Traffic Impact Study for Proposed Development of the Nceda Solar And

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE

NCEDA SOLAR AND SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE UPINGTON

WITHIN DAWID KRUIPER LOCAL MUNICIPALITY

NOVEMBER 2016

PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY:

C/O EOH Coastal & Environmental Services 31 Galway Road 25 Tecoma Street Nahoon Berea East London East London 5241 5241 Telephone: 043 735 0890 Telephone: 043 726 7809 Facsimile: 086 556 1154 Facsimile: 086 672 4339 Cellular: 083 465 1558 Cellular: 076 281 9660 E-mail: [email protected]

CONTENTS Page

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND…….………………………………... 1 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………...…….. 1 1.2 Proposed development…………………………………………………………. 1 2. EXISTING OPERATING CONDITIONS…………...…………………….…… 2 2.1 Intersection control……………………………………………………….……… 2 2.2 Capacity along access roads………..…………………………………………. 3 2.3 Traffic calming…………………………………………………………………… 3

2.4 Pedestrian and cycle facilities………………………………………………….. 3 2.5 Public transport facilities………….………………………………….…………. 3 2.6 Rail and air transport facilities………….………..……………….……………. 3 3. EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES…………………….….…………………..…. 4 4. FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES…...………………………………………...... 5 4.1 Traffic generation…………………………………………………………….….. 5 4.2 Trip assignment/distribution……………………………………………………. 6 5. INTERNAL CIRCULATION AND PARKING……..…………………………... 12 5.1 Internal circulation……………………………………………………………….. 12 5.2 Parking and loading facilities…………………………………………………… 12 6. ACCESS PROPOSALS.…..…………………………………….……………... 14 6.1 Vehicular access………………………………………………………………… 14 6.2 Pedestrian and bicycle access………………………………………………… 15 6.3 Access control…………………………………………………………………… 15 7. ANALYSIS RESULTS.…..………………………………………………..…..… 16 8. CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………………….…………… 22 9. RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………….………..….……… 23 10. REFERENCES………………………………………..…………………………. 25

i LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1.1 Site locality map FIGURE 1.2 Proposed site layout FIGURE 4.1 AM and PM peak 2017, without development trips FIGURE 4.2 AM and PM development generated trips FIGURE 4.3 AM and PM peak 2017, with development trips FIGURE 4.4 AM and PM peak 2022, without development trips FIGURE 4.5 AM and PM peak 2022, with development trips FIGURE 5.1 Recommended layout FIGURE 7.1 Recommended road improvements

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 2.1 Existing intersection control TABLE 3.1 Traffic count data used TABLE 5.1 Road reserves and building lines TABLE 5.2 Parking requirements as per DOT standards TABLE 5.3 Number of loading bays required TABLE 7.1 SIDRA LOS colour codes TABLE 7.2 Level of service definitions - HCM Method TABLE 7.3.1 - 7.3.2 LOS results AM and PM peak hours TABLE 7.3.3 Intersection control types TABLE C.1 Land use, trip generation, parking and loading

LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A Figures APPENDIX B SIDRA Intersection LOS Reports APPENDIX C Land use, trip generation, parking and loading APPENDIX D Traffic volumes

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CBD Central Business District DKLM Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality GLA Gross Leasable Area HCM Highway Capacity Manual LSDF Local Spatial Development Framework LOS Level of Service (as defined by Highway Capacity Manual) NA Not Analysed ped pedestrian SANRAL South African National Roads Agency Limited SAT Saturday SEZ Special Economic Zone SIDRA Software for the design and evaluation of traffic/ pedestrian intersections TIS Traffic Impact Study veh/h vehicles per hour

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 Introduction

Emonti Consulting Engineers CC was approached to prepare a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the proposed development of the following properties: Portion of allotment area, Erf 6009 and Erf 5645, Upington – situated within the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality (DKLM).

Following the investigation and study, recommendations regarding site access from the public road network, road network improvements, internal site layout, traffic safety, on-site circulation, parking and any loading facilities, will be made.

The approach and methodology followed in conducting this study were in terms of the references included in Chapter Ten.

1.2 Proposed development

The site is located in Upington, which is situated within Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality. (Khara Hais Local Municipality was disestablished and merged with Mier Local Municipality to establish Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality on 3 August 2016). A site locality map can be seen in Figure 1.1.

The current use of the site generates very limited trips for the peak hours.

The proposed development comprises industrial (light, medium and heavy), offices, retail, educational (university), hotel, sports fields, open space, solar farm and roadway, and will commonly be referred to hereafter as “the site” and/or “the development”.

The proposed land uses of the property in question are given in Table C.1 in Appendix C. The proposed site layout is illustrated in Figure 1.2.

It should be noted that currently the site layout for the various sites have not been finalised and therefore realistic sizes, as indicated in Table C.1, have been assumed. It is proposed that the site layout would only be finalised once the various Developers submit their building plans for approval.

It should also be noted that a development of this magnitude will take many years to reach its full development potential and thus will be undertaken in many phases. At this stage a total of approximately six phases are being considered.

2. EXISTING OPERATING CONDITIONS

2.1 Intersection control

Control strategies at the existing intersections relevant to this study are presented in Table 2.1.

TABLE 2.1: Control strategies

No. Intersection Control

1 N10/N10 Priority /stop 2 Borcherd Street/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street All-way stop 3 Anton Lubowski Road (R360)/N10 Priority /stop 4 Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street Traffic signals

The following photographs identify some of the intersections that will be utilised by traffic generated by the development.

N10/N10 intersection Borcherd Street(N10)/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street intersection

Anton Lubowski Road/N10 intersection Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street intersection

2.2 Capacity along access roads

The N10 is a road of national significance and provides access to the Nakop Border Post in the west and Groblershoop in the east. However, in the context of this development, it provides access to the surrounding road network in Upington.

From on-site observations sufficient spare capacity appears to exist along the road network to cater for the medium to long term future regarding anticipated traffic growth, including future trips relating to this development. This will however be analysed and commented on later in this report.

2.3 Traffic calming

No traffic calming exists along the road network adjacent to the site, and from on-site observations the vehicular speeds in the vicinity of the proposed accesses rarely exceed the posted speed limit.

2.4 Pedestrian and cycle facilities

No formalised pedestrian or cycle facilities are currently available on the surrounding road network. Pedestrians currently utilise the very wide verges.

2.5 Public transport facilities

Similarly, no formalised public transport facilities are currently available on the surrounding road network.

2.6 Rail and air transport facilities

The Upington Railway station is located approximately two kilometres south of the site whereas the Upington Airport is approximately two kilometres north east of the site.

3. EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES

In order to establish the current traffic conditions relevant traffic count information was used. This traffic count information is available in Appendix D.

Table 3.1 below gives a summary of the traffic count information utilised in this study.

TABLE 3.1 Traffic count data used

No. Station Data Type Date

1 Count station 207 Upington automatc classified traffic volume on-going 2 N10/N10 3 Borcherd Street/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street 12 hr manual unclassified traffic volume 19-Oct-16 4 Anton Lubowski Road (R360)/N10 5 Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street

The analysis of current traffic performance is based on the observed traffic data that, when necessary, have been adjusted and smoothed in order to represent a balance network of traffic volumes. The balanced peak hour traffic flow volumes are displayed as network diagrams in Figures 4.1 to 4.5.

