appendix e: transport assessment - latitude 32 · 2019-02-15 · transport assessment guidelines...

LATITUDE 32 DA 6A STRUCTURE PLAN – DRAFT FOR ADVERTISING 67

NOVEMBER 2017

Appendix E: Transport Assessment

Latitude 32 DevelopmentArea 6A Structure Plan

Transport Assessment

Prepared forLandCorp

20 July 2017

Latitude 32 Development Area 6A Structure PlanTransport Assessment

Cardno ii

Contact InformationCardno (WA) Pty LtdTrading as CardnoABN 77 009 119 000

11 Harvest Terrace, West Perth WA 6005

Telephone: 08 9273 3888Facsimile: 08 9486 8664International: +61 8 9273 3888

[email protected]

Author(s):Andreas WangSenior Transport Planner

Document InformationPrepared for LandCorpProject Name Transport AssessmentSite Name Latitude 32 (DA6A)Client Reference Enter Client Reference

Project No. CW964200Document Title Latitude 32 Development

Area 6A Structure PlanDiscipline Code Traffic & TransportDocument Type ReportDocument Sequence 1Date 20 July 2017Revision Number C

Approved By:Ray CookSenior Principal/Manager – Traffic & Transport WA

Document HistoryRevision Date Description of Revision Prepared by: Reviewed by:

A 26/05/2017 Rev A Andreas Wang / DannySrioni

Ray Cook

B 17/07/2017 Rev B Andreas Wang / RichardFarmer

Ray Cook

C 20/07/2017 Rev C Andreas Wang Ray Cook

© Cardno. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Cardno and may not be used, sold, transferred,copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person other than by agreement withCardno.

This document is produced by Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement.Cardno does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or relianceby any third party on the content of this document.


Cardno iii

Executive SummaryThis Transport Assessment has been prepared in accordance with the Western Australian PlanningCommission (WAPC) Transport Assessment Guidelines for Developments: Volume 2 – Planning Schemes,Structure Plans and Activity Centre Plans (Revised August 2016) and outlines the transport aspects of theproposed Development Area 6A (DA6A) Structure Plan for Latitude 32 and focuses on the traffic operations,access arrangements and road reservation widths within the area.

The following findings have been made in regard to the proposed DA6A Structure Plan:

> The proposed Structure Plan comprises a net developable area of approximately 70.88ha of generalindustrial land use. The land use will provide employment opportunities and further support the economicgrowth in the area.

> The land uses within the proposed Structure Plan will generate an estimated 294 two-way trips in thecritical peak hour period.

> In the short-medium term, access to DA6A will be via the existing intersection of Rockingham Road /Hurst Road, as well as via Russell Road.

> In the long term (beyond 2031), the construction of the FRCAH will necessitate the closure of the accessto Rockingham Road / FRCAH due to the controlled access nature of the FRCAH. Alternative access willbe provided via a new Local Distributor Road linking south through Development Area 5 (DA5)connecting to Musson Road in Development Area 2 (DA2).

> The IMT will not impact on the proposed access arrangements to DA6A.

> The proposed road cross-sections and intersection forms will have sufficient capacity to carry the trafficvolumes expected on the transport network during the critical peak period through to the 2040 planninghorizon.


Cardno iv

Table of Contents1 Introduction 1

1.1 Background 11.2 Site Location and Description 1

2 Existing Situation 22.1 Existing Land Uses within and Adjacent to Structure Plan Area 22.2 Existing Road Network 32.3 Existing Traffic Volumes 42.4 Existing Pedestrian / Cycle Networks 52.5 Existing Public Transport Services 62.6 Existing Rail Freight 8

3 Changes to Surrounding Transport Networks 93.1 Changes to Surrounding Road Network 93.2 Changes to Pedestrian / Cycle Networks 93.3 Public Transport 93.4 Duplication of the Freight Rail Line 103.5 Intermodal Terminal 103.6 Proposed Development Land Uses 103.7 Access Arrangements 10

3.7.1 Existing Access to DA6A 113.7.2 Short- Medium Term (2021-2031) Access to DA6A 123.7.3 Long Term (post-2031) Access to DA6A 14

3.8 Development Traffic Generation 173.9 Development Traffic Distribution 173.10 Internal Road Layout 17

4 Analysis of Transport Network 194.1 Assessment Years and Time Periods 194.2 Future Year Traffic Assessment 20

4.2.1 2026 Scenario Intersection Analysis 204.2.2 2040 Scenario 23

5 Road Reservation Widths and Cross Section 265.1 Local Distributor Road 265.2 Russell Road 265.3 Local Road 27

6 Conclusions 28

AppendicesAppendix A Trip Generation AssumptionsAppendix B Intermodel Facility TrafficAppendix C GenerationAppendix D Latitude 32 – 2040 FRCAH


Cardno v

TablesTable 2-1 Existing Weekday Mid-block Traffic Volumes 4Table 2-2 Bus Service Frequency 6Table 3-1 Proposed Development Area 2 Land Use 10Table 3-2 Traffic Generation for the Proposed Land Uses within DA6A 17Table 4-1 Level of Service (LOS) Performance Criteria 20Table 4-2 Intersection Performance of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road for 2026 Scenario 21Table 4-3 Intersection Performance of Rockingham Road / Hurst Road (Eastern Intersection) for 2026

Scenario 23Table 4-4 Intersection Performance of Rockingham Road / Hurst Road (Western Intersection) for 2026

Scenario 23Table 4-5 Intersection Performance of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road for 2040 Scenario 25

FiguresFigure 1-1 Latitude 32 and Individual Development Areas 1Figure 2-1 Existing Road Network Surrounding DA6A 3Figure 2-2 Existing Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities 5Figure 2-3 Surrounding Public Transport 6Figure 2-4 Existing Bus Stops on Rockingham Road near Russell Road 7Figure 2-5 Existing Russell Road At-Grade Rail Crossing 8Figure 3-1 Existing Access Arrangements to DA6A 11Figure 3-2 Short-Medium Term Access Arrangements to DA6A 13Figure 3-3 FRCAH and Hurst Road Potential Cross-Section 15Figure 3-4 Long Term Access to DA6A 16Figure 3-5 Proposed DA6A Internal Road Layout 18Figure 4-1 Indicative Layout of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road Intersection 21Figure 4-2 Indicative SIDRA Layout of Intersection of Rockingham Road / Hurst Road 22Figure 4-3 Assumed Layout for Intersection of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road / DA6A Access Road

- 2040 Scenario 24Figure 5-1 Proposed Road Reservation Width and Cross Section for Local Distributor Roads 26Figure 5-2 Proposed Road Reservation Width and Cross Section for Russell Road 26Figure 5-3 Proposed Road Reservation Width and Cross Section for Local Roads 27Figure 6-1 SCATS Data for Fenton Street / Kewdale Road Intersection (Note: Does not include left turn

from Kewdale Road) 32Figure 6-2 Percentage of Truck Arrivals by Time of Day 33Figure 6-3 Percentage of Truck Arrivals by Time of Day 33


Cardno 1

1 Introduction

1.1 BackgroundCardno was commissioned by LandCorp to prepare a Transport Assessment (TA) for the proposedDevelopment Area 6A (DA6A) Structure Plan of Latitude 32.

This report has been prepared in accordance with the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC)Transport Assessment Guidelines for Developments: Volume 2 – Planning Schemes, Structure Plans andActivity Centre Plans (Revised August 2016). Specifically, this report aims to assess the operations of theproposed development internally, its connections to the adjacent road network, with a focus on the trafficoperations, access arrangements and road reservation widths within the area.

This report also outlines the requirements and opportunities associated with traffic and transport withinDA6A, referencing WAPC policies and guidelines as well as best-practice planning practice within WesternAustralia.

1.2 Site Location and DescriptionDA6A is located within Latitude 32 and is one of six Development Areas that together form Latitude 32 (seeFigure 1-1).

Figure 1-1 Latitude 32 and Individual Development Areas

Source: Urbis


Cardno 2

2 Existing Situation

2.1 Existing Land Uses within and Adjacent to Structure Plan AreaThe Hope Valley-Wattleup Redevelopment Project Master Plan (Master Plan), for all intents and purposesacts as the Local Planning Scheme for the Redevelopment Area.

The Act provides for, and guides the preparation of a Master Plan in order to:

“Promote the orderly and proper planning, development and management of the redevelopmentarea, including any provision that may be made by a local planning scheme under the Planning andDevelopment Act 2005”

In summary, the Master Plan aims to resolve land use conflicts, protect and conserve heritage andenvironmental assets, provide for development in the area in a proper and orderly way, and distribute costsof common infrastructure.

The Master Plan provides for the procedure to establish statutory documents under the Master Planincluding; Structure Plans, Design Guidelines and Planning Policies, along with the requirements forPlanning Approvals and measures in which to control and guide land uses and development.

The Structure Plan for DA6A is prepared in accordance with Part 6 of the Master Plan and is consistent withthe aims for development within the Redevelopment Area. This TA supports the Structure Plan for DA6A.


Cardno 3

2.2 Existing Road NetworkThe existing road network within the Structure Plan area is shown in Figure 2-1 below.

Figure 2-1 Existing Road Network Surrounding DA6A

Source: Main Roads WA (Road Information Mapping System)

The following discusses the characteristics of the surrounding road network:

> Rockingham Road is classified as a Primary Distributor according to the Main Roads WA MetropolitanFunctional Road Hierarchy (MFRH) with a posted speed limit ranging between 80km/hr to 90km/hr and acentral median ranging between 27m to 146m, reflecting its future use as part of the FremantleRockingham Controlled Access Highway (FRCAH)

> Russell Road is classified as a Regional Distributor according to the Main Roads WA MFRH with aposted speed limit of 80km/hr in the vicinity of DA6A.

