Longbeach Mall : traffic impact assessment

Hele tekst

(1)Master's Degree in Transportation Engineering Final Year Project. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. For: Prof. CJ Bester By: Andrew Bulman Student No. 9890009. November 2001.

(2) PREFACE This Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) was commissioned in March 1998 as a supporting document to an application for the rezoning of an ert in Noordhoek from general housing to commercial use. The proposal at the time was to develop a medium·sized 15 000 m2 GLA shopping centre with supporting offices and a Health & Racquet Club. All the work (including managing the traffic counting team) was carried out by myself under the guidance of Dr Piet Jordaan at Gibb Africa Consulting Engineers. As financial backing and anchor tenants were secured for the development, the size of the proposed shopping centre was increased from a local facilily to a regional facilily of 31 000 m2 GFA to be developed in two phases. This necessitated a complete revision of the approach and content of the TIA. Owing to the regional nature of the new development, the TIA was expanded to include a wider geographical area of influence and a longer development period. This revised TIA was carried out by myself between September 1998 and March 1999 under the guidance of Dr Herman Joubert. Longbeach Mall opened for business in April 2001 complete with upgraded road network as recommended in the TIA The TIA is submitted as the final-year project for my Master's Degree in Traffic & Transportation Engineering. For the purposes of completion, an after·study of current traffic conditions on the local road infrastructure has also been included. The after·study was carried out in October 2001 (6 months after Longbeach Mall opened) and includes traffic counts at critical intersections during the Saturday morning peak period, observations of parking area utilisation, observations of shopping centre occupancy and discussions of the possible reasons for differences between predicted and actual traffic volumes. Confirmation that the study is original and was carried out by myself and permission from Arcus Gibb (Ply) Ltd to use the study as part of my final-year project, is provided in Appendix A.. November 2001.

(3) LONGBEACH MALL - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CONTENTS Chapter. Description. 1. INTRODUCTION. 1-1. 1.1. Aim of the study. 1-1. 1.2. Scope of the study. 1-1. 1.3. Modelling Approach. 1-1. 1.4. Analysis Approach. 1-2. 1.5. Contents of the rest of the document. 1-2. 2. Page. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC. 2-1. 2.1. Road Network. 2-1. 2.2. Traffic Volumes. 2-2. 2.3. Traffic Growth. 2-2. 3. TRIP GENERATION. 3-1. 4. TRIP DISTRIBUTION, MODAL SPLIT AND TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT. 4-1. 4.1. Primary Trips. 4-1. 4.2. Passer-by and Diverted Trips. 4-2. 4.3. Traffic Assignment. 4-2. 4.4. Modal Split. 4-2. 5. 6. November 2001. CAPACITY ANALYSIS. 5·1. 5.1. Analysis of intersections. 5-1. 5.2. Results of the Analysis. 5-2. 5.3. Upgrades Required. 5-3. 5.4. Summary. 5-10. WARRANTS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS. 6-1. 6.1. South African Road Traffic Signs Manual (SARTSM). 6-1. 6.2. 2005 Phase 1. 6-1. 6.3. 2010 Phase 2. 6-2. Ii.

(4) 7. 8. ACCESS TO THE DEVELOPMENT. 7-1. 7.1. Number and Sizes. 7-1. 7.2. Traffic Control. 7-1 8-1. PARKING. 8.1. Required spaces and provision of parking. 8-1. 8.2. Parking layout and management of parking. 8-1. 8.3. Public Transport. 8-1. 9. INTERNAL CIRCULATION AND PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT. 9-1. 10. STRUCTURE PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS. 10-1. 11. COST RESPONSIBILITY. 11-1. 11.1. Approach. 11-1. 11.2. Proposed Cost Responsibility. 11-1. 12. CONCLUSIONS. 12-1. 13. RECOMMENDATIONS. 13-1. 14. AFTER-STUDY. 13-1. 14.1. Introduction. 14-1. 14.2. Comparison of Actual Development Versus Planned Development. 14-1. 14.3. Traffic Counts. 14-2. 14.4. Parking Utilisation. 14-3. 14.5. Conclusions. 14-4. 14.6. Recommendations. 14-6. 15. REFERENCES. 14-1. APPENDIX A - Confirmation of Original Work and Permission from Gibb Africa APPENDIX B - Trip Generation of the Proposed Development APPENDIX C - Trip Distribution APPENDIX D - SIDRA Analysis Results APPENDIX E - TRANSYT Analysis Results APPENDIX F - Off - Street Parking Requirements. November 2001. iii.

(5) 1. INTRODUCTION. 1.1. Aim ofthe study The aim of the study is to determine the traffic impact of a proposed new 12,6 Ha relaiUcommercial development situated in the Noordhoek Valley. This study is part of the development plan approval process, which is currently underway. Figures 1.1 and 1.2 show the site, having as its boundaries Buller Louw Drive to the north, Sunnydale Road to the east and Longboat Road to the south. The existing Sun Valley Mall shopping centre incorporating Pick 'n Pay lies directly to the north on the other side of Buller Louw Drive. GIBB Africa (Ply) Ltd was appointed to conduct the study by Boness Developments Phase 3 (Ply) Ltd.. 1.2. Scope ofthe study The proposed development is shown in Figure 1.3 and consists of a regional shoPRing centre 2 with a gross leasable area of 31 040m 2 , a 350m fast food restaurant, a 2 745m 2 business 2 park and a 3 000m health club. The main access to the development will be via Buller Louw Drive and Hou Moed Avenue. The Department of Transport's Manual for Traffic Impact StUdies (2) recommends a full scale study for any new development that will generate in excess of 150 peak hour trips. The development falls into this category and therefore the impact of the development on all the affected intersections within a 1 km radius should be analysed. Furthermore, since the proposed development will generate in excess of 2000 peak hour vehicle trips, the guidelines recommend an evaluation for the base year (2000), for 5 years after the base year or completion of a major phase and for 10 years after the base year assuming full development. The construction of the full Fish Hoek Northern Bypass/Boyes Drive extension would reduce the future traffic flow on the Ou Kaapse Weg corridor and improve the functioning of the intersections. This report assumes the worst case scenario that this road will not be constructed within the next 10 years. Both the Friday and Saturday peak hours were investigated and it was found that the Saturday peak hour is the most critical combination of existing and site generated traffic.. 1.3. Modelling Approach The traffic growth rate used was based on population growth patterns in the area and accepted norms specified in the Manual for Traffic Impact Studies (2). The traffic generated by the proposed development was estimated using the Department of Transport's South African Trip Generation Rates (1). This generated traffic was then combined with the background traffic volumes and the impact of the development determined.. November 2001. 1-1.

(6) PAARLI--I--::;:j. STELLENSOSCH. FALSE SAY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAIL. LOCALITY SKETCH. J. GIBBAfrica LAWGIBB Group Member. J... Project No.. R". ~.=====::;:=====::;:=====::::-~=====:;::====:::: ;:<=..=.=.=n=.•=•=.=.=.=..=.=.=.=.=••=.=.=.•=.=.=.==~. (. Prepared 8y. S.S. Checked By. A.B. Reviewed By. H.J. Date. Scale. N.TS. MARCH 1999. J80212A. Drg,No. /. FIG 1.1. This drawing is not to be used in whole, or part, other than for ~he intended purpOse and projett as defined on this drawing. Refer to the contract tor full terms ..nd conditions,. /.

(7) CAPE FARMS. A N. A. NOOROHOEK/HOU MOEO B. NOOROHOEK/OU KAAPSE WEG C. OU KAAPSE WEG/BULLER LOUW o. OU KAAPSE WEG/LONGBOAT E. OU KAAPSE WEG/KOMMET JIE 1. BULLER LOUW ISUNNYOALE 2. PICK 'N PAY ENTRANCE 1. 3. LONGBEACH MALL ENTRANCE 1. 4. PICK 'N PA Y ENTRANCE 2 5. LONG8EACH ENTRANCE 2.. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. GIBBAfrica. (~~=E=TA="===L=OC:::;A=L=A=R=EA==::;:====:::::;:--:::=====:::;====::::::J ~ =.=., !=.=~=.'.=B=~=.=~=~.=~=U=!,=.M=••=~=~=~=~=~=ia.=: : Prepared By. 5.5. Checked By. AB. R!!:viewed. By. H.J. Scale. 1.10 000. Date. MARCH 1999. Project No.. J80212A. /. Drg,No. FIG 1.2. This drawing is not to be used in whole, or part, other than for the intended purpcsl! and project as defined on this drawing. Refer to the contract for full terms and conditions.. /. R".

(8) "-. .. - : : ..... - .. 1. 1 1. J.I ••••. ,~. ;J. ._--. lJj IUJLDING Llf£S '. m ROADS.. ~~lIT MT. TO On€R.. L. L. L I-. I-. av """. 1-. --. .._---::.=.:.':::'-. .. -. -_ _._---_ ... ... ==::;:.. ..---=-. --- --,.~. tA \41". I' .... tf. ..... •.

