figure 3.6:cotter road – adelaide avenue/yarra glen full diamond...

Figure 3..6: Cotter Rooad – Adelaidde Avenue/Yaarra Glen Full Diamond Interchange

CB++E Traffic, Transport and Infraastructure Assessment; Revisioon 2; 17/02/2015 | The SMECC Group | 9

Y

Figure 3..7: Cotter Rooad – Adelaidde Avenue/Yaarra Glen Intterchange Intersection D Detail

CB+E Traffic, Transport and Infrastrructure Assessmment; Revision 2; 17/02/2015 | The SMEC GGroup | 10

4. TRAFFIC MODELLING AND ANALYSIS

The road network layout discussed in Chapter 3 was used as the basis for the traffic modelling and analysis. A ‘Do Nothing’ scenario was also modelled to allow comparison and illustration of the differences in network flow and operations between the existing configuration and the CB+E Master Plan.

4.1. Existing Traffic Volumes (2014) Manual, classified traffic counts were performed for all major intersections in the study area for the weekday AM and weekday PM peak periods on Thursday 31 July 2014, and for the weekend midday peak period on Saturday 2 August 2014. The resulting survey count data are included in Appendix A. As such, the base year micro‐simulation and intersection models are referred to as 2014 AM Existing.

4.2. Road Network Scenarios Five basic modelling scenarios have been investigated:

• Existing represents the road network in 2014 (micro‐simulation and intersection modelling only).

• Do Nothing represents the road network in 2021 and 2031, with expected land use and road network developments, but without the CB+E Master Plan.

• CB+E Master Plan Stage 1 is based on the 2021 Do Nothing road network and land use with appropriate changes for the first stage of the CB+E Master Plan.

• CB+E Master Plan Stage 2 is based on the 2031 Do Nothing road network and land use with appropriate changes for the second stage of the CB+E Master Plan. This includes the concurrent construction of the Adelaide Avenue Bus Stop underneath the Kent Street bridge, which assumes that the existing Adelaide Avenue T2 lane reverts to a Bus Only lane.1

• CB+E Master Plan Stage 3 is based on the 2031 Do Nothing road network and land use with appropriate changes for the third and final stage of the CB+E Master Plan.

4.3. Strategic Transport Modelling

Strategic transport modelling was initially undertaken to provide preliminary indications of the network flow changes that can be expected in each future scenario. Two planning horizons have been considered; 2021 and 2031, with Stage 1 modelled in 2021 and Stages 2 and 3 modelled in 2031. Ideally, Stage 2 would be modelled in 2026, but a 2026 model is not yet available.

The EMME‐based Canberra Strategic Transport Model (CSTM), which was recently calibrated to the 2011 ABS Journey‐to‐Work data, was used to estimate traffic projections along the links within the designated study area. The model includes all planned land use changes and road infrastructure upgrades that are expected to be in place by 2021 and 2031, based on information obtained from the Environment and Planning Directorate (EPD, formerly ESDD).

The CSTM is an AM peak model. While a PM version of the model has been developed to enable the growth calculations for the PM and weekend peak micro‐simulation models (as discussed in Section 4.4.2), it is considered appropriate only for the calculation of these relative growth calculations. As

1 This assumption is made for traffic modelling purposes only and is based on the proposed concept design in the Adelaide Avenue Bus Stops Feasibility Study (SMEC 2013). The final bus stop design is still subject to further investigation and will need to be coordinated between relevant government agencies.

CB+E Traffic, Transport and Infrastructure Assessment; Revision 2; 17/02/2015 | The SMEC Group | 11

such, the absolute PM peak model outputs have not been presented below as the model has been calibrated to match observed traffic behaviour in the AM peak period only.

