PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE BOOYSENDAL SOUTH EVEREST MINE

Transcription

1 BOOYSENDAL PLATINUM (PTY) LTD TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY (FEB 2017) REV 2 PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE BOOYSENDAL SOUTH EVEREST MINE PREPARED BY: HAMATINO CONSULTING ENGINEERS 13 HOOGGELEGEN ROAD WHITE RIVER 1240 (013) Cell

2 TITLE OF REPORT: TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: BOOYSENDAL SOUTH EVEREST MINE Report File Name: P31_16/TIA/- Booysendal Client: Booysendal South Everest Mine Hamatino Consulting Engineers 13 Hooggelegen Street White River 1240 Prepared by: H.W. Swart Hendrikus Wouterus Swart ID: PR : Ecsa Reg No: DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS REVISION DATE

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ABSTRACT Booysendal Platinum (Pty) Ltd (Booysendal) is an operational platinum group metal (PGM) mining complex located in the mining belt of the Eastern Limb Igneous Complex in South Africa. The mine is located approximately 33km west of Mashishing (Lydenburg), 40km south-southwest of Steelpoort, 32km north of Dullstroom and 21km northeast from Roossenekal. Access to the existing Booysendal Mine is provided from provincial road R577 (P171 Lydenburg / Roossenekal Road) via provincial road D874 towards the mine) Booysendal has commenced with an expansion project to ramp up the Booysendal Mine's Capacity (Booysendal South Expansion Project). The Project involves, among other things, upgrading / maintenance activities (not influencing traffic volumes other than traffic during construction phase). This includes the expansion of Waste management facilities, Water pipelines, Airway vents, stormwater dams etcetera. Expansion in terms of increased future production capacity of the mine that will have a direct impact on traffic flow to and from the mine includes the proposed new underground mine with a capacity of 120,000 t/m at BS 4 Booysendal South (the former Everest Mine). The Booysendal South Expansion Project also includes a new access road between Booysendal south and Booysendal that will provide a link road towards provincial road R577 (P170 Lydenburg / Roossenekal Road) via road D874 towards Lydenburg. Traffic to and from the former Everest Mine previously gained access via a private road (also providing access to other mines located to the north) towards provincial road D212. The above mentioned traffic will no longer use this route but divert along D874 towards R577 (P170) which will inevitable increase traffic volumes along Road D874 The compilation of a full scale traffic impact study is required for this development, hence this study. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the conclusions below at section11, the following measures are recommended to address traffic impacts of the Booysendal South Expansion Project: The establishment of a speed hump (designed for a speed of 40 km/h) at the start of the downhill approach (along Road D874), followed by two set s of rumble strips / Cosbi lines III Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

4 combination between the speed hump and the Road D874 / Village Access Road intersection. The speed hump and Cosbi lines shall be designed by a geometric roads engineer / traffic engineer in accordance with the SCIR standard; That the existing village access road be re-gravelled at certain sections with the upgrading of stormwater control. It is however advised that the provision of a light pavement and double seal be considered in the near future. That the existing Black Wattle trees at the north western corner of the D874 / Village Access Road intersection be removed in order to enhance sight distance towards the north; The possible security clearance of the vehicles at the access gate and possible delays as a result thereof requires its own assessment and falls beyond the scope of this study. It is however advised that an access gate operational procedure be developed in consultation with the mine security control and a traffic engineer. IV Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

5 TABLE OF CONTENT 1. INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY STUDY AREA TRAFFIC NOMENCLATURE METHODOLOGY TRAFFIC STATUS QUO (2017) EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ANALYSIS: EXISTING SCENARIO AM AND PM: PEAK ANALYSIS TRIP GENERATION & TRIP DISTRIBUTION DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT TO THE ROAD NETWORK 9 6. IMPACT ASSESSMENT: BASE YEAR ANALYSIS WITH DEVELOPMENT (2017) IMPACT ASSESSMENT: CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACT ASSESSMENT: HORIZON YEAR ANALYSIS (2022) ACCESS ROAD ACCESS ROAD D VILLAGE ACCESS ROAD D874 / VILLAGE ACCESS ROAD AND D874 / R577 INTERSECTION SHOULDER SIGHT DISTANCES ACCESS STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS V Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

6 REFERENCES ANNEXURE A: TRAFFIC VOLUMES ANNEXURE B: ANALYSIS OUTPUT ANNEXURE C: 12 HOUR COUNT ANNEXURE D: CONSTRUCTION PHASE TRIP GENERATION1 ANNEXURE E: CV- HW SWART1 ANNEXURE F: DECLARATION OF INTEREST2 VI Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

7 TABLE OF TABLES TABLE 1: LEVEL OF SERVICE... 3 TABLE 2: PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COUNTS... 6 TABLE 3: PEAK HOUR EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE (2017)... 8 TABLE 4: DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION TABLE 5: ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION PHASE TRIP GENERATION TABLE 6: BASE YEAR WITH DEVELOPMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE (2017) TABLE 7: BASE YEAR WITH DEVELOPMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE (2017) TABLE 8: HORIZON YEAR LEVELS OF SERVICE (2022) TABLE 9: SUMMARY OF SIGHT DISTANCE CALCULATIONS (60 km/h) TABLE OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: 12 HOUR TRFAFFIC FLOW GRAPH ALONG ROAD D FIGURE 2: TRAFFIX ROAD NETWORK & TRIP DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 3: BOOYSENDAL ACCESS ROAD FIGURE 4: ROAD D874 LONGITUDINAL SECTION FIGURE 5: STEEP GRADIENT ALONG ROAD D FIGURE 6: VILLAGE ACCESS ROAD VII Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