> Hurst Road is classified as a Local Road that provides an existing connection to Rockingham Road fromthe DA6A area. Hurst Road currently only serves as access to 1-2 warehouse type facilities and to aquarry site.


Cardno 4

Road classifications are defined in the MFRH as follows:

> Primary Distributors: provide for major regional and inter-regional traffic movements and carry largevolumes of generally fast moving traffic. Some are strategic freight routes and are all State Roads.Primary Distributors are managed by Main Roads WA.

> Regional Distributors: Roads that are not Primary Distributors, but which link significant destinations andare designed for efficient movements of people and goods within and beyond regional areas. RegionalDistributors are managed by local government.

> Access Roads: Provide access to abutting properties with safety aspects having priority over the vehiclemovement function. In urban areas, these roads are bicycle and pedestrian friendly, with aesthetics andamenity also important. Access Roads are managed by local government.

2.3 Existing Traffic VolumesExisting weekday mid-block traffic volumes were obtained from Main Roads WA’s Traffic Map for keysections in the vicinity of the site as shown in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1 Existing Weekday Mid-block Traffic VolumesLocation Weekday Traffic Volumes (two-way)

Daily AM Peak(6am-7am)

PM Peak(4pm – 5pm)

Rockingham Road (north of Russell Road, 2016 counts) 29,619 2,418 2,819

Rockingham Road (south of Russell Road, 2016 counts) 26,895 2,129 2,612

Russell Road (east of Rockingham Road, 2016 counts) 8,279 580 745


Cardno 5

2.4 Existing Pedestrian / Cycle NetworksThe existing pedestrian/cycle networks in the area surrounding the site are illustrated in Figure 2-2. The siteis located within proximity to the Perth Bicycle Network (SW17) along Russell Road.

Figure 2-2 Existing Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities


Cardno 6

2.5 Existing Public Transport ServicesExisting bus services adjacent to the site are shown in Figure 2-3 and the bus frequencies are summarisedin Table 2-2. As shown in Figure 2-4, there are 2 existing bus stops on Rockingham Road near RussellRoad which service Bus Route 549.

Table 2-2 Bus Service FrequencyBus Route Weekday (peak) Weekday (off-peak) Saturday Sunday & Public

Holiday

522 3 services daily 3 services daily No Service No service

549 10-20 mins 20-60 mins 30-60 mins 30-60 mins

Figure 2-3 Surrounding Public Transport

Source: Transperth (June 2016)


Cardno 7

Figure 2-4 Existing Bus Stops on Rockingham Road near Russell Road

Source: nearmap (June 2016)


Cardno 8

2.6 Existing Rail FreightThe Midland to Kwinana Railway (MKR) corridor with a width of approximately 40m is currently located at theeastern boundary of DA6A. The rail corridor currently consists of a single rail track and has an at-grade railcrossing where it intersects Russell Road, as shown in Figure 2-5. It is noted that the rail corridor is ownedby the Public Transport Authority (PTA) but is leased to Brookfield Rail on a 45 year lease.

Figure 2-5 Existing Russell Road At-Grade Rail Crossing

Source: Google Street View (November 2015)


Cardno 9

3 Changes to Surrounding Transport Networks

3.1 Changes to Surrounding Road NetworkA number of changes are proposed for strategic roads as part of the future external road network. Thesechanges include:

> Construction of the Fremantle-Rockingham Controlled Access Highway (FRCAH) to the west of the studyarea. The FRCAH is currently proposed as a controlled access highway with 3 lanes in each direction andis to have a posted speed limit of 100km/h;

> Construction of Rowley Road with 2 lanes in each direction to the south of the Structure Plan area, toallow for unimpeded traffic movements between the FRCAH and the Kwinana Freeway and is to have aposted speed limit of 80km/h (source: Main Roads WA 31/01/2014).

> Upgrade of Anketell Road to 2 lanes in each direction to the south of the study area (posted speed limit of80km/h assumed – the existing speed limit on Anketell Road varies between 80km/h and 90km/h).

> Russell Road upgraded to 2 lanes in each direction by 2027/28 (source: City of Cockburn – Regional andMajor Roadworks 2016 – 2030,http://www.cockburn.wa.gov.au/documents/CouncilServices/EngineeringServices/RegionalMajorRoadworks_Mar2017-A3.pdf)

Advice from Main Roads WA (dated 31/01/2014) suggest that the FRCAH will be constructed prior to 2031,while the construction of Rowley Road and the Anketell Road upgrade will be completed prior to 2026.Subsequent advice from Main Roads WA (dated 15/6/2017) suggests that MRWA still intend to constructFRCAH by 2031, although not in its ultimate form. The ultimate form of FRCAH is to be constructed post-2031.

As requested by Main Roads WA, the SIDRA intersection analysis for signalised intersections has beenbased on a minimum cycle time of 110 seconds.

While it is noted that the existing FRCAH design includes an East-West Interchange located to the north ofDA2, extensive traffic modelling undertaken by Cardno (based on ROM sub-area matrices received21/02/2014) suggests that the proposed regional and Latitude 32 internal road network can functionacceptably, provided that further localised intersection upgrades along the North South District DistributorRoad (NSDDR) and Russell Road are undertaken to increase the intersection capacities. Given that theDepartment of Transport (DoT) has confirmed that the East West Interchange is no longer required tosupport the IMT, the East-West Interchange has not been assumed to form part of the Latitude 32 transportnetwork.

3.2 Changes to Pedestrian / Cycle NetworksA Principal Shared Path (PSP) is expected to be constructed as part of the FRCAH along the easterncarriageway and will provide primary regional cycling connectivity for all of Latitude 32. The level of accessfor cyclists from the FRCAH to the Latitude 32 internal cyclist network will ultimately depend on the detaileddesign of the FRCAH and Russell Road.

Road cross-sections depicting these facilities are provided in Section 5 of this report.

3.3 Public TransportThe bus interchange and train station in Aubin Grove (near the Russell Road and Kwinana Freewayinterchange) have recently commenced services (May 2017). The facility include a parking facility with 2,000car parking bays, 88 bike parking bays, 19 motorbike parking bays and six bus feeder services.

Consultation has also been undertaken with the PTA regarding the suggestion to relocate the route of theexisting 920 bus service between Fremantle to Rockingham. Once the FRCAH is constructed, it isunderstood that this will form the main corridor for the 920 bus service (due to the controlled-access natureof the road).


Cardno 10

PTA have indicated that while the industrial land uses as part of Latitude 32 are generally associated withlow employment density, relocation of the 920 service to the NSDDR would be preferred as the land usesalong Rockingham Road would likely attract even less patrons. It is noted that any deviation of the 920service to Latitude 32 will require demonstration that the overall journey times for the 920 bus servicebetween Fremantle and Rockingham will not be negatively impacted by such a deviation.

Physical infrastructure improvements such as bus queue-jump facilities and on-street bus bays may berequired to improve the journey times for a limited-stop bus service through this area. It is noted that thequeue-jump facilities described require minimal additional physical road infrastructure and would generallyconsist of lengthening left turn lanes at signalised intersections. These measures would be expected to beimplemented by the PTA following completion of the NSDDR from Anketell Road to Russell Road, and wouldbe required only to mitigate the impact of regional traffic use of the NSDDR.

3.4 Duplication of the Freight Rail LineConsultation was undertaken with Brookfield Rail in June 2014 to identify the short, medium and long-termplanning of the rail network adjacent to DA2 and has continued to date for the planning of DA5 and DA6A.Advice from Brookfield Rail suggests that a duplication of the existing rail line between Kwinana to CockburnSouth (which includes the entire section of the rail line that runs through Latitude 32) is planned in themedium-term future, although it is noted that the exact timing of the rail line duplication will depend on arange of economic factors and is subject to future analysis. The additional rail line would be provided withinthe existing 40m rail reserve and therefore does not impact on the DA6A eastern boundary.

3.5 Intermodal TerminalA potential future Intermodal Terminal (IMT) (a facility where the exchange of freight between differentmodes of transport can occur) of approximately 200ha is currently proposed to be located within DA5.

At the time of writing, a draft IMT concept has been finalised by the Department of Transport (DoT), howeverthe concept is currently under review. The draft IMT concept includes the realignment of the MKR line to thewest of its current alignment. Any future realignment of the MKR line would form part of the structure planprepared for the IMT precinct. The DA6A internal road network and proposed access strategy is notimpacted by whether or not the IMT is progressed.

3.6 Proposed Development Land UsesThe Net Developable Area (NDA) and land use for the proposed DA6A, is summarised in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1 Proposed Development Area 2 Land UseLand Use Net Developable Area (ha)

General industry 70.88

3.7 Access ArrangementsAccess arrangements to DA6A have been considered for the existing, short-medium and long term, definedas:

> Current – within the first few years of development commencement of DA6A (nominally prior to 2021);

> Short-Medium Term – defined as the year that the existing access arrangements to DA6A will no longerperform satisfactory during the peak hour periods but prior to full build-out of the entire surroundingregional road network (nominally between 2021 – 2031); and

> Long Term – full build out of the surrounding regional road network (post-2031).


Cardno 11

3.7.1 Existing Access to DA6AEarly stages of development will rely on the existing access to Rockingham Road via Hurst Road togetherwith the existing crossovers to Rockingham Road and Russell Road.

Hurst Road will, in the short-medium term, provide a connection between Rockingham Road and the existinglots within the Structure Plan area.

