanade to 6.5m (at the dog leg-reverse kerb section of the laneway) down to approximately 4.9-5.2m in Markham Place.

The Esplanade/Markham Place (between Brown Street/Fox Lane and Markham Lane)

is one-way westbound. This one-way westbound system has been well established over the years and prevents traffic from rat-running from Liverpool Road to Brown Street.

The subject section of the Esplanade/Markham Place is mainly ‘No Stopping’ on both sides with an indented loading zone bay to the eastern side of the dogleg, and section of ‘No Parking’ on the southern side of Marham Place closer to Markham Lane.

The existing road width conditions and traffic directions of the Esplanade/Markham Place and surrounding streets are shown in Figure1. Existing street view photos of the Esplanade/Markham Place are shown in Figure 2.

DISCUSSION

The following information is provided in discussion.

Figure 1. Locality Plan

Street Name	The Esplanade/Markham Place
Carriageway width (m) kerb to kerb	3.7m near Fox’s Lane to 8.3m to 4.9m near Markaham Place.
Carriageway type	One-way westbound.
Classification	Local
Speed Limit km/h	40 (high pedestrian activity area)
85^th percentile speed km/h	32
Vehicles per day (vpd)	Less than 1000
TfNSW available reported crash history (last 5 years)	NIL in the last 5 years, (1)x 2014- Pedestrian walking with Traffic RUM 4- minor injury. (1) x2010 vehicle turning left from intersection at Fox’s Lane into object- non-casualty.
Parking arrangements	No Stopping/ No Parking. Indented Loading zone area eastern side of the dog-leg.
Side intersecting street	Fox’s Lane and Markham Lane

Table 1. Road Network detail.

(2) design options were initially provided for under a report by Barros Van den Dool Active Transport Pty Ltd in reference to the TfNSW Technical Directions for Bicycle contra-flow facilities.

These were as follows:

Option 1-

Provide simply "Bicycles Excepted” (R9-3) signs at each end and in the reverse curve, supported by bicycle pavement stencil (PS2) – see plan in Attachment 1.

This may be suitable for a full straight section of road with clear vision of traffic and bicycles in the opposing direction under low speed and traffic volume conditions.

Option 2-

Option 1 plus green pavement contra-flow lane designation at each end and in the reverse curve of the lane to emphasise the educational strength of the facility and enforce bicyclists to keep to the left-hand side of the lane.

This would be more applicable when the sight distance of vehicles and bicyclists around a bend of a road is restricted. - see plan in Attachment 2.

Traffic counts and observations on site reveal that The Esplanade/Markham Place provides service vehicle access to the rear of various properties, with large vehicle movements up to 5% in volume of traffic. Swept path movements of a design garbage truck shows such vehicles needing to turn wide coming around the corner of the reverse curve (dog leg) from The Esplanade into Markham Place. Other vehicles are similar noted to turn out wide with restricted sight view of opposing bicycles. Bicyclists are then at risk with vehicles blindly turning into the path of any oncoming bicyclist at the dog leg.

In view of this, an alternate and preferred Option 3 is therefore considered and shown in plan Attachment 3. This option provides design elements of Option 1 and 2 but allows for bicyclists to come off safely onto the western footway side of the dog leg section of the lane. Cyclists can reemerge back onto to the road at the straight section of The Esplanade in view of opposing traffic.

The plan for option 3 is as follows:

Ø Provide ‘Bicycles Excepted’ signage under the existing ‘No Entry’ to the western side of Markham Place (east of Markham Lane) and under the one-way signs at the eastern end of The Esplanade.

Ø Provide 5 metres of short length green pavement bicycle lane marking and bicycle pavement stencils at the start on the western end of the Esplanade/Markham Place, and at the corner of the dog leg section of the Esplanade to keep cyclists to left hand side and direct them onto the footpath.

Ø Build bicycle ramps onto and out from the footpath at the corners to the dog leg section of the Esplanade/Markham Place.

Ø Define a shared path zone area for pedestrian and bicycles via way of signage in accordance with the Technical Directions/ NSW Bicycle guidelines. Note that the zone is identified on public land. The footpath or footway elsewhere is under private land to the adjoining property. The shared path zone area is also located away of any concentrated pedestrian traffic.

Ø Provide warning bicycle ‘use footpath’ and ‘watch for’ bicyclist signage.

Ø Provide bicycle pavement stencils along The Esplanade. A green pavement length of bicycle lane marking is not provided at the end of the Esplanade with Fox’s Lane/Brown Street as vehicles turn close to the corner and there is insufficient road width to formally apply lane marking according to the TfNSW bicycle guidelines.

