TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT
FOR PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (PHASE 1)
ON A PORTION OF PTN 4 OF FARM THORNHILLS NO.388, PORT ALFRED (NDLAMBE MUNICIPALITY)
Prepared for : Bigen Africa (Pty) Ltd
Prepared by : Engineering Advice and Services (041) 5812421
December 2007 CONTENTS
Page
1. Introduction 1
2. Overview of the Development and its Environs 3
3. Data Collection 3
4. Road Safety Assessment 4
5. Network Analysis – Before Development 5
6. Proposed Access Arrangements 6
7. Trip Generation & Distribution 8
8. Network Analysis – After Development 11
9. Public Transport Requirements 12
10. Financial Implications 12
11. Recommendations 12
12. References 14
Annexures:
A - Detailed Traffic Count Data B - SIDRA Output Sheets – 2007 Before Development C - SIDRA Output Sheets – 2007 After Development D - SIDRA Output Sheets – 2012 After Development
Figures:
1 - Locality Plan 2 - Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (2007) – Before Development 3 - Existing Road and Intersection Configuration 4 - Peak Hour traffic volumes 2007 – After development 5 - Peak Hour traffic volumes 2012 – After development 6 - Proposed Intersection Upgrading – R67 / Nemato Access 7 - Proposed Intersection Upgrading – R67 / Air School Access 8 - Proposed Intersection Upgrading – R67 / Wharf Street 9 - Proposed Intersection Upgrading – R67 / R72
1 Traffic Impact Assessment
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Engineering Advice & Services cc was appointed by Bigen Africa (Pty) Ltd during October 2007 to conduct a Traffic Impact Assessment for the proposed Thornhill Integrated Housing Development on a portion of Portion 4 of the Farm Thornhills No. 388 in Port Alfred for the Ndlambe Municipality.
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
A preliminary traffic and transportation assessment prepared for Bigen Africa during March 2007 identified the following issues to be addressed in detail in this TIA:
The operation and safety of traffic on the R67, particularly with regard to pedestrian activity; The operation of affected intersections should be assessed for phases of the development in order to provide the Municipality with an indication of road upgrading costs required to adequately accommodate traffic generated by each phase of the development.
In broad terms, the purpose of the traffic assessment is to determine the extent and nature of the traffic generated by the proposed development, to assess the impact of this traffic on the operation of the associated road network, and to devise solutions for any problems identified. The following key elements, inter alia, are addressed in this TIA:
The suitability and safety of proposals for access to and egress from the site, The capacity of the existing and future road network within the influence radius, and The road upgrading measures required to accommodate the proposed development.
In general, this report serves to satisfy the Ndlambe Municipality and the Department of Roads and Transport of the Province of the Eastern Cape that the traffic impact of the envisaged development is within acceptable limits and that the suggested improvements conform to the standards and parameters set by these authorities.
1.3 METHODOLOGY
The approach followed in conducting the traffic impact assessment is in accordance with accepted general practice and involved the following process:
Present traffic flow patterns were obtained and the affected intersections were analysed, whereafter recommendations were made on the present need for road upgrading, without taking the proposed development into account.
A limited traffic safety assessment was conducted in the vicinity of the site, to determine potential road safety deficiencies that currently exist and to inform proposals for the geometric design of road improvements that may be required.
Given the extent of the development, the expected number of trips that will be generated by the northern (first) phase of the development were determined by using applicable trip generation rates as recommended by the National Department of Transport.
The distribution of the generated trips was estimated, whereafter the generated traffic was assigned to the surrounding road network.
Once again, the functioning of the affected intersections were analysed and recommendations made on the need for road upgrading, for both the current (2007) and future (2012) planning horizons.
The access requirements and the location of the access points were determined. The access points were then analysed for the applicable planning horizons in order to ensure that they operate at acceptable levels of service.
By taking into account the major findings of the study, conclusions were made regarding the financial responsibilities of the affected parties for the required road upgrading measures.
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 TU2y2qerewyx
si2vygesyx
UP2y2ie2vyxhyx
UP2y2y2ivsefir
vimits2of2viility
rojet2itleX
nd rojetionX epprovedX repredX2g
hislimer2of2rrnty
IHH H IHH PHH QHH RHH SHH THH UHH VHH weters
qussEgonform
ie2mkes2no2wrrnty2of
ryxrsvv2D2y2evpih2E2se
ny2kindD2expressed2or2impliedD2
ghekedX2gr
with2regrd2to2the2dt2nd
shll2not2e2held2lile2in2ny2event
for2ny2inidentil2or2onsequentil ingineerX gientX
dmges2in2onnetion2with
hwg2xoX ingineering2edvie
or2rising2out2of2the2use2of2this2dtF hrwing2itleX
rojet2xoX
he2dt2remins2the2sole2property2of nd2ervies
the2gvsix2nd2my2only2e2used2for2the2
SHTGqisGpigure2QFpr gevi2I2X2RHDHHH purposes2of22projet2with2the2prior2
@PSPEgEHVA psq i2I hteX written2pprovl2of2the2gvsixF hteX hteX2higiwfi2PHHR elX2@HRIA2SVI2PRPI psq i2I2E2vygevs2vex 3 Traffic Impact Assessment
2. OVERVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND ITS ENVIRONS
As can be seen from Figure 1, the development is situated to the east of Port Alfred adjacent to the R67 provincial route between Port Alfred and Grahamstown (TR 04501), on a portion of Portion 4 of the Farm Thornhills No. 388, which covers an area of 251 hectares and is currently undeveloped.
The Nemato residential area abuts the site to the west of the R67. Land to the south east and north of the site is used for agricultural purposes. The railway line to Grahamstown borders the site to the south and southeast. 43 Air School is located to the northwest of the proposed development to the north of Nemato.
The proposed development is split into two main portions, a southern portion of 100 hectares and a northern portion of 151 hectares. Detailed land use planning has been finalised for the northern portion of the development, which will be developed as Phase 1 during 2008. The southern portion is of greater environmental significance, and as such View of site from the railway line to the north development proposals have yet to be finalised, pending
finalisation of the environmental issues on this portion.
This TIA will thus focus on the proposed development of the northern portion.
The integrated development concept provides for the development of residential land use of varying densities, with provision for business sites in the development that will be developed in parallel with the residential erven, possibly by private enterprise. The intention is to develop the area in an integrated manner, such that new residents in the area have access to as many facilities and amenities as possible.
The proposed development of the northern portion comprises of a total of 2551 Residential I erven comprising of 1507 single storey units and 744 semi-detached units, 653 Residential III units (2 storey row houses), 462 Residential IV units (2/3 storey apartments), 8 business sites, 2 school sites, 4 church sites and 6 community sites (crèches, community halls, retirement homes).
3. DATA COLLECTION
3.1 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES
As the development has a major impact on the R67 and R72 provincial roads, it was agreed with the District Roads Engineer of the Eastern Cape Department of Roads and Transport that the TIA should investigate the impact of the development on intersections on the R72 and R67 adjacent to the site. Accordingly, peak hour traffic turning movement counts were conducted at the following intersections during weekday evening and morning peak periods on Tuesday 6 and Wednesday 7 November 2007 respectively.
R67 / R72 R67 / Wharf Street R67 / Nemato access road Main Road / Wharf Street
The detailed survey data is attached as Annexure A and is summarised on Figure 2 overleaf.