The current access arrangement to DA6A is shown in Figure 3-1.

Figure 3-1 Existing Access Arrangements to DA6A


Cardno 12

3.7.2 Short- Medium Term (2021-2031) Access to DA6AIn the short-medium term, the following access arrangements will service DA6A:

Rockingham Road via Hurst Road

Initial stages of development will be accessed from Rockingham Road via the existing Hurst Road whichwill be extended as an internal local road.

It is expected the existing intersection of Hurst Road with Rockingham Road will remain operational inthe medium term to provide access to the initial stages of development until either the FRCAH isconstructed (severing access to Rockingham Road) or when an alternative point of access is available,whichever occurs first.

Russell Road

Russell Road will remain in its current form as a regional distributor road (one lane in each direction).

In the short-medium term (i.e. prior to the duplication of Russell Road, subject to City of Cockburn majorcapital works program), the intersection of Russell Road and the new Local Distributor Road isproposed to be a channelised priority T-intersection (refer Figure 4-1).

The existing crossover to Russell Road providing access to the quarry operations will be severed oncethe Russell Road / LDR intersection is constructed.

Local Distributor Road

A new Local Distributor Road (LDR) will run south from Russell Road through the centre of the StructurePlan area. The staging of construction of the LDR and local road network will depend on the rate atwhich DA6A develops.

Ultimately the LDR will provide a district connection from Russell Road south through DA5 to MussonRoad in DA2.

The crossover to Lot 201 in the south will remain in place to provide legal access until such time as thedevelopment front moves south and/or the LDR is constructed and access to Rockingham Roadsevered (whichever comes first).

The short-medium term access arrangement to DA6A is shown in Figure 3-2.


Cardno 13

Figure 3-2 Short-Medium Term Access Arrangements to DA6A


Cardno 14

3.7.3 Long Term (post-2031) Access to DA6AIn the long term, the following access arrangements will service DA6A:

FRCAH – constructed beyond 2031.

Russell Road

Russell Road is assumed to be upgraded to a 4-lane road in the long term. The intersection of Russell Road/ LDR is proposed to be in the form of a 4-way roundabout, which also provides connectivity to DA6B (northof Russell Road).

Whilst the City of Cockburn major road capital works program indicates that Russell Road will beduplicated by 2027/28, discussions at an officer level suggest that this timing may be much later. Thetiming for the ultimate upgrade of Russell Road will be discussed with the City of Cockburn.

Hurst Road

In the long term, access to Rockingham Road via Hurst Road will be severed following the constructionof the FRCAH. Suitable alternative access via a new LDR will be made available at the time the FRCAHis constructed.

Local Distributor Road

With the FRCAH severing access at Rockingham Road / Hurst Road post-2031, a new LDR will runsouth from Russell Road through the centre of the Structure Plan area. This LDR will ultimately providea district connection from Russell Road south through DA5 to Musson Road in DA2.

The timing of this connection will be associated with the construction of the FRCAH (severing access toRockingham Road from Hurst Road) and when a second access point is required to service theStructure Plan area. The crossover to Lot 201 at this point in time will be removed.

Alternative Option for Southern Connection

The DA6A Structure Plan identifies an alternative access option to provide for the southern extension ofHurst Road, utilising the land comprising the batters between the southbound carriageway of the FRCAHand the Structure Plan boundary, refer the black dashed line in Figure 3-3. This alternative alignmentprovides an opportunity to take advantage of underutilised land in the road reservation, however, is subjectto agreement with Main Roads WA.

A potential cross section is provided in Figure 3-3 to illustrate the level difference and design considerationsfor Hurst Road and the interface to the FRCAH. The alternative option to utilise land within the FRCAH willbe subject to agreement with Main Roads WA.

The long term access arrangement to DA6A is shown in Figure 3-4.


Cardno 15

Figure 3-3 FRCAH and Hurst Road Potential Cross-Section

Source: Cossill and Webley, 2017


Cardno 16

Figure 3-4 Long Term Access to DA6A


Cardno 17

3.8 Development Traffic GenerationThe methodology to develop the traffic volumes to be used for intersection analysis was discussed andagreed with Main Roads WA on 13/02/2015 and consisted of estimating the daily traffic volumes andapplying a 10% peak hour factor to determine the critical peak hour volumes.

To estimate traffic generation for the proposed development, trip generation rates were applied. As the tripgeneration rate require the Gross Floor Area (GFA) of the development, an NDA to GFA conversion factor of0.375 (based on engineering judgement and industry practice) was applied in order to account for areassuch as parking, external storage areas, landscaping etc. Table 3-2 summarises the forecast trips generatedby DA6A, while additional information on the trip generation rates can be found in Appendix A.

Table 3-2 Traffic Generation for the Proposed Land Uses within DA6ADaily Critical Peak Hour

Land Use Incoming Outgoing Incoming Outgoing

Industrial 1,472 1,472 147 147

TOTAL 1,472 1,472 147 147

3.9 Development Traffic DistributionThe assignment of the development generated trips to the external road network was undertaken using theSATURN software suite, using traffic distribution splits derived from data extracted from the Main Roads WARegional Operations Model (ROM).

3.10 Internal Road LayoutThe proposed internal road layout is shown in Figure 3-5. A new LDR will function as the primary north-south connection within the Structure Plan area. The LDR will connect south through DA5 and connect toMusson Road in DA2 and Russell Road to the north.

All other roads within DA6A are proposed to be classified as Local Roads.


Cardno 18

Figure 3-5 Proposed DA6A Internal Road Layout


Cardno 19

4 Analysis of Transport Network

4.1 Assessment Years and Time PeriodsAs stated in the Section 8.9.2 of the WAPC Transport Assessment Guidelines for Developments: Volume 2 –Structure Plans, “the analysis of the transport networks should therefore be undertaken for the (assumed)year of full development”. Analysis of the road network has therefore been undertaken for the scenario years2026 and 2040 (to reflect the year of assumed full development of Latitude 32). It is noted that the land useassumptions are very broadly defined, given the intended nature of industrial development, consistent withprevious structure plans undertaken in Latitude 32. It is also noted that this analysis assumes that no IMT willbe constructed and that this represents the worst-case scenario as more traffic is expected to be generatedby the general industrial land use than compared to the IMF (although a higher proportion of heavy vehicleswould be expected on the road network as a result of the IMF). Additional information on traffic generationfor the IMT is included in Appendix B.

The traffic generation rates of the proposed Latitude 32 developments have been sourced from the TripGeneration 7th Edition by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, while the background 2040 trafficvolumes have been based on daily 2031 ROM sub-area matrices provided by Main Roads WA (21/02/2014)with an agreed post-2031 linear growth rate of 3.2% / year applied to reach the 2040 traffic volumes. Thepeak hour turning volumes used for the SIDRA intersection analysis in this report are based on the modelleddaily demand volumes for the scenario years 2031 and 2040, with an agreed 10% peak hour factor applied.This methodology has been discussed and agreed with Main Roads WA (24/02/2015). Additional informationon the trip generation rates can be found in Appendix A.

As part of this analysis, the SIDRA intersection layouts for each intersection have been analysed and theSIDRA performance summary table for the associated intersection has been provided. As requested by MainRoads WA, the SIDRA intersection analysis for signalised intersections has been based on a minimum cycletime of 110 seconds.

The assumed intersection layouts have been informed by the number of lanes for each approach to theintersections, with the number and length of turning-lanes informed by the demand for each turningmovement at each intersection.

SIDRA outputs for each approach are presented in the form of Degree of Saturation (DOS), Average Delay,Level of Service (LOS) and 95th Percentile Queue. These characteristics are defined as follows:

> Degree of Saturation (DOS): is the ratio of the arrival traffic flow to the capacity of the approach duringthe same period. The Degree of Saturation ranges from close to zero for varied traffic flow up to one forsaturated flow or capacity. The theoretical intersection capacity is exceeded for an un-signalisedintersection where DOS > 0.80;

> 95% Queue: is the statistical estimate of the queue length below which 95% of all observed queues wouldbe expected;

> Average Delay: is the average of all travel time delays for vehicles through the intersection. An un-signalised intersection can be considered to be operated at capacity where the average delay exceeds 40seconds for any movement; and

> Level of Service (LOS): is the qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a trafficstream and the perception by motorists and/or passengers.

The different levels of service can generally be described as shown in Table 4-1.


Cardno 20

Table 4-1 Level of Service (LOS) Performance Criteria

LOS Description SignalisedIntersection

UnsignalisedIntersection

A Free-flow operations (best condition) ≤10 sec ≤10 secB Reasonable free-flow operations 10-20 sec 10-15 secC At or near free-flow operations 20-35 sec 15-25 secD Decreasing free-flow levels 35-55 sec 5-35 secE Operations at capacity 55-80 sec 35-50 secF A breakdown in vehicular flow (worst condition) ≥80 sec ≥50 sec

4.2 Future Year Traffic Assessment

4.2.1 2026 Scenario Intersection AnalysisDetailed intersection analysis has been undertaken for the following intersections for the 2026 scenario:

> Russell Road / Local Distributor Road

> Rockingham Road / Hurst Road

As agreed with Main Roads WA, a heavy vehicle proportion of 15% has been applied to all turning vehiclemovements for the purpose of the SIDRA intersection assessment.

4.2.1.1 Russell Road / Local Distributor Road – 2026An indicative layout for the proposed channelised priority T-intersection form is shown in Figure 4-1. TheSIDRA assessment results are presented in Table 4-2. Based on the results of the analysis, the intersectionis expected to perform satisfactory in the 2026 scenario.