(9) 1.4. Analysis Approach Traffic volumes were obtained through manual traffic counts taken during March and June 1998 by GIBB Africa and previous counts obtained from the Cape Metropolitan Council and Hawkins, Hawkins and Osborne. The SIDRA 5.20 and TRANSYT 9 computer programmes were used to estimate operational conditions at the critical intersections.. 1.5. Contents of the rest of the document The rest of this document describes the traffic impact study carried out for this proposed development, as follows: a) Chapter 2 describes the current road network and traffic volumes, for the 2000 base year, the 2005 horizon year and the 2010 horizon year in the study area without the proposed development. b) Chapter 3 estimates the trips that will be generated by phase 1 of the proposed development and the full development. c) Chapter 4 explains how these trips were assigned to the current road network. d) Chapter 5 analyses the capacity of the intersections that will be affected, by using the SIDRA 5.20 and TRANSYT 9 computer programmes. e) Chapter 6 calculates the need for signalisation against the standard warrants.. f) Chapter 7 describes the accesses to the development with reference to the standards required by the Provincial Administration of the Western Cape. g) Chapter 8 determines the parking bays required for the development. h) Chapter 9 refers to the internal road network for the proposed development. i) Chapter 10 discusses the proposed upgrades in relation to recommendations made in the local structure plans. j) Chapter 11 calculates the developers cost responsibility for the road upgrades. k) Chapter 12 draws conciusions from the analysis. I) Chapter 13 makes recommendations. m) Chapter 14 is an after-study of the phase 1 development.. November 2001. 1-2.

(10) 2. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC. 2.1. Road Network The development will be served by the following existing roads as shown in Figure 2.1 and listed below. These roads have been classified according to the Sunnydale Local Area Draft Structure Plan (4) with the exception of au Kaapse Weg which is a Government Gazetted Expressway. a). au Kaapse Weg (M64) - Expressway (Class 1) This is a two lane road passing over the Steenberg Mountains and descending into the Noordhoek Valley where it passes through the residential suburbs of Sunnydale and Sun Valley terminating in a signaiised intersection with Kommetjie Road/Glencairn Expressway (Intersection E). Located on the road within the residential area is a signalised intersection with Buller Louw Drive (Intersection C) and two unsignalised intersections with Noordhoek Road and Longboat Road (Intersections B and D). Turning lanes exist at the signalised intersections.. b). Noordhoek Road (M6) - Primary Distributor (Ciass 2) This is a two lane road from Chapman's Peak Drive terminating in an unsignalised intersection with au Kaapse Weg (Intersection B). Hou Moed Avenue connects to this road via an unsignalised intersection (Intersection A).. c). Kommetjie Road (M65) - Primary Distributor (Class 2) This is a two lane road to the west of au Kaapse Weg which becomes a four lane road east of au Kaapse Weg. There are two signalised intersections on this road within the study area, one at au Kaapse Weg (Intersection E) and the other at Corsair Way. Turning lanes exist at the signalised intersections.. d). Glencairn Expressway (M6) - Primary Distributor (Class 2) This is a two lane road terminating in a signalised intersection with Kommetjie Road (Intersection E).. e). Hou Moed Avenue - District Distributor (Class 3) This is a two lane road off Noordhoek Road providing access to the existing commercial node. f). Buller Louw Drive - Local Collector (Class 4) This is a two lane road that provides access to the existing Sun Valley Mall and the proposed development off au Kaapse Weg. A right turn lane is provided at the au Kaapse Weg intersection.. g). Longboat Road - Local Collector (Class 4) This is a two lane road off au Kaapse Weg providing access to the residential suburbs of Sunnydale and Sun Valley.. November 2001. 2-1.

(11) 2.2. Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes at intersections in the study area were counted manually during the Friday afternoon (16:00 to 18:00) peak period and Saturday morning (10:30 to 12:30) peak period in March and June 1998 and compared to traffic counts from 1996, 1997 and 1998 obtained from the Cape Metropolitan Council and Hawkins, Hawkins and Osborne. A traffic impact study should analyse the worst situation of the combined effect of background traffic and site generated traffic. An analysis of both the Friday PM and Saturday AM peak hours indicated that the most critical combination occurred on the Saturday morning. This is a result of the high traffic generation experienced at shopping centres during the Saturday morning peak period, as well as the large size of the proposed development in combination with the existing Pick 'n Pay development. The peak hour volumes were obtained from the above mentioned surveys and are used as a measure of the current traffic levels. The results of these counts are shown in Figure 2.1.. 2.3. Traffic Growth The annual population growth rate for the Noordhoek area as indicated in the 1995 Census Results is 1.73%. The Manual for Traffic Impact Studies - Table 5.1 (2) indicates an average traffic growth rate to be 2.5% to 3.5% pa and a high traffic growth rate to be 3.5% to 6%. Along with the rapid expansion of informal settlements in the area such as Masiphumelele (growth rate unknown) and the local authority's policy of increasing the density of development in the area (Sunnydale Local Area Structure Plan (4») it was decided that a uniform traffic growth rate of 3.5% pa over the next five years would be realistic. The higher growth rate used in the traffic anaiysis implicitly allows for development and densification in the study area. A growth rate of 3.5% over a 10 year period results in an increase of 41 % in traffic volumes whereas a 2.5% growth rate only represents a 28% increase. The growth rate was applied to the balanced peak hour volumes on the roads derived from traffic counts shown in Figure 2.1. Pick 'n Pay has approval to develop a further 4 OOOm' GLA. It was assumed that Pick 'n Pay will develop this 4 OOOm' GLA gradually over the next 10 years in line with demand. The Pick 'n Pay traffic has therefore been increased accordingly. The resultant 2000, 2005 and 2010 traffic volumes can be seen in Figures 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 respectively. Initially traffic forecasts obtained from the EMME/2 model of the Cape Metropolitan Council (CMC) for 2015 were used to determine growth rates for traffic volumes in the vicinity of the development. To achieve this the 1995 assignment (done in February 1997) was used as an indication of the 1995 traffic, while the 2015 assignment gives the forecasts for future traffic. The compound growth rate as calculated from this model proved to be unrealistic and in some cases yielded a negative growth rate. This is probably due to the small scale and isolation of the target area in comparison to the large scale of the model.. November 2001. 2-2.

(12) ~. 1l,. II~. ""...~. "II~"II'" II ... "'~, " 0" '1>" ~. ~. SUN VALLEY. II II. ~ "II. SUNNYOALE. DIAGRAMATIC ONLY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. OET AIL. BALANCED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR EXISTING (1998) SA TURDAY PEAK WITHOUT GENERA TED TRAFFIC. Prepared By. S.S. Checked. By. A.B. Reviewed By. H.J. Scale. GIBBAfrica Date. N.T.S.. MARCH 1999. LAWGIBB Group Member C . . . . . .T • • • • • • • • • • • •" • • • • • • • T. Project No.. J80212A. Org.No. /. FIG 21. This drawing is not to be used in whole, or part, other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on thi!!. drawing. Refer to the contract for full terms and conditions.. /. J.. R"..

(13) 11, II~ ,,~. \\ ~ \\. ". \\ '!it. \\ ~. \I. II. \~\. SUN VALLEY. II ~\I ." II ~ \\. "\1. ~ \\. SUNNYDAlE. \I. tjL~~'~~~~:~''''''''~\''~''~'O==4. Sl:~,:::,~O""~"~I';;"";:"~~~~~B~'~. E. OIAGRAMA TIC. \~ '€i ~. ONLY. ~\. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. OETAJl. FUTURE (2000) SA TURDAY PEAK VOLUMES WITHOUT GENERATED TRAFFIC. P~epared By. SS. Checked By. A.B. Reviewed By. HJ. Scale. GIBBAfrica LAWGIBB Group Member. Date. NT.S. a_a •••• _T. C• • • • LT. MARCH 1999. Org.No.. Project No.. J80212A. /. FIG 2.2 /. This drawing is not to be used in whote. or part. other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drawing. Refer to the contri:lct for full terms and conditions.. Ia. Rev.

(14) ~. II~. II ~. ".. "'" "" " ~". \\ ~. \\ ~. \\. SUN VAllEY. II. ."". ~\\. ,II. SUNNYOAlE. "'l \\. ". OIAGRAMA TIC ONLY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAIL. FUTURE (2005) SA TURDAY PEAK VOLUMES WITHOUT GENERA TED TRAFFIC. Prepared By. SS. Checked ay. AB. Reyiewed By. H.J. Scale. GIBBAfrica LAWGIBB Group Member C•••• I.Tl. Date. N.T.S.. MARCH 1999. M• • • • • • • • T. Project No.. J80212A. Drg.No. /. FIG 23. This drawing is not to be used in whole. or part. orher than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drawing Refer to the contract for full terms and conditions.. /. J.. R".

(15) 1l, ,,~. -. "\\ =a """\... \\. \\ \\ \\. \~\. SUN VALLEy. \\ 0\\. '1>\\ ~ \\ ,,\\. SUNNYOAlE. ~ \\. \\. DIAGRAMA TIC ONLY. PROJECT. LONGSEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. oET AIL. FUTURE (20101 SA TURDAY PEAK VOLUMES WITHOUT GENERATED TRAFFIC. Prepared By. S5. Checked By. AS. R!!:viewed By. H.J. GIBBAfrica LAWGIBB Group Member C• • • • LT. Date. Scale. N.T.S.. MARCH 1999. 111. In. Project No.. J80212A. Drg.No. /. FIG 2.4. This drawing is not to be used in ....hole. or part, other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drawing Refer to the contract ror full terms and conditions .. /. J... R"..