View of approach to Wharf Street / R67 intersection from the south along the R67
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 4 Traffic Impact Assessment
n
w 9
4
o
t
1
6
s /
1
/ 1
Figure 2 : 2007 Traffic Volumes m
LEGEND 5
a 5
1
1
h
a r
10 / 21 - AM / PM G 4 / 4 15 / 16
43 Air School
6
3
3
5
1
9 1
7
/ Thornhill 2
/
2
/ 0
/ 1
6
6 5
6 1
1 1 N 2
15 / 18 0 63 / 5
2
1
6
1 7
1
5 1
1
Nemato / 6 /
1
/ 2
/ 7
6
5
6 6
1
3 1 8 / 111 arf Street 157
Wh 85 / 61
7
6
R
6
4
3
3
CBD 1
1
2
2
4
/ /
/
7
Station Hill
/ 8 0
1
1
2 4
7
2 1 6
159 / 168 /34 32 /30 45 182 / 117 18 P 164 / 116 East Lo 182 / 3 as R72 ndon / 143 co East Bank 24 / 13 153 e Cr es t ce 42 / 47 Stree 21 n 116 / 155 ain 2 / t M 98 29 11 / 9 / 2 18
Marina /15 25 /32 24 6 7 /
Figure 2 : Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Before Development - 2007
3.2 DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
As this study will also analyse the impact of the development in 2012, daily traffic volumes at permanent and temporary count stations on the R72 were obtained from the Department of Roads and Transport in order to determine average traffic growth. Data obtained for traffic counts from 2000 to 2005 indicates an average growth of approximately 5% per annum over this period. It is assumed that the average annual growth over the next five years will be similar to average growth over the previous six-year period.
An average growth of 5% per annum was therefore used to project peak hour traffic growth from 2007 to 2012.
3.3 ROAD NETWORK AND INTERSECTION CONFIGURATION
The existing road network and intersection configuration were roughly measured up using a tape measure. The primary road network can briefly be described as follows:
Regional Route 72 is a route of national and provincial significance and comprises of a 3,7m wide traffic lane and 3m wide gravel shoulders in each direction in the vicinity of the R67. Right turn lanes are provided on both approaches to the R67. The posted speed limit is 60km/h in the vicinity of the R67. The road is in a good condition.
Regional Route 67 is a route of national and provincial significance and comprises of a 3,7m wide traffic lane and 2.5m wide surfaced shoulders in each direction View of R72 / R67 intersection from the west
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 5 Traffic Impact Assessment
between the R72 and the northern edge of Nemato. Kerbing and 2m wide sidewalks are also provided on both sides of the road between the R72 and a point approximately 450m north of the railway line. The posted speed limit is 60km/h in the vicinity of the site. The road is in a good condition for a distance of approximately 1.8km from the R72, at which point, the shoulder changes to gravel. From this point northwards, the road condition can be considered to be in a fair to poor condition. The road widens to accommodate a passing lane at the Wharf Street intersection. View of R67 to north (south of Nemato Access)
Wharf Street, a residential collector road, links the Port Alfred CBD with the Nemato residential area situated west of the R67. The road is surfaced (albeit in a poor condition) and comprises of a single 3.5m lane per direction. Between the access road to Nemato and the R67 (a distance of approximately 250m), the road surface widens to include a 2.5m surfaced shoulder per direction. The road edge is not kerbed apart from the eastern edge at the bottom of the hill and on the approaches to Main Street. The approaches to the R67 and Main Street in the CBD are stop controlled. Prior to the construction of the R67 between the R72 and Wharf Street, this road View of Main Road from Wharf Street served as the main link between Port Alfred and Grahamstown.
The existing road and intersection configuration in the vicinity of the development is indicated on Figure 3.
4. ROAD SAFETY ISSUES
A number of traffic safety issues were observed along the R67 and Wharf Street in the vicinity of the proposed development, that if attended to would lead to an improvement of traffic safety along these roads even before any development occurs. These issues are indicated on Figure 3.
4.1 SIGHT DISTANCES There is inadequate advanced warning of the entrance into the Port Alfred urban area from the north. The posted speed limit of 100km/h is only reduced to 80km/h after the Nemato Access Road intersection. This situation is compounded by the lack of surfaced shoulders which could allow through traffic to pass slow moving right-turning traffic, as well as heightened pedestrian activity from this intersection towards Port Alfred.
Furthernore, both the Nemato and 43 Air School access road intersections are situated on crests and are not clearly visible to approaching traffic from both the south and west. Shoulder sight distances towards the north and south appear to be adequate, but safety would be significantly improved were the posted speed limit to be reduced to 80km/h on the approach to 43 Air School access road and then reduced to 60km/h on the approach to the Nemato access road. The introduction of high visibility signage should also be considered on the approach from the north. This issue was also documented in the Road Safety Audit (1) conducted on the R67 during 2004 by Stewart Scott View from Nemato Access towards Port Alfred International on behalf of the Department of Roads and
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 6 Traffic Impact Assessment
Transport.
4.2 ROAD SIGNS AND MARKINGS. Road signs along both the R67 and Wharf Street are inadequate. As stated above, no advance warning signs are in place on the approaches to Port Alfred, the Nemato Access Road and Wharf Street. In addition, no signs warning motorists of sharp curves have been provided in Wharf Street on the approaches to the Port Alfred CBD, and advance warning of the railway crossing is inadequate.
4.3 ROAD SURFACE Wharf Street is in a poor condition with numerous repaired potholes indicating evidence of road failure. The older Lack of warning signs in Wharf Street section of the R67 is also in a poor condition with deformation of the road surface evident.
4.4 PUBLIC TRANSPORT / PEDESTRIANS While traffic surveys indicate that public transport volumes are low, no formal public transport facilities have been provided along Wharf Street or the R67. Significant pedestrian volumes were observed along Wharf Street and the R67. A pedestrian sidewalk is however under construction along Wharf Street. No sidewalks are provided along the R67 north of the railway line.
No sidewalks along R67 Pedestrian sidewalk under construction in Wharf Street
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 TU2y2qerewyx
xey2yeh rsqriih2eyegr2pyw2qerewyx
qeiv2ry vhi2ihqi2fieuGhy2ypp sxehi ei2ehexgih2exsxq2yp2 fex2eie
5
RQ2es2gryyv
5
xy2weusxq
xy2ehexgih2exsxq2yp2sxiigsyx
xy2pixgsxq
5
xy2shievu
5
xy2pixgsxq
5
sxehi ei2ihisex2pegsvssi
yy2vsqrsxq
rep2ii
sxehi ei2exsxq2sqxeqi rep2ii
sxehi ei2ehexgih2exsxq
yp2esv2gysxq
5
re2g i
sxehi ei2sqx 5
5
UP2y2ie2vyxhyx
UP2y2y2ivsefir
vimits2of2viility
rojet2itleX
nd rojetionX epprovedX repredX2g
hislimer2of2rrnty
IHH H IHH PHH QHH RHH SHH THH UHH VHH weters
qussEgonform
ie2mkes2no2wrrnty2of
ryxrsvv2D2y2evpih2E2se
ny2kindD2expressed2or2impliedD2
ghekedX2gr
with2regrd2to2the2dt2nd
shll2not2e2held2lile2in2ny2event
for2ny2inidentil2or2onsequentil ingineerX gientX
dmges2in2onnetion2with
hwg2xoX ingineering2edvie
or2rising2out2of2the2use2of2this2dtF hrwing2itleX
rojet2xoX
he2dt2remins2the2sole2property2of nd2ervies
psq i2Q2E2issxq2yeh2xiyu2 the2gvsix2nd2my2only2e2used2for2the2
SHTGqisGpigure2QFpr gevi2I2X2RHDHHH purposes2of22projet2with2the2prior2
@PSPEgEHVA psq i2Q hteX written2pprovl2of2the2gvsixF hteX hteX2higiwfi2PHHR elX2@HRIA2SVI2PRPI exh2epi2yfviw 8 Traffic Impact Assessment
5. NETWORK ANALYSIS – BEFORE DEVELOPMENT
Given the observed traffic turning movement volumes, the traffic situation was analysed in order to determine the Level of Service at which the road network is operating, even before development occurs. The capacity analysis was undertaken using the SIDRA (2) capacity analysis method, but applying the Highway Capacity Manual (3) gap acceptance criteria for unsignalised intersections. The results are shown in Table 1 below and the detailed SIDRA output sheets are attached as Annexure B.
