Kingscliff Public School Redevelopment

EPA comments attached

BCD comments as per attachment.

1. Support
I support the major project.
2. Reasons for Support
The reasons for support are, I and my family have been local residents on Kingcliff “hill” for over 20 years and have long recognized the need to increase the student capacity for the growing numbers of new families and school students in the Kingscliff area. Additionally, the replacement of the longstanding temporary classrooms, which have been something of a local embarrassment and eyesore for many years, is welcomed.
COMMENTS FOLLOW
3. Student Safety and Traffic Management – Key Issue
I have read and note the content of the Traffic and Transport Impact Statement (the TTIS). Consistent with the significant increase in student numbers and school amenities - I consider that the safety, health and welfare of the students, parents, child carers, visitors to the school, and the local surrounding residents should be regarded as a, if not “the”, paramount planning consideration. The TTIS in my view is deficient in that there is no indication that it considered all more holistic alternatives/solutions.
Accordingly, I strongly believe the Project and TISS team must undertake a more sympathetic and wider view of alternatives to the traffic problems in the vicinity of the school. I would withdraw my support for the project in the absence of a fuller more exhaustive re-consideration and analysis of traffic issues/concerns associated with the Project.
4. One-way traffic corridor needed on Sutherland Street in front of school
It is clear that the safety and health risks to the school and its community would be significantly mitigated and reduced by converting the portion of Sutherland Street bordering the East side of the School into a one way thoroughfare with additional traffic calming devices in the vicinity of the school.
My specific proposal and suggestion - which is supported by all local parents and residents that I have communicated with – is:
1. To convert the section of Sutherland Street between the Moss Street intersection and the Seaview Street intersection (roundabout) into a one-way thoroughfare permitting traffic to travel from South to North only, in front of school;
2. To complete the proposal, and make it workable, it appears it would be necessary to:
a. continue the existing single lane, one way traffic along Marine Parade Town Shopping Center, past the Cudgen Surf Club and the remainder of the Kingscliff shops and restaurants, to the beginning of Marine Pde and the intersection with Moss Street; and
b. convert Moss Street to one way (East to West) to the intersection with Sutherland Street.
3. This practical and relatively simple proposal offers the following significant improvements and advantages to the school and wider Kingscliff community:
4. It would be non-controversial as it involves only a very small portion of Sutherland Street and is unlikely to create any significant inconvenience or disruption to existing traffic or directly affected residents in Kingscliff. Any transitional disruption would be temporary and quickly adjusted to residents and visitors, and the short period of inconvenience is far outweighed by the long-term significant gains in safety, noise abatement, and other health benefits.
5. It will eliminate the often loud traffic noise generated by heavy traffic required to get up the Kingscliff hill (vehicles have to accelerate in lower gear up the Sutherland Street hill when traveling North to South). The present noise levels interfere with the concentration of students and teachers during classes.
6. On completion, the carbon footprint from exhaust emissions next to the school will be significantly reduced, improving the health and welfare of our children, particularly over the long period of years normally spent at the school by students.
7. It will improve the pick-up and drop-off of students at the beginning and end of each day and significantly mitigate the risks of accidents and congestion at those times.
8. It will reduce the safety risk to children, parents, residents and other persons needing to cross Sutherland Street ear the school.
9. It would be a consistent and fully compatible completion/extension of the existing very successful (and welcomed) one-way traffic flow arrangements along the Marine Pd shopping strip.
10. It will also significantly reduce the traffic accident risks at the roundabout at the intersection of Sutherland and Seaview Street.
11. It will also result in the desirable diversion of commercial and other traffic (incl. HGV’s) to other access routes around Kingscliff and away from the school – the traffic on Sutherland street would likely be more than halved.
12. Overall it will deliver a safer and smoother circuit and flow of traffic in the center of Kingscliff township while greatly improving the well-being, welfare and health of students, teachers, staff, residents and visitors to Kingscliff.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Kind regards
Phil Reynolds

