Township Establishment Traffic Impact Study

FARM LILYVALE 30/2313 AND SHELLYVALE EXT 8, BLOEMFONTEIN

TOWNSHIP ESTABLISHMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

SEPTEMBER 2017

Project: 7069

PO Box 25054, Langenhoven Park, 9330, 12 AG Visser Street, Langenhoven Park, Bloemfontein Tel & Fax: 051 446 2647, Cell: 083 381 5884, E-mail: [email protected]

REPORT SHEET

Property Description: Farm Lilyvale 30/2313 and Shellyvale Ext 8, Bloemfontein

Municipal Area: Mangaung Metro Municipality

Application: Township Establishment

Type of Report: Traffic Impact Study

Project Number: 7069

Compiled by: Koot Marais Pr Eng

Declaration I, Koot Marais, author of this traffic impact study, hereby certify that I am a professional traffic engineer (registration No 920023) and that I have the required experience and training in the field of traffic and transportation engineering as required by the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA), to compile this traffic impact study and I take full responsibility for the content, including all calculations, conclusions and recommendations made herein.

Signed:

920023 Date: September 2017

Prepared by:

PO Box 25054, Langenhoven Park, 9330, 12 AG Visser Street, Langenhoven Park, Bloemfontein Tel & Fax: 051 446 2647, Cell: 083 381 5884, E-mail: [email protected]

` 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION 5

1.1 Aim of the Study 5

1.2 Background 5

1.3 Site Location 6

1.4 Development 7

1.5 Scope of Analysis 10 1.5.1 Period for Analysis 10 1.5.2 Assessment Years 10 1.5.3 Warrants for a Traffic Impact Study 10 1.5.4 Extent of Analysis 11

1.6 Available Information 12 1.6.1 Traffic Counts 12 1.6.2 Latent Rights 13

2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 14

2.1 Existing Road Network 14

2.2 Existing Land Use 14

2.3 Road Planning 15

3 TRIP GENERATION 16

3.1 Trip Generation Rates - The South African Trip Generation Rates Document 16

3.2 Trip Generation Rates - TMH 17 17

3.3 Trips Generated 18

4 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 21

5 TRIP ASSIGNMENT 23

6 CAPACITY ANALYSIS 28

6.1 Intersection A: Access from Bloemendal Road 29

6.2 Intersection B: Bloemendal Road / Ray Champion Road Intersection 32

6.3 Intersection C: Bloemendal Road / Flockemann Street Intersection 35

6.4 Intersection D: Rayton Road / Gilles van der Wall Street Intersection 37

6.5 Intersection E: Rayton Road / General Dan Pienaar Drive Intersection 38

6.6 Bloemendal Road 38

` 3

6.7 Summary 39

7 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 42

8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 52

9 REFERENCES 53

` 4

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Aim of the Study

The aim of this study is to determine the traffic impact of a proposed Township Establishment on the Farm Lilyvale 30/2313 and Shellyvale Ext 8, Bloemfontein.

1.2 Background

Township establishment on Shellyvale Extension 8, (previously Portion 33 of the Farm Lilyvale 2313), which forms part of the application, has been approved and was supported by a number of studies, of which the latest was a study in support of Service Agreement Purposes undertaken during 2014.

The said layout will now be changed and Portion 30 of the Farm Lilyvale 2313 is now included as part of the township establishment.

This document reports on the traffic impact of the whole area.

The developer is as follows:

Lenova Construction and Development Pty Ltd 4 Christo Groenewald Street. Lilyvale

` 5

1.3 Site Location

The development is situated to the north of Hillsboro, and will access onto Bloemendal Road (extension of Rayton Road), and with possible future extension of the road network, also with Nicolai Street and De Vletter Street. .

Figure 1.1 Location Plan

` 6

1.4 Development

The planned layout is shown below.

Figure 1.1 Amended Layout

It was endeavoured to as far as possible retain the approved layout of Extension 8 as shown below:

` 7

Figure 1.1 Approved Layout of Extension 8

Detail of the new layout is as follows:

` 8

From a practical point of view the land uses are as follows:

Land Use Size Unit Note

Extension 8 Single Residential Units 78 unit Townhouse Units 237 unit Shopping Centre 2000 m² 1 Cemetery 5866 m² Creche 50 pupils 2

Por 30/2313 Single Residential Units 128 unit Townhouse Units 58 unit

Flats 358 unit

Offices 3500 m² 3

Notes:

1. A shopping centre of 2000m² was assumed for Extension 8 in the approved layout and was thus retained. 2. It was assumed that the crèche will accommodate 50 pupils. This will not have a major implication 3. Offices will be restricted to 3500m², which is the practical development size

` 9

1.5 Scope of Analysis

1.5.1 Period for Analysis

Based on the type of proposed development and the nature of traffic flow in the area, both the morning and afternoon peak periods need to be investigated.

1.5.2 Assessment Years

As excessive Latent Rights are assumed and there is little chance of densification in this area other than the Latent Rights, a horizon year growth rate is not really deemed appropriate. To ensure a conservative approach, a growth rate of 1.5% was nonetheless assumed. The base year and five years after the base year have been analysed.