It should be noted that Council at its meeting on 25 February 2020 did adopt the following recommendation of its traffic committee that:

‘A bicycle contra-flow treatment in Markham Place/The Esplanade, Ashfield, between Markham Lane and Fox Lane/Brown Street, be approved in principle and listed on Council’s future Capital Works Program.’

This report however outlines further and detailed examination to reinforce and propose option 3.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The project is listed in Council’s Traffic Facilities Capital Works program to be carried out in 2025/2026, subject to funding and programming. The work is estimated to be around $14,000.

CONSULTATION

No consultation is required as the proposal does not impact on any parking or vehicle servicing off the lane. Residents will be notified accordingly.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the design plan (Option 3) of a contra-flow facility in the Esplanade/Markham Place, Ashfield, between Brown Street/Fox’s Lane and Markham Lane with signs and markings along the road and use of a section of footway as shared path (as shown in Attachment 3) be approved.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩	Plan Option 1 -Contra-flow bicycle facility- signs and bicycle logo markings. (2 plan sheets)
2.⇩	Plan Option 2- Contra-flow bicycle facility- signs, bicycle logos and bicycle pavement lane markings.
3.⇩	Plan Option 3- Contra-flow bicycle facility- signs, bicycle logos, bicycle pavement lane marking and footway shared path.

Eaton Street, Balmain
Kerb to Kerb Width	8.3m approx.
Carriageway Type	One-way northbound, one travel lane
Classification	Local
Speed Limit	40 km/h
Available TfNSW recorded crash history last 5 years (Q3 2019 – Q2 2024)	No reported crashes at Eaton Street.
Parking Arrangements	Parking permitted on both sides. ’P 5 minute 8am-9am, 2.45pm-3.30pm’ restriction applies during school drop-off/pick-up times. ‘4P ticket 9am-2.45pm, 3.30pm-10pm school days, 8am-10pm other days, permit holders excepted area B2’ restriction applies at other times.

Pedestrian and vehicle count Eaton Street at Gladstone Street, Balmain
Date	Time	Pedestrian (adult)	Pedestrian (child)	Vehicle
7 May 2025	3.00pm – 4.00pm	67	102	77
9 May 2025	8.15am – 9.15am	90	90	115

Street	Between	Side	Average occupancy rate (10am and 2pm)
Douglas Street	Percival Lane West and Bruce Lane East	North	79% (11/14)
Douglas Street	Percival Lane West and Bruce Lane East	South	96% (13/14)
			88% (24/28)

No of properties	30
Responses	7
Response rate	23%
Support	6
Oppose	1
Support rate	86%

Resident’s comments	Officer’s response
Issues are with laneway access and not on-street parking on Douglas Street. Laneway access needs to be rectified first.	The proposed timed permit parking restrictions are intended to take parking pressure off Douglas Lane. ‘No Parking’ and ‘No Stopping’ restrictions are proposed Douglas Lane to ensure laneway and driveway/garage access.
Install on both sides of Douglas Street, not one side. Furthermore, Douglas Street on the southern side is the more problematic location.	Residential parking schemes have been generally placed on one side of the street. This approach aims to give eligible households in the scheme area, who take up a permit, a greater chance of finding parking closer to their property whilst still providing parking opportunities for other users such as businesses in the area, their patrons, visitors to the area and households that are not eligible to participate in the scheme. The proposed timed permit parking restrictions are installed on the northern side of Douglas Street due to current parking issues in Douglas Lane (at the rear of the properties on the northern side)
Difficulty finding parking on Douglas Street and have to park on Bruce Street	Noted.
Commuter parking is affecting the ability to park on Douglas Street. Some households have mobility parking permits and cannot walk long distances. Parking has become worse over time on Douglas Street due to commuter parking	Timed permit parking restrictions are proposed on the northern side of Douglas Street to assist households on Douglas Street find a parking space close to their premises and deter commuter parking.

1.⇩	Proposed Raised Pedestrian Crossing - Eaton Street south of Gladstone Street, Balmain
2.⇩	Swept Path - Proposed Raised Pedestrian Crossing - Eaton Street south of Gladstone Street, Balmain

1.⇩	King Street, Birchgrove Road and Darling Street, Balmain - Proposed Intersection Improvements
2.⇩	King Street, Birchgrove Road and Darling Street, Balmain - Swept Path Analysis

Street Name	Henson Street
Carriageway width (m) kerb to kerb	12.8
Carriageway type	Two-way, one travel lane each direction.
Classification	Local
Speed Limit km/h	50
85^th percentile speed km/h	46
Vehicles per day (vpd)	2,500
TfNSW available reported crash history (last 5 years)	NIL in vicinity of the intersection.
Parking arrangements	Unrestricted parking both sides

Side intersecting street	Herbert Street

1.⇩	Resident parking scheme - consultation plan
2.⇩	Final parking proposal - Douglas Lane Stanmore