Browse Forums General Discussion Re: Council asking for cars to exist the garage forwards 3Nov 14, 2012 1:12 am 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Council asking for cars to exist the garage forwards 6Nov 14, 2012 6:20 pm Wow thanks you seem to know a lot. But shouldn't the architect know or do all this? I have no idea why we have the visitor space, i will ask the architect. The garages are setback about 2m from the driveway. Yer they have also asked this, but I have shortened it a bit: - 2x2.5msight splays in acc with the Australian Std - relocate crossover outside the prohibited zone on the continuous side of the t-intersection in acc Australian Std - increase garage height clearance to 2.2m in acc with Australian Std - car park layout to comply with clause 52.06 Re: Council asking for cars to exist the garage forwards 7Nov 15, 2012 10:27 am Architects will tend to know some of the basic components of car park design; however, Traffic Engineering is a very specialised field and it would be unreasonable to expect that an architect would know all the requirements. I do a lot of work for tight sites such as yours where say you are trying to fit several dwelling on a lot that was only intended for one dwelling. It is best to get a Traffic Engineer in during the early design stage as it could save you costs in the long run (i.e. layout redesign fees, land holding costs as Council may take a while to respond especially if you have to submit several versions of the plans etc) and maybe even save you some stress too as developing can be a nervous process at least the first time around. - The sight triangles are in noted in Figure 3.3 of AS/NZS 2890.1:2004, and with a one lane driveway you would notice that they would be required on both sides. The current version of Clause 52.06 also refers to sight splays on Page 8 as follows: "Have a corner splay or area at least 50 per cent clear of visual obstructions extending at least 2 metres along the frontage road from the edge of an exit lane and 2.5 metres along the exit lane from the frontage, to provide a clear view of pedestrians on the footpath of the frontage road. The area clear of visual obstructions may include an adjacent entry or exit lane where more than one lane is provided." Some Councils may accept other design solutions if a sight triangle cannot be provided; however, depending on the driveway design you may be able to stagger the driveway on entry to meet the above, then taper it back in. - I am not sure of your layout; however, going by Council comments you are located opposite a T-intersection. The prohibited zone is shown in Figure 3.1 of AS/NZS 2890.1:2004. When Council mentions the continuous side, I am assuming they mean the area noted as Y-Y on the above mentioned diagram. In does say under note 1 of that figure that 'domestic driveways are excluded......of the the kerb section marked Y-Y'. Domestic property is defined on page 7 of AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 as 'a property comprising three or less domestic units'. My understanding is that your property is only three dwellings, so this may not necessarily apply to your site. - While AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 does currently note 2.2m on page 48, the recently revised Clause 52.06 notes the following on page 8: 'Provide at least 2.1 metres headroom beneath overhead obstructions, calculated for a vehicle with a wheel base of 2.8 metres.' The wheel base is only relevant to sag gradients; however, if you have a flat entry and you have provided 2.1m clearance then you may not need an increased height unless you are designing specifically for disabled spaces (note disabled spaces have there own separate standard AS/NZS 2890.6:2009 with increased height requirements that differ to AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 and Clause 52.06). - From what you have told me, it doesn't look like you can strictly meet the dimensional requirement of 52.06 given your aisle width; however, this is where a computer turning simulation is useful in order to convince Council I hope the above has been useful to you. Cheers Re: Council asking for cars to exist the garage forwards 8Nov 15, 2012 9:15 pm Thank you Zav My architect has given me quotes from two other Traffic Engineers and I just nearly had a heart attack. I noticed you profile website is www.zavtraffic.com.au and you are located in Kew Can I contact you via that? Also, before we decide on a traffic engineer, my husband and I would like to talk to you in person and discuss our options. Can we come into your office to discuss our plans? Re: Council asking for cars to exist the garage forwards 9Nov 17, 2012 7:36 am That is correct. Prices for traffic engineers can vary, so it is a good idea to get a few quotes. Also, always look at what you are getting for a like to like comparison. You are most welcome to come in for a chat. cheers Thanks again for this information. If you do hear anything different, would be great to know 4 8286 Even if it's not being sub-divided and you want to keep it as Torrens title, you will still need to talk to a town planner or Council themselves, to see if they will allow… 1 11116 We've had the offer of a short term tenant whilst waiting for CDC/DA home approval and demolition for our knock down rebuild. It would achieve a pretty low rent as it's… 0 13796 |