4.3.1. Land Use

The strategic transport model is divided into traffic analysis zones (TAZs), which contain the following land use information:

• Population

• Employment

• Retail Space

• School Enrolment

• Tertiary Enrolment

ACT land use projections for 2031 were updated by EPD on 30 October 2013 and were provided to SMEC in December 2014. An illustration of the TAZs within and around the study area is shown in Figure 4.1, while Tables 4.1 and 4.2 detail the corresponding land use data for TAZs surrounding the study area in 2021 and 2031 respectively. The table also includes the estimated additions to the land use figures due to the CB+E Master Plan. The population figure is based on the dwelling yield provided by LDA and the average occupancy for equivalent medium‐high density dwelling types in Curtin, Deakin and Yarralumla derived from the ABS 2011 Census of Population and Housing.

The employment figure is based on the commercial floor space yield provided by LDA and an average employment density of 0.0475/m², given in the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments for commercial floor space. The total retail floor space was specified by LDA.

813

242

307

818

257

245

239

237

244

335

326

238

240

231

284

241

58

246

285

2

57

243

123 TAZ Reference

Figure 4.1: Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) Layout in the Study Area (CB+E Development Area Shown)


Table 4.1: Land Use Information for TAZs Within and Around the Study Area (2021)

Zone Description Population Employment Retail Space [m² GFA]

School Enrolments

Tertiary Enrolments

239 Deakin (Shops & Stonehaven Cr) 1,800 500 12,000 0 0

240 West Deakin (south of Strickland Cr) 0 2,550 4,500 150 0

241 West Deakin (north of Strickland Cr) 100 1,500 0 785 0

242 Yarralumla 657 219 0 0 0

243 Yarralumla 525 337 5,212 0 0

244 Yarralumla 893 190 0 250 0

307 Curtin (north) 3,790 710 11,841 270 0

Canberra Brickworks Development

CB+E Master Plan Stage 1 692 71 1,500 0 0

Table 4.2: Land Use Information for TAZs Within and Around the Study Area (2031)

Zone Description Population Employment Retail Space [m² GFA]

School Enrolments

Tertiary Enrolments

239 Deakin (Shops & Stonehaven Cr) 1,900 550 12,500 0 0

240 West Deakin (south of Strickland Cr) 0 2,600 4,500 200 0

241 West Deakin (north of Strickland Cr) 100 1,600 0 785 0

242 Yarralumla 635 270 0 0 0

243 Yarralumla 559 355 5,212 0 0

244 Yarralumla 915 200 0 250 0

307 Curtin (north) 3,860 730 13,841 270 0

Canberra Brickworks Development

CB+E Master Plan Stage 2 2,367 71 1,500 0 0

CB+E Master Plan Stage 3 3,088 511 2,000 0 0

4.3.2. Other Inputs and Assumptions

The revised modelling for this project uses updated parking costs provided by EPD in 2014.

Parking is paid in the City, Belconnen, Tuggeranong, Woden, Queanbeyan, Gungahlin Town Centre and the Parliamentary Triangle.


4.3.3. Peak Volume and V/C Assessment

A selection of midblock volumes has been extracted from the CSTM, and listed in Table 4.3 for comparison. The location of each of these midblock counts is shown in Figure 4.2.

Table 4.3: CSTM Midblock Counts

Location Road 2021 AM 2031 AM

Do Nothing MP Stage 1 Do Nothing MP Stage 2 MP Stage 3

1 Cotter Road (EB/WB) 1,660/560 1,940/770 1,690/620 1,960/900 1,970/930

2 Brickworks Road (NB/SB) N/A 150/130 N/A 260/250 310/290

3 Central Street (EB/WB) N/A N/A N/A 140/30 140/20

4 Dudley Street (EB/WB) 720/160 380/10 780/180 230/50 230/40

5 Novar Street (NB/SB) 180/150 90/100 190/170 70/80 60/70

6 Denison Street (EB/WB) 80/360 80/160 80/390 270/180 280/200

7 Kent Street (NB/SB) 360/690 270/420 370/730 300/460 320/470

8 Yarra Glen (NB/SB) 2,030/760 2,170/860 2,070/790 2,310/950 2,360/950

9 Adelaide Avenue (EB/WB) 3,520/1,510 3,450/1,500 3,560/1,600 3,490/1,640 3,510/1,640

Note: Traffic counts are rounded to the nearest 10 vehicles.