Table 1 : Capacity analysis – 2007 peak hours (before development) Delay (s) Critical Approach V/C LOS Intersection AM PM AM PM AM PM
Wharf Street / Main Street 8.2 9.2 0.545 0.552 A A
R67 / Wharf Street 7.6 7.4 0.296 0.215 A A
R67 / R72 9.3 8.6 0.462 0.395 A A
R67 / Nemato Access Road 4.0 4.6 0.120 0.124 A A
R67 / Air School Access Road 2.4 2.5 0.123 0.125 A A
The results in Table 1 indicate that, currently, all the affected intersections operate satisfactorily in terms of capacity.
6. ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS
Access to the full development is proposed at three locations along the R67. Access to the northern portion of the development – Phase 1 – is proposed directly opposite the existing Nemato Access Road and opposite the access road to 43 Air School. The southern portion of the proposed development – Phase 2 – will gain access directly opposite Wharf Street. The access points to the northern portion of the development will be addressed in this TIA.
The reason for these locations is twofold. Firstly, it allows traffic to be concentrated at existing intersections, at which sight distances meet the necessary requirements. Secondly, suitable pedestrian facilities can be provided between Nemato and the proposed development and channelled through controlled intersections. More importantly, pedestrian activity can be controlled during the initial stages of the development, when there are likely to be high numbers of scholars crossing the R67 to attend schools in Nemato.
Shoulder sight distances were assessed in terms of Figure 2.5.5(a) of TRH 17: Geometric Design of Rural Roads (4). TRH17 indicates that a Single Unit and Trailer Vehicle (e.g. an articulated vehicle) entering a 15m wide road with a design speed of 80 kph requires a minimum shoulder sight distance of 330m. The minimum required shoulder sight distance for a passenger vehicle under these operating conditions is 175m.
Nemato Access Road – south access This intersection is positioned on a crest. A visual inspection to assess the shoulder sight distances from the intersection point was undertaken by driving along the R67. From this inspection, it appears that visibility is good from the proposed intersection both to the north and south. Shoulder sight distances to the south and north are approximately 1.1km and 900m respectively, well above the required minimum of 330m. Sight distance from Nemato intersection towards north
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 9 Traffic Impact Assessment
43 Air School Access Road – north access This intersection is positioned on a crest. A visual inspection to assess the shoulder sight distances from the intersection point was undertaken by driving along the R67. From this inspection, it appears that visibility is good from the proposed intersection both to the north and south. Shoulder sight distances to the south and north are approximately 900m and 600m respectively, well above the required minimum of 330m.
Sight distance from Air School intersection towards north
As discussed in Chapter 4, it is also recommended that the posted speed limit be reduced to 80km/h on the approach to the Air School Access Road (north intersection) from the north, then reduced further to 60km/h on the approach to the Nemato Access road. Both of these speed restriction signs should be High Visibility Signs.
Given the status of the road, and the likelihood of high vehicle speeds due to low traffic volumes, it is recommended that right-turn lanes be provided on the approaches to each access to the development to improve traffic safety.
The location and configuration of the proposed access points are indicated on Figure 6.
7. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
7.1 TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS
7.1.1 Residential Component
The guidelines of the National Department of Transport (5) recommend a peak hour trip generation rate of 0.5 vehicle trips per residential unit for low-income housing with a directional split of 65:35 in the peak period, and 1.1 vehicle trips per residential unit for medium income or cluster housing with a directional split of 75:25 in the peak period.
The single storey and semi-detached residential units are classified as low-income units, while the row housing and apartment units are aimed at the middle-income group.
The peak hour trip generation for Phase 1A and the remainder of the development are as follows:
Phase 1A Given that 347 single storey and 166 semi-detached residential erven will be provided in the first phase of the proposed development, this relates to a peak hour trip generation as follows:
TGR = 0.5 trips / unit * 513 units = 257 trips (in and out) Split (in / out) = 65 : 35
Phase 1B (Remainder) In the remainder of the development 1160 single storey and 578 semi-detached residential erven will be provided as well as 390 row houses and 462 two/three storey apartments. This relates to a peak hour trip generation as follows:
TGR (low) = 0.5 trips / unit * 1738 units = 869 trips (in and out) Split (in / out) = 65 : 35
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 10 Traffic Impact Assessment
TGR (medium) = 1.1 trips / unit * 852 units = 937 trips (in and out) Split (in / out) = 75 : 25
7.1.2 Business Component
Eight business sites are proposed in the entire development, with three in Phase 1A (a gross area of 14 308m2) and five in the remainder of the development (a gross area of 13 970m2). It is assumed that development will take up approximately 50% of the available space per site.
The Department of Transport’s South African Trip Generation Rates (5) recommends a peak hour trip generation rate of 224.5* GLA (-0.34) for shopping centres, which yields peak hour trip generation as follows:
Phase 1A TGR = 224.5* GLA (-0.34) /100m2 * GLA/100 = 224.5* 7154 (-0.34) / 100 m2 * 7154/100 = 10.98 trips / 100 m2 * 7154/100 = 785 trips (in and out) Split (in / out) = 50 : 50
Phase 1B (Remainder) TGR = 224.5* GLA (-0.34) /100m2 * GLA/100 = 224.5* 6985 (-0.34) / 100 m2 * 6985/100 = 11.07 trips / 100 m2 * 6985/100 = 773 trips (in and out) Split (in / out) = 50 : 50
It is noted though that the rates in the DoT Guidelines (5) were determined from shopping centres at which little public transport facilities are available and which are located in areas of high car ownership. In the case of this development, a large portion of customers will probably make use of public transport to get to and from the shopping centre. Furthermore, commuters in the areas surrounding the centre are also likely to walk to and from the centre given the relatively short distances.
In a study conducted for a shopping centre in Port Elizabeth during the mid 1990’s (6), it was motivated that trip generation rates could be reduced by up to 50% in areas where public transport is the dominant mode of transport used by customers of retail centres.
It is motivated that the development is located in an area where the majority of customers are likely to arrive at and depart from the development by foot and minibus-taxi. As such, it is recommended that the generated trips for the retail development be reduced to 75% of the guidelines, in order to be conservative. Applying this factor, results in the following trip generation rates:
Table 2: Trip Generation Rates – Retail Component REDUCED RATE PHASE DOT RATE TRIPS TRIPS (75%)
1A 10.98 / 100m2 785 8.24 589 1B 11.07 / 100m2 773 8.30 580
Furthermore, it is generally also accepted that only 42% of the trips generated by retail developments are considered to be primary trips with the remaining trips being made up of pass-by trips (35%) and diverted trips (23%). In the case of this development, it was conservatively assumed that the diverted trips were also primary trips. Thus 65% of the trips generated by the retail component of the development are assumed to be primary trips.