It is noted that the assumed intersection form will require appropriate sight line assessments to be achievedand will likely require a Road Safety Audit (RSA) to be undertaken at the sub-division stage of development.


Cardno 21

Figure 4-1 Indicative Layout of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road Intersection

Table 4-2 Intersection Performance of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road for 2026 Scenario


Cardno 22

4.2.1.2 Rockingham Road / Hurst Road – 2026The indicative SIDRA layout of the existing intersection form is shown in Figure 4-1. Due to the wideseparation of the northbound and southbound carriageways of Rockingham Road (approximately 135m),analysis was undertaken separately for the intersections of the northbound (western intersection) andsouthbound (eastern intersection) carriageways of Rockingham Road. The results of the analysis aresummarised in Table 4-3 and Table 4-4 for the eastern and western intersections respectively. Based on theresults of the analysis, this intersection is expected to perform satisfactorily in the 2026 scenario.

It is noted that this intersection / access will be closed upon construction of the FRCAH (assumed to occurbeyond 2031).

Figure 4-2 Indicative SIDRA Layout of Intersection of Rockingham Road / Hurst Road


Cardno 23

Table 4-3 Intersection Performance of Rockingham Road / Hurst Road (Eastern Intersection) for2026 Scenario

Table 4-4 Intersection Performance of Rockingham Road / Hurst Road (Western Intersection) for2026 Scenario

4.2.2 2040 ScenarioDetailed intersection analysis has been undertaken for the Russell Road / Local Distributor Road intersectionfor the 2040 scenario.

4.2.2.1 Russell Road / Local Distributor Road – 2040The assumed layout for this intersection is shown in Figure 4-3, while the performance of this intersection isshown in Table 4-5. Based on the results of the analysis, this intersection is expected to performsatisfactorily in the 2040 scenario. It is assumed that this intersection will be constructed as part of theRussell Road duplication (refer Section 3.1) proposed to take place around 2027/28.


Cardno 24

Figure 4-3 Assumed Layout for Intersection of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road / DA6A AccessRoad - 2040 Scenario


Cardno 25

Table 4-5 Intersection Performance of Russell Road / Local Distributor Road for 2040 Scenario


Cardno 26

5 Road Reservation Widths and Cross Section

5.1 Local Distributor RoadThe proposed road cross-section for the Local Distributor Road is shown in Figure 5-1 and is proposed toconsist of a 25.0m road reservation width, which includes a 4.5m verge on each side of the road, 5.5m widetraffic lanes and a 5.0m wide central median. The proposed speed limit for Local Distributor Road at the siteis 50 km/h. The Local Distributor Roads are proposed to include a 2.0m pedestrian path on one side of theLocal Distributor Road, while a 2.5m shared path is proposed to be provided on the other side.

Figure 5-1 Proposed Road Reservation Width and Cross Section for Local Distributor Roads

5.2 Russell RoadWhile not part of the DA6A internal road network, a road cross-section has been prepared for the proposedultimate form of Russell Road and is shown in Figure 5-2. The proposed cross-section has a width of 44.0mand consists of 2 traffic lanes in each direction, a 5m wide median/swale (7m wide including shoulders),6.0m verges and includes foothpaths on both sides of the road. The road reserve also accommodates aminimum 15.0m Primary Ecological Linkage in the southern verge.

Figure 5-2 Proposed Road Reservation Width and Cross Section for Russell Road


Cardno 27

5.3 Local RoadThe proposed road cross-section for the Local Roads is shown in Figure 5-3 and is proposed to have a20.0m road reservation width, which includes 2.0 – 2.5m wide pedestrian paths in each direction and 2.5mfor on-street parking and planted nibs in each direction, as well as a 5.0m wide traffic lane in each direction.

It is noted that the proposed cross-section for the Local Roads result in a total width of 20.0m, with the usefor the remaining 1.0m to be determined at time of detailed design.

The proposed road cross-section for the Local Roads allows sufficient width for heavy vehicle movementsalong these roads. The proposed speed limit of Local Roads within the development area is 50 km/h.

Figure 5-3 Proposed Road Reservation Width and Cross Section for Local Roads


Cardno 28

6 Conclusions

This Transport Assessment has been prepared in accordance with the Western Australian PlanningCommission (WAPC) Transport Assessment Guidelines for Developments: Volume 2 – Planning Schemes,Structure Plans and Activity Centre Plans (2006Revised August 2016) and outlines the transport aspects ofthe proposed Development Area 6A (DA6A) Structure Plan for Latitude 32 and focuses on the trafficoperations, access arrangements and road reservation widths within the area.

The following conclusions have been made in regard to the proposed DA6A Structure Plan:

> The proposed Structure Plan comprises a net developable area of approximately 70.88ha of generalindustrial land use. The land use will provide employment opportunities and further support the economicgrowth in the area.

> The land uses with the proposed Structure Plan will generate an estimated 294 two-way trips in thecritical peak hour period.

> In the short-medium term, access to DA6A will be via the existing intersection of Rockingham Road /Hurst Road, as well as via Russell Road.

> In the long term (beyond 2031), the construction of the FRCAH will necessitate the closure of the accessto Rockingham Road / FRCAH due to the controlled access nature of the FRCAH. Alternative access willbe provided via a new Local Distributor Road linking south through Development Area 5 (DA5)connecting to Musson Road in Development Area 2 (DA2).

> The IMT will not impact on the proposed access arrangements to DA6A.

> The proposed road cross-sections and intersection forms will have sufficient capacity to carry the trafficvolumes expected on the transport network during the critical peak period through to the 2040 planninghorizon.


Cardno 29


APPENDIX

ATRIP GENERATION ASSUMPTIONS

1

HI Anika

In regard to the level of industrial trip generation used in the Latitude 32 study, John Chortis provided the following response (see emails below).

It can be seen that the level of traffic generation used for Latitude 32 is appropriate and indeed, may be over-predicting the potential traffic demands.

I trust this addresses any concerns MRWA may have held in this regard. Jonathan Riley

[email protected] Box Z5578 Perth WA 6831 Mobile 0413607779

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Chortis, John" <[email protected]>Subject: FW: Industrial Traffic GenerationDate: 1 April 2015 12:03:39 pm AWSTTo: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

2

From: Donald Veal [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Wednesday, 1 April 2015 10:53 AM To: Chortis, John Subject: RE: Industrial Traffic Generation

Donald VealDirector

[email protected]

T: +61 8 9274 7076 6 Burgess St, Midland, WA 6056F: +61 8 9274 4854 PO Box 5060, Midland, WA 6056M: 0428 722 604 WWW.DVCWORLD.COM

From: Chortis, John [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, 30 March 2015 1:49 PM To: [email protected]: FW: Industrial Traffic Generation

3

From: McCarney, Gary Sent: Monday, 30 March 2015 9:39 AM To: Chortis, John Subject: RE: Industrial Traffic Generation

From: Chortis, JohnSent: Friday, 27 March 2015 2:53 PM

4

To: McCarney, Gary Subject: FW: Industrial Traffic Generation

From: Jon Riley [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, 24 March 2015 11:21 AM To: Chortis, John Cc: Szito, Imre; Dax Foley; Nicola Popenhagen Subject: Industrial Traffic Generation

Hi John

Further to our meeting yesterday, I have attached my email to MRWA in reviewing to the trip generation used by Cardno for Latitude 32.

Given the more transport nature of land uses expected in latitude 32, I feel that the overall trip rate is a reasonable reflection of what may occur once the area is fully developed.

I would appreciate your comments in this regard.

Jonathan Riley

[email protected] Box Z5578 Perth WA 6831Mobile 0413607779

Further to our meeting on Tuesday I have gone back through the research undertaken for the traffic generation of Latitude 32. As stated at the meeting this was one of the first issues addressed when I was engaged by Landcorp to review the structure plan reports.

Daily Demands To recap, the Latitude 32 subject area comprises of 914ha of developable area. The DSP report states a daily generation of 55,526vpd which equates to 60.75 trips per ha.

5

I have reviewed several industrial estates in the north of the state and found the following trip rates (based on present day traffic counts). The estates have limited entry/exit points so the traffic data quite accurately reflects the traffic demands.

Karratha industrial estate 59 trips per ha Hedland industrial estate 25 trips per ha Port Hedland industrial area 20 trips per ha Broome Port industrial area 57 trips per ha

It is noted that these examples are in the Pilbarra, but as you will be aware over the past few years, these areas have been exceptionally busy!

For the purpose of the Latitude 32 assessment I retrieved the traffic data for Henderson, which derived a trip rate of 50.6 trips per ha. This fits very well with the above trips rates.

An assessment of Canning Vale derived a trip rate of 95 trips per ha. However, Canning Vale has a fair level of retail activity and is not a direct comparison. But this helps to get a feel for the overall traffic generation of large precincts.

It is considered therefore that the use of 60.75 trip per ha provide a reasonable expectation of traffic associated with the future development of Latitude 32.

Peak Hour The traffic reporting is based on 7,236 peak hour trips, which equates to 13% of the daily forecast.

Assessment of MRWA traffic data in the Henderson area (including Rockingham Road) indicates the peak ranges between 8% and 12% of the daily flow, so it can be seen that the peak analysis does have some robustness to it.

DISCLAIMER

This email and any attachments are confidential and may contain legally privileged and/or copyright material. You should not read, copy, use or disclose any of theinformation contained in this email without authorisation. If you have received it in error please contact us at once by return email and then delete both emails. There is no warranty that this email is error or virus free.

DISCLAIMER

This email and any attachments are confidential and may contain legally privileged and/or copyright material. You should not read, copy, use or disclose any of theinformation contained in this email without authorisation. If you have received it in error please contact us at once by return email and then delete both emails. There is no warranty that this email is error or virus free.