(16) 3. TRIP GENERATION The document "South African Trip Generation Rates" (1) by the Department of Transport was used to estimate the site traffic that will be generated by the proposed development. Due to the close proximity of Sun Valley Mall, the more realistic scenario of combining It with the proposed development into one commercial node and basing the trip generation on this combined node was used. During the Saturday morning peak period it is assumed that the trip generation of both the office development and health club (see Appendix A for motivation) would be low in comparison with the shopping centre and that their effect would be negligible. These two land uses were therefore excluded from the analysis. Appendix B contains details on the estimation of the trips generated by the respective land uses. Table 3.1 and 3.2 summarises the total site trip generation during the critical Saturday peakhour(11:30-12:30). The shopping centre is analysed as a combined node of both the Pick 'n Pay and subject development. The trip generation of the sUbject development is determined by sUbtracting the trip generation of Pick 'n Pay from the combined node trip generation. Passer-by and diverted traffic included in the total is shown in brackets (58% of total trip generation). Table 3.1: Total New Trips Generated by Phase 1 of the Development Total Trips Generated (Veh/hr) No. 1 2. Land Use Type Shopping Centre Fast Food Restaurant. Size. Saturday AM Peak 2. 26100 m 2. 350 m. TOTAL. In. Out. Total. 1134 (658). 1134 (658). 2268 (1316). 57 (33). 47 (28). 104 (61). 1191 (691). 1181 (685). 2372 (1376). Table 3.2: Total New Trips Generated by the FUll Development Total Trips Generated (Veh/hr) No.. 1 2. Land Use Type. Shopping Centre Fast Food Restaurant TOTAL. November 2001. Size. Saturday AM Peak 2. 31040 m 350 m. 2. In. Out. Total. 1281 (743). 1281 (743). 2563 (1487). 57 (33). 47 (28). 104(61). 1338 (776). 1328 (770). 2667 (1546). 3-1.

(17) 4. TRIP DISTRIBUTION, MODAL SPLIT AND TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT. 4.1. Primary Trips To determine the effect of the proposed development on the road network, the trips generated by the development were distributed onto the road network. The primary market area (geographical area that will be influenced by the development) and distribution of the generated traffic from these areas were determined using the Surrogate Method as described in the Manual for Traffic Impact Studies (2). The primary market area was determined using a combination of a maximum travel time of 30 minutes expected for a development of this size and the proximity of competing developments in the area. (Manual for Traffic Impact Studies - Table 7.1 (2)). The primary market area was divided into geographical zones and population figures (1995 census) were obtained from the Department of Urban Studies for these zones. The number of trips generated by each zone was determined according to income level and proximity to competing developments such as Blue Route Mall. Trip rates were obtained from the South African Trip Generation Rates Manual (1). The number of trips per zone was then assigned to the most logical route to and from the development. These trips were then converted to a percentage of the total generated trips per main route into the development. It has been observed that Corsair Way is being used as a "rat run" through a residential area from Fish Hoek to Sun Valley Mall for primary trips. Through traffic using Corsair Way is undesirable as the higher speeds and volumes of traffic travelling through the residential area create a hazard to pedestrians, cyclists and school children. Some measures to discourage through traffic from using Corsair Way have been introduced by the local authority in the form of speed humps. All generated traffic was assigned to the main routes and not to Corsair Way as use of this route should be discouraged. Appendix C contains details on the trip distribution procedure. Table 4.1 below and Figure 4.1 show the results of the trip distribution. Table 4.1: Primary Trip Distribution Route. November 2001. Percentage. Noordhoek Road. 10 %. Ou Kaapse Weg. 1%. Sunnydale Road. 3%. Corsair Way. 7%. Kommetjie Road West. 32 %. Glencairn Expressway. 16%. Kommetjie Road East. 31 %. 4-1.

(18) 4.2. Passer-by and Diverted Trips Passer-by and diverted trips have been calculated and distributed onto the road network in proportion to the observed traffic volumes on the road network.. 4.3. Traffic Assignment Figure 4.2 and 4.3 show the assigned traffic volumes for phase 1 and the full development for the Saturday peak period. Figure 4.4 and 4.5 show the future traffic volumes (2005 and 2010) combined with the distributed generated traffic volumes (phase 1 and full development) for the Saturday peak period.. 4.4. Modal Split All traffic generated by the development during the Saturday morning peak hour is assumed to be passenger cars and other light vehicles.. November 2001. 4-2.

(19) --. 7%. ...... lI,. "\ \\ '". ,,~. \\ ~. ,,';.. " .. \\. \\ \\. SUN VALLEY. "" -" 'i>" 'v \\. c \\. 'j,". SUNNYOAlE. ~". DIAGRAM ATIC. ONLY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAIL. PERCENT AGE DISTRIBUTION OF PRIMARY TRIPS. Prepared By. SS. (hecked By. A.B. Reviewed By. N. T.S.. This drawing is net to be used in whole,. Of. LAWGIBB Group Member C••••LT'••••••••• * _"'.A.I_'''T. Date. Scale. H.J. GIBBAfrica MARCH 1999. Project No.. J80212A. O'g.No /. FIG 4.1. part, other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this dr:lwing.. Refer to the contract for full terms and conditions.. /. J. R"..

(20) ~. \\\'; \\. \\ ~. ",. \\ '/l.. " .. " \\. \~\. SUN VALLEY. ." ". ~"\\ ~. ~~"\\. SUNNYDAlE. \\. OIAGRAMA TIC ONLY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. GIBBAfrica. DETAIL. GENERA TEO TAfFlC VOLUMES WITH ASSIGNMENT FOR PHASE 1 OF THE DEVELOPMENT (VEH/HRI. LAWGIBB Group Member. Prepared By. s.s. Checked. By. A.B. Reyiewed By. H.J. Scale. C • • • • LT • • • • • • • , • • • • ,tl. Date. N.T.S.. MARCH 1999. Project No.. J80212A. Drg.No. /. FIG 4.2. This drawing is not t~ be used in whole, or part, other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drawing ~efl!r. to the contract for full terms dnd conditions. J.... T. /. R"..

(21) CD. ~ll!. "\. ,,~ ,,~. \\ l'. ". "\~\. "'il. \\. SUN VALLEY. ". ~" ~ \\. ." 'i>". ~ \\. SUNNYDAlE. A. ". OIAGRAMA TIC. ONLY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. GIBBAfrica. DETAIL. GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH ASSIGNMENT FOR THE FULL DEVELOPMENT (VEH/HR). LAWGIBB Group Member. Prepared. By. SS. Checked By. A.B. Reviewed By. H.J. Sule. Date. N. LS.. MARCH 1999. C• • ' ...TlIiUI. Project No.. JB0212A. Drg.No. /. FIG 4J. This drawing is not tCl be used in whole, or parI, other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drOlwing.. Refer to the contract tor full terms and conditions.. ,J... • •1 . . . . . .A.A • • • • IIT. /. R".

(22) "11\\. "". "'""""..... ~. ". ~. \\. SUN VALLEY. ". .....""". ~ \\. ,,-". SUNNYDALE. ';.. \\. ". DIAGRAM ATIC ONLY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAIL. FUTURE (2005) TRAFFIC VOLUMES INCLUDING PHASE 1 GENERA TED TRAFFIC FOR THE SA TURDAY PEAK HOUR !VEH.lHR). Prepared By. 55. Checked By. A.B. Reviewed By. H.J. Scale. GIBBAfrica Date. N.T.5. MARCH 1999. LAWGIBB Group Member ~ C • • • • LT. ". Pro jed No.. J80212A. 0'9.No. /. FIG 4.4. This drawing is not to be used in whole, or part, other than for the intended purpo!.e and pro jed as defined on this drawing Refer to the (ontr<ld for full terms and conditions.. T. /. R"..

(23) SUN VALLEY. SUNNYDALE. DIAGRAM ATIC ONLY. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAil. FUTURE 12010) TRAFFIC VOLUMES INCLUDING GENERATED TRAFFIC FOR THE SA TURDAY PEAK HOUR (VEH/HR!. Prepared By. S.S. (hecked. By. AB. Reviewed By. H.J. Scale. GIBBAfrica LAWGIBB Group Member C • • • • ~TIIi •. • • • , •• ". • • A • • • • • • • ..,. Date. N.T.S. MARCH 1999. This drawing is not to lie used in whole, or part, other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drawing Refef to the contract for full terms and conditions. J....

(24) 5. CAPACITY ANALYSIS. 5.1. Analysis of intersections Analysis of the intersections was carried out using two different analysis programmes. SIDRA 5.20 was used to determine levels of service and queue lengths and TRANSYT 9 was used to determine green band progression and queue lengths. SIDRA 5.20 analyses the intersections as isolated intersections while TRANSYT 9 analyses the intersections as part of a network where all the intersections are interrelated. Three future scenarios have been analysed by means of SIDRA for each intersection and these are:. Scenario 1: Scenario 2: Scenario 3:. Future 2000 base flows without the development. Future 2005 traffic flows with the phase 1 site generated traffic added. Future 2010 traffic flows with the full development site generated traffic added.. For each of the 2005 & 2010 scenarios, three different cases have been analysed:. Case 1:. Case 2: Case 3:. Normal growth for all traffic except on the "rat run" Corsair Way. Traffic on this road was assumed to have a much lower growth rate with all the additional traffic being re-routed on the main roads. Normal growth for all traffic including the traffic on Corsair Way. The construction of Hou Moed Avenue with traffic reassigned to the new road.. The two scenarios anaiysed by means of TRANSYT are:. Scenario 2 - Case1 : Scenario 3 - Case1:. Future 2005 traffic flows with the phase 1 site generated traffic added. Future 2010 traffic flows with the fUll development site generated traffic added.. The results of the analysis are as follows.. November 2001. 5-1.