It is also assumed that approximately 10% of the generated trips for the development will occur during the AM peak hour. These trips will most likely comprise of employees arriving for work as shopping generally only commences after the AM peak hour.
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 11 Traffic Impact Assessment
Applying the reduced trip generation rates results in anticipated vehicle trips as indicated in Table 3 below.
Table 3: Summary of Generated Trips – Retail Component PRIMARY TRIPS PASS-BY TRIPS COMPONENT TRIPS IN TRIPS OUT TRIPS IN TRIPS OUT AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Phase 1A 19 192 19 192 10 103 10 103 Phase 1B to E 19 188 10 188 10 101 10 101 Total 38 380 29 380 20 204 20 204
7.1.3 School Component
The guidelines of the National Department of Transport (5) recommend a peak hour trip generation rate of 0.9 and 0.8 vehicle trips per pupil for secondary and primary schools respectively in the AM peak period. However, these rates were also determined in areas of high car occupancy and medium to high income. It is therefore motivated that trip generation rates be reduced to 50% of the rates contained in the National Department of Transport (5) guidelines to take into account lower income levels and car occupancy rates as well as the higher numbers of pedestrian trips.
Assuming 1000 pupils will be accommodated in the Secondary School in Phase 1A and 1500 pupils in the Primary School in the next phase of the development, this relates to a peak hour trip generation as follows:
Phase 1A - Secondary School TGR = 0.4 trips / pupil * 1000 pupils = 400 trips (in and out) Split (in / out) = 50 : 50
Phase 1B (Remainder) - Primary School TGR = 0.45trips / pupil * 1500 pupils = 675 trips (in and out) Split (in / out) = 50 : 50
7.1.4 Church Component
No trip generation figures are available for churches, given that church activities generally occur outside of peak hours.
However, during surveys conducted recently for the preparation of a TIA for the Bantu Church of Christ in New Brighton, Port Elizabeth (7), a total of 60 trips were observed entering and exiting the church site during the busiest hour during the service. Given that on average approximately 1500 persons attend services at this church on a regular basis, this relates to a vehicle trip generation rate as follows:
TGR = Number of trips / no of persons (seats) = 60 / 1500 = 0.04 trips (in and out) / person (seats) Split (in / out) = 45 : 55
It is assumed that proposed churches in the development will accommodate approximately 2000 persons each. Thus the total number of vehicle trips anticipated to be generated by the two churches in Phase 1 A and the remainder of the proposed development is as follows:
Trips = TGR * no of persons = 0.04* 2000 = 80 trips
It is noted however that these trips are likely to occur on weekends, when commuter traffic is at its lowest. As such the anticipated vehicle trips will not be considered during weekday peak hours.
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 12 Traffic Impact Assessment
7.1.5 Community Facilities
Given the nature of these developments – crèches, retirement homes and community halls, no additional trips have been determined as it has been assumed that these trips will have minimal impact on the road network outside the boundaries of the proposed development.
7.2 SUMMARY OF GENERATED TRIPS
7.2.1 Summary – Phase 1A - 2007
The total trip generation for Phase 1A of the proposed development is summarized in Table 4 below.
Table 4 : Summary of Anticipated Peak Hour Trips – Phase1A - 2007 PRIMARY TRIPS PASS-BY TRIPS COMPONENT TRIPS IN TRIPS OUT TRIPS IN TRIPS OUT AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
Retail 19 192 19 192 10 103 10 103 Residential - Low 90 167 167 90 - - - - Residential - Medium 72 217 217 72 - - - - School (Secondary) 200 0 200 0 - - - - Church 0 0 0 0 - - - - Total 381 384 584 354 10 103 10 103
7.2.2 Phase 1B - 2012
The total trip generation for the reminder of the northern portion (Phase 1B) of the proposed development is summarized in Table 5 below.
Table 5 : Summary of Anticipated Peak Hour Trips – Phase1B - 2012 PRIMARY TRIPS PASS-BY TRIPS COMPONENT TRIPS IN TRIPS OUT TRIPS IN TRIPS OUT AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Retail 19 188 10 188 10 101 10 101 Residential - Low 304 565 565 304 - - - - Residential - Medium 234 703 703 234 - - - - School (Primary) 337 0 337 0 - - - - Church 0 0 0 0 - - - - Total 894 1456 1615 726 10 101 10 101
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 13 Traffic Impact Assessment
7.3 TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The origins for the trip distribution for the proposed development were determined by using the observed weekday AM and PM peak hour trends at the adjacent intersections and considering the location of residential and industrial suburbs surrounding the development as a basis. Furthermore, it was assumed that the bulk of trips generated by the schools and retail components of the development would originate from within the development, and not have a major impact on the municipal road network. As such, it was assumed that only 20% of the trips generated by these components would originate outside the proposed development.
The origins for the weekday AM and PM peak hour trip distribution are therefore assumed to be as follows:
- 20 % to and from north, via R67; - 80 % to and from south, via R67
The trips to the south are further distributed as follows:
- 65 % to and from south via the R67; of which - 15% to the east via the R72; - 15% to the south; and - 70% to the west via the R72 - 35 % to and from Port Alfred via Wharf Street;
It is further assumed that upon completion of Phase 1A, 50% of the generated trips will use the Nemato Access (south) and 50% will use the Air School Access (north). The split for the full development is assumed to be 60% via the Nemato Access and 40% via the Air School Access.
Using these assignments, the projected traffic volumes generated by Phase 1A of the proposed development added to the existing (2007) traffic, are indicated on Figure 4.
The projected traffic volumes generated by Phase 1B of the proposed development and added to the escalated (2012) background traffic, are indicated on Figure 5.