4 4. FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES

For purposes of this study it was assumed that the development will be functional in 2017 and therefore a design horizon of five years (i.e. 2022) was used for the future operational LOS analysis. In reality it will possibly take some twenty or so years for the development to reach its full potential.

The recommended critical peak hours for analysing retail developments are weekday PM and SAT peak hours and weekday AM and PM peak hours for most other land uses. In this study the analyses were made for both the future weekday AM and PM peaks to address anticipated capacity problems in the peak hours most relevant to the development.

It is acceptable to project future traffic volumes by taking the recorded growth history of traffic counts into consideration. The generally accepted growth rate in the study area is 3% per annum. Applying the growth rate of 3% from the base year to the design horizon year the growth factor would be 1.16, meaning an increase in background traffic volume of 16% over the five year design horizon.

For the future scenario analysis the current traffic volumes were maintained as background traffic and increased by an annual growth factor. New trips relating to the proposed development were added to obtain the future estimated traffic volumes for 2022.

4.1 Traffic generation

The recommended vehicle trip generation rates (as per References One and Four) for the land uses listed in Table C.1 were used to calculate the estimated number of trips for the various peak hours in order to determine the critical peak hour. Note the values used are based on Reference Four.

The recommended vehicle trip generation rates were then adjusted to take into account site specifics. The following factors, amongst others, were considered when making the trip generation adjustments: i. public transport, ii. predicted car ownership, and iii. land use mix.

Based on these factors trip reductions, as illustrated in Table C.1, were assumed. The recommended in/out split for the peak hours can be seen in Table C.1 which also shows details of trip generation calculations for the various peak hours.

From Table C.1 it can be seen that the PM peak hour, in terms of trips generated, is greater than the AM peak hour for a regular week day. When the projected future traffic volumes and predicted traffic generated are added together, the combined effect does not change the critical peak period which remains the PM peak hour.

The following are the scenarios that were analysed, where necessary: i. existing 2017 critical peak hour traffic, ii. existing 2017 critical peak hour traffic with development traffic, iii. projected 2022 critical peak hour without development traffic, and iv. projected 2022 critical peak hour with development traffic.

4.2 Trip assignment/distribution

The generated trips, as identified in Section 4.1, have been distributed to the road network manually, based on the principles of the gravity model and taking into account knowledge of local conditions, Reference Five.

The resultant trip assignments are illustrated as network diagrams in Figures 4.1 to 4.5 for the various scenarios and time horizons tested.

0 (0) 10 (10)

230 (130) 80 (50) 260 (140) 0 (0) 0 (0) 20 (90) 30 (100) 0 (0) 20 (60)

10 (10) N10 0 (0) N10 70 (80) N10 (Borcherd St)

0 (0) 120 (200) 80 (40) 10 10 140 70 10 0 0 0 ( ( (

0 0 0 190 (80)

( 90 (50) ( ( ( 10 10 50 10 10 (10) ) ) )

( 280 ) ) ) )

) 50 (50) 0 (0)

ccess “A” A

Proposed Development

N10

Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Dakota Street

10 (10) 0 (0) 70 (80)

130 (250) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 30 (110) 260 (700) 10 (10) 0 (0) 10 (10) 0 (0) 10 (10) 10 (10) 30 (30) 130 (130)

100 (100) Anton Lubowski Road 10 (10) 120 (190)

10 (10) 0 (0) 0 (0) 240 (100)

140 560 10 10 10 10 10 (10) 30 (30) 100 (100) 130 (120) ( ( ( ( 20 10 10 10 ( ( 110 550 ) ) ) )

10 (10) ) ) 10 (20)

ccess “C” ccess “B” A A

Traffic Volume key: Figure 4.1: AM and PM 2017, without development trips. AM (PM) = 1234 (1234) veh/h

50 (210) 0 (0)

0 (0) 190 (70) 100 (50) 0 (0) 0 (0) 100 (50) 0 (0) 10 (10) 80 (310)

100 (50) N10 120 (70) N10 0 (0) N10 (Borcherd St)

0 (0) 0 (0) 30 (100) 30 10 30 30 20 50 10 130 290 (100)

( 0 (0) ( ( ( ( ( ( 150 10 100 100 20 20 (20) 120 10 ( 520 ) ) ) ) ) ) )

) 480 (180) 100 (50)

ccess “A” A

Proposed Development

N10

Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Dakota Street

10 (10) 190 (70) 50 (210)

0 (0) 100 (420) 40 (200) 190 (70) 140 (70) 10 (10) 100 (50) 130 (520) 10 (10) 50 (200) 100 (50) 10 (10) 190 (70) 160 (620)

100 (420) Anton Lubowski Road 0 (0) 50 (210)

30 (150) 380 (130) 480 (180) 0 (0)

140 10 0 0 10 180 ( ( 0 0 30 (100) 50 (200) 380 (130) 580 (170) ( ( 10 ) ) 10 ( (

70 40 ) )

) )

30 (150) 0 (0) ccess “C” ccess “B” A A

Traffic Volume key: Figure 4.2: AM and PM 2017, development generated trips. AM (PM) = 1234 (1234) veh/h

10 (10) 600 (220) 230 (130) 270 (120) 360 (190) 10 (10) 10 (10) 120 (140) 30 (100) 10 (10) 100 (370)

110 (60) N10 120 (70) N10 70 (80) N10 (Borcherd St)

10 (10) 120 (200) 110 (140) 40 20 170 100 30 50 10 130 480 (180)

( 90 (50) ( ( ( ( 160 20 30 30 (30) 120 10

( ( ( 380 150 520 ) ) ) ) )

) ) ) 150 (100) 480 (180)

ccess “A” A

Proposed Development

N10

Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Dakota Street

20 (20) 190 (70) 120 (290) 130 (250) 100 (420) 40 (200) 190 (70) 170 (180) 270 (710) 110 (60) 130 (520) 20 (20) 60 (200) 110 (60) 20 (20) 220 (100) 290 (720)

200 (520) Anton Lubowski Road 10 (10) 140 (400)

40 (160) 380 (130) 480 (180) 240 (100)

280 570 10 10 20 190 40 (110) 80 (230) 480 (230) 710 (290) ( ( ( 20 10 20 ( ( ( 180 560 50 ) ) )

)

40 (160) ) ) 10 (20)

ccess “C” ccess “B” A A

Traffic Volume key: Figure 4.3: AM and PM 2017, development with generated trips. AM (PM) = 1234 (1234) veh/h

0 (0) 10 (10)

270 (150) 90 (60) 300 (160) 0 (0) 0 (0) 20 (100) 30 (120) 0 (0) 20 (70)

10 (10) N10 0 (0) N10 80 (90) N10 (Borcherd St)

0 (0) 140 (230) 90 (50) 10 10 160 80 10 0 0 0 ( ( (

0 0 0 220 (90)

( 100 (60) ( ( ( 10 10 60 10 10 (10) ) ) )