(25) 5.2. Results of the Analysis Detailed results of the SIDRA and TRANSYT analysis is shown in the appendices as follows: SIDRA. Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix. 01 02 03 04 05 06 07. : Future 2000 : Future 2005 : Future 2005 : Future 2005 : Future 2010 : Future 2010 : Future 2010. scenario Case 1 scenario Case 2 scenario Case 3 scenario Case 1 scenario Case 2 scenario Case 3 scenario. TRANSYT. Appendix E1 : Future 2005 Case 1 scenario Appendix E2 : Future 2010 Case 1 scenario. A summary of the results of the SIDRA analysis for the 2000, 2005 Case 1 and 2010 Case 1 scenarios is shown in Table 5.1 below. Table 5.1: Summary of SIDRA Results. Int.. Intersection. No A. Hou Moed/Noordhoek. 2000 LOS. 2005 Case 1 Scenario. New LOS. 2010 Case 1 SCenario. New LOS. A. No upgrades. A. No upgrades. B. Road B. Noordhoek Rd/Ou KaapseWeg. B. No upgrades. B. Signalisation. B. C. Buller Louw/Ou KaapseWeg. C. Geometric upgrades. D. Further geometric upgrades. F. LongboaUOu Kaapse. A. No upgrades. F. Geometric upgrades. A. D. Weg. E. Kommetjie/Ou Kaapse. and signalisation. C. Geometric upgrades. D. Further geometric upgrades. D. A. Geometric upgrades. F. No further upgrades. F. B. Geometric upgrades and. B. No further upgrades. C. C. No further upgrades. C. Weg. 1. Sunnydale/Buller. Louw 2. Existing Pick 'n Pay. entrance. signalisation. Longbeach Mall main entrance. -. New construction and signalisation. 4. Pick 'n Pay entrance 2. A. No upgrades. A. Longbeach Mall entrance 2. -. No upgrades. 5. New construction. A. No upgrades. A. 3. Both the Case 2 (increased traffic on Corsair Way) and Case 3 (construction of Hou Moed Avenue) scenarios will have the effect of reducing traffic on the main roads. Although this will improve operating conditions on the main roads to some extent, it does not reduce the overall upgrades required significantiy. Where SIDRA analyses each intersection as an isolated intersection, TRANSYT joins all the intersections into a network where progression of vehicle platoons through the network is maximised. This leads to a more realistic modelling of operational conditions at the intersections and is therefore accepted as a more accurate reflection of queuing conditions. The resultant queue lengths, as predicted by TRANSYT, are shown on Figure 5.1 and 5.2. Average queue spacing is assumed to be 6m per vehicle.. November 2001. 5-2.

(26) ® L'loml ,o13 om l. \\ \\ \. SUNNYDALE. LEGEND,. .J...... NO. OF CARS (LENGTH IN METRES) IN QUEUE.. '4.. ".-----------------'-------.::~r---------____., PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAIL. 2005 - CASE 1 TRANSYT ANAL YSIS QUEUE LENGTHS. P~epared By. S.s. Checked By. AB. Reviewed. By. H.J. Scale. GIBBAfrica LAWGIBB Group Member C• • • • LTI • • • D.,IIIIII. Date. N.T.S.. MARCH 1999. Project No.. J80212A. Org.No. /. FIG 5.1. This drawing is not to be used in whole. or part, other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drawing. Refer to the contract for fut! terms and conditions.. J.... I.IIIT. /. Rev..

(27) L,16ml ,7142ml. .... 1il. 'e,. ~. ,r.l. \\II~e. \\. ~. \\ ~ II ..... \' ~. II \\ ~ II ' " II Y II II II II II I. +-116ml. SUNNYDALE. LEGEND,. -L-. NO. OF CARS (LENGTH IN METRES) IN QUEUE.. PROJECT. LONGBEACH MALL TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. DETAIL. 2010 - CASE 1 TRANSYT ANAL YSIS QUEUE LENGTHS. P~epared By. S.S. Checked. By. A.B. Reviewed By. H.J. Scale. GIBBAfrica LAWGIBB Group Member C• • • • LTUI.. Date. N. T.S.. MARCH 1999. •. • •UlI. •. Project No.. J80212A. Org.No. /. FIG 52 /. This drawing is not to be used in whole. or part. other than for the intended purpose and project as defined on this drawing. Refer to the (on/ract for rutl terms and conditions.. J.... .AWAlII'.'WT. Rev.

(28) The queue length refers to the maximum distance of the back of the queue from the stop line, This is the dynamic situation of vehicles joining the queue while it is being discharged during the green phase and is not the stationary queue at the end of the red phase which could result in the blocking of an upstream intersection, From the results it can be seen that an effective green band progression can be achieved along Buller Louw Drive and Ou Kaapse Weg in both 2005 and 2010,. 5.3. Upgrades Required A summary of the upgrades required are as follows:. 5.3.1. Future 2005 Phase 1 Scenario Noordhoek Road I Hou Moed Avenue Intersection. GOOMETRY:. @. _·.~"··Sl_. ......,-. F ....., · _ ~..,",,'.;. No upgrades required, Noordhoek Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection. .oo-':=:h. (::l'r_). ~:T":~I~. F':'.'.1tOOIloouo<.. ."""''' ........... 01 ........·. No upgrades required,. November 2001. 5-3.

(29) Buller Louw Drive I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection. _·:TR'.II_. " ",.....,:" ..... HI. '1Jl,iLouIc. ".... An additional through lane at the north approach, right turn lane at the west approach, left slip lane at the south approach and additional exit lanes at the west and south approaches will be required.. Longboat Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection.. AIIIIII.'"W!CJi!IIl F.Il'" ,LoNoouI< 6i:~·';:I'''''.·)jj. ......... No upgrades required for development traffic. Signalisation is recommended, but not supported by the authorities.. Kommetjie Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection GOOMETRY. II-'--'-~--!. ~=-.l. -I _,.,,:11_ FU.::. I<Ut!ouK. "c_C.'o'''''''_. Additional right-turn and left-turn lanes at the north approach and an additional exit lane at the west approach will be required.. -. November 2001. 5-4.

(30) Buller Louw Drive I Sunnydale Intersection. .......... *"~. I~. :=~.. _. TII·.cii>GM. FI:I.'>...,.;;r.... ...OC:-o·,....< ......... Additional through lanes at the west and east approaches and a right turn lane at the west approach will be required. The addition, a keep clear zone painted in Buller Louw Drive at the intersection will facilitate movement during peak periods.. Pick 'n Pay Entrance 1 I Buller Louw Drive GEOMRrRY. 5-~t::;. I __ th <-,,-~. """"YR;UDOIVl. FUiof:·P1CMAC'C £a<:-...., ..... ·:w,_. Additional through lands and turning lanes at the west and east approaches will be required. Through traffic as the east approach will not be signalised and will travel unrestricted. Right turning traffic exiting Pick 'n Pay should not be allowed but can easily make use of alternative Pick 'n Pay entrance.. Longbeach Mall Entrance 1 I Buller Louw Drive Intersection d'H,AFAIl>A. GED:tifE'I'RY. f. -t=". 1=~~ •. ....... Tl\rl.~. F',I"'::~~. _"'_';11.":';"'". The layout of this new intersection is as above.. November 2001. 5-5.

(31) Pick 'n Pay Entrance 2 I Buller Louw Drive Intersection. _. ;TR;all,iIM. "/:1~.';;',,,,,..ec:a. •.;u,·_. £aci~alo.. No upgrades required. Longbeach Mall Entrance 2/ Buller Louw Drive Intersection G:roME.'1ItY. e. _·T":UlKlM FH<i,; 1,01..11>11'0. or~II.1"".;"'_. The layout of this new Intersection is as above.. November 2001. 5-6.

(32) 5.3.2. Future 2010 Phase 2 Scenario Noordhoek Road I Hou Moed Avenue Intersection.. __ ,",.,..~,.,.,.. &&O_C_',O"', fl" ......... No upgrades required. Noordhoek Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection GIDME'I'RY. .....'_ ,-..•. 1=~~>. ~MII,TII.,"~. Hlio,':_'. n.,..e'-.;, . i.i .......... The intersection will require signalisation. Buller Louw Drive I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection. f. -,_,-... ::r~:..,. AlIIIII:·,,,,,,,"....,.. ~".,~. ••o_c .......... ndi><;. An additional through lane at the south approach and exit lane at the north approach will be required.. November 2001. 5-7.