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 14 Traffic Impact Assessment
1 n
9
2
w
Figures 4 and 5 – 2007 and 2012 traffic volumes 1
6
4
o /
1
/
t
/
2
s
1
6
5
2
1 m
LEGEND 1
a
h
a r
10 / 21 - AM / PM G 4 / 4 2 / 4 / 20 Phase 1A 16 42 15 / 4 / 2
43 Air School 170 / 80
6
2 1
9
8
7
2
6 9
3
1
/
7
1
2 /
/
2
/ / 0
1
/ 3
3
2 6
2
9
3
6
8 1 1 N 2 15 / 18 / 5 2 0 63 / 50 42 / 2 / 2 5 0
170 / 8
5
3 9
31 1
7 6
3
2
5
1 1
/
Nemato /
6
/ /
/
4 7
6 2
4
7
6
0 8
2
3 3 2 9 13 / 22 f Street 2 1
Whar 85 / 6
7
6
R
6 4
5
8
CBD 7
3
2
2
4
/ /
/
7
6
Station Hill / 8 3
2
2 5
7 3
2 6 231 322/ 50 66 / 46 81 / 258 / 271 424 P 164 / 116 East Lon 234 / as R72 don / 143 co East Bank 24 / 13 153 e Cr es 58 / 79 t ce Stree 25 n 116 / 155 ain 2 / t M 9 41 11 / 9 8 / 21 8 Marina 15 25 / 64 40 / 6 / 7
Figure 4 : Peak Hour Traffic Volumes After Development - 2007
9 n
6
8
4
w
3
0
1
o /
2
/
t
/
7
s
0
8
9 7
2 m
LEGEND 1
a
h
a r
10 / 21 - AM / PM G 5 / 5 5 / 8 / 66 Phase 1A / 20 150 19 / 5 8 64
43 Air School 599 / 2
8
5 0
3 87
8 7
4
5
7
2
1
4 /
/
3 / /
3
/
2
7
/ 5 4
1
7 Phase 1B
0 9 9
3 8 2
2 3
N 3
19 / 23 6 / 9 / 89 / 64 203 80 / 6 10 56 814 / 3
Nemato
6
5 4
7
9
5
6
94
7 /
3 7
3
/
/
/
1
8
4 7
/ 4 4
7 1
8 0
6
3 1
4 6 4
1 27 / 66 et 4 harf Stre 8
W 108 / 7
4
9
9
CBD 0
4
4
5
7
/
/
9
6
4
3 Station Hill
/ 9
9
2
R 9
/
8
7
7
6 5
701 / 485 701/ 104 189/ 99 205/ 8 530 / 778 41 P 209 / 148 East Lon 437 / 8 as R72 don / 183 co East Bank 31 / 17 195 e Cr es et ce 118 / 194 Stre 48 nt 148 / 198 Main 3 / 50 86 14 / 11 / 2 78 Marina 32 / 19 32 / 175 103 / 8 / 9
Figure 5 : Peak Hour Traffic Volumes After Development - 2012
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 15 Traffic Impact Assessment
8. NETWORK ANALYSIS
8.1 AFTER DEVELOPMENT 2007
Given the observed traffic turning movement volumes, and after adding the traffic that would be generated by the proposed development, the traffic situation was analysed in order to determine the Level of Service at which the affected intersections will operate, after development.
The capacity analysis was undertaken using the SIDRA (2) capacity analysis method, but applying the Highway Capacity Manual (3) gap acceptance criteria for unsignalised intersections. The results are contained in Table 6 below, and the detailed SIDRA output sheets are attached as Annexure C.
Table 6: Capacity analysis – 2007 peak hours (After development) Delay (s) Critical Approach V/C LOS Intersection AM PM AM PM AM PM
Wharf Street / Main Street 13.6 11.8 0.831 0.744 B B
R67 / Wharf Street 8.2 7.9 0.553 0.500 A A
R67 / R72 21.5 12.9 0.953 0.716 C B
R67 / Nemato Access (south) 6.3 5.8 0.308 0.215 A A
R67 / Air School Access (north) 6.1 5.7 0.233 0.135 A A
The results in Table 6 indicate that the affected intersections all operate satisfactorily in terms of capacity. It should be noted however that the south and north intersections were analysed with exclusive right-turn lanes on the R67 approaches to the intersections (as indicated on Figures 6 and 7) in order to ensure safe operation.
8.2 AFTER DEVELOPMENT 2012
Given the escalated traffic turning movement volumes, and after adding the traffic generated by the proposed development, the traffic situation was analysed in order to determine the Level of Service at which the affected intersections and accesses will operate, after development occurs in 2012.
The results are contained in Table 7 below, and the detailed SIDRA output sheets attached as Annexure D.
Table 7: Capacity analysis – 2012 peak hours (After development) Delay (s) Critical Approach V/C LOS Intersection AM PM AM PM AM PM
Wharf Street / Main Street 327.0 183.0 >1.000 >1.000 F F
R67 / Wharf Street 24.2 232.0 1.000 >1.000 C F
R67 / R72 205.0 144.0 >1.000 >1.000 F F
R67 / Nemato Access (south) 419.0 34.5 >1.000 1.000 F D
R67 / Air School Access (north) 12.9 11.6 0.784 0.655 B B
The results in Table 7 indicate that once background traffic and additional trips generated by Phase 1B of the proposed development have been taken into account, all of the affected intersections, with the exception of the R67 /
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 UCTION
LIMIT OF CONSTR
m
8
4 1
1
5
m
7 6
3 R
0
3.7 m m
3.1 m L I M
I T m 3.7 25 m O F
C
O 60 m N S
T
R
U 3 C . 7 T
I 3 O m
. N 7 m 8 2 3 m
. 7
D 3 A L 5 m 3 m S RO I 3 S . . E M C 4 C 4 TH A I SOU T m 3 m
O . 4
F
m C
O
N D SS ROA S E O ACC T NEMAT R
U
C
T
I O
N
3
6
m
1
5
m
1
4
8
m
ION RUCT ONST OF C LIMIT
IVUNYELWE IVUNYELWE IPROJETI / PROJECT INANI UTSHINTSHO / AMENDMENTS UMLINGAN- UMENZI "UMNIKELO" "AS BUILT" - NOTES UMLINGANISELO WOMZOBO OHLISIWEYO CH LESIVUMELWANO ISELO DESIGN APPROVED APPROVED INANI UMHLA INKCAZA IVUNYELWE SCALE ON REDUCED DRAWING ENGINEERING ADVICE CONTRACT NO. NO. DATE DESCRIPTION APPROVED SCALE UMZOBI ANDAND SERVICESSERVICES THORNHILLS INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT - TIA DRAWN CP associated with ULWAZI 73 Heugh Road, Walmer INANI LOMZOBO IVUNYELWE P.O. Box 13867 INJINELI./ENG. UMENZELWA / CLIENT UMZOBONKCAZA / DWG DESCRIPTION CH DWG.NO. 20mm KUMZOBO WANGAPHAMBILI APPROVED Humewood Port Elizabeth 506-FIG-06 1 : 1000 PROPOSED INTERSECTION - 20mm ON ORIGINAL DRAWING UMHLA 6013 UMHLA / DATE UMHLA / DATE NOV 2007 UPGRADING - R67/NEMATO ACCESS DATE tel/fax: (041) 581 2421 UMNIKELO ISSUE LEGEND EXISTING ROAD PROPOSED ROAD WIDENING
PROPOSED ROAD MARKINGS
m
8
4 1
1 5
m
3 6
m
3 . 4
m 3 . 4 3 m 5 . m 3 4
m
m 28
AD RO SS CE AC OL m HO 3.7 SC m AIR 60 3.1 m
3.7 m 3 m 0
25 m R
6
7
1 5
m
1
4
8
m
IVUNYELWE IVUNYELWE IPROJETI / PROJECT INANI UTSHINTSHO / AMENDMENTS UMLINGAN- UMENZI "UMNIKELO" "AS BUILT" - NOTES UMLINGANISELO WOMZOBO OHLISIWEYO CH LESIVUMELWANO ISELO DESIGN APPROVED APPROVED INANI UMHLA INKCAZA IVUNYELWE SCALE ON REDUCED DRAWING ENGINEERING ADVICE CONTRACT NO. NO. DATE DESCRIPTION APPROVED SCALE UMZOBI ANDAND SERVICESSERVICES THORNHILLS INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT - TIA DRAWN CP associated with ULWAZI 73 Heugh Road, Walmer INANI LOMZOBO IVUNYELWE P.O. Box 13867 INJINELI./ENG. UMENZELWA / CLIENT UMZOBONKCAZA / DWG DESCRIPTION CH DWG.NO. 20mm KUMZOBO WANGAPHAMBILI APPROVED Humewood Port Elizabeth 506-FIG-07 N.T.S PROPOSED INTERSECTION - 20mm ON ORIGINAL DRAWING UMHLA 6013 UMHLA / DATE UMHLA / DATE NOV 2007 UPGRADING - R67/AIR SCHOOL ACCESS DATE tel/fax: (041) 581 2421 UMNIKELO ISSUE 18 Traffic Impact Assessment
Air School Access, experience problems in terms of capacity, when analysed with the same intersection configurations as analysed for the 2007 development horizon.