( 320 ) ) ) )

) 60 (60) 0 (0)

ccess “A” A

Proposed Development

N10

Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Dakota Street

10 (10) 0 (0) 80 (90)

150 (290) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 30 (130) 300 (810) 10 (10) 0 (0) 10 (10) 0 (0) 10 (10) 10 (10) 30 (30) 150 (150)

120 (120) Anton Lubowski Road 10 (10) 140 (220)

10 (10) 0 (0) 0 (0) 280 (120)

160 650 10 10 10 10 10 (10) 30 (30) 120 (120) 150 (140) ( ( ( ( 20 10 10 10 ( ( 130 640 ) ) ) )

10 (10) ) ) 10 (20)

ccess “C” ccess “B” A A

Traffic Volume key: Figure 4.4: AM and PM 2022, without development trips. AM (PM) = 1234 (1234) veh/h

10 (10) 600 (220) 270 (150) 280 (130) 400 (210) 10 (10) 10 (10) 120 (150) 30 (120) 10 (10) 100 (380)

110 (60) N10 120 (70) N10 80 (90) N10 (Borcherd St)

10 (10) 140 (230) 120 (150) 40 20 190 110 30 50 10 130 510 (190)

( 100 (60) ( ( ( ( 160 20 30 30 (30) 120 10

( ( ( 420 160 520 ) ) ) ) )

) ) ) 160 (110) 480 (180)

ccess “A” A

Proposed Development

N10

Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Dakota Street

20 (20) 190 (70) 130 (300) 150 (290) 100 (420) 40 (200) 190 (70) 170 (200) 310 (820) 110 (60) 130 (520) 20 (20) 60 (200) 110 (60) 20 (20) 220 (100) 310 (770)

220 (540) Anton Lubowski Road 10 (10) 190 (430)

40 (160) 380 (130) 480 (180) 280 (120)

300 660 10 10 20 190 40 (110) 80 (230) 500 (250) 730 (310) ( ( ( 20 10 20 ( ( ( 200 650 50 ) ) )

)

40 (160) ) ) 10 (20)

ccess “C” ccess “B” A A

Traffic Volume key: Figure 4.5: AM and PM 2022, development with generated trips. AM (PM) = 1234 (1234) veh/h

11 5. INTERNAL CIRCULATION AND PARKING

5.1 Internal circulation

The internal circulating network proposed is shown in Figure 1.2 and the recommended layout in Figure 5.1. Some minor changes to improve the overall efficiency of the development, as listed below, have been included in Figure 5.1. i. building lines, ii. public transport, iii. restricted access, iv. traffic calming, v. internal road network, vi. boundary wall/fence, and vii. access control.

It would be advisable for the Developer to plan, design and build the internal layout to a standard acceptable by the municipality in order to allow for accessibility of service and emergency vehicles, etc. The layout, as recommended in Figure 5.1, should meet these requirements and provides acceptable internal circulation.

Table 5.1 illustrates the road reserve widths and building lines that are most likely to be imposed on the roads in the study area. It should be noted that this is a guide based on existing standards and conditions imposed on other similar development areas.

Table 5.1: Road reserves and building lines Recommended Road type Road name Road reserve Building line

National road N10 50m 20m – non-residential

Primary roads 20m 5m Internal roads Secondary roads 16m 5m

It will also be necessary to request SANRAL to reduce the current building lines along the property boundaries with the N10 as per Table 5.1 above. This is assuming that the building line will be taken from the road reserve boundary.

5.2 Parking and loading facilities

Refuse loading will occur from dedicated refuse areas strategically located in the development and other loading associated with deliveries, removals etc. will occur from the dedicated load bays to be provided. All parking and loading requirements are to be catered for on the individual sites.

In terms of the Department of Transport Parking Standards (Reference Six) the required minimum parking and loading bays are as set out in Tables 5.2, 5.3 and C.1. Table C.1 includes recommended reductions that may be granted (based on estimated sizes of the development).

Details of parking and loading bays at the individual sites should be finalised at the design stage for these sites and must comply with the tables provided herein.

12 Table 5.2: Parking requirements as per DOT standards Land use Parking requirement A : RESIDENTIAL 1. Hotels and motels 1 bay/bedroom and 10 bays per 100m² of public accessible area B : OFFICES AND BUSINESS 1. General Offices 2,5 bays/100 m² GLA 2. Business 7 bays/100 m² GLA, if < 5,000 m² GLA Shops 6 bays/100 m² GLA if >5,000 and < 15,000 m² GLA 5 bays/100 m² GLA, if >15,000 m² GLA C : INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL 1. Manufacturing 1 bay/100 m² GLA 2. Warehousing 1 bay/100 m² GLA 3. Diaries, Bakeries and Laundries 1 bay/100 m² GLA 4. Storage Yards 1 bay/100 m² GLA D : EDUCATIONAL 1. Universities 0.4 bays per student E : RECREATION, SPORT AND ENTERTAINMENT 1. Sport Stadiums 0,25 bays/seat

Table 5.3: Number of loading bays required Loading bays Type of goods vehicles GLA No. of No. of Total No. Land Use Light Medium Heavy (m²) receiving parking of loading (%) (%) (%) bays bays bays* Office 0 1 0 1 buildings 2 000 2 0 2 5 000 3 0 3 85 15 - 10 000 3 1 4 20 000 4 1 5 Suburban 0 1 0 1 supermarkets 500 2 0 2 and shopping 1 000 3 1 4 centres 2 500 4 2 6 5 000 5 2 7 30 65 5 10 000 6 2 8 15 000 7 2 9 20 000 8 2 10 25 000 9 2 11 Industrial land 0 1 0 1 use 1 000 2 1 3 5 000 3 1 4 10 000 3 1 4 20 000 5 1 6 30 40 30 40 000 9 1 10 60 000 12 1 13 80 000 15 1 16 100 000 17 1 18 Notes: * Total loading bays equals receiving bays plus parking bays.

6. ACCESS PROPOSALS

6.1 Vehicular access

The proposed access to the site is via one access onto the N10 and two accesses onto Anton Lubowski Road. The positions of the proposed accesses to the site are shown in the photographs below and in Figure 1.2.

Proposed accesses

Proposed access “A” onto the N10 Proposed access “B” onto Anton Lubowski Road

Proposed access

Proposed access “C” onto Anton Lubowski Road

The intersection sight distances for turning manoeuvres associated with the specific posted speed limit of 60km/h and 80km/h and the site gradients experienced are approximately 150m and 220m respectively. Both approaches on the N10 and Anton Lubowski Road at the proposed accesses meet these minimum requirements.

6.2 Pedestrian and bicycle access

Pedestrian and bicycle access to the site is via the proposed accesses.

Due to the location and nature of the development it is expected to generate local pedestrian traffic and the appropriate pedestrian facilities have been recommended as illustrated in Figure 7.1 and listed below: i. surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along both sides of all internal roads within the development, ii. surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along Anton Lubowski Road between the proposed access “B” and Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street, iii. surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along the N10 between the proposed access “A” and Ds. Aubey Beukes Street, and iv. raised pedestrian tables across Anton Lubowski Road in close proximity to the proposed accesses.