(33) Longboat Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection. GEOMETRY. _. .-. .....r •. ,...,,-) I_th. /WIII·;Tft':.,_. "l'1.,,-LlIltCIOUic....... _Ql.;;.~::,;n. Additional through and exit lanes at the north and south approaches and signalisation of this intersection will be required. Kommetjie Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection. ....". lIll.o~=t. :=~>. An additional right turn lane at the east approach will be required. Buller Louw Drive I Sunnydale Intersection GEDMETRY. - -_.- - - - - - - ,, ~. @. ... .L.,,,. -7. 'l"":'-'~. ~. L~r'. ...... -t:=;'. :::r~=.l. 11,iYIyd.1._. -,.,. ,-. ..... ~H .. i...-.:i.... !;..;~QI.... :. .......... No further upgrades will be practical at this intersection.. November 2001. 5-8.

(34) Pick 'n Pay Entrance 1 I BUller Louw Drive Intersection. GEOMETRY. L.U!i:!I!.. .. ... ,,.n.th. _.,.;,~.. '". ~. ). '/wlB··Tj,.'.I'_ "h;;"'~'I_. ~cn"';;::ln"""". No further upgrades will be required. Longbeach Mall Entrance 1 I Buller Louw Drive Intersection. ._-. !:l!Il!!!i:. _''-rO. ::::r~:..,. _'TIl-C."""". FI:1.".""""""'" .~CI""")'I~. No further upgrades will be required. Pick 'n Pay Entrance 2 I Buller Louw Drive Intersection. _1R:.'_. Fl:I.':'~IOI!~1. "~.Cl_':"'_. No further upgrades will be required.. November 2001. 5-9.

(35) ,.. .. ;:::::::..::~.::. - ~..:.:.:..:.:.. -.. ................ ...• ~.

(36) Longbeach Mall Entrance 2 I Buller Louw Drive intersection GiXlM>:!'RY. 8. ....". -~=. I_th. <_.n••. _.~ft:·IIDOM "l.1'ii;:~. l!~''''''''::I1I_. No further upgrades will be required.. 5.4. Summary The above analysis shows the minimum upgrades required at each intersection to achieve satisfactory operating conditions. However, due to reasons such as continuity between intersections, safety and space limitations the final geometric layout may be slightly different. A concept plan showing the final upgrades to the local network rationalised for the 2010 scenario is shown in Figure 5.3.. November 2001. 5-10.

(37) I Fig 5.3. --. \. ongbeach Mall J80212B Scale 1 : 1000. GIBB AfrIca LAWGIBB Group Member. J.... TO CHAPMANS PEAK __. -.

(38) 6. WARRANTS FOR"TRAFFIC SIGNALS. 6.1. South African Road Traffic Signs Manual (SARTSM) The installation of traffic signals should not proceed unless their use is properly motivated and warranted. Traffic signal warrants as described in SARTSM (5) are used to motivate the need for traffic signals at intersections. Warrants 1 & 2 from SARTSM have been used in this study. The requirements of these two warrants are as follows: Warrant 1 : If for each of any two hours of an average day the average delay to critical sideroad traffic exceeds 30 seconds per vehicle and the traffic volumes for the same two hours are not less than the values given in Table 6.2. Warrant 2 : If for each of any four hours of an average day the volumes of the traffic on the main road and the critical side road when plotted on one or two of the charts, in accordance with paragraphs 6.8.8.3 fall into Zone A and/or Zone B.. Warrants 1 & 2 requires two hours and four hours respectively of traffic volumes on an average day. Due to the accepted use of only one critical peak hour in Traffic Impact Studies, it is assumed that all hours have equivalent volumes to the critical peak hour. The application of the warrants are follows:. 6.2. 2005 Phase 1 Pick 'n Pay Access I Buller Louw Drive Intersection This intersection is currentiy a stop-controlled 3-way junction that is analysed as a 3-way 2 x 2 lane signalised junction. Side-road traffic flow Main road traffic flow. 619 veh/hr 2 832 veh/hr. This intersection meets Signal Warrant No 2. (Fig 6.12) Longbeach Mall access I Buller Louw Drive Intersection This proposed intersection is analysed as a 3-way 1 x 2 lane junction. The eastern approach of Buller Louw Drive (main road), however, has an exclusive left turn lane. The estimated traffic flow for the left turning movement was not included in the main road traffic flow (Section 6.8.5 of SARTSM). Side-road traffic flow Main road traffic flow. 1 271 veh/hr 612 veh/hr. This intersection meets Signai Warrant N02. (Fig 6.10). November 2001. 6-1.

(39) 6.3. 2010 Phase 2 The previously analysed intersections already meet the required warrants for the 2005 scenario and were therefore not analysed again. Noordhoek Main Road / Ou Kaapse Weg. This intersection is currently a stop-controlled 3-way junction that is analysed as a 3-way 2 x 2 lane signalised junction. Side road traffic flow 328 veh/hr Main road traffic flow 1 248 veh/hr This intersection meets Signal Warrant No 2. (Fig 6.12) Longboat Road / Ou Kaaspe Weg. This intersection is currently a stop-controlled 4-way junction that is analysed as a 4-way 2 x 1 lane signalised junction. Side road traffic Main road traffic. 112 veh/hr 3942 veh/hr. The average delay to side-road traffic exceeds 30sec by a considerable margin, but does not meet the requirements for a minimum side-street flow of 160 veh/hr as stated in Signal Warrant No 1. (Table 6.2) The low volume of side-road traffic counted at this intersection is probably due to the current difficulty experienced by vehicles exiting the side-roads. A further consideration is the safety of the side-street vehicles, having to transverse at least three lanes of opposing traffic to perform a right turn manoeuvre. This intersection may be equipped with vehicle detection loops and operated in a semi-vehicle actuated mode to allow the controller to skip the side road phase when no demand has been detected.. November 2001. 6-2.

(40) -p ill ,.. Ii j. •I. 111. !. I I. EJ. .. :. I I. I I. : : : : :: ". ,.

(41) 7. ACCESS TO THE DEVELOPMENT. 7.1. Number and Sizes Three accesses will be used to serve the proposed development as shown in Figure 7.1. Access A will be off Buller Louw Drive near' the existing Pick 'n Pay entrance and will be a slip road only. Stacking space will be approximately 80 m and the slip lane is not expected to interfere with the traffic flow on Buller Louw Drive. Access B will be the main access to the development off Buller Louw Drive and will consist of two entrance lanes and two exit lanes. Stacking space will be approximately 55 m for both approach lanes and queues are not expected to be a problem due to free flow conditions at the traffic circle. Access C will be off Carlton Road and will serve the business park and function as a minor access to the development's western parking area.. 7.2. Traffic Control The existing Pick 'n Pay entrance and Access B will require signalising according to the standards set by the "South African Road Traffic Signs Manual" (5). Access C, the Buller Louw Drive I Carlton Road intersection and the alternate Pick 'n Pay entrance will be priority controlled.. -. November 2001. 7-1.

(42) 8. PARKING. 8.1. Required spaces and provision of parking The Provisional Administration's Draft Road Access Policy (3) determines parking requirements with due consideration of the extent to which public transport will be provided. The type of development envisaged however, would not be primarily served by public transport, but a limited number of buses and taxis should be expected. Appendix F contains the calcuiations for parking requirements of the respective land uses as summarised in Table 8.1 below. Table 8.1: Summary of off-street parking requirements. Phase 1 Land Use Retail Cinema Fast Food Restaurant Office Park. 8.2. Size 2. 24000 m 2100 m 350 m. Full Development. Required Parking Bays. Size. 1440. 28940 m2. 2. 2 2. 2745 m. 2. Required Parking Bays 2. 1736. 84. 2100 m. 84. 20. 2. 20. 110. 350 m. 2. 110. 2. 2745 m. Gymnasium and Health Club. 3000 m. 157. 3000 m. 157. Total. 32195 m'. 1811. 37135 m'. 2107. Parking layout and management of parking The submitted parking layout allows for the number of parking bays as indicated in Table 8.1.. 8.3. Public Transport A taxi drop-off point with space for three taxis has been provided within the parking area. Busses should not enter the parking area, but lay-byes could be provided on Ou Kaapse Weg near the Buller Louw I Ou Kaapse Weg intersection and on Buller Louw Drive near the Carlton Road Intersection.. November 2001. 8-1.

(43) 9. INTERNAL CIRCULATION AND PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT The internal circulation of the development is dominated by a large parking area, a slip lane and two access roads, one of which terminates in a traffic circle. The majority of the traffic will enter via the slip road and the main entrance and will exit via the main exit and Carlton Road. There is a ring road that runs around the shopping centre providing a circulation route for delivery vehicles. Pedestrian crossings and walkways will be provided at signalised intersections and through the parking areas to the main entrances. Pedestrian walkways and cyclist facilities will be provided on Buller Louw Drive and Sunnydale Road.. November 2001. 9-1.