Figure 4.2: Strategic Transport Model Midblock Count Locations

The traffic demand on Cotter Road increases considerably between Existing and Do Nothing due to the duplication of Cotter Road to the west by 2016. In the CB+E Master Plan scenarios, there is a


further increase as the full diamond interchange provides better capacity for the eastbound traffic movement than the existing single lane ramp from Cotter Road to Adelaide Avenue.

In the Do Nothing scenarios, the on‐ramp from Cotter Road is over capacity. This, combined with the additional eastbound traffic on Cotter Road allowed by its duplication, results in a substantial proportion of the east‐west traffic diverting to Dudley Street (i.e. rat‐running), and accessing Adelaide Avenue via the on‐ramp from Novar Street. In the CB+E Master Plan scenarios, the Cotter Road – Denison Street connection provides a direct link for vehicles travelling between Cotter Road and Deakin. This, in conjunction with Quarry Ridge Road and the full diamond interchange connecting Cotter Road to Adelaide Avenue, relieves Dudley Street and the other roads within the CB+E development by providing more direct links for traffic that does not originate or terminate in the development.

The one‐hour peak traffic flow diagrams from the CSTM, from which the values in Table 4.3 were extracted, are shown in Figures 4.3 through 4.7. These diagrams illustrate the AM peak hour vehicle volumes (both enumerated, and as line thicknesses) and the congestion level in terms of the hourly Volume to Capacity ratio (V/C), across the entire network surrounding the CB+E development area. This is a measure of congestion and indicates that a road has reached its theoretical capacity once V/C equals or exceeds 1.

The congestion levels that are shown have been developed to give a general overview of the road network implications. The lines are colour coded according to their V/C. Green, blue and yellow colour bands indicate acceptable vehicle flow conditions and that the road is operating well within its capacity. Orange and red indicate that the demand on the road is approaching its capacity and is likely to exhibit unstable vehicle performance characteristics. Lines that are black indicate that the road is congested, which means the demand has exceeded the capacity. It should be noted that this is still at a strategic (i.e. high) level of assessment, so black links only indicate that there is a potential problem with the network that should be investigated further using more detailed methods such as micro‐simulation and intersection analysis.

When road links become orange, red or black, drivers will increasingly attempt to find alternative (i.e. faster) routes to avoid them. The travel time on any link in the model is a function of the V/C. The volume‐delay functions used in strategic transport modelling, which relate the travel time of vehicles to the congestion level, generally have the effect of doubling travel time when V/C = 1 compared to when V/C = 0. The travel time increases very steeply as V/C increases beyond this value. This models driver behaviour by making these routes less desirable, preventing the volumes from greatly exceeding the specified capacity of a road, since it results in rerouting of traffic. As a result, it also indicates where “rat‐running” might be expected to occur.


In 2021 AM Do Nothing, the traffic volumes on Cotter Road have grown substantially and both the Adelaide Avenue on‐ramp and Dudley Street are now over capacity. The additional traffic on Dudley Street is rat‐running traffic attempting to access Adelaide Avenue via the on‐ramp from Novar Street. It is worth noting that these two roads constrain the amount of traffic that can use Cotter Road.

Figure 4.3: 2021 AM Do Nothing Strategic Transport Model Output


In 2021 AM CB+E Master Plan (Stage 1), Brickworks Road and the Cotter Road – Adelaide Avenue/ Yarra Glen full diamond interchange provides additional options for Cotter Road traffic. Traffic heading to Yarralumla can use Brickworks Road while traffic heading to Deakin can directly access Denison Street from Cotter Road. Dudley Street still carries some rat‐running traffic but the congestion is greatly relieved. With the added connectivity, traffic between Cotter Road and North Yarralumla is also seen to be using the Brickworks Road – Denman Street – Woolls Street route as an alternative.

Figure 4.4: 2021 AM CB+E Master Plan (Stage 1) Strategic Transport Model Output


The situation in 2031 AM Do Nothing is much the same as in 2021 AM; Cotter Road volumes are constrained by the capacity of Dudley Street and the Adelaide Avenue on‐ramp, both of which are over capacity.