6.3 Access control

It is expected that individual sites, based on specific needs of that particular site, will require access control. It is therefore recommended that once the specific land use/tenant for a particular site are known then the access control parameters will be calculated based on the requirements of Reference Five.

At this stage it is not proposed to introduce access control to the entire development. Should this be proposed in the future then the type of control, number of lanes and position of the access control will need to be calculated as per Reference Five.

15 7. ANALYSIS RESULTS

Tables 7.3.1 to 7.3.3 contain a summary of some of the SIDRA analysis results. More detail may be viewed in Appendix B. This includes all aspects of the input data used in the analyses including items such as lane configuration, control strategy, etc. The colour coding used in the graphic representations found in Appendix B is explained in Table 7.1.

TABLE 7.1: SIDRA LOS colour codes Colour Rating Level of Service Used in displays Control delay, LOS Green Excellent LOS A Light blue Very good LOS B Dark blue Good LOS C Magenta Acceptable LOS D Orange Poor LOS E Red Very poor LOS F

The presented Level of Service (LOS) results are based on control delay and are illustrated in Table 7.2.

TABLE 7.2: Level of service definitions - HCM Method Control delay per vehicle in seconds (d) Level of Service (including geometric delay) Signals and roundabouts Stop and yield A d <=10 d <= 10 B 10 < d <= 20 10 < d <= 15 C 20 < d <= 35 15 < d <= 25 D 35 < d <= 55 25 < d <= 35 E 55 < d <= 80 35 < d <= 50 F 80 < d 50 < d Note: Above Tables 7.1 and 7.2 and explanation courtesy of Reference Three.

Tables 7.3.1 to 7.3.2 contain a summary of some of the SIDRA analysis results as undertaken at the various intersections, where Table 7.3.3 shows the control types assumed for the analysis for the various scenarios.

From the results it is clear that while the two peak periods test very similar, the current critical peak hour is the PM peak hour. On completion of the development the PM peak hour remains the more critical in terms of volume and LOS at intersections.

The anticipated impact of the proposed development varies depending on the road segment under review. From the SIDRA analyses results, together with on-site observations, the following road segments require mentioning and are displayed in Figure 7.1.

16 TABLE 7.3.1: Intersection Level of Service (AM peak) KEY A-C D E F NA Level of Service

No. Intersections 2017 AM status quo 2022 AM option 1 2022 AM option 2 2022 AM option 3 2022 AM option 4 APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. 1 N10/Access "A" NA NA B B B B B B A A 2 N10/N10 NA NA A A A A NA NA NA NA 3 Anton Lubowski Road/N10 NA NA A A B A NA NA NA NA 4 Anton Lubowski Road/Access "B" NA NA B B B B NA NA NA NA 5 Anton Lubowski Road/Access "C" NA NA C B C B A A NA NA 6 Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street NA NA NA NA NA NA C C NA NA 7 N10/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street NA NA NA NA B A C B NA NA TABLE 7.3.2: Intersection Level of Service (PM peak) KEY A-C D E F NA Level of Service

No. Intersections 2017 PM status quo 2022 PM option 1 2022 PM option 2 2022 PM option 3 2022 PM option 4 APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. APPR. INTERS. 1 N10/Access "A" NA NA D C D C C B A A 2 N10/N10 NA NA A A A A NA NA NA NA 3 Anton Lubowski Road/N10 NA NA A A B A NA NA NA NA 4 Anton Lubowski Road/Access "B" NA NA B B B B NA NA NA NA 5 Anton Lubowski Road/Access "C" NA NA F D D C C B NA NA 6 Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street NA NA F E E D D C NA NA 7 N10/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street NA NA F D B A B B NA NA TABLE 7.3.3: Intersection control type Intersection control type No. Intersections 2017 status quo 2022 option 1 2022 option 2 2022 option 3 2022 option 4

1 N10/Access "A" NAPriority/stop Extra lanes Traffic signals Roundabout 2 N10/N10 NA Priority/stop Extra lanes NA NA 3 Anton Lubowski Road/N10 NA Priority/stop Extra lanes NA NA 4 Anton Lubowski Road/Access "B" NA Priority/stop Extra lanes NA NA 5 Anton Lubowski Road/Access "C" NAPriority/stop Extra lanes Roundabout NA 6 Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street NATraffic signals Roundabout Extra lanes NA

N10/Access “A” intersection

Based on traffic volumes this intersection does not operate at an acceptable LOS once the site is fully developed. A number of alternative intersection designs were considered, i.e. stop/priority, stop/priority with extra lanes, traffic signals and a roundabout. The option that produced the best LOS was the traffic signal option and therefore it is recommended that traffic signals, with the lane configuration as illustrated to the right be implemented at this intersection.

N10/Access “A” intersection

N10/N10 intersection

Based on traffic volumes this intersection operates at an acceptable LOS once the site is fully developed. However, in order to improve the traffic safety of the intersection it is proposed to separate the turning traffic from the straight through traffic. It is therefore recommended to introduce auxiliary lanes as per the lane configuration illustrated to the right.

N10/N10 intersection

Anton Lubowski Road/N10 intersection

Similarly, based on traffic volumes this intersection operates at an acceptable LOS once the site is fully developed. It is however recommended to introduce auxiliary lanes as per the lane configuration illustrated to the right in order to improve traffic safety.

Anton Lubowski Road/N10 intersection

Anton Lubowski Road/Access “B” intersection

Similarly, the traffic volumes at this intersection operate at an acceptable LOS once the site is fully developed. It is further recommended to introduce auxiliary lanes as per the lane configuration illustrated to the right in order to improve traffic safety.

Anton Lubowski Road /Access “B” intersection

Anton Lubowski Road/Access “C” intersection

Based on traffic volumes this intersection does not operate at an acceptable LOS once the site is fully developed. A number of alternative intersection designs were considered, i.e. stop/priority, stop/priority with extra lanes and a roundabout. The option that produced the best LOS was the roundabout option (i.e. Option 2 below). The stop/priority controlled intersection, with auxiliary turning lanes, also gave an acceptable LOS. Either of these two options will work. It is therefore recommended that the roundabout option, as illustrated to the right below, be implemented at this intersection.

Option 1: Stop/priority with extra lanes Option 2: Roundabout

19 Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street intersection

Based on traffic volumes this intersection does not operate at an acceptable LOS once the site is fully developed. A number of alternative intersection designs were considered, i.e. traffic signals, traffic signals with extra lanes and a roundabout. The option that produced the best LOS was the traffic signal option with auxiliary lanes and therefore it is recommended that traffic signals, with the lane configuration as illustrated to the right be implemented at this intersection.

Anton Lubowski Road /Dakota Street intersection

Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street/N10 intersection

Based on traffic volumes this intersection does not operate at an acceptable LOS once the site is fully developed. A number of alternative intersection designs were considered, i.e. all way stop, traffic signals with extra lanes and a roundabout. The option that produced the best LOS was the roundabout option (i.e. Option 2 below). The stop/priority controlled intersection, with auxiliary turning lanes, also gave an acceptable LOS. Either of these two options will work. It is therefore recommended that the roundabout option, as illustrated to the right below be implemented at this intersection.