(44) 10. STRUCTURE PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS The effect of recommendations in the Draft Ward 21 Strategic Plan (6) and the Draft Fish Hoek Structure Plan (7) has been investigated and the results are as follows: Draft Fish Hoek Structure Plan: Traffic & Transportation StudY. , au Kaapse Weg will become an increasingly important arterial route in Southern Peninsula, especially If the motivation to downscale the function of the proposed Northern Bypass is accepted. Its current two lane section between Kommetjie Main Road and Noordhoek Road is proposed to be upgraded to a dual carriageway, which will improve mobility along the route. Access to formal and informal businesses along the route along this section of au Kaapse Weg is also proposed to be rationalised.' - P. 54. This Traffic Impact Study recommends that Ou Kaapse Weg between Noordhoek Road and Kommetjie Road is upgraded to a four lane dual carriageway facility once phase 2 of the development is constructed. This is in accordance with the recommendations in the Draft Fish Hoek Structure plan.. , Following the implementation of traffic calming measures in the form of stop controls and speed humps, Corsair Way was still subject to rat-running between au Kaapse Weg and Kommetjie Main Road. The upgrading of the intersections along au Kaapse Weg may have reduced rat-running along Corsair Way by facilitating routing via the au Kaapse Weg I Kommetjie Main Road intersection. Should the problem persist, additional traffic control measures may have to be considered along Corsair Way, without however compromising its local distributor function. In addition, a free-flow left turn lane at the southbound approach to the au Kaapse Weg I Kommetjie Main Road intersection should be considered.' - Pvi This Traffic Impact Study recommends the construction of a left turn lane with maximum green time at the southbound approach to the au Kaapse Weg I Kommetjie Road intersection during phase 1 of the construction. This will decrease congestion along the main route and make "rat running' along Corsair Way less desirable. If observations during the first 5 years shows that a left slip lane would be desirable, it can be upgraded during phase 2 of the development. Short green times at the Buller Louw IOu Kaapse Weg intersection at the Corsair Way approach will also discourage "rat-running'. Draft Ward 21 Strategic Plan. 'Kommetjie Main Road which should be upgraded to two lanes in both directions, as well as discrete pedestrian zone simply seen as a road but should be designed as a generous linear space which accommodates both vehicles and pedestrians and which links the different experiences of the valley: recreation, agriculture, urban an national park.• -P19 Upgrades recommended by this Traffic Impact Study for the Kommetjie Road I Ou Kaapse Weg intersection are in accordance with current proposals to upgrade Kommetjie Road to two lanes in both directions.. -. November 2001. 10-1.

(45) 11. COST RESPONSIBILITY. 11.1. Approach. The two road corridors that require upgrading have very different purposes. Buller Louw Drive will be used predominantly as an access road to the shopping centres while Ou Kaapse Weg is a route of metropolitan significance that provides mobility and access to the South Peninsula region. The cost responsibility has therefore been calculated using two approaches, one for each corridor. These approaches are: (a). The current available spare capacity on Buller Louw Drive is sufficient to accommodate all growth until 2010 without the development of Longbeach Mall. The upgrades to Buller Louw Drive are required solely for the Longbeach Mall development and should therefore be paid for 100% by the developer.. (b). The upgrades required to Ou Kaapse Weg are for both background growth traffic and site development traffic. The formula to calculate the developer's cost responsibility for these upgrades is. based on the PAWC's Road Access Policy (P.6.3) and is as follows: . .. Nett Site Traffic Developers Cost Re spons/billty = Upgrade Cost x -,-;-=::-'=--::-'--'7'7-:---;New Capacity Added. The formula states that the proportion of the costs of upgrading to be borne by the developer is the ratio of nett site traffic to capacity added. The nett site traffic is calculated as follows: i.. If the existing intersection still has spare capacity after background growth until 2010, the portion of site traffic using this spare capacity is subtracted from the total site traffic to provide the nett site traffic.. ii.. Should there be no spare capacity after background growth to 2010, the nett site traffic equals the totai site traffic.. 11.2 Proposed Cost Responsibility Using the above approach, the follOWing cost responsibilities to the developer have been calculated. All calculations are based on the 2010 Case 1 scenario. 11.2.1 All upgrades to Buller Louw Drive including the following Intersections: Carlton Road I Buller Louw Drive intersection Longbeach Mall entrance I Buller Louw Drive intersection Pick 'n Pay entrance I Buller Louw Drive intersection Sunnydale Road I Buller Louw Drive intersection Buller Louw Drive approach at the Buller Louw Drive I Ou Kaapse Weg intersection. Developer's Cost Responsibility. November 2001. =100%.. 11-1.

(46) 11.2.2 Buller Louw Drive I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection (excluding the BUller Louw Drive approach): Existing traffic (2000) Site traffic (2010) Growth traffic (10 yrs) Current Capacity (2000) Future Capacity (2010) Nett Site traffic. 1711 575 703 2678 2989 =. Developer's Cost Responsibility =. 575 - (2678-1711-703) = 311 311 =100% 2989-2678. 11.2.3 Longboat Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection: Existing traffic (2000) Site Traffic (2010) Growth traffic (10 yrs) Current Capacity (2000) Future Capacity (2010) Nett Site traffic. 1723 1260 1111 3126 7155 =. Developer's Cost Responsibility =. 1260 - (3126 -1723-1111) = 968 968 =24% 7155 - 3126. 11.2.4 Kommetjie Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection: Existing traffic (2000) Site traffic (2010) Growth traffic (10 yrs) Current capacity (2000) Future capacity (2010) Nett Site traffic. 2295 1073 1341 4400 6478. =. Developer's Cost Responsibility =. 1073 - (4400-2295-1341) = 309 309 =15% 6478 -4400. 11.2.5 Noordhoek Road I Ou Kaapse Weg Intersection Minimal site traffic utilises this intersection and the development is not affected by operational conditions at this intersection. Developer's Cost Responsibility =. November 2001. 0%. 11-2.

(47) 12. CONCLUSIONS The analysis has shown that the traffic impact of the proposed development can be adequately incorporated into the road network, provided that a phased upgrading of the road network is undertaken as indicated in Chapter 5.3. A summary of the road upgrades required for each phase are as follows: Phase 1 development: Buller Louw Drive will require upgrading to a four lane dual carriageway facility from Longbeach Mall entrance 1 to au Kaapse Weg. All intersections included in this section of road will reqUire upgrading as indicated in Chapter 5.3. Upgrades to the Kommetjie Road I au Kaapse Weg intersection will also be required. Phase 2 development: au Kaapse Weg will reqUire upgrading to a four lane dual carriageway from Noordhoek Road to Kommetjie Road. All intersections included in this section of road will require upgrading as indicated in Chapter 5.3. The analysis has also shown that although the construction of Hou Moed Avenue and future increased use of the "rat run" Corsair Way ease congestion on the main routes, it has a limited effect on the upgrades required. The TRANSYT analysis has shown that the future linked network of signalised intersections will work effectively with good vehicle progression along Buller Louw Drive and au Kaapse Weg leading to shorter queue lengths. All signal warrants have been met regarding the installation of signals at the recommended intersections. There are no other possible "rat runs" that will be created due to the construction of this development. Sunnydale Road should not be used as a "rat run" due to the longer travelling times when using this route and the slower average speeds. Although this road may not initially require speed humps, it should be observed during the first phase of the development to determine operational conditions. Internal circulation routes, on-site parking requirements and taxi embayments have all been accommodated within the site. Bus lay-byes should be provided on Ou Kaapse Weg and Buller Louw Drive. Investigations into the effect of recommendations in the Draft Ward 21 Strategic Plan and the Draft Fish Hoek Structure Plan have been carried out and all upgrades recommended in this traffic study comply with the relevant plans. Calculation of the developer's cost responsibility regarding the upgrading of the external roads has been carried out and is summarised as follows: Buller Louw Drive Buller Louw I au Kaapse Weg Intersection Noordhoek I au Kaapse Weg Intersection Longboat I au Kaapse Weg Intersection Kommeljie I au Kaapse Weg Intersection. November 2001. 100% Developer 100% Developer 0% Developer 24% Developer 15% Developer. 12-1.

(48) 13. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations can therefore be made: 1. Approval It is recommended that the Chief Directorates of Transport of both the Provincial Administration of the Western Cape, the Cape Metropolitan Council and the Executive Director: Urban and Environmental Services give their approval in terms of the rezoning conditions adopted by the South Peninsula Municipal Council. 2. Upgrade implementation The upgrades as indicated in Chapter 5.3 should be constructed in two phases to coincide with the phasing of the development. The 2005 scenario upgrades should be constructed before phase 1 of the development is completed and the 2010 scenario upgrades before phase 2 of the development is completed. 3. Traffic signals All signalised intersections on Ou Kaapse Weg and BUller Louw Drive in the study area should be linked and properly co-ordinated to ensure that the maximum progression of vehicle platoons can be achieved and the available storage length between closely spaced intersections will not be exceeded. 4. Cost responsibility Negotiation with the Local Authority, CMC and PAWC regarding the developer's cost responsibility should take place in accordance with the cost apportionment calculations as indicated in Chapter 11.. November 2001. 13-1.