The base year was assumed to be 2019.

1.5.3 Warrants for a Traffic Impact Study

The change is expected to generate in excess of 150 peak hour trips and according to the “Manual for Traffic Impact Studies”1, a Traffic Impact Study is warranted.

` 10

1.5.4 Extent of Analysis

All intersections where the increase in the critical lane volumes is expected to exceed 75, within 1.5 km of the development should be analysed. Given the location of the development, the following intersections were analysed.

Figure 1.3 Intersections Investigated

a) Intersection A: Access from Bloemendal Road b) Intersection B: Bloemendal Road / Ray Champion Road Intersection c) Intersection C: Bloemendal Road / Flockemann Street Intersection d) Intersection D: Rayton Road / Gilles van der Wall Street Intersection e) Intersection E: Rayton Road / General Dan Pienaar Drive Intersection

` 11

1.6 Available Information

1.6.1 Traffic Counts

The following traffic counts were used.

Intersection Source Date Counted Growth Rate Bloemendal Rd / Ray Counted by KMA for this study 2017/06/08 1.5% Champion Rd Bloemendal Rd / Flockeman Counted by KMA for this study 2017/06/07 1.5% St Rayton Rd / Gilles van der Counted by KMA for this study 2017/06/07 1.5% Wall St Rayton Rd / General Dan Counted by KMA for this study 2017/06/06 1.5% Pienaar Dr

Notes:

(1) All traffic counts undertaken by KMA are done by Koot Marais PR Eng personally or under his direct supervision.

` 12

1.6.2 Latent Rights

The Manual for Traffic Impact Studies describes Background Traffic as the existing traffic volumes, approved developments and anticipated developments. All applied for developments, and more accurately rezonings or township establishments for which traffic impact studies have been compiled, are normally assumed to be anticipated developments. In this corridor the following latent rights are applicable.

No Description Project Impact in No Study Area 1 Woodland Hills development 6017 No 2 Remainder of, and Subdivision 3 of Musket 2718, 6158 No 3 Shellyvale Extension 2 & 5 6154 Yes 4 Portion 2 and the Remainder of Portion 1 of the farm Mount Sophia 1441 6174 No 5 Plot 13 Lilyvale 6176 Yes 6 Portion 2 of Western Spitskop 6185 No 7 Plot 4, Rayton 6188 Yes 8 Joy 1401 6202 No 9 Portion 4 of the Farm Newmarket 2946 6197 Yes 10 Portion 2 of the farm Newmarket 2946 Yes 11 Remainder of Plot 28, Portion 1 of Plot 28, and Portion 2 of Rayton 341 6194 Yes 12(Rayton Portion 1View) of Plot 3 Raytion 6226 Yes 13 Township establishment on Portion 20 of the farm Lilyvale 2313, 6171 Yes 14 Township Establishment on Portion 2 of Plot 28, Rayton Smallholdings 6319 Yes 15 Township establishment on Plot 9 and the Remainder of Plot 12 Lilyvale 6528 Yes 16 Subdivision 29 of the Farm Lilyvale 2313 , Bloemfontein 6598 Yes 17 Erf 28563 Woodlands 6760 No 18 Rezoning to extend Curro School 6259 No 19 Erven 535 and 536 Shellyvale Extension 7 6154 Yes 20 Portion 45 of Farm No 2844, Groenvlei Function-, Facilities. 6978 No 21 Private University on Plot 27 Rayton 7097 No 22 Farm Rooidam (Emoya) Yes 23 Portion 1 of Plot 3, Lilyvale 6910 Yes 24 Erf 538, Shellyvale Yes

In reality, only a portion of applied for developments actually realise as some are not approved, whilst a large portion of applications do not proceed to the final stage.

In many instances land is zoned for development or an application was launched, but the main aim was to increase the value of land and not to actually develop the property. The implication is that developers keen to actually develop are “penalised” due to the need to consider all the latent rights.

It is not possible to determine the status of each latent right, but to give an indication of the impact, scenarios were also developed to indicate the situation with no latent right trips. These scenarios were not fully analysed but in certain instances reference is made to the specific situation.

` 13

2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2.1 Existing Road Network

The most important roads in the area are the following:

Street / Road Road No Route Description Geometry Classific Functional Jurisdiction No ation Classification Frans Kleynhans Road S850 The road becomes Lucas Stayn Two-lane undivided Collector Collector Free State Province Road to the east of the N1. The road rural road provides access to properties but also connects certain areas with the city centre Ray Champion Street The road serves a number of small Two-lane undivided Local Major Residential Mangaung Metro holdings rural road Street Access Link Municipality Rayton Road / S1031 Provides access for institutions Rural Two-lane Collector Collector Free State Province/ Bloemendal Road such as the National Botanical Paved Road. Mangaung Metro Gardens and the Martie du Plessis Southern section of Municipality School and connects areas of the road, is a four- Heuwelsig, Hillsboro, Dan Pienaar lane divided urban and Rayton with Gen Dan Pienaar street. . Drive. Gen Dan Pienaar Drive M19 The road serves the northern Urban four lane Arterial Arterial Mangaung Metro suburbs as the main arterial. To the divided road Municipality south of Kellner Street the road becomes Parfitt Avenue Flockemann Street The road serves properties Urban two-lane Local Major Residential Mangaung Metro street Street Access Link Municipality Gilles van der Wall The road serves properties Urban two-lane Local Major Residential Mangaung Metro Street street Street Access Link Municipality Curlewis Street The road serves properties Urban two-lane Local Major Residential Mangaung Metro street Street Access Link Municipality

2.2 Existing Land Use

The area is currently vacant and surrounded by open areas and planned residential developments.