The intersections were then analysed with various improvements, the results of which are indicated in Table 8 below.
Table 8 : Capacity analysis – 2012 peak hours (After development – with improvements) Delay (s) Critical Approach V/C LOS Intersection AM PM AM PM AM PM
Wharf Street / Main Street 48.1 39.1 >1.000 1.008 D D
R67 / Wharf Street (Widening) - 14.7 - 1.000 - B
R67 / R72 (Traffic Signals) 21.1 22.8 1.000 1.000 C C
R67 / Nemato Access (Widening) 22.0 29.0 >1.000 1.000 C D
The analysis of the intersections is discussed in further detail below.
Wharf Street / Main Street Widening of this intersection was considered. However, due to the proximity of the bridge, it is not possible to effect widening. The intersection was therefore analysed with traffic signal control and a left-turn lane on the Wharf Street southbound approach, resulting in an improvement in the average delay from 327 seconds (LOS F) to 48 seconds (LOS D) during the AM peak hour and from 183 (LOS F) to 39 seconds (LOS D) during the PM peak hour.
Wharf Street / R67 This intersection was analysed with a left-turn lane on Wharf Street on the eastbound approach, and an acceleration lane on the R67 exiting the intersection to the north, resulting in an improvement in the average delay from 232 seconds (LOS F) to 15 seconds (LOS C) during the PM peak hour. The proposed improvements are indicated on Figure 8.
R67 / R72 This intersection was analysed with an additional left-turn lane on the R72 eastbound approach and under traffic signal control, resulting in an improvement in the average delay from 25 seconds (LOS F) to 22 seconds (LOS C) during the AM peak hour and from 144 (LOS F) to 29 seconds (LOS D) during the PM peak hour. The proposed improvements are indicated on Figure 9.
R67 / Nemato Access (south) This intersection was analysed with a left-turn lane on the R67 on the southbound approach, and an acceleration lane on the R67 exiting the intersection to the south, as indicated on Figure 6. This configuration resulted in an improvement in the average delay from 419 seconds (LOS F) to 22 seconds (LOS C) during the AM peak hour and from 34.5 to 29 seconds (LOS D) during the PM peak hour.
9. PUBLIC TRANSPORT REQUIREMENTS
Public transport facilities will be provided as part of the detailed design component of the road infrastructure within the development. Given the nature of the R67, it is not considered advisable to provide public transport facilities along the R67, but rather to provide these facilities within the development. In so doing, access to public transport if required will be more convenient and pedestrian traffic will be reduced.
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 INANI DWG.NO. 506-FIG-08 CONTRACT NO. CONTRACT INANI LOMZOBO INANI LESIVUMELWANO ISSUE UMNIKELO LEGEND OPOSED ROAD OPOSED PROPOSED ISLAND PROPOSED ROADMARKING EXISTING ROAD EXISTING PR PROPOSED INTERSECTION - INTERSECTION PROPOSED - R67/WHARFUPGRADING STREET THORNHILLS INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT - TIA DEVELOPMENT INTEGRATED THORNHILLS UMZOBONKCAZA / DESCRIPTION DWG UMZOBONKCAZA IPROJETI / PROJECT IPROJETI
m 80 PPROVED UMHLA / DATE UMHLA A IVUNYELWE UMENZELWA / CLIENT UMENZELWA
m 7 95 R6 PPROVED INJINELI./ENG. / DATE UMHLA A IVUNYELWE
0 m 6013
7 Humewood Port Elizabeth Port
m 13867 Box P.O.
AND SERVICES AND SERVICES
AND SERVICES AND SERVICES m
2421 581 (041) tel:
7 m
. Walmer Road, Heugh 73
2 ENGINEERING ADVICE ENGINEERING ADVICE ENGINEERING ADVICE ENGINEERING ADVICE
associated with ULWAZI associated with ULWAZI associated with ULWAZI associated with ULWAZI
2
7 1
. 3 R
m .7 3 M CH L CH
0 m 2007 NOV 6 m 1.9 ESIGN
PPROVED
UMENZI D m UMZOBI DRAWN UMHLA DATE
IVUNYELWE A
0
6
T
E
E
R
T
S
m F
70 R A
45mm DRAWING ORIGINAL ON H
45mm KUMZOBO WANGAPHAMBILI 45mm WANGAPHAMBILI KUMZOBO SCALE ON REDUCED DRAWING REDUCED ON SCALE W UMLINGANISELO WOMZOBO OHLISIWEYO WOMZOBO UMLINGANISELO ISELO SCALE 1 : 1 1000
UMLINGAN- m
5 4 APPROVED IVUNYELWE INKCAZA DESCRIPTION UTSHINTSHO / AMENDMENTS UTSHINTSHO DATE UMHLA NO. INANI "AS BUILT" - NOTES "AS BUILT" "UMNIKELO" "UMNIKELO" -- INANI DWG.NO. 506-FIG-09 ESIVUMELWANO CONTRACT NO. CONTRACT INANI LOMZOBO INANI L
N ISSUE UMNIKELO PGRADING - R67/R72- PGRADING MZOBONKCAZADWGDESCRIPTION / PROPOSED INTERSECTION - INTERSECTION PROPOSED U THORNHILLS INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT - TIA - THORNHILLSINTEGRATEDDEVELOPMENT U IPROJETIPROJECT /
m 7 3. m .4
3 UMHLADATE / APPROVED IVUNYELWE MENZELWACLIENT / m U 7
3.
m
7
.
3
P
O T PPROVED NJINELI./ENG. S I UMHLADATE / A IVUNYELWE
m
m 7
.
7 3
. 3
m
0 m
6
4
. m 3 .7 m 6013 3 Humewood PortElizabeth .4 13867 Box P.O.
AND SERVICES AND SERVICES tel/fax: (041) 581 2421 581 tel/fax: (041)
3 AND SERVICES AND SERVICES
73 Heugh Road, Walmer Road, Heugh 73
m ENGINEERING ADVICE ENGINEERING ADVICE
ENGINEERING ADVICE ENGINEERING ADVICE
associated with ULWAZI associated with ULWAZI associated with ULWAZI associated with ULWAZI
7
. 3 m .7 CP 3 CH CH
NOV 2007 NOV
m
0 m 6 0 6 PROVED ESIGN ATE UMENZI D UMZOBI DRAWN UMHLA D IVUNYELWE AP 25mmORIGINAL ON DRAWING 25mmKUMZOBO WANGAPHAMBILI SCALE ON REDUCED ON DRAWINGSCALE UMLINGANISELO WOMZOBO OHLISIWEYO WOMZOBO UMLINGANISELO ISELO SCALE
1 : 1000 : 1
UMLINGAN-
m
0 7 APPROVED IVUNYELWE INKCAZA DESCRIPTION UTSHINTSHO / AMENDMENTS DATE UMHLA NO. INANI "AS BUILT"NOTES "AS - "UMNIKELO" 21 Traffic Impact Assessment
10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 GENERAL
The investigation concludes that traffic generated by the proposed development will require improvements to the municipal and provincial road network upon completion of various phases of the development.