Option 1: Traffic signals with extra lanes Option 2: Roundabout

Traffic calming

Due to the expected increase of pedestrians in the area it is proposed to erect a raised pedestrian table in close proximity to each of the proposed accesses.

20 Public transport facilities

Due to the location and nature of the development it is expected to generate public transport that will want to pick-up and/or drop-off commuters and not necessarily need to enter the development. In order to facilitate this common practice the appropriate public transport facilities have been recommended at each of the three accesses, i.e. a public transport embayment on both exiting sides of each of the access intersections.

In addition, the development is expected to generate a considerable volume of public transport vehicles. As a result it is necessary to allocate an area for a large public transport facility on site. The position of the public transport facility should be located towards the centre of the development and in close proximity to the retail areas. A possible site for the proposed public transport facility is illustrated in Figure 7.1.

Limited access

It is essential to ensure that no vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian accesses are permitted onto the N10 and Anton Lubowski Road other than at the proposed accesses. It is therefore recommended that a suitable barrier be erected to prohibit such access. In this regard, an adequate pedestrian and vehicle proof fence/wall is to be erected along the property boundary with the N10 and Anton Lubowski Road.

Internal road location

It is not ideal to have two roads running parallel and adjacent to one another. This was proposed on three sides of the development. It is therefore proposed to remove these roads and relocate them “one block” in from the surrounding roads as illustrated in Figure 5.1.

Building lines and road reserve

It is proposed to have building lines as recommended in Table 5.1.

Pedestrian facilities

Due to the location and nature of the development it is expected to generate local pedestrian traffic, particularly along the surrounding road network. Due to the expected pedestrian volumes the appropriate pedestrian facilities have been recommended as illustrated in Figure 7.1.

Street lighting

In order to ensure traffic safety, it is proposed to extend the existing street lighting for some 200m north of access “A” on the N10 and 200m north of access “B” on Anton Lubowski Road.

Anton Lubowski Road

The eastern section of Anton Lubowski Road currently has four lanes, whereas the western section only has two lanes. Although not a requirement it may be advisable to increase the width of Anton Lubowski Road to be four lanes for the section between the N10 and Dakota Street.

8. CONCLUSIONS

Following the investigation and analysis it is concluded that: i. The current operating conditions on the road network within the study area are found to be acceptable with no LOS or capacity failures. ii. The existing critical peak, in terms of traffic volume, was found to be the PM peak hour while the AM peak hour tested very similar but with marginally lower demands. iii. Once developed and fully occupied, the proposed development may be expected to generate in the order of 2,400 and 2,800 new vehicle trips in AM and PM commuter peak hours respectively. iv. The combined critical peak hour of existing and development trips is found to be the PM peak hour. v. The network is not overloaded when development trips are assigned for any of the given tested peak hours, subject to the recommended road network improvements being undertaken. vi. The proposed changes to the layout and road network, as shown in Figures 5.1 and 7.1 respectively, the site layout and road network adequately serve the proposed development.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the investigation and conclusions it is recommended that: i. This Traffic Impact Study (TIS) be submitted to the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality (DKLM) for their perusal with the complete development proposal, and that the DKLM in turn forward the TIS, with their comments, to the South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) for their perusal. ii. The development proposal, that is the development of the NCEDA Solar and SEZ Development, as submitted and reflected herein, being approved in principle from a traffic impact perspective by the DKLM and SANRAL. iii. The site layout changes, as shown in Figure 5.1, being made a condition of approval. The required internal road network improvements to be made by the development are as follows: a. building lines, b. public transport, c. restricted access, d. traffic calming, e. internal road network, f. boundary wall/fence, and g. access control. iv. The road network improvements, as listed below and shown in Figure 7.1, being made a condition of approval and should be undertaken in phases. Phase “A” road improvements are to be undertaken prior to the development of any phase of the development becoming operational. Phase “B” projects are to be implemented as and when warranted by traffic volumes at a particular time in the future as determined by the road authority. It should however be noted that these improvements may change subject to subsequent investigations in consultation with the road authority. The required public road network improvements to be made to accommodate the development are as follows: Phase “A” road network improvements a. The construction of two public transport facilities, together with the associated pedestrian facilities, along the N10 and Anton Lubowski Road in close proximity to each of the proposed accesses to the development. b. The construction of surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along both sides of all internal roads within the development. c. The construction of surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along Anton Lubowski Road between the proposed access “B” and Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street. d. The construction of surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along the N10 between the proposed access “A” and Ds. Aubey Beukes Street. e. The construction of raised pedestrian tables across Anton Lubowski Road in close proximity to each of the proposed accesses. f. A 20m building line being imposed along the N10 road boundary. g. No direct vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian access being permitted onto the N10 and Anton Lubowski Road other than at the proposed accesses. h. The speed limit along the N10 in the vicinity of the proposed accesses being reduced to 60km/h from a point approximately 200m north of the proposed access. i. The speed limit along the Anton Lubowski Road in the vicinity of the proposed accesses being reduced to 60km/h from a point approximately 200m north of the proposed access “B” to the existing 60km/h zone further south. j. Extending of the existing street lighting for some 200m north of access “A” on the N10 and 200m north of access “B” on Anton Lubowski Road.

23 Phase “B” road network improvements k. The installation of traffic signals, with the lane configuration as illustrated in Figure B.1.C., being implemented at the N10/Access “A” intersection. l. The introduction of auxiliary lanes, as illustrated in Figure B.2.B., being implemented at the N10/N10 intersection. m. The introduction of auxiliary lanes, as illustrated in Figure B.3.B., being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/N10 intersection. n. The construction of a stop/priority controlled intersection with auxiliary lanes, as illustrated in Figure B.4.B., being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/Access “B” intersection. o. The construction of a roundabout, with the lane configuration as illustrated in Figure B.5.C., being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/Access “C” intersection. p. The introduction of additional lanes as illustrated in Figure B.6.C., being implemented at the Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street/N10 traffic signalised intersection. q. The construction of a roundabout, with the lane configuration as illustrated in Figure B.7.B., being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street intersection. v. Parking and load bays being provided as per Tables 5.2, 5.3 and C.1. vi. Details of parking and loading bays being finalised at the design stage. vii. Consideration being given to widening Anton Lubowski Road to four lanes between the N10 and where the road currently has four lanes just west of Dakota Street. viii. All costs associated with the internal and external road network, as indicated in Figures 5.1 and 7.1, being solely to the Developer’s account and must be implemented as the different phases are developed.

It should be noted that all figures represented in this Traffic Impact Study are concept drawings only and are not to be used for construction purposes. These concept drawings are to be developed into engineering drawings by the Developer’s appointed civil engineer. The engineering drawings are then to be approved by the relevant road authority officials prior to construction.

