Is McDonald's Australia trying to hoodwink Clarence Valley Council?

Historical image of Treelands Drive and environs circa 2005
Click on image to enlarge

Eight (8) school buses use Treelands Drive, Yamba in the morning and three (3) school buses use Treelands Drive in the afternoon on school days.
Twelve (12) ordinary buses on the Yamba to Grafton and Return route move along Treelands Drive each weekday starting at around 7.15 am and ending at approximately 6.20pm.
On weekends and most public holidays these ordinary buses travel up and down Treelands Drive eight (8) times in total.
[Figures based on published timetable and telephone conversation with Busways,6 April 2010]

So there is a grand total of twenty-three (23) bus movements in Treelands Drive each Monday through to Friday in any normal week.

Evidently this road is generally thought to be the slowest section of the Yamba township bus route.

Why am I bothering to tell Clarence Valley residents something they all know or could find out with a single phone call to the Busways Yamba office?

Because apparently this simple piece of information was beyond the capabilities of McDonald's Australia when it presented a "Traffic Impact Assessment" to Clarence Valley Council, as part of its development application for a 24 hour eat-in and drive through fast food outlet in Treelands Drive.

This is what McDonald's asserts: "There is a bus shelter across Treelands Drive from the site with a posted timetable indicating Hail and Ride services, although it is unclear how the bus routes through the vicinity from Yamba Road." [McDonalds Australia Pty Ltd,Report for Proposed McDonalds Restaurant at 7 Treelands Drive Yamba, Traffic Impact Assessment, March 2010,p.11]

One would have thought that a timetable giving times for buses picking up and putting down "opp Bi-Lo" would have given McDonald's some hint - just as a sensible person would have expected that this large multinational would have thought to add school bus movements into the traffic mix.

But wait, there's more! McDonald's Australia thinks it is perfectly acceptable to expect that traffic flow (along Treelands Drive onto Yamba Road or Gumnut Road, up and down Osprey Drive, or along Gumnut through to The Halyard and down Shores Drive to Yamba Road) will go swimmingly, even with its own averaged prediction of anywhere between 180-230 extra vehicles per hour with an average maximum of 340 extra vehicles per hour in each direction along Treelands Drive. [ibid p.17]

How do we know all will be well? Why because McDonald's is using a 'guesstimate' (apparently based on one site visit) for how well the intersections at each end of Treelands Drive function at the present time; "Due to the absence of vehicle turning movement data for the intersection of Yamba Road/Treelands Drive and Treelands Drive/Gumnut Road, the intersections could not be assessed for existing operational performance." As well as relying on its own interpretation of a decade old Yamba Traffic Study to tick off on the proposed increase in traffic along Yamba Road generally in the vicinity of the shopping precinct. [ibid,p.10-11]

Now I haven't even begun to look at every aspect of the McDonald's/Clarence Property/Westlawn application because, with Council charging over a dollar per page for photocopying, I haven't had the luxury of bringing a copy of the entire Environmental Impact Statement etc. back home with me and so must return to read further.

However, if the aforementioned issues are an example of how McDonald's has approached the matter I am concerned that both the Yamba community and shire councillors are being fed a tissue of wishful thinking and possibly deliberate obfuscation.

This is one of those times that all current shire councillors should do more than open their business papers the night before or on the day of the monthly meeting and, seriously look at what McDonald's is asserting in the actual documents it has lodged.

The amenity of a significant section of Yamba and residents' ability to move easily/safely by car, bus or on foot, are two of the many things at stake because of this particular inappropriate development application.