` 14

2.3 Road Planning

The following road planning is relevant:

 It is planned to link Nicolai Street with Bloemendal Road, with the Bloemendal Road / Ray Champion Road Intersection being changed to a four-legged intersection. Provision was made in the planning for this possibility.

 There is also a possibility that Nicolai Street will be connected with Galliope Drive, Gascony Crescent and General Beyers Street. This possible planning will not directly affect the development.

 Christo Groenewald Street currently terminates on the boundary of Wild Olive Estate and as a collector, and thus part of the higher order network, it makes sense that this road eventually be linked with Bloemendal Road. No alignment has as yet been determined for this possibility, but with some roads terminating on the eastern boundary of the development site, future links are possible.

If the mentioned new roads are implemented, some trips from the development will distribute to other roads, thus reducing traffic on Bloemendal / Rayton Road. Due to uncertainty on the implementation of the roads, no traffic was assigned to this possible future links.

` 15

3 TRIP GENERATION

Trip generation can be determined by means of either The South African Trip Generation Rates2 document or TMH1711.

In general, until such time that the TMH 17 officially replaces the former document; the South African Trip Generation Rates document is used in medium to higher income area, unless there are no relevant rates in the mentioned document or there could be other valid reasons for using the TMH 17 rates.

3.1 Trip Generation Rates - The South African Trip Generation Rates Document

Possible relevant rates are:

3.1.1 Housing Units

Trip generation rates based on the document “The South African Trip Generation Rates”² for cluster housing and medium income housing are as follows:

AM Peak = 1,1 trips/unit Directional Split 25:75 PM Peak = 1,1 trips/unit Directional Split 75:25

3.1.2 Business

The trip generation rate according to the “South African Trip Generation Rates”² for a shopping centre is 224.5*GLA-0.34 for the PM peak.

Trip generation during the morning peak is often disregarded and no rates for South African conditions are provided in the relevant documents. The 6th Edition of Trip Generation provides more information on the matter and proposes a rate of 1.1trips / 100m² with a directional distribution of 61: 39. Trip generation rates for the shopping component of the centre are therefore as follows:

AM Peak = 1.1 trips/100m² Directional Split 61:39 PM Peak = 16.9 trips/100m² Directional Split 50:50

3.1.3 Offices

Trip generation for offices was taken at 2.3 trips / 100m2 GLA, split 85:15 for both the AM and PM peaks as recommended by “The South African Trip Generation Rates” ².

` 16

3.2 Trip Generation Rates - TMH 17

Relevant land uses for this development as described in the TMH 17 are as follows:

3.2.1 Single Dwelling Units 210

Single dwelling units are detached houses on individual erven. The units usually have individual accesses to streets.

3.2.2 Apartments and Flats 220

Dwelling units located in one building. Buildings are normally multi-storied while dwelling units are relatively small in size.

3.2.3 Town Houses Multi Level 232

Dwelling units provided in clusters in multi-level complexes. Individual townhouses can be provided on different levels. Individual townhouse could consist of one storey or could be multi- storeyed.

3.2.4 Pre-School (Day Care Centre) 565

A facility where care is provided for pre-school age children. The facilities include classrooms.

3.2.5 Offices 710

This land-use includes developments at which affairs of businesses, commercial or industrial organisations are conducted.

3.2.6 Shopping Centre 820

A shopping centre is an integrated (mixed-use) group of commercial establishments that operate as a unit. May include small components of other land uses, such as restaurants, hardware and paint shops, etc.

` 17

3.3 Trips Generated

Table 3.1: Possible trip generation as per SA Trip Generation document

AM PEAK PM PEAK AM Trips PM Trips Land Use Size Unit TGR Split AM In Out TGR TGR Split PM In Prim Sec Out Prim Sec Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips Trips Extension 8 Single Residential 78 unit 1.1075:25 86 21 64 1.175:25 86 64 64 21 21 TownhouseUnits Units 237 unit 1.10 75:25 261 65 196 1.1 75:25 261 196 196 65 65 Shopping Centre 2000 m² 1.1 61:39 22 13 9 224.5gla^- 16.9450:50 339 169 110 59 169 110 59 Cemetery 0.34 Creche Sub Total 369100268 685429370 59 256197 59 Por 30/2313 Single Residential 128 unit 1.10 75:25 141 35 106 1.1 75:25 141 106 106 35 35 TownhouseUnits Units 58 unit 1.10 75:25 64 16 48 1.1 75:25 64 48 48 16 16