D M McQUIRK Pr. Eng. MSc. Transportation & Traffic Eng., BSc Civil Eng, Dipl Traffic Safety Management Registered with ECSA 970660, member of IMESA

10. REFERENCES

Reference 1 South African Trip Generation Rates. 2nd Edition, June 1995. Reference 2 Manual for Traffic Impact Studies RR93/635, October 1995. Reference 3 SIDRA operators manual. Reference 4 South African Traffic Impact and Site Traffic Assessment Manual, Volumes 1and 2 (TMH16) August 2012. Reference 5 South African Trip Data Manual, Volume 1 (TMH 17), September 2012. Reference 6 Department of Transport Parking Standards, November 1985.

25 APPENDIX A

FIGURES

30 APPENDIX B

SIDRA INTERSECTION LOS RESULTS

31 FIGURE B.1.A: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/Access “A” Design year

Without improvements Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.1.B: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/Access “A” Design year

With improvements – extra lanes Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

33 FIGURE B.1.C: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/Access “A” Design year

With improvements – extra lanes and traffic signals Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.1.D: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/Access “A” Design year

With improvements – roundabout Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.2.A: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/N10 Design year

Without improvements Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.2.B: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/N10 Design year

With improvements – extra lanes Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

37 FIGURE B.3.A: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/N10 Design year

Without improvements Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA AM (with PM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.3.B: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/N10 Design year

With improvements – extra lanes Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

39 FIGURE B.4.A: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Access "B" Design year

Without improvements Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA AM (with PM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.4.B: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Access "B" Design year

With improvements – extra lanes Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

41 FIGURE B.5.A: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Access "C" Design year

Without improvements Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA AM (with PM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.5.B: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Access "C" Design year

With improvements – extra lanes Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.5.C: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Access "C" Design year

With improvements - roundabout Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

44 FIGURE B.6.A: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street Design year

Without improvements Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA NA AM (with PM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.6.B: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street Design year

With improvements - roundabout Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

46 FIGURE B.6.C: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street Design year

With improvements – extra lanes with traffic signals Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

47 FIGURE B.7.A: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Design year

Without improvements Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA NA AM (with PM (with development trips) development trips)

FIGURE B.7.B: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Design year

With improvements - roundabout Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

49 FIGURE B.7.C: Level of Service (LOS) Intersection: N10/Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street Design year

With improvements – traffic signals with extra lanes Peak 2017 2022

NA NA AM (without development trips)

NA NA

PM (without development trips) Design year

2017 2022

NA NA PM (with AM (with development trips) development trips)

APPENDIX C

LAND USE, TRIP GENERATION, PARKING AND LOADING

Table C.1: Land use, trip generation, parking and loading Land use Trip generation Parking Loading Split (%) Trips Parking bay reduction for Loading bays Percentage Trip rates reduction for 6 6 0 0 0 0% 0% 150

peak developments in peak PM PM AM AM peak areas with, Pc** AM peak ended m Size Code Uni ts Uni ts Si ze s of Guidelines (without Land use Size units Size units Total edium Heavy ents, Pm Trip factor*** Trip M Light reductions) In In In In peak Total recom Out Out Out Out Parking per unit/ GLA PM AM AM peak ity to public transport Other (specify) Other Low vehicleLow Ownership, Pv On-site taxi bays On-site bus bays Mixed Mixed use developm On-site bicycle bays Parking required in term Hourly/daily distribution Hourly/daily Public transport nodes or corridors, Pt corridors, or nodes transport Public Proxim On-street taxi bays (constructed/painted) On-street bus bays (constructed/painted)

Heavy Industrial/ 120 100000 100 m ² GLA 0,50 0,70 75 25 25 75 20% 0% 20% 0,64 240 80 112 336 100000 100 m² GLA 1 1000 5 7 5 18 manufacturing Area ² GLA 0,60 0,60 80 20 20 80 20% 0% 20% 0,64 1536 384 384 1536 500000 100 m² GLA 1 5000 27 36 27 90 140 Manufacturing 500000 100 m Hotel 310 100 1 Room0,500,506040554520%0%20%0,4513 9 1210 100 1Room 1 100 (Residential)**** ² GLA 10 20

Hotel (PAA) 200 200 100 m 550 University / College 100 1 Student 0,20 0,20 80 20 30 70 20% 0% 20% 0,26 4 1 2 4 100 1 Student 0,25 25 ² GLA 2,10 2,10 85 15 20 80 20% 0% 20% 0,64 114 20 27 108 10000 100 m² GLA 2,5 250 3 1 0 4

²710 GLA Offices1,53 8,69 65 35 5010000 50 20%100 0%m 20% 0,26 26 14 111Total 111split 10000 100 m²Total GLA parking/loading 6 600 required in 2 5 0 8 Note * Size adjustment factor already applied. 2441 820 Shopping Centre* 10000 100 m terms of guidelines2752 Maximum reduction permitted based on area Total 6995 38 49 33 120 ** Values in italics are estimated. andParking car ownership reductions (Reference permitted Seven)= as per ***Trip factor includes accumulative reduction Pc = 1-(1-Pm/100).(1- guidelines Split existing trips Pv/100).(1-Pt/100) Percentage1933 split (%) 508 648 2104 0 1200 120 48 0 0 0 0 1368 Parking bays required including reductions and 2723 79 21 24 76 Total parking/loading requiredbays iprovided30n terms %, i.e. of to guide achievelines reductions (including reductions)2098,5

Total new trips0000Split new 2436 trips 5627 Actual parking/loading bays provided150 6 6 0 0 0 5789 38 49 33 120 Effective parking bays 1930 506 633 2090 provided

100% 5564 63 150 6 6 0 0 0 0 5789 0 0 0 0

100% 5564 63 1200 120 48 0 0 0 0 6994,9 edium Total Light Heavy M Total Other (specify) Other On-site taxi bays On-site bus bays bus On-site On-street taxi bays On-street bus bays bus On-street On-site bicycle bays Disabled parking bays Percentage of reduced rate Standard on-site parking bays Standard on-street parking bays