Bitzios TRAFFIC & PARKING REPORT - COMMENTS

1. The “stakeholders” identified in the report do not include the people who actually live on the roads abutting the school and share their usage of the frontage with the school. Surely they are stakeholders. Why were they excluded from consultation?
2. Deficiency #D9. The report states “Pedestrian entrances are located on Orient Street and Sutherland Street. There are missing connections and crossing facilities to these accesses which are needed to encourage active transport participation and improve safety.”
But the report then argues that this presently dangerous “kiss’n’drop” practice on the east side of Sutherland St can be eliminated by removing the formal facility on the west side and deliberately not providing any pedestrian safety refuge for parents & children crossing Sutherland St to the eastern gate to the school. This makes no sense at all. Firstly, the statement that “This (new western) path may also encourage drop-off / pick-up on the west side of Sutherland Street (page 22)” is inconsistent with the proposed removal of the “kiss’n’drop” zone on the west side. Parents travelling south will continue this convenient drop-off practice as they have for years, despite any signage changes.
Secondly school children from dwellings fronting Sutherland St east, (between Palmer & Lane Hungerford Lane) must still cross Sutherland St to get to the eastern school gate.
A pedestrian refuge is needed opposite the new eastern gate.
3. The report is vague on necessary upgrades to footpaths in the school proximity. Irrespective of their design and funding being done by others, it should recommend appropriate measures it thinks are commensurate with the activity generated by the proposed school. That is its brief.
4. The Report ignores the existence of Hungerford Lane as a key part of the movement network surrounding the school. U-turns are mostly prohibited by the barrier lines in Sutherland St., so the Lane operates as half of a useful “drop-off” loop for parents approaching from the north or leaving for the north, as they can “kiss’n’drop” or collect their children and avoid an illegal U-turn on a busy road.
Hungerford Lane is also a preferred alternative route for through-cyclists as it is a gentler grade and much safer than Sutherland St which has squeeze points for bikes, no marked bike lanes, and very heavy traffic. The report refers to these high traffic volumes as a “transport barrier.”
Hungerford La should be considered part of the integrated movement network.
5. On-street parking east-side Sutherland St, south of #44 is achieved by parking on the public footpath or encroaching on the marked through-lane. Both these practices are illegal & dangerous to students & their transport providers. The road marking should be shifted west to create a legal parking lane or the practice formally prohibited.
6. Speeding remains an issue. The 40kph school zone needs reinforcement signage on the Palmer Lane bend as traffic speeds often increase there, perhaps due to confusion with the end of the 40kph Catholic school zone which adjoins it. Provision of the deleted #D9 pedestrian refuge in Sutherland St would also assist with traffic calming in this street.

Pedestrian Refuge Islands on Sutherland St:- I read that there won't be a safety crossing opposite the school gate on Sutherland St. as there is already a crossing closer to Moss St.
However, I live opposite the school and know that many parents drop/collect their children on the eastern side of Sutherland St. They will continue to do this, despite the main entrance being directed to Orient St. I know the Tweed Shire Council is constructing a new footpath on the eastern side of Sutherland St designed to encourage families to walk/ride safely to this Sutherland St 2nd major entrance gate. However there will be no safe crossing that leads directly from eastern to western side of Sutherland St to the gate. Not a safe situation.
It is inferred parents wont continue to drop off/collect children on the eastern side of Sutherland St once the school renovation is complete. They will continue to do this as the design provides an entrance gate on Sutherland St; it's what they have done for years and it is a direct drop off/collection point for parents heading north or south to work, without getting involved with the traffic in Orient St. and surrounding streets.

Traffic Studies:- I totally challenge the SIDRA results of the Traffic studies with regard to delays and queue lengths. As a resident who lives opposite the school in Sutherland St, one knows not to be out in one's car at school start and finish times as one will be involved in long queues in the proximity of the school. Kingscliff PS traffic interacts with the Catholic School traffic as well as the High School.
I challenge the claim there will be no significant growth in Sutherland St traffic in the next 10 years. In the 17 years I have lived here the traffic has increased dramatically and the area is still growing to the south. Tourist traffic has grown significantly in recent years and will continue to grow exponentially. The new Hospital will bring with it a very significant increase in traffic. Local Traffic routes will change to avoid Cudgen Road and the Tweed Coast Rd intersection which even now before it's built the traffic is becoming overwhelming at 3pm - diversion past the Primary school and down the coast road will increase.
None of these effects seem to have been taken into account by the traffic study.

Please find attached, the TfNSW Response to SSD 8378620 (Kingscliff Public School redevelopment).

Greetings,
Please be advised, to avoid duplicating TfNSW submissions, the collective TfNSW Response will be uploaded by Roads and Maritime Services Account in the Portal. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Robert Rutledge, Transport Planning Manager, TfNSW

HNSW ACH advice attached.

Please see Council's comments / request for further information as attached.