Flats 358 unit 1.1075:25 394 98 295 1.1 75:25394 295 295 98 98 Offices 3500 m² 2.3085:15 81 68 12 2.315:85 81 12 12 68 68

Sub Total 679218461 679461461 0 218218 0 Total 1047 318 729 1364890 831 59 474 414 59

` 18

Table 3.2: Possible trip generation as per TMH 17

No Reduction Factors AM PEAK PM PEAK Land Use No Unit Pm Pv Pv Pt Pc TGR TGRSplit PHF AM AM In Out TGR TGR Split PHF PM PM In Out Mixed Low V Low Trans Reduc In OutTrips ReducTrips ReducTrips ReducTrips Extension 8 p ed ed Residential 210 Single Dwelling unit 10% 40% 70% 15% 1.00 25% 75% 1.00 70% 30% 210 Single Dwelling 78 unit 0 1.00 1.00 25% 75% 78 78 20 59 1.00 1.00 70% 30% 78 78 55 23 231 Townhouses unit 15% 30% 50% 15% 0.85 25% 75% 0.85 70% 30% 231 Townhouses 237 unit 0 0.85 0.85 25% 75% 201 201 50 151 0.85 0.85 70% 30% 201 201 141 60 Institutional 565 Pre-School Student 5% 50% 80% 15% 1.00 50% 50% 0.65 0.80 50% 50% 565 Pre-School 50 Student 0 1.00 1.00 50% 50% 0.65 77 77 38 38 0.80 0.80 50% 50% 40 40 20 20 566 Cemetery ha 0% 30% 50% 15% 0.20 70% 20% 0.20 35% 65% 0.65 566 Cemetery 1 ha 0% 0 0.20 0.20 70% 20% 0 0 0 0 0.20 0.20 35% 65% 0.65 0 0 0 0 Retail 820 Shopping Centre 100m² 10% 30% 60% 15% 0.60 65% 35% 3.40 50% 50% 820 Shopping Centre 2 000 100m² 0 2.89 2.89 65% 35% 58 58 38 20 16.38 16.38 50% 50% 328 328 164 164 Pass-by 13% 50% 50% 43 21 21 Diverted 29% 50% 50% 95 48 48 Sub Total 414 414 146 268 647 647 379 268 30/2313 Residential 210 Single Dwelling unit 10% 40% 70% 15% 1.00 25% 75% 1.00 70% 30% 210 Single Dwelling 128 unit 0 1.00 1.00 25% 75% 128 128 32 96 1.00 1.00 70% 30% 128 128 90 38 220 Apartment & Flats unit 15% 30% 50% 15% 0.65 25% 75% 0.65 70% 30% 220 Apartment & Flats 358 unit 0 0.65 0.65 25% 75% 233 233 58 175 0.65 0.65 70% 30% 233 233 163 70 231 Townhouses unit 15% 30% 50% 15% 0.85 25% 75% 0.85 70% 30% 231 Townhouses 58 unit 0 0.85 0.85 25% 75% 49 49 12 37 0.85 0.85 70% 30% 49 49 35 15 Offices 710 Offices 100m² 20% 20% 30% 15% 2.10 85% 15% 2.10 20% 80% 710 Offices 3 500 100m² 0 2.10 2.10 85% 15% 74 74 62 11 2.10 2.10 20% 80% 74 74 15 59 Sub Total 484 484 165 319 484 484 302 182 Total 898 898 311 587 1131 1131 681 449

The difference between the two tables is mainly because TMH 17 differentiate between the different types of residential, whereas the SA Trip Generation Rates document uses the same rates for all residential types. Due to this differentiation and the inclusion of land uses such as a cemetery, TMH 17 was used.

As the trip generation of approved layout of Extension 8 is already included in Latent Rights, only the new portion must be added. The additional trips will be as follows. As the shopping component is already dealt with in the original trip generation, all trips were assumed to be new.

Table 3.3: Additional potential trip generation

AM PEAK PM PEAK AM Trips PM Trips Land Use Size Unit TGR Split AM In Out TGR TGR Split PM In Out Trips Trips Ext 8 & Por 30 898 311 587 1131 681 449 Previous Ext 8 297 82 215 495 316 179 Additional Trips 601 229 372 636365270

The trips indicated in Table 3.3 were used for distribution.

4 TRIP DISTRIBUTION

Trip distribution was based on the analogue method with consideration of gravitational distributions.