APPENDIX D

TRAFFIC VOLUMES

53 Project :TIS for SEZ Upington Date : 19/10/2016 Intersection : Anton Lubowskiand Dakota Street No.: 1 Time period: 6:00- 18:00 Light and Day : Wednesday Anton Lubowski Dakota Street Anton Lubowski Dakota Street INTER- heavy vehicles Eastbound Southbound Westbound Northbound SECTION ENDING 123 456 789 101112 ORIENTATION TIME Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Total Hour 06:15 15 18 2 35 3 12 6 21 16 18 0 34 1 54 22 77 167 167 06:30 19 22 2 43 3 18 5 26 26 22 0 48 0 60 25 85 202 369 06:452323955523432352405916543109255624 07:00 24 23 12 59 5 44 19 68 46 43 0 89 0 133 34 167 383 1007 07:15 40 53 18 111 10 64 38 112 70 30 1 101 1 170 45 216 540 1380 07:30 28 32 21 81 9 71 56 136 66 27 0 93 1 148 21 170 480 1658 07:45 32 26 15 73 8 82 17 107 56 28 2 86 1 104 40 145 411 1814 08:00 18 20 15 53 2 54 9 65 29 14 1 44 1 71 22 94 256 1687 08:15 23 12 18 53 14 73 16 103 26 17 1 44 2 94 20 116 316 1463 08:30 23 10 8 41 7 71 15 93 24 9 0 33 1 69 17 87 254 1237 08:45 13 12 10 35 4 66 11 81 16 13 2 31 2 64 14 80 227 1053 09:00 18 14 12 44 9 91 14 114 27 13 3 43 2 82 20 104 305 1102 09:15 23 16 14 53 14 116 16 146 38 13 3 54 1 100 26 127 380 1166 09:30 11 5 4 20 4 32 11 47 14 4 1 19 2 54 11 67 153 1065 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 09:45 22 9 11 42 8 70 19 97 19 10 1 30 0 81 24 105 274 1112 456 10:0013111539147569520913036818892531060 32 261 130 10:15 13 12 9 34 16 85 18 119 28 17 2 47 2 84 26 112 312 992 10:30 10 8 5 23 8 65 11 84 9 6 1 16 0 55 8 63 186 1025 10:45237124212639842191315551272229980 11:00 13 10 7 30 19 80 15 114 31 23 2 56 2 93 26 121 321 1048 3 66 238 7 11:15 14 12 9 35 20 82 15 117 24 18 0 42 2 76 18 96 290 1026 2 134 128 8 11:30 11 11 14 36 6 69 11 86 20 6 1 27 2 54 20 76 225 1065 1 124 3 9 11:45 13 21 33 67 11 61 39 111 28 28 2 58 4 99 30 133 369 1205 12:00 15 31 51 97 16 53 66 135 36 49 2 87 6 144 39 189 508 1392 12:15 28 17 11 56 10 85 25 120 21 15 1 37 0 86 30 116 329 329 12:30 23 15 8 46 11 68 14 93 22 14 2 38 3 77 15 95 272 601 140 555 3 12:45 27 24 10 61 6 117 21 144 28 22 1 51 3 85 33 121 377 978 12 11 10 13:00 51 25 13 89 15 144 40 199 21 23 4 48 0 63 21 84 420 1398 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) 13:15 22 18 4 44 8 59 19 86 15 11 1 27 1 46 11 58 215 1284 456 13:30 14 9 5 28 6 40 12 58 27 10 0 37 2 64 19 85 208 1220 105 695 251 13:45 22 11 11 44 7 68 14 89 38 32 3 73 2 111 39 152 358 1201 14:00 15 14 15 44 4 79 15 98 58 31 0 89 1 140 33 174 405 1186 14:1520137403507602012032184171022341205 14:30 16 6 15 37 6 56 14 76 19 5 1 25 2 48 15 65 203 1200 3 77 96 7 14:45 35 28 35 98 14 87 37 138 26 15 1 42 2 76 37 115 393 1235 2 125 118 8 15:00 36 24 35 95 18 75 34 127 25 18 2 45 2 79 32 113 380 1210 1 190 20 9 15:15 37 14 59 110 20 51 21 92 23 13 4 40 3 67 27 97 339 1315 15:30 16 10 17 43 11 73 18 102 31 21 0 52 2 87 26 115 312 1424 15:45106 5 2111341257127 2 210 3116471461177 16:00 30 14 12 56 13 62 26 101 21 11 1 33 3 54 10 67 257 1054 110 547 21 16:15 31 25 22 78 28 73 35 136 37 41 1 79 2 80 32 114 407 1122 12 11 10 16:30 21 22 26 69 18 104 18 140 25 27 0 52 0 88 30 118 379 1189 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 16:45 53 25 19 97 19 141 36 196 23 29 2 54 1 155 30 186 533 1576 456 17:00 26 18 24 68 15 140 25 180 25 30 2 57 2 113 26 141 446 1765 558 3671 5350 17:15 78 62 33 173 59 285 97 441 36 27 7 70 18 184 35 237 921 2279 17:30 33 20 1 54 12 129 93 234 12 32 9 53 0 95 19 114 455 2355 17:45 37 31 14 82 8 53 22 83 11 14 0 25 2 52 15 69 259 2081 18:00 60 15 11 86 9 78 20 107 18 32 2 52 2 77 22 101 346 1981 3 738 1319 7 2 884 942 8 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 1 1198 73 9 Peak hour 124 134 66 324 32 261 130 423 238 128 3 369 3 555 140 698 1814 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) Peak hour 190 125 77 392 105 695 251 1051 96 118 20 234 21 547 110 678 2355 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 5386 4119 96 Totals 1198 884 738 2820 558 3671 1121 5350 1319 942 73 2334 96 4119 1171 5386 15890 12 11 10

Project :TIS for SEZ Upington Date : 19/10/2016 Intersection : N10and Anton Lubowski No.: 2 Time period: 6:00- 18:00 Light and Day : Wednesday N10 Anton Lubowski Rd N10 Anton Lubowski Rd INTER- heavy vehicles Eastbound Southbound Westbound Northbound SECTION ENDING 123 456 789 101112 ORIENTATION TIME Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Total Hour 06:15320 5 0112121412141515 06:30430 7 0101221521251833 06:45650110112121412252255 07:00110 2 0202002241051166 07:15410 5 02022024343102172 07:30300 3 01120022335111872 07:45310 4 0415231611241969 08:00000 0 01123003175131876 08:15200 2 0314001123271469 08:30400 4 06060011064102172 08:45110 2 0505113512361871 09:00220 4 05051124156122578 09:15320 5 04040101179172791 09:30310 4 06060112183122494 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 09:45310 4 04040011064101995 456 10:00600 6 0404006632162292 092 10:15700 7 0707031413592792 10:30310 4 02020202254111987 10:45200 2 0224114620131583 11:00100 1 0303102322591677 3 047 11:15100 1 0404222614161767 2 338 11:30300 3 0404202425181967 1 11 7 9 11:45511 7 0415112413152173 12:00611 8 0415012301011774 12:15200 2 0325100116291717 12:30300 3 0549001102131633 10 9 11 12:45000 0 0202210313151043 12 11 10 13:00300 3 0314002201121154 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) 13:15200 2 0202010112361148 456 13:30020 2 0202213603141446 050 13:45320 5 0101020214271551 14:00010 1 0101021321581353 14:15320 5 0415011203141658 14:30310 4 0112112422041458 3 027 14:45310 4 0112112422151558 2 318 15:00310 4 0112002211241257 1 749 15:15110 2 020200110033 849 15:30120 3 0202001114161247 15:45200 2 001120021113 840 16:00210 3 020200000213 836 4116 16:15210 3 000001011214 836 12 11 10 16:30110 2 010101120314 933 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 16:45220 4 0202000023161237 456 17:00100 1 000000111304 635 0 118 141 17:15210 3 0101212523271643 17:30200 2 020200111214 943 17:45110 2 0011101214161142 18:00100 1 000001231135 945 3 2327 2 43 37 8 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 1 119 64 9 Peak hour 1130140921143714119103069 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) Peak hour 730100505214761142143 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 305 141 58 Totals 119 43 2 164 0 118 23 141 32 37 64 133 58 141 106 305 743 12 11 10