Click here to report this email as spam.

Latitude 32 Development Area 2 Structure Plan Transport Assessment

24 January 2017 Cardno 40


APPENDIX

C INTERMODEL TERMINAL TRAFFIC GENERATION



While the trip generation for intermodal terminals is listed in the ITE Trip Generation 7th Edition, these rates

are only based on a sample size of 2 and the correlation is quite poor for these data points (negative

gradient).

The trip generation for intermodal facilities is generally largely dependent on the number of containers going

to/from the terminal. Advice from the DoT suggests that a 77 hectare intermodal terminal is estimated to

handle a total of 1.2 million containers per year, 30% of which is expected to arrive by rail and 70% by

trucks. This equates to approximately 2,300 containers per day, thus resulting in approximately 4,600 daily

truck movements to/from the intermodal terminal, as well as car trips generated by the staff at the intermodal

terminal.

A study on the trip generation of 9 intermodal terminals in the US showed that the truck trip generation per

acre of land (1ha = 2.471 acres) ranged between 11.14 – 31.65 daily truck trips / acre, with an average of

15.29 truck trips per acre. By applying this trip rate to the potential 77ha intermodal terminal, this results in

an estimated 2,905 daily truck trips to/from the intermodal terminal, as well as car trips generated by the staff

at the intermodal terminal. The average traffic profile for the intermodal terminals analysed are shown in

Figure 8-1 and illustrates that the peak operating times of the intermodal terminals fall outside of the

roadside peak operating periods.

It should be noted that the peak period for the truck movements associated with the intermodal terminal is

not likely to coincide with the AM or PM peak hour of the roadside environment (illustrated in Figure 8-1 and

Figure 8-2 below) and would therefore have a lesser impact of the performance of the internal and external

intersections during the peak hour (critical) periods.

Figure 8-1 SCATS Data for Fenton Street / Kewdale Road Intersection (Note: Does not include left turn from Kewdale Road)

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 0:00

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f D

aily T

raff

ic

Time of Day

Kewdale Intermodal Terminal (Fenton Street)

Road

Intermodal



Figure 8-2 Percentage of Truck Arrivals by Time of Day

Source: “Traffic Study of the Proposed Logistics Park in Johnson County”, Kansas City, 2006

Figure 8-3 Percentage of Truck Arrivals by Time of Day

Source: “Intermodal Truck Traffic: Description and Results of a Survey in Chicago”, Journal of International Traffic Engineers, 2000




APPENDIX

D LATITUDE 32 – 2040 FRCAH INTERCHANGE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Latitude 32 – 2040 FRCAH Interchange Performance Evaluation

CEP02297

Prepared for LandCorp

05/05/2014


CEP02297


05/05/2014 Cardno i

Contact Information

Cardno WA Pty Ltd

Trading as Cardno

ABN 77 009 119 000

11 Harvest Terrace, West Perth WA 6005

Telephone: 08 9273 3888

Facsimile: 08 9486 8664

International: +61 8 9273 3888

[email protected]

www.cardno.com

Document Information

Prepared for LandCorp

Project Name Insert project name

File Reference CEP02297 - Draft report

(Vic Traf Comments).docx

Job Reference CEP02297

Date 05/05/2014

Document Control

Ve

rsio

n Date Description of Revision

Pre

pa

red

By

Prepared

(Signature)

Re

vie

we

d

By

Reviewed (Signature)

1 05/05/2014 Version 1 of Report AW RC + PM

Ve

rsio

n

Reason for Issue Approved for Release

By

Approved

(Signature)

Approved Release Date

1 Issue for client comment RC 05/05/2014

© Cardno 2014. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Cardno and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person other than by agreement with Cardno.

This document is produced by Cardno solely for the benefit and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the engagement. Cardno does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document.


05/05/2014 Cardno ii

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 Background and Methodology 2

3 FRCAH – Basic Level of Service (LOS) 6

3.1 General 6

3.2 FRCAH Free-Flow Speed (FFS) 7

3.3 Beeliar Drive – Russell Road 7

3.4 Russell Road – Rowley Road 8

3.5 Rowley Road – Anketell Road 9

3.6 Summary 9

4 On-Ramp (Merge Area) LOS 10

4.1 General 10

4.2 Volumes 10

4.3 On-Ramp Assessment 11

4.4 Summary 12

5 Off-Ramp (Diverge Area) LOS 13

5.1 General 13

5.2 Volumes 13

5.3 Off-Ramp Assessment 14

5.4 Summary 15

6 Signalised Intersections 16

6.1 General 16

6.2 Russell Road Diamond Interchange 16

6.3 Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange 18

6.4 Anketell Road Diamond Interchange 20

7 Evaluation 22

7.1 General 22

7.2 Freeway LoS 22

7.3 On-Ramp LoS 22

7.4 Off-Ramp LoS 22

7.5 Interchanges 22

8 Conclusions: 23

Figures

Figure 2-1 Latitude 32 Transport Network for No Intermodal Scenario without East West Interchange 3 Figure 2-2 Latitude 32 Transport Network for No Intermodal Scenario with Full East West Interchange 4 Figure 2-3 Latitude 32 Transport Network for No Intermodal Scenario with LILO East West Interchange 5


05/05/2014 Cardno iii

Tables

Table 3-1 FRCAH Ramp Density (ramps per miles) for Beeliar Drive – Russell Road 7 Table 3-2 2040 PM Peak Hour Demand Flow for Beeliar Drive – Russell Road 7 Table 3-3 LOS for Beeliar Drive - Russell Road 8 Table 3-4 FRCAH Ramp Density (ramps per miles) for Russell Road – Rowley Road 8 Table 3-5 2040 PM Peak Hour Demand Flow for Russell Road – Rowley Road 8 Table 3-6 LOS for Russell Road – Rowley Road 9 Table 3-7 Basic Freeway Segment LOS Descriptions (Source: HCM 2010) 6 Table 3-8 LOS Criteria for Basic Freeway Segments 7 Table 3-9 FRCAH Ramp Density (ramps per miles) for Rowley Road – Anketell Road 9 Table 3-10 2040 PM Peak Hour Demand Flow for Rowley Road – Anketell Road 9 Table 3-11 LOS for Rowley Road – Anketell Road 9 Table 4-1 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and On-ramp Demand Flows for the Russell Road Diamond Interchange 10 Table 4-2 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and On-ramp Demand Flows for the Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange 11 Table 4-3 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and On-ramp Demand Flows for the Anketell Road Diamond Interchange 11 Table 4-4 LOS Descriptions for Merge and Diverge Segments (Source: HCM 2010) 10 Table 4-5 DR and LOS for Russell Road Diamond Interchange On-Ramps 11 Table 4-6 DR and LOS for Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange On-Ramps 12 Table 4-7 DR and LOS for Anketell Road Diamond Interchange On-Ramps 12 Table 5-1 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and Off-ramp Demand Flows for the Russell Road Diamond Interchange 13 Table 5-2 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and Off-ramp Demand Flows for the Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange 13 Table 5-3 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and Off-ramp Demand Flows for the Anketell Road Diamond Interchange 14 Table 5-4 DR and LOS for Russell Road Diamond Interchange Off-Ramps 14 Table 5-5 DR and LOS for Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange Off-Ramps 14 Table 5-6 DR and LOS for Anketell Road Diamond Interchange Off-Ramps 15 Table 6-1 Intersection Performance of Western Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario 17 Table 6-2 Intersection Performance of Eastern Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario 17 Table 6-3 Intersection Performance of Western Signalised Intersection on Rowley Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario 18 Table 6-4 Intersection Performance of Eastern Signalised Intersection on Rowley Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario 19 Table 6-5 Intersection Performance of Western Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario 20 Table 6-6 Intersection Performance of Eastern Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario 21

Appendices

Appendix A Composite SIDRA Signal Phasing Diagrams


05/05/2014 Cardno 1

1 Introduction

Cardno has been engaged by LandCorp to use the Latitude 32 district-wide traffic model developed by Cardno on behalf of LandCorp for 2040 to evaluate the performances of the following interchanges along the proposed Fremantle Rockingham Controlled Access Highway (FRCAH) during the modelled 2040 PM peak hour period:

> FRCAH / Russell Road (diamond interchange);

> FRCAH / Rowley Road (partial clover-leaf); and

> FRCAH / Anketell Road (diamond interchange)

The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the effect of any presence and form of a potential East-West FRCAH interchange (located approximately halfway between the FRCAH / Russell Road interchange and the FRCAH / Rowley Road interchange) on the other interchanges listed above as it is understood that the monetary cost of providing such a structure would most likely be passed on to any potential developers and thus render the area cost-prohibitive for future development. It is noted that only the PM peak hour period has been assessed as part of this analysis as no AM peak hour model has been developed of the study area as the PM peak hour period has been identified as the critical peak hour period for Latitude 32 in terms of development generated traffic. For the purpose of this study, it has been assumed (and agreed with the Client) that Latitude 32 will be fully built-out by 2040 and that no intermodal facility will exist within Latitude 32. The methodology used for this analysis includes SIDRA analysis of the co-ordinated signalised sections of the interchanges, the use of Level of Service (LOS) criteria listed in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) for the freeway (FRCAH) segments, as well as demand flow outputs directly from the SATURN models.


05/05/2014 Cardno 2

2 Background and Methodology

For the purpose of this study, 3 different East-West Interchange options were considered:

> No East-West Interchange (Figure 2-1);

> LILO East-West Interchange (Figure 2-2); and

> Full East-West Diamond Interchange (Figure 2-3).