Figure 4.5: 2031 AM Do Nothing Strategic Transport Model Output


In 2031 AM CB+E Master Plan (Stage 2), Dudley Street has been replaced and the Cotter Road – Adelaide Avenue/Yarra Glen interchange, along with the CB+E internal road design, can be seen to mitigate any possible rat‐running through CB+E. There are modest increases in traffic on Cotter Road compared to 2021 AM. Cotter Road west of Brickworks Road is now over capacity, which suggests that this will be the limit of additional eastbound traffic into the area.



In 2031 AM CB+E Master Plan (Stage 3), the addition of Quarry Ridge Road, traffic between Cotter Road and North Yarralumla is now more likely to use this link than Woolls Street.



4.4. Micro‐Simulation Modelling

Traffic micro‐simulation was conducted to evaluate finer operational parameters that cannot be determined to a reasonable level of detail using a strategic transport model. Micro‐simulation allows the investigation and assessment of traffic impacts caused by potential land use changes in a given study area and analysis of potential problem areas identified in the results of the strategic transport modelling. Outputs produced by strategic transport modelling packages are macroscopic and are generally not considered to provide sufficient microscopic detail for analysing operational issues such as queued vehicles, weaving sections and intersection performance. For instance, a micro‐simulation model simulates the interaction and conflict between the vehicles in the network and the network itself, while a strategic transport model is based on empirical formulae linking travel time and cost to traffic volume and roadway capacity.

Detailed information on the impacts of small changes in the network can also be obtained by micro‐simulation, providing analysts and decision‐makers with insight in to the effectiveness of proposed intervention measures and network system improvements. It is thus a useful tool for comparing traffic operations between design alternatives that do not have large‐scale differences.

The Paramics network models are shown in Figures 4.8 through 4.11 for Existing/Do Nothing, CB+E Stage 1 (2021), CB+E Stage 2 (2031) and CB+E Stage 3 (2031), respectively.

Figure 4.8: 2014 Existing/Future Do Nothing Paramics Model


Figure 4.9: 2021 CB+E Stage 1 Paramics Model




4.4.1. OD Matrix Estimation and Model Calibration

The base model’s demand matrix was estimated using the manual intersection turning movement counts and midblock counts collected on Thursday 31 July 2014 and Saturday 2 August 2014 for the following intersections, also shown in Figure 4.12:

1. Cotter Road – Lady Denman Drive

2. Cotter Road – Dunrossil Drive

3. Cotter Road – Dudley Street

4. Novar Street – Kintore Crescent

5. Novar Street – Dudley Street/Adelaide Avenue on‐ramp

6. Kent Street – Adelaide Avenue off‐ramp

7. Kent Street – Denison Street

8. Adelaide Avenue at Kent Street bridge


Figure 4.12: Intersection and Midblock Count Locations for Estimation

Micro‐simulation demand estimation was performed using Paramics Estimator. This software uses an incremental method to attempt to generate an Origin‐Destination (OD) matrix that matches the provided turn, midblock and cordon count data. It runs a simulation of the model and records the traffic at each location for which traffic count data has been provided, comparing the simulated volumes to the provided real world counts to determine their accuracy. As it knows the origin and destination of each vehicle recorded at a count location, it can make incremental change to the contents of the OD matrix and repeat the process, eventually converging on a minimised average GEH statistic for all of the input data, in this case turning movement counts.

The GEH statistic, which is simply named after the transport planner who devised it (Geoffrey E. Havers), is an empirical formula that was adopted by the UK Highway Agency for use as an acceptance criterion for comparison and evaluation of modelled traffic volumes against real‐world traffic counts. It is used as a reference to measure the general accuracy of a transport model according to the following equation:

2(M − C )2 GEH = M + C

Where:

• M is the traffic volume estimated by the model; and

• C is the observed real‐world traffic count.

The ideal GEH‐based calibration criteria for micro‐simulation modelling according to the UK Highways Agency Design Manual for Roads and Bridges are shown in Table 4.4.