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

4368 39 6 83

2 227 35 5 104 Bloemendal 0 345 198 310 159 294 141 23 11 190

29 12 Rayton 58 Ray Champion `

Figures 4.1a: AM Peak Trip Distribution

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

1%61% 6%0% 1%0%0% 14%0%

0% 38% 6% 0%1% 0%17% Bloemendal 0% 57% 33% 52% 26% 49% 23% 4% 0% 2% 0% 32%

5%0% 2%0%0% Rayton 10%0% Ray Champion

Figures 4.1b: AM Peak Trip Distribution

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

0215 190 600 1410

0 82 53 018 0198 Bloemendal418 149 584 203 741 397 701 356 56 49 22 0 494

27125 1600 Rayton 2150 Ray Champion

Figures 4.1c: AM Latent Rights

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

10260 25 3 108

15 350 23 4 98 Bloemendal 235 315 212 290 191 267 25 17 93

35 20 Rayton 159 Ray Champion `

Figures 4.2a: PM Peak Trip Distribution

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

2%41% 4%0% 0%0%0% 17%0%

2% 55% 4% 0%1% 0%15% Bloemendal0% 0% 37% 50% 33% 46% 30% 42% 4% 0% 3% 0% 15%

6%0% 3%0%0% Rayton 25%0% Ray Champion

Figures 4.2b: PM Peak Trip Distribution

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

64174 1170 2000 3230

7 369 60 017 0188 Bloemendal253 592 371 803 466 962 421 904 52 146 25 0231

10298 3300 Rayton 5800 Ray Champion

Figures 4.2c: PM Latent Rights

5 TRIP ASSIGNMENT

The generated trips have been assigned to the background traffic volumes. The following figures show the traffic volumes for the different peak periods and scenarios. As discussed in Section 1.6.2 scenarios were also developed to indicate the situation with no latent right trips. For the purpose of these scenarios (Figures 5.4a and 5.8a), a 3% per annum growth rate was assumed.

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

3851 988122 225616

31 15 6 42407 Bloemendal445 227 408 198 555 234 629 228 18 42 10 119 745

1738 1972408 Rayton 160548 Ray Champion `

Figure 5.1a: 2017 AM Peak Volumes

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

4054 1093129 239654

33 16 6 45432 Bloemendal472 241 433 210 589 248 667 242 19 45 11 126 790

1840 2076433 Rayton 170581 Ray Champion ` Figure 5.1b: 2019 AM Peak Volumes

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

0215 5954 1693129 380654

0 82 85 1624 45630 Bloemendal 890 390 1016 413 1330 645 1369 598 75 94 32 1261284

45165 3676433 Rayton 385581 Ray Champion `

Figure 5.1c: 2019 AM Background Peak (Including Latent Rights)

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

4583 9854 2293129 463654

2 309 120 1629 45734 Bloemendal 890 390 1361 611 1640 804 1663 739 98 94 43 126 1474

74165 4876433 Rayton 443581 Ray Champion

Figure 5.2: 2019 AM Background Peak with Development

Access Flockemann Gilles vd Wall Gen Dan Pienaar

0215 6258 16101139 399704

0 82 88 1724 48663 Bloemendal 926 409 1050 429 1375 664 1420 617 77 97 33 136 1345

46168 3782466 Rayton 398626 Ray Champion

Figure 5.3: 2024 AM Peak Background Peak (Including Latent Rights)

Access Flockemann St Gilles vd Wall St Dan Pienaar Dr

4583 10158 22101139 482704

2 309 123 1729 48767 926 409 1395 627 1685 823 1714 758 100 97 44 136 1535

75168 4982466 456626 Ray Champion

Figure 5.4a: 2024 AM Background Peak with Development

Access Flockemann St Gilles vd Wall St Dan Pienaar Dr

4583 8663 17108150 376758

2 309 100 1812 52639 547 279 1032 514 1151 519 1226 493 75 52 23 146 1230

6047 3589502 311674 Ray Champion

Figure 5.4b: 2024 AM Peak with Development (3% per annum growth, no Latent Rights)

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

28 18 4 87 47 294 248

34 32 6 82247 Bloemendal 174 348 168 282 299 332 295 328 22 40 24 317 235

1838 27103126 Rayton 425530 Ray Champion `

Figure 5.5a: 2017 PM Peak Volumes

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

30 19 4 92 50 312 263

36 34 6 87262 Bloemendal 185 369 178 299 317 352 313 348 23 42 25 336249

1940 29109134 Rayton 451562 Ray Champion `

Figure 5.5b: 2019 PM Peak Volumes

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

64174 14719 249250 635263

7 369 96 3424 87450 Bloemendal 437 961 549 1102 783 1314 734 1252 75 188 51 336 480

121139 62109134 Rayton 1031562 Ray Champion `

Figure 5.5b: 2019 PM Background Peak (Including Latent Rights)

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

74434 17219 279250 743263

22 719 119 3428 87548 Bloemendal 437 961 784 1417 995 1604 925 1519 100 188 68 336573

156139 82109134 Rayton 1190562 Ray Champion

Figure 5.6: 2019 PM Background Peak with Development

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

64174 14921 259954 659283

7 369 99 3724 94470 Bloemendal 451 990 563 1125 808 1341 758 1279 77 192 53 362 499

123142 64118144 Rayton 1066606 Ray Champion

Figure 5.7: 2024 PM Peak Background Peak (Including Latent Rights)

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

74434 17421 289954 767283

22 719 122 3728 94568 Bloemendal 451 990 798 1440 1020 1631 949 1546 102 192 70 362 592