It should be noted that the 2040 scenario year represents the assumed build-out year for Latitude 32.

The regional (non-development) traffic demand flows used as input to these models were sourced from 2031

ROM sub-area matrices provided by MRWA, with an annual (linear) agreed growth rate of 3.2% applied to

account for the anticipated growth in traffic expected to occur between 2031 to 2040.

The following assessment will consider the impacts to:

> Freeway section LOS;

> Freeway on-ramp LOS;

> Freeway off ramp LOS; and

> Freeway interchange operations.


05/05/2014 Cardno 3

Figure 2-1 Latitude 32 Transport Network for No Intermodal Scenario without East West Interchange


05/05/2014 Cardno 4

Figure 2-2 Latitude 32 Transport Network for No Intermodal Scenario with Full East West Interchange


05/05/2014 Cardno 5

Figure 2-3 Latitude 32 Transport Network for No Intermodal Scenario with LILO East West Interchange


05/05/2014 Cardno 6

3 FRCAH – Basic Level of Service (LOS)

3.1 General

The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the LOS for the basic freeway segments (not including merging

and diverging areas – these are covered in Section 4 and Section 5 of this report) located between Beeliar

Drive and Anketell Road and to demonstrate the effect that any presence and form of a potential East-West

FRCAH interchange is likely to have on the basic LOS of these freeway segments.

Basic level of service for a section of freeway is defined in Chapter 11 of the HCM. The methodology in this

chapter may be used for planning purposes and is intended to determine the number of lanes required to

deliver a particular level of service, or to evaluate the level of service for a given number or lanes.

Descriptions of the different LOS condition are summarised in Table 3-1 and the LOS criteria summarised in Table 3-2. Table 3-1 Basic Freeway Segment LOS Descriptions (Source: HCM 2010)

Level of Service Description of Level of Service

LOS A LOS A describes free-flowing operations. The free-flow speed prevails on the freeway and vehicles are almost completely unimpeded in their ability to manoeuvre within the traffic stream. The effects of incidents or point breakdowns are easily absorbed.

LOS B LOS B represents reasonably free-flow operations and the free-flow speed on the freeway is maintained. The ability to manoeuvre is only slightly restricted, and the general level of physical and psychological comfort provided to drivers is still high. The effects of minor incidents and point breakdowns are still easily absorbed.

LOS C LOS C provides for flow with speeds near the free-flow speed of the freeway. Freedom to manoeuvre within the traffic stream is noticeably restricted and lane changes require more care and vigilance on the part of the driver. Minor incidents may still be absorbed but the local deterioration in service quality will be significant. Queues may be expected to form behind any significant blockages.

LOS D LOS D is the level at which speeds begin to decline with increasing flows, with density increasing more quickly. Freedom to manoeuvre within the traffic stream is seriously limited and drivers experience reduced physical and psychological comfort levels. Even minor incidents can be expected to create queuing as the traffic stream has little space to absorb disruptions.

LOS E LOS E describes operation at capacity. Operations on the freeway at this level are highly volatile because there are virtually no usable gaps within the traffic stream, leaving little room to manoeuvre within the traffic stream. Any vehicle changing lanes can establish a disruption wave that propagates throughout the upstream traffic flow. At capacity, the traffic stream has no ability to dissipate even the most minor disruption and any incident can be expected to produce a serious breakdown and substantial queuing. The physical and psychological comfort afforded to drivers is poor.

LOS F LOS F describes breakdown, or unstable flow. Such conditions exist within queues forming behind bottlenecks. Breakdowns occur for a number of reasons:

• Traffic incidents can temporarily reduce the capacity of a short segment so that the number of vehicles arriving at a point is greater than the number of vehicles that can move through it.

• Points of recurring congestion, such as merge or weaving segments and lane drops, experience very high demand in which the number of vehicles arriving than the number of vehicles that can be discharged.

• In analysis using forecast volumes, the projected flow rate can exceed the estimated capacity of a given location.

LOS F operations within a queue are the result of a breakdown or bottleneck at a downstream point. In practical terms, the point of the breakdown has a v/c ratio greater than 1.00 and is also labelled LOS F, although the actual operations at the breakdown point and immediately downstream may actually reflect LOS E conditions. Whenever queues due to a breakdown exist, they have the potential to extend upstream for considerable distances.


05/05/2014 Cardno 7

Table 3-2 LOS Criteria for Basic Freeway Segments

Level of Service Density (passenger cars / mile /lane)

A < 11

B > 11 – 18

C > 18 – 26

D > 26 – 35

E > 35 – 45

F > 5

3.2 FRCAH Free-Flow Speed (FFS)

MRWA have previously advised that the posted speed limit for the FRCAH is to be set at 90 km/h which

corresponds to approximately 55 miles/hour (the units required for the HCM calculations). In accordance with

the methodology described in the HCM, a check is initially made to ensure that this Free-Flow Speed (FFS)

is achievable. The maximum FFS for a freeway is defined as:

FFS = 75.4(mi/h) − f�� − f�� − 3.22TRD�.�� (Source: HCM 2010, Equation 11-1)

Where fLW is an adjustment factor dependant on the average lane width and fLC is an adjustment factor

dependant on the left-side lateral clearance of the freeway. For the purpose of this study, it has been

assumed that the average lane width of the FRCAH is 3.50m (similar to the existing average lane width on

the Kwinana Freeway) and a 2.00m left-side lateral clearance (similar to the left-side lateral clearance of the

Kwinana Freeway), thus resulting in an fLW adjustment factor of 1.9 (mi/h) and an fLC adjustment factor of 0.0

(mi/h). Assuming a ramp density of 1.33 ramps/mi (defined as the total number of ramps 3.0 miles upstream

and downstream from the mid-point of the segment in question), this results in a maximum FFS of:

FFS = 75.4(mi/h) − 1.9(mi/h) − 0.0(mi/h) − 3.22(1.33)�.�� = 69.4(mi/h) = 112(km/h)

As the assumed posted speed limit for the FRCAH of 90 km/h is less than the maximum FFS for the

assumed geometry, 90km/h will be the assumed FFS for this study.

3.3 Beeliar Drive – Russell Road

The freeway ramp densities for the segment of the FRCAH between Beeliar Drive and Russell Road are

summarised in Table 3-3 while the demand flows are summarised in Table 3-4. It should be noted that as

this segment of the FRCAH is connected to an external node in the SATURN model, no re-routing of traffic

can occur on this segment and the demand flows are therefore similar for all 3 scenarios.

Table 3-3 2040 FRCAH Ramp Density (ramps per miles) for Beeliar Drive – Russell Road

Scenario Southbound Northbound

No East-West Interchange 1.00 1.00

LILO East-West Interchange 1.33 1.00

Full East-West Interchange 1.33 1.33

Table 3-4 2040 PM Peak Hour Demand Flow for Beeliar Drive – Russell Road


No East-West Interchange 6056 4027

LILO East-West Interchange 6056 4027

Full East-West Interchange 6056 4027


05/05/2014 Cardno 8

The LOS of a freeway segment is related to the flow rate (vp) per passenger car (pc) per hour per lane, which is defined as:

!" =#

$%& ∗ ( ∗ )*+ ∗ )"(,-./01: 3456787, :;.<=>-?88 − 6)

where the variables are defined as: vp = demand flow rate under equivalent base conditions (pc/h/lane) V = demand volume under prevailing conditions (veh/h) PHF = peak-hour factor N = number of lanes fHV = adjustment factor for heavy vehicles fP = adjustment factor for unfamiliar driver populations For the purpose of this assessment, it has been assumed that 10% of the traffic along this segment of the FRCAH will consist of heavy vehicles and a level (flat) terrain, resulting in heavy vehicle adjustment factor of 0.95. It is assumed that the traffic will primarily consist of commuter traffic, resulting in an adjustment factor of 1.00 for driver behaviour and from analysis of existing SCATS data along Rockingham Road, the PHF is found to be 0.90. By combining the above data and relevant tables from HCM, the LOS for this segment of the FRCAH for each scenario is summarised in Table 3-5 below. Table 3-5 LOS for Beeliar Drive - Russell Road


vp

(pc/lane/hr) Density

(pc/lane/min) LOS vp


(pc/lane/min) LOS

No East-West Interchange

2361 50.0 F 1487 27.0 D (borderline C)

LILO East-West Interchange

2361 50.0 F 1487 27.0 D (borderline C)

Full East-West Interchange

2361 50.0 F 1487 27.0 D (borderline C)

3.4 Russell Road – Rowley Road

The freeway ramp densities for the segment of the FRCAH between Russell Road and Rowley Road are

summarised in Table 3-6 while the demand flows are summarised in Table 3-7 and the resulting LOS are

summarised in Table 3-8.

Table 3-6 FRCAH Ramp Density (ramps per miles) for Russell Road – Rowley Road





Table 3-7 2040 PM Peak Hour Demand Flow for Russell Road – Rowley Road






05/05/2014 Cardno 9

Table 3-8 LOS for Russell Road – Rowley Road


vp




(pc/lane/min) LOS


2288 49.1 F 1147 20.8 C


2289 49.1 F 1094 19.9 C


2277 49.4 F 1348 24.5 C

3.5 Rowley Road – Anketell Road

The freeway ramp densities for the segment of the FRCAH between Rowley Road and Anketell Road are

summarised in Table 3-9 while the demand flows are summarised in Table 3-10 and the resulting LOS are

summarised in Table 3-11.