Table 4.4: Ideal GEH Calibration Thresholds

GEH Value Proportion

GEH < 5 ≥85%

GEH < 10 100%

Traffic input into Estimator was comprised of the following for each modelled network:

• The pattern matrix for the 2014 AM peak period estimation was extracted from the SMEC EMME 2011 AM strategic transport model of Canberra.

• Manual intersection counts were conducted by Austraffic Pty. Ltd.

The estimation was run iteratively until the average GEH was minimised.

Due to the absence of meaningful route choice in the model the All‐Or‐Nothing assignment method was used for estimation.

The resulting average GEH statistics achieved at the end of the demand estimation process are as shown in Table 4.5. The resulting GEH distribution is shown in Table 4.6 and the average for each intersection is shown in Table 4.7.

Table 4.5: Estimation GEH Results

Peak Period Average GEH

Weekday AM 1.11

Weekday PM 0.72

Weekend Midday 1.03

Table 4.6: GEH Statistics of the Base Micro‐Simulation Model Calibration

GEH Value AM PM Weekend

GEH < 5 100% 100% 98%

GEH < 10 100% 100% 100%


Table 4.7: Average GEH Statistics By Intersection

Intersection AM PM Weekend

Cotter Road – Lady Denman Drive 0.7 0.2 0.3

Cotter Road – Dunrossil Drive 0.9 1.0 0.9

Cotter Road – Dudley Street 1.2 0.6 0.8

Novar Street – Kintore Crescent 2.0 1.2 1.8

Novar Street – Dudley Street/Adelaide Avenue on‐ramp

Kent Street – Adelaide Avenue off‐ramp

0.8

1.0

0.3

0.8

0.3

1.8

Kent Street – Denison Street 0.6 0.3 0.2

Adelaide Avenue at Kent Street Bridge 0.7 0.3 0.4

4.4.2. Future Demand

The future scenario OD matrices were developed using the estimated 2014 OD matrices as a baseline, with growth rates extracted from the CSTM results. The process involves a number of steps:

1. Productions and attractions (trip ends) for each zone are extracted for the study area in each scenario and year using the CSTM.

2. A nominal 2014 CSTM baseline is calculated by interpolation between 2011 and 2016.

3. Growth rates from 2014 to 2021 and 2031 are calculated for the trip ends at each zone of this sub‐area OD matrix. These are then applied to the estimated 2014 OD matrix trip ends to derive future trip ends. This is done for each combination of scenario and peak period.

4. The resulting grown trip ends are balanced, so that the total productions and attractions are equal. This is necessary for the final step to converge.

5. The grown trip ends are then used to generate the future scenario OD trip matrices using the Fratar method. This is a process that alternately and iteratively scales the rows (productions) and columns (attractions) of the 2014 OD matrix to match the future scenario trip ends calculated earlier. This results in future scenario OD matrices containing the total number of trips expected from the calculated trip ends, with trip patterns resembling the estimated 2014 OD matrices.

The CSTM is calibrated to the AM peak period. For the purposes of calculating growth rates for the weekday PM peak period, the complete traffic assignment OD matrices generated by the AM peak model have been transposed and reduced by 10% before being re‐assigned to the network to generate nominal PM peak sub‐area models. While this cannot be expected to generate a reliable PM peak model in and of itself, the technique has been used only to calculate growth rates and is thus considered sufficient. Similarly, the weekend midday peak period growth has been calculated using the average of the AM and PM peak matrices, based on the assumption that the travel pattern throughout the weekend midday peak period is largely symmetrical.


4.4.3. Demand Profiles

The traffic volumes from the intersection turning movement counts were provided for 15 minute intervals. The weekday AM peak hour was identified as 08:00‐09:00, the weekday PM peak 17:00‐18:00 and the weekend midday peak 11:30‐12:30. The models each consist of a one‐hour warm‐up period followed by the one‐hour peak simulation period. The demand profiles are shown in Tables 5 through 4 for the AM, PM and Weekend peak periods respectively.