(49) 14. AFTER-STUDY. 14.1. Introduction Phase 1 of Longbeach Mall opened for business in April 2001 with 26 100 m' GLA of retail area, a McDonalds Restaurant, 1872 parking bays and an upgraded road network as recommended in the TIA. Owing to the age of trip generation rates and uncertainty of traffic growth rates used in the TIA, it was decided that an after-study of traffic volumes and parking utilisation would give a valuable insight into the differences between actual and predicted traffic conditions. Conclusions could therefore be reached as to the validity of the assumptions made in the TIA and the applicability of the trip generation rates used. It is important to note that the total traffic volumes and levels of service of the road infrastructure was calculated for the horizon year of 2005 when the shopping centre was expected to realise its full potential. It was predicted that an additional 26 100 m' GLA of retail space to the eXisting 8 900 m' GLA in the existing shopping centre would be an "over supply" of retail space for the area in the short term and that demand would grow to match supply by 2005. The remainder of this section compares and discusses the predicted versus actual circumstances in greater detail.. 14.2 Comparison of Actual Development Versus Planned Development A comparison of the extent of the constructed development versus what was originally planned (and used as the basis of the TIA), is shown in Table 14.1 below: Table 14.1: Extent of actual development versus planned development Land Use. Size (m' GLA) Planned. Constructed. Longbeach Mall. 26100 m'. 26100 m'. Sun Valley Mall. 2000 m'. Om'. Health & Raquet Club. 3000 m'. Om'. Offices. 2745 m'. Om'. 350 m'. 350 m'. McDonalds. From the above table it can be seen that none of the proposed offices, the Health & Racquet Club or the Sun Valley Mall extension have been built yet. Although this will result in generally lower traffic leveis at different times of the day, the only land use that will affect the results of the TIA, is the outstanding 2 000 m' Sun Valley Mall extension as it is the only land-use that generates trips during the critical Saturday morning peak hour. In addition to the above, it was observed that both shopping centres are not fully occupied with Longbeach Mall at approximately 90% occupancy and Sun Valley Mall at approximately 80% occupancy. The external road network was constructed as recommended in the TIA for phase 1 of the development except for the south approach to the Ou Kaapse Weg I Buller Louw Drive. November 2001. 14-1.

(50) intersection where the proposed left slip lane was changed to a double left to improve weaving conflict in Buller Louw Drive. Owing to severe budget constraints, the Local Authority did not make any contribution to the external road upgrades which were all paid for by the developer.. 14.3 Traffic Counts Traffic counts were carried out on Saturday, 13 October 2001 from 11:15 to 12:45, Saturday, 27 October 2001 from 11 :30 to 12:30 and Friday, 19 October 2001 from 06:45 to 08:30. Screen-Line Count The Friday count was a screen-line count taken on Ou Kaapse Weg between Buller Louw Drive and Noordhoek Road during the Friday AM peak period of 07:15 - 08:15 (See Figure 14.1). The purpose of this count was to determine the actual rate of background traffic growth in the Noordhoek area since 1997 so it can be compared to the predicted rates used in the TIA. Ou Kaapse Weg is the only viable route out of the Noordhoek area for commuters and is therefore a good position for a screen-line count. When the previous count took place in 1997, Chapman's Peak Drive was open, but all vehicles were still required to pass this point to get to Chapmans Peak Drive. The weekday AM peak is the only period that is not affected significantly by the construction of Longbeach Mall as the traffic is predominantly home to work/school trips. Comparison of counts carried out during this period is therefore considered to be an accurate reflection of the general growth of people and vehicles in the Noordhoek area. The results of the screen-line counts are shown in Figure 14.1 and Table 14.2 below: Table 14.2 Comparison of Screen-line Traffic Counts on Ou Kaapse Weg. Direction. Peak Hour Traffic Volume. Percentage Increase. April 1997. October 2001. Total. Per Annum. Northbound Traffic. 945. 1072. 13.4%. 2.8%. Southbound Traffic. 337. 376. 11.6%. 2.5%. 1282. 1448. 12.9%. 2.7%. Total. The compound growth rate was measured as 2.7% pa which is less than the predicted growth rate of 3.5% pa used in the TIA, but still within acceptable limits. Intersection Counts The Saturday counts were carried out at critical intersections on the external road network to quantify current traffic levels during the critical Saturday peak hour of 11:30 to 12:30. These traffic counts are used to determine how the construction of Longbeach Mall has affected traffic patterns since 1998 and if these traffic patterns are consistent with what was predicted in the TIA. Figure 14.2 shows the current Saturday peak period traffic volumes along with the percentage change in volumes from those counted in 1998 (Figure 2.1) before Longbeach Mall was constructed. From this comparison, the following observations can be made: •. The traffic volumes have increased substantially since 1998 on all routes carrying traffic to. November 2001. 14-2.

(51) BACKGROUND TRAFFIC GROWTH FRI19/10/2001: 07:15 - 08:15. ~. o Noordhoek Road. SCREEN-LINE. % Increase 13.4%. 1012001. ~. 1072. 945. 1 1. 04/1997. 10/2001. 337. 376. % Increase 11.6%. Sun Valley Mall Buller Louw Drive. Corsair Way. '*~ c. _____. ILongbeach Mall I. ". Ul. [FIGURE 14.1.

(52) BACKGROUND TRAFFIC - SAT 13/10/2001: 11:30 -12:30 PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM 1998 TRAFFIC. f. Q. K[;] m. ;1. +1%. -t34%. 0. 0. 295. l. -34%. 140--+. +32%. 155~. ~38%. [;]. Noordhoek Road. 351 +16%. I. I. r. ". :z. '"+. '1'. N. II' 00. ·19%. _oo~. ~11%. -139. r-. 80. -4%. G;J. +40%. -9%. 3'~ 179~. <0 00. 'f. +. ~. if!. (/. .J 1. I r ~. i!l. ~ II' m. .-. #.. +. [;]. [;]. [;]. +22%. +35%. +12%. I. #-. II'. Sun Valley Mall [ Buller LolJW Drive. c;]. !!. 0 0. 0. !Longbeach Mall. I. '". [;]. +13%. #.. +53%. 112~. '" 'f 1. +24%. 289--+. ". ~6%. +<"~. .,. GJ. 801~. r. I r. ~ ill N 00. II'. N. N. #.. m +. N. w. L. +31%. [;]. -1%. +4%. 101. + - - 252. #.. II'. .-. .J 1 L. ~. .. ...- r-". +31%. II'. '"m. +'HOJ.. -28%. ':'. [;]. Gill]. +2<l%. +34%. Longboat Road. f ~. 0.. ~0. xx% = Percentage change in turning movement volume since 1998 xx% = Percentage change in link volume since 1998. 0. GJ. See Figure 2.1 for 1998 volumes.. GJ. +27%. +40% -7%. GJ Kommetjie Road. +30%. +?nw.. e;] +15%. 484~. ';?. ,..---. 4'~. I r:z. r ::. ill. #.. ~. +31%. #. 00. 00 ~. +. #.. 00 00. .-. W +14%. <0. #.. '"'"+. II'. m + <0. ~ N. .J 1 L. w. L. 32B. +18%. GJ. +--. 236. ·11%. +5%. 9. +125~. ill. r-. W +52%. +2W.. ~ '"~. $ E. 5 0. lFIGURE 14.2 ,. .!!!. '". Corsair Way.

(53) and from the commercial node. •. The traffic volumes have increased moderately on all other routes except Noordhoek Rd. This is probably due to the fact that Chapman's Peak Drive has been closed since the 1998 count was carried out.. •. The northbound and southbound through movements at the Buller Louw IOu Kaapse Weg intersection have reduced while the turning movements into the commercial node have increased. This denotes that a significant amount of existing passer-by traffic diversion into the commercial node has occurred as predicted in the TIA. The same situation exists at the Kommetjie Rd I Ou Kaapse Weg intersection.. •. Traffic on the Corsair Way "rat run" has continued to increase despite upgrades to Kommetjie Road and Ou Kaapse Weg.. Figure 14.3 shows the current Saturday peak period traffic volumes along with the percentage change in volumes from those predicted in the TIA for the 2005 horizon year (Figure 4.4). From this comparison, the following observations can be made: •. The current traffic volumes are still substantially lower than the total predicted volumes for 2005 on all routes carrying traffic to and from the commercial node.. •. The volume of traffic was predicted in the TIA to decrease on the Corsair Way "rat run" as measures were introduced to kerb this traffic. This has not occurred and current traffic volumes are higher than predicted.. •. Approximately only half the volume of traffic is entering and exiting the commercial node than predicted in the TIA.. Commercial node Traffic Table 14.3 below shows a comparison of the total volume of traffic entering and exiting the commercial node via Buller Louw Drive and Hou Moed Avenue during the Saturday peak hour in 1998 (counted), 2001 (counted) and 2005 (predicted). Table 14.3: Volume of Traffic Entering and EXiting the Commercial Node Access Point. Number of Vehicles Year 1998. Year 2001. Year 2005. Hou Moed Avenue. 401. 511. 853. Buller Louw Drive. 1381. 1933. 3757. Total. 1782. 2444. 4610. From the above numbers it can be seen that the addition of Longbeach Mall to the commercial node has increased the number of vehicles entering and exiting the precinct by 37%, but still nowhere near what was predicted for 2005.. 14.4 Parking Utilisation Table 14.4 shows the number of parking bays recommended in the TIA for Phase 1 and the full development compared with the number that was actually constructed:. November 2001. 14-3.