55 Project :TIS for SEZ Upington Date : 19/10/2016 Intersection : N10and N10 No.: 3 Time period: 6:00- 18:00 Light and Day : Wednesday N10 N10 N10 N10 INTER- heavy vehicles Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION ENDING 123 456 789 101112 ORIENTATION TIME Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Total Hour 06:15000 0 00000000000000 06:30040 4 0000062800111313 06:45040 4 0000053850161831 07:001 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 01411510 1 2 2253 07:150 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 01752230 1 4 3184 07:301 7 0 8 0 0 0 0 02142540 1 5 38109 07:450 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 02833140 2 6 45136 08:000130130000029332100146160 08:151130140000031132002248177 08:300110110000023023101236175 08:45224026000008311000037167 09:002250270000110314301445166 09:151250260000112316501648166 09:300140140000013114000028158 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 09:4501401400000819200225146 456 10:006130190011014216003339140 000 10:151110120000013215002229121 10:301120130000011112202429122 10:45210012000009413202429126 11:001 5 0 6 0 0 0 0 01721900 0 0 25112 3 007 11:152901100000104141102271102 24 80 8 11:30060 6 0000085131023221031 2139 11:450130130112010313202432106 12:000200200101012113201337118 12:150 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 01521710 2 3 2727 12:3001101100000911060062754 5012 12:45170 8 0000041510011468 12 11 10 13:001200210000013215001137105 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) 13:1511501600000808300327105 456 13:3021001200000527300322100 000 13:45060 6 00000538201317103 14:00110011000001331610122995 14:1511001100000931240042795 14:30170 8 00000831140152497 3 007 14:45280100000093124015271072 85 41 8 15:00280100000092113003241021 959 15:150 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 01822050 0 5 29104 15:301120130000013114201330110 15:4501401400000819101225108 16:000100100000018220201333117 2010 16:15219021000007310302536124 12 11 10 16:302150170000012012102332126 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 16:451160170000012214300334135 456 17:004280320000015217200251153 024 17:1532202500000819300337154 17:3011902000000606202430152 17:45260 8 00000314302517135 18:00113014000006392013261103 027 2 567 562 8 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 1 50 100 9 Peak hour 2240260 0 0 0 0801393120 517136 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) Peak hour 9850940 0 0 0 041546100 212152 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 146 1 100 Totals 50 567 0 617 0 2 2 4 2 562 100 664 100 1 45 146 1431 12 11 10

56 Project :TIS for SEZ Upington Date : 19/10/2016 Intersection : N10and Ds Aubrey Beuke No.: 4 Time period: 6:00- 18:00 Light and Day : Wednesday N10 Ds Aubrey Beukes St N10 Ds Aubrey Beukes St INTER- heavy vehicles Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound SECTION ENDING 123 456 789 101112 ORIENTATION TIME Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Right Through Left Total Total Hour 06:152122 1641492712144303171219494 06:303102 15315102891352751902494188 06:45 4 23 0 27 5 35 46 86 20 20 12 52 16 28 1 45 210 398 07:00 2 24 2 28 25 67 65 157 29 42 18 89 22 37 0 59 333 731 07:15 2 13 2 17 21 62 64 147 34 55 16 105 17 27 2 46 315 952 07:30 4 12 6 22 18 66 54 138 30 63 12 105 17 38 3 58 323 1181 07:45 1 20 10 31 17 63 41 121 28 27 7 62 14 41 1 56 270 1241 08:002 193 241242389226329 6710351 462291137 08:150 134 171316305918279 543 302 35165987 08:301 8 8 1792819561717438635041152816 08:45124113683222622210436225128162708 09:00322123792923612111638629237173652 09:155 1912369 26235819128 3910323 45178665 09:30112102352224512614444727034152665 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 09:45014102463119561610632320225137640 456 10:00 3 27 10 40 10 15 20 45 19 14 6 39 4 29 1 34 158 625 81 258 224 10:15 3 22 12 37 10 22 19 51 22 13 3 38 6 50 3 59 185 632 10:30 2 15 10 27 13 27 18 58 16 10 7 33 5 22 2 29 147 627 10:451 116 181129256518113 327 293 39154644 11:00116122983021592817247433441176662 3 20 121 7 11:15 1 10 11 22 11 28 28 67 20 17 6 43 8 19 5 32 164 641 2 69 187 8 11:301 178 2611241853331213585 150 20157651 1 9539 11:45 1 23 11 35 11 29 22 62 35 14 11 60 6 18 0 24 181 678 12:00 1 28 14 43 11 34 25 70 36 15 8 59 6 20 0 26 198 700 12:15 3 25 20 48 11 24 24 59 13 13 6 32 5 26 0 31 170 170 12:30 1 18 18 37 19 20 21 60 24 19 8 51 5 28 2 35 183 353 6 143 70 12:450 187 251824246636226 645 422 49204557 12 11 10 13:00 4 25 20 49 14 29 41 84 32 19 11 62 13 35 3 51 246 803 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) 13:152 268 36122722615122118416603 79260893 456 13:30 1 29 22 52 9 58 75 142 58 15 25 98 8 29 0 37 329 1039 50 144 128 13:45 3 21 9 33 18 58 44 120 32 23 5 60 5 26 0 31 244 1079 14:00 2 14 8 24 37 49 38 124 38 28 5 71 1 29 2 32 251 1084 14:15 3 10 16 29 15 26 24 65 26 18 4 48 8 21 0 29 171 995 14:30 1 19 4 24 9 26 23 58 23 11 8 42 2 27 4 33 157 823 3 55 202 7 14:45 1,5 14 6 21,5 9 26 24 59 27 16 8 51 2 28 2 32 163,5 742,5 2 79 78 8 15:002 9 7 1892525593121759229031167658,51 10 53 9 15:152 168 261122225534245 635 321 38182669,5 15:30 1 24 11 36 11 37 22 70 36 12 5 53 7 29 2 38 197 709,5 15:450 268 3411223871211113455 350 40190736 16:00 2 20 14 36 25 34 47 106 37 18 18 73 11 36 3 50 265 834 6 281 51 16:153 5015685 403277462311800 381 39264916 12 11 10 16:30 3 18 11 32 12 42 32 86 34 19 5 58 10 39 1 50 226 945 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 16:45 0 23 15 38 18 24 23 65 49 23 5 77 11 61 2 74 254 1009 456 17:005 1513339 383077361316656 440 50225969 585 1600 3641 17:15 4 28 19 51 12 49 38 99 61 19 20 100 22 107 1 130 380 1085 17:301 138 22113337815623129112693 842781137 17:45 4 13 13 30 10 47 37 94 45 14 9 68 4 39 2 45 237 1120 18:001 119 211034307443169 686 273 361991094 3 477 1443 7 2 899 932 8 AM Peak (vehicles per hour) 1 95 415 9 Peak hour 9 69 20 98 81 258 224 563 121 187 53 361 70 143 6 219 1241 PM Peak (vehicles per hour) Peak hour 10 79 55 144 50 144 128 322 202 78 53 333 51 281 6 338 1137 12 hour (06:00 to 18:00) total vehicles 2048 1611 363 Totals 94,5 899 477 1470,5 585 1600 1456 3641 1443 932 415 2790 363 1611 74 2048 9949,5 12 11 10