Table 4.8: AM Peak Traffic Demand Profile

Warm‐up Period AM Peak Period

Period Proportion Period Proportion

07:00 – 07:15 8% 08:00 – 08:15 23%

07:15 – 07:30 13% 08:15 – 08:30 24%

07:30 – 07:45 15% 08:30 – 08:45 26%

07:45 – 08:00 21% 08:45 – 09:00 27%

Total 57% Total 100%

Table 4.9: PM Peak Traffic Demand Profile

Warm‐up Period PM Peak Period


16:00 – 16:15 19% 17:00 – 17:15 27%

16:15 – 16:30 20% 17:15 – 17:30 27%

16:30 – 16:45 21% 17:30 – 17:45 24%

16:45 – 17:00 21% 17:45 – 18:00 22%


Table 4.10: Weekend Peak Traffic Demand Profile

Warm‐up Period Weekend Peak Period


10:30 – 10:45 23% 11:30 – 11:45 24%

10:45 – 11:00 22% 11:45 – 12:00 26%

11:00 – 11:15 23% 12:00 – 12:15 25%

11:15 – 11:30 23% 12:15 – 12:30 25%



4.4.4. Route Travel Time and Average Travel Speed

The Paramics Do Nothing models were used in the analysis of route travel times and average speeds, as these typically provide a more accurate depiction of operations than strategic transport models. Specific routes within the study area were selected and analysed to give an indication of traffic operational changes from the base year to the future planning horizons.

It is important to note that, while this is considered as the Do Nothing case for CB+E, the planned road network upgrades across the greater Canberra network for 2031 have been included in the modelling.

Major routes within the study area were chosen to determine vehicular flow parameters, particularly average speed and average route travel time. The following routes in the study area network were selected, shown in Figures 4.13 through 4.16:

1. Between Adelaide Avenue and Deakin Employment Area

2. Between Cotter Road and Adelaide Avenue

3. via Cotter Road – Adelaide Avenue ramps

4. via Cotter Road – Kent Street/Novar Street Ramps

5. Between Cotter Road and Deakin Employment Area

6. Between Yarra Glen and Adelaide Avenue

Figure 4.13: Paramics Performance Testing Routes (Do Nothing)


Figure 4.14: Paramics Performance Testing Routes (CB+E Master Plan Stage 1)




The route travel time results are shown in Tables 4.11, 4.12 and 4.13 respectively for the AM, PM and weekend peak periods.

The additional of signalised intersection control along Kent and Novar Streets has an impact on the travel time for routes 1 and 2b, both of which use some or all of these intersections.

• Route 1: Denison Street to Adelaide Avenue (via Kent and Novar Streets) In conjunction with increased demand on Denison Street as a result of the Cotter Road extension, the additional signals at Cotter Road – Denison Street and the signalisation of three intersections on Kent and Novar Streets result in an increase in travel time on this route in both directions. The increase is greater in AM than PM.

• Route 2a: Cotter Road to Adelaide Avenue (via the Interchange) In the eastbound direction there is a slight increase in travel time when comparing 2021 Do Nothing to 2021 CB+E Stage 1 as a result of the additional signals on the route. In 2031 CB+E Stage 2 however there is a further increase, due to additional congestion on Adelaide Avenue eastbound affecting the performance of the eastbound on‐ramps. In CB+E Stage 2 and Stage 3, the Adelaide Avenue Bus Stop is assumed to be constructed, which also assumes that the existing T2 lane is converted back to a Bus Only lane. The impact assessment of this change on the Adelaide Avenue/Yarra Glen corridor and the surrounding network (which extends outside the CB+E study area) is beyond the scope of this report and should be investigated in a separate study.

• Route 2b: Cotter Road to Adelaide Avenue (via Dudley Street) This route exhibits similar behaviour to Route 2a, with the eastbound performance in CB+E Stage 2 and Stage 3 performance being affected by the Adelaide Avenue Bus Stop. In the


CB+E Master Plan options, the volume on this route is substantially reduced compared to Do Nothing due to the presence of the new interchange.