In view of the findings of this study it is recommended that:
This traffic impact study be approved by the Ndlambe Municipality and the Eastern Cape Department of Roads and Transport;
Access to the proposed development be obtained from the R67 at the locations indicated on Figure 6 and Figure 7;
The access points and affected intersections be upgraded at the cost of the developer as detailed below;
10.2 BEFORE DEVELOPMENT
The investigation concludes that the Ndlambe Municipality should give some attention to the improvement of pedestrian facilities along both the R67 and Wharf Street. In addition, some attention should be given to the upgrading of road signs on Wharf Street and on the approaches to the railway crossing.
In view of these findings it is recommended that:
Pedestrian facilities be provided on Wharf Street and the R67 at the cost of the Municipality; Warning signs be provided on the approaches to the sharp curve on Wharf Street and the railway crossing on the R67 at the cost of the Municipality.
10.3 AFTER DEVELOPMENT 2007 – PHASE 1A
The study concludes that the only improvements to the road network required upon completion of Phase 1A of the development relate to the provision of access to the development from the R67.
In view of these findings it is recommended that:
The R67 be upgraded at the access points to the development opposite the Nemato Access Road and the Air School Access Road, as indicated on Figures 6 and 7, and the costs of the upgrading should be met by the developer; The posted speed limit be reduced to 80km/h on the approach to the Air School Access from the north and further reduced to 60km/h on the approach to the south access point from the north, by means of high visibility signs, at the cost of the developer.
10.4 AFTER DEVELOPMENT 2012 – PHASE 1B
The study concludes that upgrading will be required at the affected intersections as a result of the additional traffic generated by Phase 1B of the proposed development:
In view of these findings it is recommended that:
Traffic signals be provided at the Wharf Street / Main Street intersection; The Wharf Street / R67 intersection be upgraded as indicated on Figure 8; Traffic signals as well as an exclusive left-turn lane on the eastbound approach be provided at the R72 / R67 intersection as indicated on Figure 9; and These intersection improvements be provided at the cost of the developer.
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007 22 Traffic Impact Assessment
11. REFERENCES
1. Stewart Scott International, Road Safety Audit – TR4601 and 4602 Port Alfred – Grahamstown – Fort Beaufort, Department of Roads and Transport, March 2004
2. Akcelik R and Besley M, SIDRA User Guide, Australian Road Research Board Limited, 1992.
3. Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, 2000.
4. NITRR, TRH 17 - Geometric Design of Rural Roads, CSRA, September 1984.
5. Stander et al, South African Trip Generation Rates, Second Edition, Department of Transport, June 1995.
6. Parker, RJ, Rainbow Nations Shopping Centre, 1996.
7. Engineering Advice and Services cc, TIA for Proposed Church Development on erf 52184, New Brighton, February 2007.
8. De Leuw Cather & SENA, SADC Road Traffic Signs Manual, Department of Transport, June 1999
Ptn 4 of Farm Thornhills No. 388, Port Alfred – Integrated Housing Development December 2007
Annexure A
Detailed Traffic Count Data
Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : Wharf Street / Pascoe Crescent / Main Street NO. 1 Time period: 06:00 – 09:00
STARTING PASCOE CRESCENT WHARF STREET MAIN STREET INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 6:00 0 9 3 12 6 0 13 19 0 0 0 0 16 9 25 56 6:15 0 8 1 9 1 0 7 8 0 0 0 0 19 4 0 23 40 6:30 0 12 2 14 6 0 11 17 0 0 0 0 10 11 0 21 52 6:45 0 35 6 41 4 0 26 30 0 0 0 0 28 17 0 45 116 264 7:00 0 29 6 35 3 0 28 31 0 0 0 0 33 38 0 71 137 345 7:15 0 77 5 82 17 0 48 65 0 0 0 0 42 47 0 89 236 541 7:30 0 62 3 65 13 0 57 70 0 0 0 0 37 33 0 70 205 694 7:45 0 82 4 86 5 0 69 74 0 0 0 0 61 40 0 101 261 839 8:00 0 77 9 86 6 0 44 50 0 0 0 0 42 33 0 75 211 913 8:15 0 66 8 74 7 0 56 63 0 0 0 0 47 50 0 97 234 911 8:30 0 51 4 55 3 0 40 43 0 0 0 0 19 39 0 58 156 862 Total 0 508 51 559 71 0 399 470 0 0 0 0 354 321 0 675 1704 Peak hour 0 298 21 319 41 0 218 259 0 0 0 0 182 153 0 335 913 Peak 15 min 0 82 9 86 17 0 69 74 0 0 0 0 61 47 0 101 261 913 PHF 0.93 0.88 #DIV/0! 0.83 0.87
Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : Wharf Street / Pascoe Crescent / Main Street NO. 1 Time period: 15:00 – 18:00
STARTING PASCOE CRESCENT WHARF STREET MAIN STREET INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 15:30 0 17 6 23 3 0 20 23 0 0 0 0 28 19 0 47 93 15:45 0 51 6 57 10 0 46 56 0 0 0 0 41 36 0 77 190 16:00 0 81 11 92 8 0 59 67 0 0 0 0 72 83 0 155 314 16:15 0 35 12 47 4 0 36 40 0 0 0 0 52 43 0 95 182 779 16:30 0 59 12 71 7 0 53 60 0 0 0 0 73 41 0 114 245 931 16:45 0 50 5 55 4 0 52 56 0 0 0 0 66 30 0 96 207 948 17:00 0 70 6 76 6 0 80 86 0 0 0 0 112 44 0 156 318 952 17:15 0 39 6 45 4 0 49 53 0 0 0 0 67 28 0 95 193 963 17:30 0 16 2 18 1 0 29 30 0 0 0 0 27 16 0 43 91 809 17:45 0 28 3 31 4 0 40 44 0 0 0 0 55 32 0 87 162 764 Total 0 446 69 515 51 0 464 515 0 0 0 0 593 372 0 965 1995 Peak hour 0 218 29 247 21 0 234 255 0 0 0 0 318 143 0 461 963 Peak 15 min 0 70 12 76 7 0 80 86 0 0 0 0 112 44 0 156 318 963 PHF 0.81 0.74 #DIV/0! 0.74 0.76 Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : R67 / Wharf Street NO. 2 Time period: 06:00 – 09:00
