Woolworths Double Bay Parking; Double Bay Village; Double Bay Residents
HELP KEEP OUR STREETS SAFE
as DOUBLE BAY
GROWS
Questions & Answers
1
Are the traffic numbers accurate?
All the data reported on this site has been measured by independent engineers on a fee-for-service basis. The traffic flows are recorded on video over a defined time period and then software is used to establish the count and direction. This permits Absolute and Relative data sets to be reported.
Absolute data compares the change between two real numbers (e.g. Anderson Street carried 54 cars per hour in April 2015 and it carried 93 cars per hour in December 2009, and this is an absolute reduction of 39 cars per hour).
Relative data compares the change in percentage terms (e.g. Anderson Street traffic flows have fallen by 42% relative to 2009 measurements). This is calculated as (54-93)/93 x 100.
This website reports the average traffic stats from 2015 onwards.
Addressing your concerns
Since the website launch on 10 March 2016 there have been a number of recurring questions and themes raised by visitors that are addressed on this page.
Additional comments were also made by individuals in the closed petition and these can be accessed here.
3
Why isn't Kiaora Lane measured?
Kiaora Lane was a one-way street that used to service the pre-development car park entrance traffic, which then exited via Anderson Street (93 vehicles per hour), Patterson Street (32 vehicles per hour) and the eastern end of Kiaora Lane (81 vehicles per hour). These intersection flow numbers were recorded by Halcrow in 2009. All this traffic then made its way into Manning Road and Kiaora Road.
Kiaora Lane is now a two-way street and the majority of it is a shared zone with pedestrians. It also provides heavy vehicle access for the Dan Murphy loading dock and parking access for a number of businesses on New South Head Road.
However, since it no longer provides access for Woolworths Double Bay parking there is no plan to measure traffic flows on it.
2
Is this an initiative of the Double Bay Action Group?
This is a separate initiative that is only providing traffic data and reports, and does not rely on member subscriptions or public money.
The Double Bay action group (correctly titled the Double Bay Residents Association Inc.) is an incorporated association (number Y0094440) under the Associations Incorporation Act 2009 and is regulated by NSW Fair Trading. It relies on a Committee to manage its affairs and this has traditionally been made up of 6 residents from Court Road and Pine Hill Avenue.
Because the Association is dealing with public money, members of the Committee are legally required to declare any interest in a matter that conflicts with their ability to perform their duties. For example, Committee members living on Court Road are legally required to declare their conflict of interest when making decisions regarding traffic impacts on Court Road, such as the restrictions placed on the Anderson Street entrance. This requirement is in place to help ensure that public money is not used to benefit individual Committee members. Contemporary practice is that abstained votes for reasons of conflict are formally recorded in Committee minutes.
The Association is also not required to produce or submit audited financial statements. Instead they submit a summary of their financial affairs at their AGM and these are then lodged with the Director-General NSW Fair Trading. To obtain the financial information on any association you make a request to registryinquiries@finance.nsw.gov.au and the records show that in the financial year to 31 December 2014 the Association Y0094440 appears to have received $4,605 in subscriptions from 28 residents, and in the 2013 financial year it appears to have received $4,505 in subscriptions from 26 residents. Approximately $9,000 was spent to lobby Woollahra Council and the Joint Regional Planning Panel in the same period.
4
Anderson Street is too narrow for heavy traffic!
The following table provides width measurements for all affected streets, intersection flows and their respective calming measures for heavy traffic.
From this data, the statement "Anderson Street is too narrow for heavy traffic" is highly unlikely to be true as Patterson Street is the same width as Anderson Street (7.1 metres) and was carrying 433 vehicles per hour on completion (Jun 2016).
Both Anderson Street and Patterson Street are similar in that they are both 2-way residential streets providing access to flats and houses, but the demands placed on Patterson Street are greater. Anderson Street only provides access to 2 blocks of flats whereas Patterson Street provides access to 2 blocks of flats and 4 houses.
5
Did Anderson Street really carry 39% of pre-development car park traffic?
It actually carried 45% of all car park EXIT traffic, being 93 vehicles per hour. It shared this EXIT role with Kiaora Lane (39% or 81 vehicles per hour) and Patterson Street (16% or 32 vehicles per hour).
All pre-development ENTRANCE traffic went via the Manning Road & Kiaora Lane intersection, but Kiaora Lane no longer provides a car park access. Some additional traffic (31 vehicles per hour) also entered Patterson Street off Manning Road to either use the extensive off-street parking or access the houses and flats, and this additional traffic has been added to the Patterson Street profile to show the total pre-development flow as 63 vehicles per hour.
Hence, the pre-development figures reported are:
-
Anderson Street - 93 vehicles per hour (39%)
-
Kiaora Road - 81 vehicles per hour (34%)
-
Patterson Street - 63 vehicles per hour (27%)
6
What about the congestion inside the car park?
This website relies on RMS benchmarks for safety and amenity on public roads which are not applicable to private car parks. Hence, the operation of the car park and its internal congestion is not measured on this website.
If you are concerned about how the car park operates internally then please contact Woollahra Council.
7
How was the Kiaora Road second entrance lane removed?
Woollahra Council’s Condition C.1(n) for the Construction Certificate required changes to the Kiaora Road entrance to accommodate 2 entrance lanes as well as 2 exit lanes. This was endorsed by the JRPP on 27 June 2012. The following illustration provides an interpretation of the requirement.
Part of Council’s expert consideration was that:
..... queued vehicles on the footpath, waiting to enter the proposed car park, are undesirable because it creates a significant hazard for the numerous pedestrians who will be walking in this busy retail area. Further, if it becomes known that the Kiaora Road entrance experiences delays, this may result in motorists utilising other entrances which will have unknown traffic impacts on the surrounding streets. Based on the above analysis, it is felt that the Kiaora Road entrance is inadequate to cater to the volume of vehicles which are anticipated to utilise this entrance. Modifications to this entrance should be made such that there are two boom gate entrances. It is proposed that there would still be one vehicular entrance to the car park off Kiaora Road; however it would split into two lanes within the site, with two boom gates.