158142 84118144 Rayton 1225606 Ray Champion

Figure 5.8a: 2024 PM Background Peak with Development

Access Flockemann GillesGilles vd Wallv d Wall St Gen Dan Pienaar

74434 10322 810758 567305

22 719 93 3911 101466 Bloemendal211 372 598 945 708 937 682 909 67 49 47 390 446

8747 53127155 Rayton 824652 Ray Champion

Figure 5.8b: 2024 PM Peak with Development (3% per annum growth, no Latent Rights)

6 CAPACITY ANALYSIS

Capacity analyses were performed by means of the SIDRA program. The tables below show the Levels of Service of the different traffic movements. Levels of Service (LOS) give an indication of operational characteristics in a traffic stream and their perception by motorists and passengers. Levels of service A to D are usually assumed to be acceptable, with LOS E regarded as the maximum flow rate, or capacity of the facility.

Figure 6.1 Intersections Investigated

6.1 Intersection A: Access from Bloemendal Road

A layout was previously determined as follows.

Previously Designed Layout

Levels of service will be as follows:

Intersection: North East South West Access L T R L T R L T R L T R 2 2019 AM Peak with Development A A F F A F 4a 2024 AM Peak with Development A A F F A F

Levels of service will already be low when the access is established due to the relatively high through traffic; depending on the extent of latent right implementation.

Additional turning lanes as shown below can be considered

Possible Improved Layout

This will not improve levels of service but will improve queues as follows:

Intersection A North East South West LTRLTRLTRLTR 95th Percentile Queues Current Layout 2 2019 AM Peak with development 0.0 0.0 192.2 192.2 29.2 4 2024 AM Peak with development 0.0 0.0 206.7 206.7 0.0 37.5 With Auxilliary Lanes 4 2024 AM Peak with development 0.0 0.0 201.0 0.2 0.0 19.8

As high volumes will be affected, the intersection will have to be signalised as follows:

Signalised Layout

Worst case levels of service will be as follows:

Intersection: North East South West Access L T R L T R L T R L T R 4a 2024 AM Peak with Development B C C D B D 8a 2024 PM Peak with Development B B B D D C

6.2 Intersection B: Bloemendal Road / Ray Champion Road Intersection

The current layout is as follows:

Existing layout

As part of the traffic impact study for Subdivision 29 of the Farm Lilyvale 2313 it was found that the intersection will experience capacity problems with the development. The low levels of service could be acceptable based on the statement in the document “South African Trip Generation Rates”, namely: “it may however be acceptable if individual movements are operating at LOS E or even F, if the traffic volumes affected are low”, although the low levels of service during the afternoon peak for southbound traffic are not acceptable.

It was however possible to improve the levels of service by upgrading the priority controlled intersection as shown below. This will also improve road safety at the intersection.

Previously Identified Improvement

Levels of service for the worst case scenarios will be as follows:

Intersection: North East South West Bloemendal/Ray Champion L T R L T R L T R L T R 4a 2024 AM Peak with development A B A A C F 8a 2024 PM Peak with development A F A A F F

Some turning movements might experience capacity problems. Queues will be as follows:

Intersection B North East South West LTRLTRLTRLTR 95th Percentile Queues With Auxilliary Lanes 4 2024 AM Peak with development 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 82.9 8 2024 PM Peak with development 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 4.4 127.7 Average Queues With Auxilliary Lanes 4 2024 AM Peak with development 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 33.0 8 2024 PM Peak with development 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 51.0

Although the affected volumes are not high, it seems that the intersection might qualify for signalisation.

If signalised, the following signalised layout should be implemented to ensure acceptable levels of service.

Signalised Layout

This will result in the following levels of service for the worst case scenarios.

Intersection: North East South West Bloemendal/Ray Champion L T R L T R L T R L T R 4a 2024 AM Peak with development A C A A D D 8a 2024 PM Peak with development A D A A D D

Signalisation and the above addition of through lanes will depend on the implementation of latent rights (Compare the scenarios with and without latent rights – Figures 5.4a, 5.34b, 5.8a and 5.8b)

6.3 Intersection C: Bloemendal Road / Flockemann Street Intersection

It was previously determined that to accommodate all the planned developments, the intersection will have to be significantly upgraded and signalised. The following layout was identified.

Previously identified layout

Levels of service with this layout will be as follows.

Intersection: North East South West Bloemendal / Flockemann L T R L T R L T R L T R 4a 2024 AM Peak with development B F D D A E 8a 2024 PM Peak with development B A B D F C

The upgraded intersection will thus no longer suffice. Considering through traffic volumes it is clear that one lane per direction will no longer suffice and the road will have to be widened to two lanes per direction.

The following layout needs to be implemented.

Further Upgraded Layout

Levels of service with this layout will be as follows.

Intersection: North East South West Bloemendal / Flockemann L T R L T R L T R L T R 4a 2024 AM Peak with development B A B D A B 8a 2024 PM Peak with development B A A D A B

As in the case of the Ray Champion Road intersection, signalisation and widening of the road will be subject to the implementation of substantial latent rights.