(54) BACKGROUND TRAFFIC - SAT 13/10/2001: 11 :30 - 12:30 PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM 2005 TRAFFIC. 1. ~w. GJ. m. ~. -21%. +4%. "-. <5 f----, 295 -37% 351. ·23%. 140___. I -46% 155~. -51%. [;i]. Noordhoek Road. -7%. 3B. ~. 179-~. ------,----------'-=""''---------l I. II. ..J 1. -10%. -44% ;'.. t1. Ii. W. ---139 +39%. -19%. 18. ;'. ~. ;'.. ~ ~. [;J. W. -35%. +2%. -45%. 1. Sun Valley Mall I. -59%. Buller Louw Drive. ~. +27%. 2as-----. -57%. 601---,. ~. ~. ..J 1 L. [;J. L. GJ. M. III. ___-r_ _-=-4lL7':l'L%_ _""'7"_ _..;... +I-. e:::;]. Iii :g ~. N. -3%. 18. -44%. r-. ~50%. ILongbeach Mall I. 101 +120%. +--- 252. ...:+='n"~ Corsair Way. +9%. [;J -45%. -39%. Longboat Road. 1$ 0.. m. xx% = Percentage change in turning movement volume from 2005. ~. xx% = Percentage change in link volume from 2005 See Figure 4.4 for 2005 volumes.. 0. ,. [;]. ~. -43%. -30%. -2% +2%. Kommetjie Road. ,- ..J 1 L 4~. Il. :!:. t< t< If. ID "i "I + ~. IFIGURE 14.3. I. ID. "i. ~. ~. ;'.. ;0;. ;;. N. ID. '\' ~. c;J. 4.~. I iI ;. -23%. -40%. ;'.. ... ~. L. -47%. -56%. G;]. _236. -7%. -43%. r-'. +80%. 3,.. [;]. G;]. -33%. -10%. ~. ~ •~. 0.. ~. ,~. c J!1. Cl.

(55) Table 14.4: Number of Parking Bays Number of Parking Bays. Land Use Phase 1 Develop.. Full Development. Constructed. 1440. 1736. 1768. Cinema. 84. 84. 84. Health & Raquet Club. 157. 157. 0. Offices. 110. 110. 0. McDonalds. 20. 20. 20. 1811. 2107. 1872. Longbeach Mall Retail. Total. From the above table it can be seen that more parking bays were provided than was required for phase 1 of the Longbeach Mall development. This was due to a decision made by the developer to build all the parking bays for the full shopping centre development during phase 1 as it would be cheaper in the long run. On-site observations on two separate Saturday mornings (including the end of the month) revealed that the car parks at both shopping centres in the precinct never reached more than about 75% capacity during the peak period.. 14.5 Conclusions Even though the TIA predictions were made for the horizon year of 2005 and the 2001 traffic counts took place only 6 months after the opening of Longbeach Mall, certain trends can be identified and conclusions made as to the effect the shopping centre has had on traffic in the local area. These conclusions are as follows: •. The Friday morning screen-line count shows that the traffic volumes in the Noordhoek Valley have continued to grow at a fairly high growth rate of 2.7% pa. This is slightly less than the 3.5% pa predicted in the TIA, which is acceptable as the TIA took a "worst case scenario" approach to the growth prediction. It is, however, debatable whether using this high growth rate over a period of 12 years to predict 2010 traffic volumes will yield acceptable results.. •. The Saturday morning intersection counts have revealed a number of differing trends in the traffic patterns from what was predicted in the TIA. The largest discrepancy between actual and predicted traffic volumes is the fact that the commercial node is only attracting 50% of the traffic that was predicted in the TIA for 2005. This can be attributed to a number of factors: a) The addition of 26 100 m2 GLA has "over supplied" the demand for retail space in the area. In fact, the retail survey carried out by Douglas Parker & Associates before Longbeach Mall was built, concluded that the primary market area of the commercial node could only support an additional 21 000 m2 GLA of retail space up until 2005. The demand therefore still has to grow for another 4 years to match the supply. b) The extent of facilities and retail space actually constructed is less than that analysed in the TIA. c). Both shopping centres in the precinct are not fully occupied with Longbeach Mall at approximately 90% occupancy and Sun Valley Mall at approximately 80% occupancy.. d). It was originally intended that Longbeach Mall and Sun Valley Mall would have different anchor tenants that would appeal to different tastes and markets. However, currently. November 2001. 14-4.

(56) Pick 'n Pay is the anchor tenant in both centres which probably also decreases the trip generation of the precinct due to lack of variety. e) The total predicted traffic volumes for 2005 are a combination of growthed background traffic and generated traffic. It was thought at the time that the background traffic on all routes would continue to grow at 3.5% in addition to the primary trips generated by the additional retail space. Experience gained since this TIA was originally completed and the new traffic counts carried out, support the theory that growth rates should only be applied to movements and routes that do not carry development traffic. The primary trips generated by the development are inclusive of growth traffic and adding the two is, in effect, double counting. This has resulted in an over-prediction of vehicles driving to and from the commercial node. •. The parking areas of both shopping centres are only about 75% full during the Saturday peak period whereas the parking area of Sun Valley Mall was regularly more than 100% full before Longbeach Mall was built. This supports the above conclusion that the commercial node is not attracting the number of vehicles that it could. It also indicates that Sun Valley Mall has lost a lot of business to Longbeach Mall.. •. The LOS experienced at all the critical intersections during the Saturday morning peak hour is currently very good due to the road upgrades being designed to reach capacity in. 2005. •. Taking all the above conclusions into consideration, it is possible to revise the calculated trip generation of the commercial node to reflect updated conditions. For the purposes of this exercise, the other land-uses in the precinct (town-house complex, petrol stations, storage depot and light industrial buildings) have been ignored as they do not contribute significantly to the trip generation during the Saturday morning peak hour. Table 14.5 below is a comparison of the theoretically calculated trip generation using trip generation rates versus the counted I predicted trip generation: Table 14.5: Counted I Predicted Versus Calculated Trip Generations Number of Trips. Method Year 1998. Year 2001. Year 2005. Calculated from formula. 1455 '. 3454 '. 3794 3. Counted I Predicted in TIA. 1782 ' +22%. 2444'. 4610 5. -29%. +22%. Percentage change. 2. Calculated using the standard trip generation formula: Vehicles/100m'; 250.2 X GLA-<l·30for a total retail area of 8 900 m' (Sun Valley Mall) Calculated using the standard trip generation formula: VehiclesJl00m' ; 250.2 X GLA·,·30 for a total retail area of 80% x 8 900 ma (Sun Valley Mall) + 90% x 26100 rna (Longbeach Mall) to account for. 3. occupancy rates. Calculated using the standard trip generation formula: VehiclesJ100m 2 = 250.2 X GLA.Q,30for a total. 4 5. retail area of 35 000 m' (Sun Valley Mall + Longbeach Mall) Counted trips Number of trips predicted in the TIA for 39 000 rna retail area (additional 4 000 rna included). From the above table it can be seen that in 1998 the number of trips counted were 22% more than calculated. This indicates that there was probably an under-supply of retail space for the demand. This is confirmed by the observation that the parking area was often more than 100% full. In 2001 the number of trips counted are approximately 30% less than calculated. This is also confirmed by the fact that the parking area currently is only 75% fUll during peak times.. November 2001. 14-5.

(57) The total number of trips predicted in the TIA for 2005 (trip generation + background growth) are approximately 22% more than the revised trip generation calculation. It is important to note that the revised trip generation calculation does not inClude the additional 4 000 m' GLA development rights that Sun Valley Mall has, whereas the TIA prediction has included this as development that was to occur by 2005.. 14.6. Recommendations The following recommendations for future TIA's of shopping centres can therefore be made:. -. •. Owing to the high and unpredictable nature of growth rates experienced in developing areas, it is not beneficial to analyse future scenarios of more than 5 years after the completion of a development. It would be more accurate for Local Authorities to insist that TIA's are limited to 5 year future scenarios and revised as each phase of a development proceeds.. •. The application of growth rates to background traffic on roads that carry large proportions of development generated traffic leads to over estimation of expected development traffic and is therefore not recommended.. •. The Trip Generation Rates used for shopping centres are based on surveys carried out at shopping centres more than 25 years ago when shopping hours were limited to Saturday mornings only and the number of shopping centres that existed were fairly lOW. The accuracy of using these rates is therefore questioned and it is recommended that a revision of these rates is carried out.. November 2001. 14-6.

(58) 15. REFERENCES 1. Department of Transport, 1995. South African Trip Generation Rates. Project Report RR 92/228, June 1995. 2. Department of Transport, 1995. Manual for Traffic Impact Studies. Project Report RR 93/635, October 1995. 3. Provincial Administration: Western Cape, 1996. Draft Road Access Policy. Department of Transport and Public Works, November 1996. 4. Cape Metropolitan Council, 1995. Sunnydale Local Area - Review of the draft local structure plan for Noordhoek Valley in respect of Sunnydale local area. Reference: 01214, November 1995 5. Department of Transport, 1993. South African Road Traffic Signs Manual Volume 3. Reference N12/4/5/B, July 1993 6. Uytenbogaardt & Dewar Architects (1998). Draft Strategic Plan Ward 21 7. Hawkins, Hawkins & Osborne (1998): Draft Fish Hoek Valley Local Structure Plan: Traffic & Transportation Study.. November 2001. 15-1.

(59) APPENDIX A CONFIRMATION OF ORIGINAL WORK AND PERMISSION FROM GIBB AFRICA.

No results found