However, on 3 December 2012 Woollahra Council approved a Section 96 to change this condition and instead imposed condition C.1(o) and I.33 that permitted a single entrance lane with a boom gate and ticketing machine to accommodate 600 vehicles per hour.
Key questions remain, such as:
-
The removal of the second entrance lane was justified on the basis that "the applicant is now suggesting that there may be technology that allows a service rate of 600 vehicles per hour". How did Council assess this suggestion and what were the conclusions?
-
Does the current "pay on foot" ticketing system accommodate 600 vehicles per hour?
8
Why is the Anderson Street entrance closed?
Anderson Street feeds into Court Road, and Court Road is the home of the President, Vice-President and Secretary of the Double Bay Residents Association (DBRA).
The public records show that the restriction placed on Anderson Street, and therefore Court Road, was initiated by 3 households including the President and Secretary of the Association. This was then endorsed by the DBRA Committee and diverts more than 100 vehicles per hour away from Court Road and into Patterson Street.
The President’s response to concerns raised about the growing safety implications caused by a restricted Anderson Street access were (1 March 2015):
I see that you have suggested that the Anderson Street exit become an entrance. However, DBRA strongly opposed this very measure when we appeared before the JRPP. The reasons were that, historically, it had always been an exit only, and for good reason. Whereas the entrance to Patterson Street is via a sub arterial road (Manning), the entrance to Anderson Street is via a small residential street (Court Road). Were there to be an Anderson Street entrance, all traffic flowing down Manning Road from the Bondi Junction direction would turn into Court Road and not Patterson, causing enormous problems for every Court Road resident.
The technical rationale for the DBRA restrictions are analysed in the table below (vph = vehicles per hour):
Philip Mason
President, Double Bay Residents' Association
6 Court Road
The technical rationale for the DBRA restrictions on Court Road and Anderson Street appears fundamentally flawed.
Without further explanation one can be forgiven for concluding that the restrictions are merely about DBRA Committee members in Court Road believing they are more entitled to a quiet life than others, even at the expense of their neighbour's safety.
Key questions remain, such as:
-
How were the increased safety risks in Patterson Street assessed by the DBRA?
-
How did the DBRA reconcile the risk of increased Patterson Street congestion and incidents affecting local business owners, shoppers, residents and visitors?
-
Was there any consultation by the DBRA with the residents in and around Patterson Street?
-
Was there any representation from Patterson Street residents on the DBRA Committee when key decisions were being made?
-
How were the conflicts of interest managed by the Court Road Committee members when they were voting for outcomes that delivered them a personal benefit, as is required under the Associations Incorporation Act 2009?
-
Did Woollahra Council undertake community consultation or just assume that the DBRA had undertaken consultation with the Patterson Street residents?
-
How did Woollahra Council verify that the DBRA's request was endorsed by the relevant property owners, as they do for applications and requests to Council from other body corporates?
Some of these concerns appear in community submissions to Council for neighbouring developments.
9
Who were the Committee members that supported the diversion of Court Road traffic onto Patterson Street residents?
The DBRA President’s goal to divert traffic away from Court Road and into Patterson Street was confirmed on 1 March 2015.
The use of town planning consultant, Tony Moody of Moody & Doyle, to advise the DBRA Committee occurred in 2012. The DBRA accounts show that the cost was $7,847 and required a personal loan from the President of $3,000.
At this time, it would appear that the 6 Committee members were:
-
Philip Mason (home on Court Road)
-
Bruce Forster (home on Court Road)
-
Michele Wearn (home on Court Road)
-
Anthony Tregonning
-
Tony Gregory
-
Mary Fisher
It is not known which of these Committee members supported the diversion of traffic away from Court Road and into Patterson Street, but 3 of the 6 Committee members resided in Court Road.
10
How can a Resident's Association favour one part of the community at the expense of another part of the community?
The Associations Incorporation Act 2009, which is the legislation governing the operation of the DBRA, requires that any conflicts of interest are disclosed by Committee members.
Section 31 states:
-
If -
-
a committee member has a direct or indirect interest in a matter being considered or about to be considered at a meeting, and
-
the interest appears to raise a conflict with the proper performance of the committee member’s duties in relation to the consideration of the matter,
-
the committee member must, as soon as possible after the relevant facts have come to the committee member’s knowledge, disclose the nature of the interest at a committee meeting.
Section 33 also states:
A committee member of an association who uses his or her position as a committee member dishonestly with the intention of directly or indirectly ..... gaining an advantage for himself or herself or for any other person ….. is guilty of an offence.
Committee members living on Court Road would appear to have gained an advantage from their position as Court Road (Anderson Street) is now only servicing 3% of the car park traffic when it used to service 39% of the car park traffic. In contrast, Patterson Street is now servicing 47% of the car park traffic when it used to service 27% of the car park traffic. The DBRA President’s goal to divert traffic away from Court Road and into Patterson Street was confirmed on 1 March 2015. This advantage was achieved with the use of community funds to engage Moody & Doyle to lobby for development restrictions, including closure of the Court Road (Anderson Street) access.
However, the DBRA committee meetings around this time did not include an agenda item for disclosure of interests. Likewise, the minutes of DBRA meetings around this time did not include any disclosure of interests.
If the disclosure of interests was not on the agenda of committee meetings then any direct interest or advantage to Court Road committee members, in diverting new traffic from the Kiaora Lands development onto other parts of the community, was unlikely to have been formally considered.