6.4 Intersection D: Rayton Road / Gilles van der Wall Street Intersection

The intersection was relatively recently upgraded as follows:

Current Layout

This will result in the following levels of service.

Intersection: North East South West Rayton / Gilles van der Wall L T R L T R L T R L T R 4a 2024 AM Peak with development C B C C C C B B D D C D 8a 2024 PM Peak with development B A D D C D B A B D C D

The current layout will thus suffice.

6.5 Intersection E: Rayton Road / General Dan Pienaar Drive Intersection

The intersection was also relatively recently signalised as follows:

. Current Layout

This will result in the following levels of service.

Intersection: North East South West Rayton / Gen Dan Pienaar L T R L T R L T R L T R 4a 2024 AM Peak with development B C C D B C 8a 2024 PM Peak with development B D D D D C

The layout will therefore suffice.

6.6 Bloemendal Road

If all the latent rights realise and traffic grows as assumed, the traffic volumes on the road will probably require widening of Bloemendal Road to a four lane road. As shown in the scenarios without latent rights (Figures 5.4b and 5.8b) the road should not qualify for widening if the development is implemented and the significantly assumed latent rights do not realise.

Clarity on the possible need for widening should be obtained by means of a Traffic Impact Study for Service Agreement Purposes, which will deal with actual traffic volumes and trip generation of developments for which Service Agreements have already been concluded.

6.7 Summary

The findings of the Capacity Analysis can be summarised as follows:

a) Access in Bloemendal Road

It is expected that the access will eventually have to be signalised as follows.

Depending on trip generation and especially latent right implementation, the intersection will probably not initially qualify for signalisation. It is thus recommended that the intersection be constructed as required for signalisation, but that signalisation only be implemented if warranted based on regular queue length studies.

b) Bloemendal Road / Ray Champion Avenue Intersection

It was previously identified that the priority controlled intersection could be retained, given side road traffic volumes but the intersection should be upgraded with proper turning lanes as shown.

Levels of service for worst case scenarios will however not be acceptable. Although the affected volumes are not high, it seems that the intersection might qualify for signalisation, depending on the extent of latent right implementation.

If signalised, the following signalised layout should be implemented to ensure acceptable levels of service.

It is recommended that if improved, the intersection be constructed as required for signalisation, but that signalisation only be implemented if warranted based on regular queue length studies. The need for provision of additional through lanes should be determined based on actual traffic volumes and trip generation of developments for which Service Agreements have already been concluded, rather than based on the assumed latent rights.

c) Bloemendal Road / Flockemann Street Intersection

The previously identified upgraded signalised intersection will not suffice, and the following layout needs to be implemented to accommodate worst case scenarios.

As in the case of the other intersections it should be determined when the intersection warrants signalisation and whether widening is required. d) Rayton Road / Gilles van der Wall Street Intersection

The recently upgraded intersection should suffice. e) Rayton Road / General Dan Pienaar Road Intersection

The recently upgraded intersection should suffice. f) Bloemendal Road

If all the latent rights realise and traffic grows as assumed, the traffic volumes on the road will probably require widening of Bloemendal Road to a four lane road. Without significant latent right implementation, widening might not be required. Clarity on the possible need for widening should be obtained by means of a Traffic Impact Study for Service Agreement Purposes, which will deal with actual traffic volumes and trip generation of developments for which Service Agreements have already been concluded.

Due to the limited reserve width this will be challenging and some private land will have to be obtained to enable this.

7 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Figure 7.1 Layout Plan

Figure 7.2 Approved Layout

As shown, access positions will not change, but the street network will be changed. The most important aspects regarding this layout are as follows:

No Basic Aspects

1 Intersections a Number of intersections Discussion: Eighteen new intersections will be created. b Spacing Discussion: Spacing is as follows:

Spacing (m) Functional Classification Relevant Ideal Road Width (cl-to-cl) Document Spacing (m) (m) Intersection Intersection 1 2 120 Major Residential Access Link 5(a) UTG 7 60 6 2 3 295 Major Residential Access Link 5(a) UTG 7 60 6 3 4 170 Major Residential Access Link 5(a) UTG 7 60 6 3 5 50 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 5 6 75 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 5 7 240 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 3 18 320 Major Residential Access Link 5(a) UTG 7 60 6 18 8 275 Major Residential Access Link 5(a) UTG 7 60 6 8 9 60 Major Residential Access Link 5(a) UTG 7 60 6 10 11 120 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 11 12 85 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 12 13 240 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 13 14 100 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 14 15 110 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 15 16 85 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 16 17 115 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 17 11 100 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6 10 16 90 Residential Access Loop 5(b) UTG 7 40 6

All spacings are acceptable.

c Traffic Control Measures Discussion: The internal intersections can be developed as priority controlled intersections as follows. As shown in blue, some portions of road will not function in the shorter term, with the result that the control will change once these sections are linked.