• Route 3: Cotter Road to Denison Street As a result of the extension of Cotter Road to Denison Street in the CB+E Master Plan, this route is shortened by 800 m, or one third of the total distance within the relevant models. The average speed however decreases in both directions as a result of the increase in demand on Denison Street and Cotter Road and the additional signalised intersections along Cotter Road. In the westbound direction, the speed reduction due to increased demand and additional signals is similar in scale to the reduction in travel distance, so that the overall travel time remains similar.

• Route 4: Yarra Glen to Adelaide Avenue In the AM peak period, there is an increase in travel time in the eastbound direction of about half a minute in CB+E Stage 2 and a minute in Stage 3 due to the assumed conversion of the T2 lane to a Bus Only lane. Otherwise, there is very little difference in travel times in this route between Do Nothing and CB+E Master Plan.

Table 4.11: Comparison of AM Peak Average Speed and Travel Time on Selected Routes

Performance Measure

Scenario

1: Denison‐Adelaide

2a: Cotter‐Adelaide via Interchange

2b: Cotter‐Adelaide via Dudley St

3: Cotter‐Denison

4: Yarra Glen‐Adelaide

EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB

Route Length [m]

2014 Existing 1,210 1,180 2,030 2,250 2,100 2,320 2,420 2,400 1,840 1,780

2021 Do Nothing

2031 Do Nothing

2021 CB+E Stage 1

2031 CB+E Stage 2

2031 CB+E Stage 3

1,210

1,210

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

2,030

2,030

2,080

2,080

2,080

2,250

2,250

2,280

2,280

2,280

2,100

2,100

2,120

2,360

2,360

2,320

2,320

2,340

2,560

2,560

2,420

2,420

1,620

1,620

1,620

2,400

2,400

1,610

1,610

1,610

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,780

1,780

1,780

1,780

1,780

Average Speed [km/h]

2014 Existing 57.2 55.8 51.9 80.7 46.9 55.0 45.4 55.7 73.6 85.1

2021 Do Nothing 55.9 48.4 49.4 80.9 35.7 50.7 35.1 55.6 75.3 84.7

2031 Do Nothing 57.0 50.5 48.8 80.1 43.4 52.2 41.5 55.8 73.6 84.2

2021 CB+E Stage 1 29.2 24.4 36.3 37.3 32.9 33.7 26.5 38.0 76.8 84.5

2031 CB+E Stage 2 15.0 24.4 19.2 36.0 14.7 21.0 22.8 34.9 52.2 81.4

2031 CB+E Stage 3 11.2 18.9 14.4 33.7 13.7 15.4 17.0 32.3 41.3 74.8

Average Travel Time [min:sec]

2014 Existing 1:16 1:16 2:21 1:40 2:41 2:32 3:12 2:35 1:30 1:15

2021 Do Nothing 1:18 1:28 2:28 1:40 3:31 2:45 4:08 2:36 1:28 1:16

2031 Do Nothing 1:16 1:24 2:30 1:41 2:54 2:40 3:30 2:35 1:30 1:16

2021 CB+E Stage 1 2:26 2:54 3:22 3:40 3:52 4:10 3:39 2:32 1:26 1:16

2031 CB+E Stage 2 4:44 2:54 6:30 3:48 9:38 7:19 4:15 2:46 2:07 1:19

2031 CB+E Stage 3 6:20 3:44 8:40 4:03 10:19 9:56 5:41 2:59 2:41 1:26


Table 4.12: Comparison of PM Peak Average Speed and Travel Time on Selected Routes

Performance Measure

Scenario




3: Cotter‐Denison



Route Length [m]