STARTING R67 R67 WHARF STREET INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 11 3 7 0 10 5 0 3 8 29 6:15 0 0 0 0 0 11 4 15 3 7 0 10 11 0 4 15 40 6:30 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 12 7 11 0 18 6 0 9 15 45 6:45 0 0 0 0 0 27 13 40 6 16 0 22 27 0 8 35 97 211 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 38 21 59 13 23 0 36 38 0 16 54 149 331 7:15 0 0 0 0 0 56 25 81 23 43 0 66 56 0 34 90 237 528 7:30 0 0 0 0 0 27 18 45 23 30 0 53 27 0 21 48 146 629 7:45 0 0 0 0 0 36 22 58 8 24 0 32 36 0 14 50 140 672 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 15 15 30 10 19 0 29 15 0 9 24 83 606 8:15 0 0 0 0 0 16 26 42 8 27 0 35 16 0 15 31 108 477 Total 0 0 0 0 0 237 156 393 104 207 0 311 237 0 133 370 1074 Peak hour 0 0 0 0 0 157 86 243 67 120 0 187 157 0 85 242 672 Peak 15 min 0 0 0 0 0 56 25 81 23 43 0 66 56 0 34 90 237 672 PHF #DIV/0! 0.75 0.71 0.67 0.71
Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : R67 / Wharf Street NO. 2 Time period: 15:00 – 18:00
STARTING R67 R67 WHARF STREET INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 15:45 0 0 0 0 0 14 13 27 8 15 0 23 14 0 4 18 68 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 23 21 44 11 27 0 38 23 0 12 35 117 16:15 0 0 0 0 0 22 12 34 10 30 0 40 22 0 6 28 102 16:30 0 0 0 0 0 28 23 51 23 30 0 53 28 0 12 40 144 431 16:45 0 0 0 0 0 21 29 50 22 19 0 41 21 0 14 35 126 489 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 31 35 66 17 49 0 66 31 0 15 46 178 550 17:15 0 0 0 0 0 31 30 61 12 38 0 50 31 0 20 51 162 610 17:30 0 0 0 0 0 32 18 50 8 17 0 0 32 0 14 46 96 562 17:45 0 0 0 0 0 17 20 37 7 16 0 23 17 0 11 28 88 524 Total 0 0 0 0 0 219 201 420 118 241 0 334 219 0 108 327 1081 Peak hour 0 0 0 0 0 111 117 228 74 136 0 210 111 0 61 172 610 Peak 15 min 0 0 0 0 0 31 35 66 23 49 0 66 31 0 20 51 178 610 PHF #DIV/0! 0.86 0.80 0.84 0.86 Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : R72 / R67 NO. 3 Time period: 06:00 – 09:00
STARTING R 72 R67 R67 R72 INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 6:00 0 9 3 12 5 2 3 10 0 3 1 4 7 8 15 41 6:15 0 9 2 11 0 2 9 11 0 0 1 1 4 11 1 16 39 6:30 1 14 3 18 2 1 9 12 1 3 3 7 15 15 1 31 68 6:45 0 15 2 17 3 1 16 20 2 3 3 8 19 20 2 41 86 234 7:00 2 19 8 29 4 6 22 32 1 3 2 6 19 19 6 44 111 304 7:15 2 35 12 49 14 12 41 67 8 4 1 13 48 43 10 101 230 495 7:30 2 22 14 38 13 8 47 68 7 8 3 18 49 37 5 91 215 642 7:45 4 26 9 39 12 4 40 56 7 8 2 17 42 37 4 83 195 751 8:00 3 33 7 43 6 8 40 54 3 4 1 8 43 47 5 95 200 840 8:15 1 36 13 50 6 6 52 64 8 9 2 19 36 32 6 74 207 817 Total 15 218 73 306 65 50 279 394 37 45 19 101 282 269 40 591 1392 Peak hour 11 116 42 169 45 32 168 245 25 24 7 56 182 164 24 370 840 Peak 15 min 4 35 14 49 14 12 47 68 8 8 3 18 49 47 10 101 230 840 PHF 0.86 0.90 0.78 0.92 0.91
Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : R72 / R67 NO. 3 Time period: 15:00 – 18:00
STARTING R 72 R67 R 67 R 72 INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 15:00 0 0000000000000000 15:15 0 0000000000000000 15:30 0 0000000000000000 15:45 0 21 2 23 4 0 3 7 0 4 1 5 7 10 1 18 53 53 16:00 4 40 13 57 8 3 20 31 7 3 1 11 30 34 2 66 165 218 16:15 1 36 3 40 6 6 27 39 4 3 1 8 31 36 3 70 157 375 16:30 2 40 15 57 8 6 37 51 4 11 3 18 18 24 2 44 170 545 16:45 4 37 10 51 7 13 38 58 3 7 0 10 34 30 4 68 187 679 17:00 3 45 15 63 9 10 45 64 8 6 1 15 31 35 4 70 212 726 17:15 0 33 7 40 6 5 39 50 0 8 2 10 34 27 3 64 164 733 17:30 0 32 4 36 5 7 19 31 0 0 0 0 10 20 5 35 102 665 17:45 1 18 5 24 4 5 25 34 1 6 1 8 13 20 4 37 103 581 Total 15 302 74 391 57 55 253 365 27 48 10 85 208 236 28 472 1313 Peak hour 9 155 47 211 30 34 159 223 15 32 6 53 117 116 13 246 733 Peak 15 min 4 45 15 63 9 13 45 64 8 11 3 18 34 35 4 70 212 375 PHF 0.84 0.87 0.74 0.88 0.86 Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : R67 / Nemato Access Road NO. 4 Time period: 06:00 – 09:00
STARTING R 67 R 67 NEMATO ACCESS ROAD INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 4 14 0 18 3 0 3 28 6:15 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 7 2 11 0 13 3 0 5 8 28 6:30 0 0 0 0 0 12 6 18 2 17 0 19 7 0 1 8 45 6:45 0 0 0 0 0 27 3 30 6 25 0 31 4 0 13 17 78 179 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 49 2 51 7 26 0 33 2 0 14 16 100 251 7:15 0 0 0 0 0 46 5 51 11 54 0 65 4 0 20 24 140 363 7:30 0 0 0 0 0 26 4 30 9 42 0 51 4 0 17 21 102 420 7:45 0 0 0 0 0 39 5 44 9 40 0 49 5 0 12 17 110 452 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 29 4 33 4 32 0 36 2 0 7 9 78 430 8:15 0 0 0 0 0 34 2 36 6 33 0 39 3 0 6 9 84 374 Total 0 0 0 0 0 275 32 307 60 294 0 354 37 0 95 132 793 Peak hour 0 0 0 0 0 160 16 176 36 162 0 198 15 0 63 78 452 Peak 15 min 0 0 0 0 0 49 5 51 11 54 0 65 5 0 20 24 140 452 PHF #DIV/0! 0.86 0.76 0.81 0.81
Project : PROPOSED THORNHILL INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT Day & date : 06/11/2007 Intersection : R67 / Nemato Access Road NO. 4 Time period: 15:00 – 18:00
STARTING R 67 R 67 NEMATO ACCESS ROAD INTER- TIME Westbound Southbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Total Hour 15:45 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 24 13 33 0 46 4 0 5 9 79 79 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 26 7 33 17 27 0 44 2 0 9 11 88 167 16:15 0 0 0 0 0 20 4 24 6 36 0 42 3 0 8 11 77 244 16:30 0 0 0 0 0 30 9 39 13 35 0 48 3 0 14 17 104 348 16:45 0 0 0 0 0 35 6 41 11 37 0 48 4 0 14 18 107 376 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 40 10 50 23 46 0 69 7 0 13 20 139 427 17:15 0 0 0 0 0 31 4 35 18 44 0 62 4 0 9 13 110 460 17:30 0 0 0 0 0 25 4 29 8 20 0 28 4 0 9 13 70 426 17:45 0 0 0 0 0 27 4 31 5 19 0 24 2 0 7 9 64 383 Total 0 0 0 0 0 258 48 306 114 297 0 411 33 0 88 121 838 Peak hour 0 0 0 0 0 136 29 165 65 162 0 227 18 0 50 68 460 Peak 15 min 0 0 0 0 0 40 10 50 23 46 0 69 7 0 14 20 139 427 PHF #DIV/0! 0.83 0.82 0.85 0.83
Annexure B
SIDRA Output Sheets – 2007 Before Development
Annexure C
SIDRA Output Sheets – 2007 After Development
Annexure D
SIDRA Output Sheets – 2012 After Development