Table 3-9 FRCAH Ramp Density (ramps per miles) for Rowley Road – Anketell Road





Table 3-10 2040 PM Peak Hour Demand Flow for Rowley Road – Anketell Road





Table 3-11 LOS for Rowley Road – Anketell Road


vp




(pc/lane/min) LOS


2219 43.8 E 635 11.6 C


2097 39.7 E 712 12.9 C


2158 41.6 E 678 12.3 C

3.6 Summary

The basic LOS for each of the freeway segments analysed ranged between E to F for the southbound

direction and C to D for the northbound direction. The low LOS for the southbound direction was primarily

found to be caused by the heavy directional demand flow of regional traffic volumes modelled for the PM

peak hour period.

The presence and form of any potential East-West interchange was only found to have a minor impact on the

overall LOS for both the northbound and southbound freeway segments analysed.


05/05/2014 Cardno 10

4 On-Ramp (Merge Area) LOS

4.1 General

The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the LOS of the freeway on-ramps of the FRCAH / Russell Road

diamond interchange, the FRCAH / Rowley Road par-clo interchange and the FRCAH / Anketell Road

diamond interchange, and to demonstrate the effect that any presence and form of a potential East-West

FRCAH interchange is likely to have on the freeway merge areas.

The LOS of the freeway merge points are dependent on up-stream demand flow (i.e. the traffic flow on the

freeway prior to the merge point) and on the on-ramp demand flow (i.e. the traffic flow merging on to the

freeway).

A description of the LOS for merging and diverging segments is provided in Table 4-1 below.

Table 4-1 LOS Descriptions for Merge and Diverge Segments (Source: HCM 2010)

Level of Service Description of Level of Service

LOS A Unrestricted operations exist and the density is low enough to permit smooth merging or diverging with very little turbulence in the traffic stream.

LOS B Merging and diverging manoeuvres become noticeable to through drivers and minimal turbulence occurs.

LOS C Vehicle speeds within the ramp influence area begin to decline as turbulence levels become much more noticeable. Both ramp and freeway vehicles begin to adjust their speeds to accomplish smooth transitions.

LOS D Turbulence levels within the influence area become intrusive and virtually all vehicles slow to accommodate merging or diverging manoeuvres. Some ramp queues may form at heavily used on-ramps but the freeway operation remains stable.

LOS E LOS E represents operating conditions approaching or at capacity. Small changes in demand or disruptions within the traffic stream can cause both ramp and freeway queues to form.

LOS F LOS F defines operating conditions within queues that form on both the ramp and freeway mainline when capacity is exceeded by demand. For on-ramps, LOS F exists when the total demand flow rate of the upstream freeway segment and the on-ramp exceeds to capacity of the downstream freeway segment. LOS F can also occur when the off-ramp demand exceeds the capacity of the off-ramp.

4.2 Volumes

The up-stream and on-ramp demand flows are summarised Table 4-2 for the Russell Road diamond

interchange, in Table 4-3 for the Rowley Road partial clover (par-clo) interchange and in Table 4-4 for the

Anketell Road diamond interchange.

Table 4-2 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and On-ramp Demand Flows for the Russell Road Diamond Interchange


Up-steam Demand Flow (vph)

On-ramp Demand Flow (vph)




5758 112 2813 1214


5812 58 2654 1373


5795 46 3360 667


05/05/2014 Cardno 11

Table 4-3 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and On-ramp Demand Flows for the Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange







4187 1506 1360 1581


3537 1943 1667 1139


3400 2132 1546 930

Table 4-4 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and On-ramp Demand Flows for the Anketell Road Diamond Interchange







3629 1270 954 676


3979 920 840 978


4116 783 876 864

4.3 On-Ramp Assessment

The LOS for the on-ramp (merge) influence area is proportional to the resulting density (DR) for the on-ramp

influence area which is defined as:

D@ = 5.475 + 0.00734V@ + 0.0078VDE − 0.00627LG (Source: HCM 2010, Equation 13-21)

where the variables are defined as:

VR = demand flow rate of the on-ramp

V12 = demand flow rate for lanes 1 and 2 of the freeway immediately upstream of the on-ramp influence area

LA = length of acceleration lane (ft)

For the purpose of this analysis, it has been assumed that a 180m (590ft) acceleration lane will be provided

– this is similar to the length of acceleration lanes for existing freeway on-ramps.

The resulting densities and LOS are summarised in Table 4-5 for the Russell Road interchange, in Table 4-6

for the Rowley Road interchange and in Table 4-7 for the Anketell Road interchange.

Table 4-5 DR and LOS for Russell Road Diamond Interchange On-Ramps


DR (pc/mi/lane) LOS DR (pc/mi/lane) LOS


33.8 E (borderline F) 25.9 C






05/05/2014 Cardno 12

It should be noted that the LOS of southbound merge point is acceptable due to the relatively low modelled demand flows for the FRCAH for all scenarios, while the LOS of the northbound merge point is acceptable due to the relatively low modelled demand flows for the on-ramp for all scenarios. Table 4-6 DR and LOS for Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange On-Ramps




35.5 F (borderline E) 20.8 C (borderline B)


35.2 F (borderline E) 19.2 B


35.8 F (borderline E) 17.0 B

Table 4-7 DR and LOS for Anketell Road Diamond Interchange On-Ramps




30.8 E 11.9 B


30.1 E 13.5 B


29.8 E 12.9 B

As shown in the above tables, the additional demand on the Russell Road, Rowley Road and Anketell Road interchanges as a consequence of not having the East-West interchange is relatively minor and does not affect the overall LOS of these intersections.

4.4 Summary

The LOS for the merge areas analysed ranged between E to F for the southbound direction and B to C for

the northbound direction. The low LOS for the southbound direction was primarily found to be caused by the

large regional traffic volumes for the “No East-West interchange” scenario, and by the large on-ramp demand

flow for the “LILO East-West interchange” scenario and the “Full East-West interchange” scenario.


05/05/2014 Cardno 13

5 Off-Ramp (Diverge Area) LOS

5.1 General

The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the LOS of the freeway off-ramps of the FRCAH / Russell Road

diamond interchange, the FRCAH / Rowley Road par-clo interchange and the FRCAH / Anketell Road

diamond interchange, and to demonstrate the effect that any presence and form of a potential East-West

FRCAH interchange is likely to have on the freeway diverge areas.

The LOS of the freeway diverge areas are dependent on up-stream demand flow (i.e. the traffic flow on the

freeway prior to the off-ramp) and on the off-ramp demand flow (i.e. the traffic flow going on to the off-ramp).

A description of the LOS for merging and diverging segments is provided in Table 4-1 in Section 4 of this

report.

5.2 Volumes

The up-stream and off-ramp demand flows are summarised Table 5-1 for the Russell Road diamond

interchange, in Table 5-2 for the Rowley Road par-clo interchange and in Table 5-3 for the Anketell Road

diamond interchange.

Table 5-1 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and Off-ramp Demand Flows for the Russell Road Diamond Interchange



Off-ramp Demand Flow (vph)




6056 298 2941 129


6056 244 2806 152


6056 261 3457 97

Table 5-2 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and Off-ramp Demand Flows for the Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange







5869 1682 1630 270


5541 2103 1826 159


5525 2125 1740 194


05/05/2014 Cardno 14

Table 5-3 2040 PM Peak Hour Up-stream and Off-ramp Demand Flows for the Anketell Road Diamond Interchange







5693 2064 1326 372


5380 1401 1326 478


5532 1415 1326 450

5.3 Off-Ramp Assessment

The LOS for the off-ramp (diverge) influence area is proportional to the resulting density (DR) for the off-ramp

influence area which is defined as:

D@ = 4.252 + 0.0086VDE − 0.009LH(Source: HCM 2010, Equation 13-22)

where the variables are defined as:

V12 = demand flow rate for lanes 1 and 2 of the freeway immediately upstream of the off-ramp influence area

LD = length of deceleration lane (ft)

For the purpose of this analysis, it has been assumed that a 95m (312ft) deceleration lane will be provided –

this is similar to the length of deceleration lanes for existing freeway off-ramps.

The resulting densities and LOS are summarised in Table 5-4 for the Russell Road diamond interchange, in

Table 5-5 for the Rowley Road par-clo interchange and in Table 5-6 for the Anketell Road diamond

interchange.

Table 5-4 DR and LOS for Russell Road Diamond Interchange Off-Ramps




40.9 F 20.6 C (borderline B)


40.8 F 19.7 B (borderline C)


40.8 F 23.8 C

Table 5-5 DR and LOS for Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange Off-Ramps




42.7 F 12.5 B


41.5 F 13.5 B


41.5 F 13.0 B


05/05/2014 Cardno 15

Table 5-6 DR and LOS for Anketell Road Diamond Interchange Off-Ramps




42.4 F 10.8 B


39.0 F 11.0 B


40.0 F 10.9 B

5.4 Summary

The LOS for the diverge areas analysed is F for all scenarios for the southbound direction and ranges from B

to C for the northbound direction. The low LOS for the southbound direction was found to be caused

primarily by the large up-stream demand flows, as well as the large off-ramp demand flows for the Rowley

Road and Anketell Road interchanges.


05/05/2014 Cardno 16

6 Signalised Intersections

6.1 General

The purpose of this analysis is to ensure that the demand volumes modelled for each of the scenarios can

be accommodated by reasonable intersection geometry and to evaluate whether the intersections will have

sufficient capacity to avoid excessive midblock queuing between the signalised intersections and to avoid

queues extending past the freeway off-ramps and affecting the performance of the FRCAH itself.

The signalised components of each of the interchanges have been analysed in SIDRA, where each set of

signals have been assumed to be co-ordinated in order to minimise the queuing expected to occur on the

interchange between the signals.