2014 Existing 1,210 1,180 2,030 2,250 2,100 2,320 2,420 2,400 1,840 1,780

2021 Do Nothing

2031 Do Nothing

2021 CB+E Stage 1

2031 CB+E Stage 2

2031 CB+E Stage 3

1,210

1,210

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

2,030

2,030

2,080

2,080

2,080

2,250

2,250

2,280

2,280

2,280

2,100

2,100

2,120

2,360

2,360

2,320

2,320

2,340

2,560

2,560

2,420

2,420

1,620

1,620

1,620

2,400

2,400

1,610

1,610

1,610

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,780

1,780

1,780

1,780

1,780


2014 Existing 56.4 59.4 58.2 76.1 54.3 58.3 52.3 57.3 86.1 75.3

2021 Do Nothing 51.7 59.2 59.3 75.6 54.3 54.8 52.2 53.1 85.6 77.7

2031 Do Nothing 49.1 58.9 57.5 75.9 53.5 55.0 51.3 51.9 85.1 76.9

2021 CB+E Stage 1 34.5 31.4 42.8 40.8 34.1 26.5 29.1 40.1 85.3 68.8

2031 CB+E Stage 2 37.5 25.7 47.2 40.2 35.3 31.0 31.5 38.6 83.6 70.1

2031 CB+E Stage 3 34.5 28.5 46.6 40.6 35.2 34.8 30.0 37.4 83.4 70.4


2014 Existing 1:17 1:11 2:06 1:46 2:19 2:24 2:46 2:31 1:17 1:25

2021 Do Nothing 1:24 1:12 2:03 1:47 2:19 2:33 2:47 2:43 1:17 1:22

2031 Do Nothing 1:29 1:12 2:07 1:47 2:21 2:32 2:49 2:47 1:18 1:23

2021 CB+E Stage 1 2:04 2:15 2:51 3:21 3:44 5:18 3:20 2:24 1:18 1:33

2031 CB+E Stage 2 1:54 2:45 2:39 3:24 4:00 4:57 3:05 2:30 1:19 1:31

2031 CB+E Stage 3 2:04 2:29 2:41 3:22 4:01 4:25 3:14 2:35 1:19 1:31


Table 4.13: Comparison of Weekend Peak Average Speed and Travel Time on Selected Routes

Performance Measure

Scenario




3: Cotter‐Denison



Route Length [m]

2014 Existing 1,210 1,180 2,030 2,250 2,100 2,320 2,420 2,400 1,840 1,780

2021 Do Nothing

2031 Do Nothing

2021 CB+E Stage 1

2031 CB+E Stage 2

2031 CB+E Stage 3

1,210

1,210

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

1,180

2,030

2,030

2,080

2,080

2,080

2,250

2,250

2,280

2,280

2,280

2,100

2,100

2,120

2,360

2,360

2,320

2,320

2,340

2,560

2,560

2,420

2,420

1,620

1,620

1,620

2,400

2,400

1,610

1,610

1,610

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,840

1,780

1,780

1,780

1,780

1,780


2014 Existing 60.3 67.0 65.5 81.5 60.7 56.9 59.1 56.1 86.8 85.6

2021 Do Nothing 60.3 66.7 65.5 81.8 60.5 56.6 58.7 55.5 86.9 86.5

2031 Do Nothing 60.1 65.7 65.0 82.1 60.1 57.4 58.2 56.3 86.4 86.3

2021 CB+E Stage 1 41.2 42.4 51.2 52.6 39.2 37.1 36.0 38.5 86.8 86.2

2031 CB+E Stage 2 39.8 42.6 51.8 59.5 38.5 41.8 37.0 42.9 85.1 86.6

2031 CB+E Stage 3 40.2 40.8 51.5 59.0 38.5 41.2 35.9 43.2 85.3 86.2


2014 Existing 1:12 1:03 1:52 1:39 2:04 2:27 2:27 2:34 1:16 1:15

2021 Do Nothing 1:12 1:03 1:52 1:39 2:05 2:28 2:28 2:36 1:16 1:14

2031 Do Nothing 1:13 1:04 1:52 1:39 2:05 2:26 2:30 2:34 1:17 1:14

2021 CB+E Stage 1 1:44 1:40 2:23 2:36 3:15 3:47 2:42 2:30 1:16 1:14

2031 CB+E Stage 2 1:47 1:40 2:24 2:18 3:41 3:40 2:37 2:15 1:18 1:14

2031 CB+E Stage 3 1:46 1:44 2:25 2:19 3:41 3:43 2:42 2:14 1:18 1:14


figure 3.6:cotter road – adelaide avenue/yarra glen full diamond...

Documents