46 d Traffic Capacity Discussion: It is believed that all internal intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service as priority controlled intersections. e Provision of deceleration lanes and turning lanes Discussion: No deceleration - or turning lanes are required at most of the internal intersections. The intersections indicated below should be developed with turning lanes.

f Continuity of Road Reserve Boundaries Discussion: There are no steps in the road reserve boundaries. g Required Improvements Discussion: There are no specific road improvements required other than the streets to be developed as part of the township and the improvements summarised in Chapter 6. The sections of the streets that will provide future linkages should be constructed but should be closed until such time that the link is required. h Phasing of Required Improvements Discussion: Phasing will depend on the phasing of the development and can, if necessary, be addressed as part of the Service Agreement. i Vertical alignment of intersections Given the road gradients, gradients at intersections are expected to be acceptable.

2 Internal Roads a Road Classification Discussion: The proposed classification is as follows.

b Width of Road Reserves Discussion: Provision is made for a minimum of 13m reserves for the internal roads, which is acceptable. c Splays Discussion: Splays are 6m x 6m as a minimum d Road widths Discussion: Proposed road widths are shown in the table under 1(b). e Road Curves Discussion: Roads are mostly straight or 90 degrees and there are no concerns regarding road curves.

49 f Super elevation Discussion: No super-elevation would be required. g Gradient of Roads Discussion: According to the layout, gradients are as follows:

The gradients were re-confirmed and the steepest portion is in the middle of northern most street at approximately 8%. Gradients are thus acceptable. h Traffic Circulation Discussion: The layout makes provision for circulation throughout the terrain accept for a cul-de-sac near Bloemendal Road. This portion is less than 150m in length and the turnaround space is 36m in diameter, allowing a 31m diameter turnaround area with 2.5m sidewalks. The sidewalks are of limited width, but with the open space, wider sidewalks are not required.

Until such time that the area is linked to the east, the road section shown below will operate as a cul-de- sac. A temporary turnaround space is provided in this area.

The fact that some erven have roads on both sides is not ideal but this should function acceptable if access is restricted to the lower order street. i Capacity of Road Links Discussion: No road link is expected to carry traffic volumes that would require more than one lane per direction. j General Sight Distances Discussion: Sight distances are in general acceptable and there are no areas with specific sight distance problems. k Pedestrian Movements Discussion: A limited level of pedestrian movement is expected and movement will be accommodated on sidewalks. l Illumination of Streets Discussion: Street illumination would be provided where necessary. m Refuse Removal Discussion: Normal refuse removal will take place and vehicles should be able to move throughout the area. The turning space in the culs-de-sac will accommodate a refuse removal truck. n Public Transport Discussion: Some public transport activity is expected and provision should be made for taxi lay-bys in the final road design, especially in the area of the townhouse erven. o Emergency Vehicles Discussion: Emergency vehicles should be able to move through the township and there are no specific aspects that will hamper response times. p Potential Conflict Areas Discussion: The maximum street length followed by a small radius horizontal curve is ±400m., which is not excessive and should not encourage speeding. q Heavy Vehicle Usage Discussion: Limited heavy vehicle volumes are expected, except during the construction phase, or delivery vehicles at the business erf. r Jurisdiction of Roads Discussion: It is the intention that the main roads be taken over by the Municipality. Indications are that a process will be followed to retain some streets as private streets. For the purposes of this study all roads were however evaluated on the basis that the streets will be public streets. 3 Other Aspects a None

8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following conclusions can be made from the study:

a) The change in the layout of Extension 8 and the addition of Portion 30/2313 could result in an additional 601 trips during the morning peak and 636 trips during the afternoon peak hours.

b) Considering the extensive latent rights, most of the analysed intersections will have to be significantly upgraded and possibly signalised. The need for improvements is however heavily dependent on the implementation of latent rights.

c) If all the latent rights realise and traffic grows as assumed, Bloemendal Road is expected to require widening to a four lane road. Without substantial latent right implementation, the road will probably suffice as a two lane road.

a) The township layout is in principle acceptable.

Based on the findings of the study, the development can be approved from a traffic point of view. Latent rights however play a relatively important role in this corridor. Clarity on the actual need for improvements should be obtained by means of a Traffic Impact Study for Service Agreement Purposes, which will deal with actual traffic volumes and trip generation of developments for which Service Agreements have already been concluded

9 REFERENCES

1. Manual for Traffic Impact Studies, Department of Transport, Pretoria, 1995 2. South African Trip Generation Rates, Department of Transport, Pretoria, 1995 3. ITE Trip Generation Rates, 6th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, 1998 4. Transportation and Land Development, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, 1988 5. UTG 1, Guidelines for the Geometric Design of Urban Arterial Roads, CSIR, Pretoria, 1986 6. National Guidelines for Road Management in South Africa, COTO 7. Spacing of Accesses on Major Arterials, Department of Transport, Pretoria, 1993 8. TMH 17 Volume 1, The South African National Roads Agency Limited, Pretoria, 2012 9. UTG 5: Geometric Design of Urban Collector Roads, CUTA, Pretoria, 1988 10. UTG 7: Geometric Design of Urban Local Residential Streets, CUTA, Pretoria, 1986