It is noted that the assumed intersection geometry have only been based on the 2040 PM peak hour

scenario for the prevailing flow movements and a similar geometry would likely be required for the non-

prevailing flow direction for the AM peak hour traffic volumes. However, the impact of the additional

geometric considerations are not likely to significantly affect the outcomes of this study.

The demand volumes used for these SIDRA assessments have been sourced from the respective Latitude

32 SATURN traffic models for the 2040 PM peak hour scenario.

It is also noted that the interchange geometries shown in the following sections have no status other than to

inform this opportunities analysis and clearly will be modified having regard to the overall freeway design

being prepared/refined and detailed land use planning still to be undertaken.

6.2 Russell Road Diamond Interchange

The composite SIDRA representation is shown in Figure 6-1 for the Russell Road interchange geometry. It

should be noted that the assumed geometries of these interchanges are primarily based on existing

interchanges and modified slightly to ensure sufficient capacity for the modelled demand flows.

Figure 6-1 Composite SIDRA Representation of the FRCAH / Russell Road Diamond Interchange


05/05/2014 Cardno 17

The SIDRA results of the worst-case (critical) scenario are summarised in Table 6-1 for the western set of

signals and Table 6-2 for the eastern set of signals.

Table 6-1 Intersection Performance of Western Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario

Intersection Approach 2040 PM Peak Hour

DOS Average Delay (s) LOS 95% Queue (m)

FRCAH Northbound Off-Ramp (S)

L 0.02 11 B 0

R 0.33 42 D 25

Russell Road (E) T 0.23 1 A 4

R 0.87 21 C 106

Russell Road (W) L 0.43 19 B 56

T 0.84 42 D 71

Overall -- 0.87 21 C --

Table 6-2 Intersection Performance of Eastern Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario



Russell Road (E) L 0.07 10 NA (continuous) NA (continuous)

T 0.73 18 B 153

FRCAH Southbound Off-Ramp (S)

L 0.17 11 NA (continuous) NA (continuous)

R 0.72 61 E 26

Russell Road (W) T 0.10 1 A 2

R 0.71 47 D 57

Overall -- 0.73 20 B --

As shown in the above tables, the signalised parts of the Russell Road interchange are found to operate acceptably during the 2040 PM peak hour period for the worst-case scenario. While it was found that the right turn from Russell Road to the FRCAH on-ramp has a 95

th percentile queue length of 106m, sufficient

storage exists between the intersections to avoid queues spilling over to adjacent intersection areas.


05/05/2014 Cardno 18

6.3 Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange

The composite SIDRA representation is shown in Figure 6-2 for the Rowley Road interchange geometry. It



Figure 6-2 Composite SIDRA Representation of the FRCAH / Rowley Road Par-Clo Interchange


signals and Table 6-4 for the eastern set of signals

Table 6-3 Intersection Performance of Western Signalised Intersection on Rowley Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario



FRCAH Northbound On / Off-Ramp (S)

L 0.16 18 B 16

R 0.82 60 E 45

Rowley Road (E) L 0.66 8 NA (continuous) NA (continuous)

T 0.91 22 C 166

Rowley Road (W) T 0.45 4 A 65

R 0.91 60 E 161

Overall -- 0.91 18 B --


05/05/2014 Cardno 19

Table 6-4 Intersection Performance of Eastern Signalised Intersection on Rowley Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario



FRCAH Southbound On / Off-Ramp (S)

L 0.77 35 C 153

R 0.87 60 E 90

Rowley Road (E) L 0.59 8 NA (continuous) NA (continuous)

T 0.90 22 C 194

Rowley Road (W) T 0.37 1 A 10

R 0.88 51 D 99

Overall -- 0.90 25 C --

As shown in the above tables, the signalised parts of the Rowley Road interchange are found to operate acceptably during the 2040 PM peak hour period for the worst-case scenario and no significant queuing occurring on the mid-point of the interchange between the sets of signals.


05/05/2014 Cardno 20

6.4 Anketell Road Diamond Interchange

The composite SIDRA representation is shown in Figure 6-3 for the Anketell Road interchange geometry. It



Figure 6-3 Composite SIDRA Representation of the FRCAH / Anketell Road Diamond Interchange


signals and Table 6-6 for the eastern set of signals

Table 6-5 Intersection Performance of Western Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario



FRCAH Northbound Off-Ramp (S)

L 0.06 14 B 3

R 0.33 30 C 26

Anketell Road (E) T 0.63 10 B 63

R 0.63 33 C 33

Anketell Road (W) L 0.33 12 B 21

T 0.65 23 C 54

Overall -- 0.65 19 B --


05/05/2014 Cardno 21

Table 6-6 Intersection Performance of Eastern Signalised Intersection on Russell Road / FRCAH Interchange for the 2040 PM Peak Hour Scenario



Anketell Road (E) L 0.58 13 B 44

T 0.59 26 C 37

FRCAH Southbound Off-Ramp (S)

L 0.72 31 C 80

R 0.47 28 C 44

Anketell Road (W) T 0.66 12 B 70

R 0.66 38 D 37

Overall -- 0.72 24 C --

As shown in the above tables, the signalised parts of the Anketell Road interchange are found to operate acceptably during the 2040 PM peak hour period for the worst-case scenario and no significant queuing occurring on the mid-point of the interchange between the sets of signals.


05/05/2014 Cardno 22

7 Evaluation

7.1 General

Cardno has been engaged by LandCorp to use the Latitude 32 district-wide traffic model for the scenario year 2040 to evaluate the performances of the following interchanges along the proposed Fremantle Rockingham Controlled Access Highway (FRCAH) during the modelled 2040 PM peak hour period:

> FRCAH / Russell Road (diamond interchange);

> FRCAH / Rowley Road (partial clover-leaf); and

> FRCAH / Anketell Road (diamond interchange)

The methodology used for this analysis includes SIDRA analysis of the co-ordinated signalised sections of the interchanges, the use of Level of Service (LOS) criteria listed in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) for the freeway (FRCAH) segments, as well as demand flow outputs directly from the SATURN models.

For the purpose of this study, 3 different East-West Interchange options were considered:

> No East-West Interchange;

> LILO East-West Interchange; and

> Full East-West Diamond Interchange.

7.2 Freeway LoS

The basic LOS for each of the freeway segments analysed ranged between E to F for the southbound

direction and C to D for the northbound direction. The low LOS for the southbound direction was primarily

found to be caused by the heavy directional demand flow of regional traffic volumes modelled for the PM

peak hour period. The presence and type of FRCAH East-West interchange was found to only have a

negligible effect on the LOS for both the northbound and southbound FRCAH segments for all scenarios

analysed.

7.3 On-Ramp LoS

The LOS for the merge areas analysed ranged between E to F for the southbound direction and B to C for

the northbound direction. The low LOS for the southbound direction was primarily found to be caused by the

large regional traffic volumes for the “No East-West interchange” scenario, and by the large on-ramp demand

flow for the “LILO East-West interchange” scenario and the “Full East-West interchange” scenario.

7.4 Off-Ramp LoS

The LOS for the diverge areas analysed was F for all scenarios for the southbound direction and ranged

from B to C for the northbound direction. The low LOS for the southbound direction was found to be caused

primarily by the large up-stream demand flows, as well as the large off-ramp demand flows for the Rowley

Road and Anketell Road interchanges.

7.5 Interchanges

No performance issues were identified for any of the signalised intersections for any of the interchanges.


05/05/2014 Cardno 23

8 Conclusions

Based on the foregoing assessment it is concluded that:

> The basic LOS of the FRCAH sections between Russell Road and Anketell Road have been evaluated,

and the presence and form of any potential East-West interchange was found to have a minimal impact

on the basic LOS of these section;

> The introduction of a full East-West diamond interchange was found to decrease the demand for the

Anketell Road on-ramp by approximately 450vph, although this was found to be off-set by the additional

demand for on the southbound Rowley Road and Russell Road on-ramps.

> The introduction of a full East-West diamond interchange was found to decrease the demand for the

Rowley Road off-ramp by approximately 600vph, although this was found to be off-set by the additional

demand for on the southbound Anketell Road and Russell Road off-ramps.

> The Freeway interchanges have been found to operate acceptably based on the assumed signal phasing,

cycle times and level of co-ordination between the signals

> Based on the findings from the analysis of this report, providing a full FRCAH East-West diamond

interchange has an overall minimal impact on the LOS of the other interchanges and freeway segments in

the vicinity.


05/05/2014 Cardno 24

APPENDIX A COMPOSITE SIDRA SIGNAL PHASING DIAGRAMS


05/05/2014 Cardno 25

Figure A1 - Composite SIDRA Phasing Diagram for Russell Road Interchange


05/05/2014 Cardno 26

Figure A2 – Composite SIDRA Phasing Diagram for Rowley Road Interchange


05/05/2014 Cardno 27

Figure A3 – Composite SIDRA Phasing Diagram for Rowley Road Interchange


05/05/2014 Cardno 28

About Cardno

Cardno is an ASX200 professional

infrastructure and environmental

services company, with expertise in

the development and improvement of

physical and social infrastructure for

communities around the world.

Cardno’s team includes leading

professionals who plan, design,

manage and deliver sustainable

projects and community programs.

Cardno is an international company,

listed on the Australian Securities

Exchange [ASX: CDD].

Contact

Perth

11 Harvest Terrace

West Perth WA 6005

PO Box 447

West Perth WA 6872

Phone +61 8 9273 3888

Fax +61 8 9486 8664

[email protected]

www.cardno.com

appendix e: transport assessment - latitude 32 · 2019-02-15 · transport assessment guidelines...

Documents