8 LOCALITY PLAN THE SITE VIII Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

9 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 OVERVIEW Booysendal Platinum (Pty) Ltd (Booysendal ) is an operational platinum group metal (PGM) mining complex located in the mining belt of the Eastern Limb Igneous Complex in South Africa. Booysendal purchased the neighbouring Everest Platinum Mine (Everest) from Aquarius Platinum in 2014 which has been incorporated into the Booysendal operations. The former Everest mine is known as Booysendal South (BS4) in terms of the new operations and has been under care and maintenance since The Booysendal operations are located approximately 33km west of Mashishing (Lydenburg), 40km south-southwest of Steelpoort, 32km north of Dullstroom and 21km northeast from Roossenekal. Access to the existing Booysendal North Mine (BN) is provided from provincial road R577 (P171 Lydenburg / Roossenekal Road) via provincial road D874 towards the mine) Booysendal has commenced with an expansion project to ramp up the Booysendal Mine's Capacity (Booysendal South Expansion Project). The Project involves, among other things, upgrading / maintenance activities (not influenc ing traffic volumes other than traffic during construction phase). This includes expansions to Water pipelines, Airway vents, stormwater dams etcetera. Expansion in terms of increased future production capacity of the mine that will have a direct impact on traffic flow to and from the mine includes the proposed new underground mines at BS1/2, BS3 and the Merensky portals with a capacity of 120,000 t/m and processing of ore and tailings at the BS4 processing plant.. Furthermore, the Booysendal South Expansion Project included the construction of a new access road between BN, BS1/2 and BS4 that will provide a link road towards provincial road R577 (P170 Lydenburg / Roossenekal Road) via road D874 towards Lydenburg. Traffic to and from the former Everest mine previously gained access via a private road (also providing access to other mines located to the north) towards provincial road D212. The above mentioned traffic will no longer use the above mentioned route and divert along D874 towards R577 (P170). The compilation of a full scale traffic impact study is required for this development, hence this study. Traffic Impact Statement: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers 1

10 1.2 PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY The primarily purpose of this study is to ensure that the access to the development (mine) is appropriate and will be able to accommodate the anticipated traffic demand in a safe and efficient manner. The intersections of R577 (P171) / D874 as well as D874 / Village Access Road had been analysed and discussed in this study. The analysis was done by determining the traffic that will be generated by the development (trip generation) and added to the existing background traffic volumes. 1.3 STUDY AREA The study area is limited to an analysis of the above mentioned two intersections namely: R577 (P171) / D874; D874 / Village Access. The counted intersection localities are depicted in figure 1 below. FIGURE 1: COUNTED INTERSECTION LOCALITY D874 / Village Access R577 / D874 2 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

11 1.4 TRAFFIC NOMENCLATURE Traffic nomenclature used in this report includes the following: Vph : Vehicles per hour Pcu : Passenger car unit Kph : Kilometres per hour V/C : Volume to capacity ratio LOS : Level of service According to the Highway Capacity Manual, the LOS is defined according to the following table: TABLE 1: LEVEL OF SERVICE LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR PRIORITY INTERSECTIONS & ROUNDABOUTS Level of Service A B C D E F Average Control Delay (S/veh) 0-10 >10-15 >15-25 >25-35 >35-50 >50 LOS CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LOS A B C D E F Control Delay per Vehicle (s/veh) 0-10 >10-20 >20-35 >35-55 >55-80 >80 Table 1 indicates the levels of services as A to F, of which A is the best and F is the worst level of service. An explanation of the respective levels of services is as follows: Level of Service A: Free flowing traffic with a volume to capacity ratio between 0 to 0.1 Level of Service B: Low stable flow with a volume to capacity ratio between 0.1 to 0.3 Level of Service C: High stable flow with a volume to capacity ratio between 0.3 to 0.7 Level of Service D: Approaching unstable flow with a volume to capacity ratio between 0.7 to Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

12 Level of Service E: Unstable flow with a volume to capacity ratio of 1.0 Level of Service F: Forced flow Intersections or lanes with a Level of Service E or F should be upgraded as soon as possible. 4 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

13 2. METHODOLOGY The methodology undertaken in conducting this study was as follow: Discussion of the planned development with the Client and consultation meeting; Conduct weekday 12h counts on Tuesday 07 February 2017 in order to determine the existing background traffic volumes 2017 at the following intersections: o R577 (P171) / D874; o D874 / Village Access. Determine the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed new expansion of the mine. Construction phase as well as future operational phase has been analysed; Analyse the existing intersection operational conditions with the use of the aasidra & Traffix for Windows computer software design packages. The above mentioned software analyse the delay experienced at the intersection and consequent levels of service; Determine the impact of the proposed development at the mine on the adjacent road network (analysed intersections) during peak traffic hour periods; All of the above to be included in a single volume report, for approval by the local authority. 5 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

14 3. TRAFFIC STATUS QUO (2017) 3.1 EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic surveys were conducted on Tuesday 07 February (from 18:00pm until Wednesday 08 February 18:00pm) in order to determine the typical weekday peak hour traffic volumes and traffic flow phenomena. The total 12h count is attached to the report as annexure C. Both of the counted intersections have been found to be very quiet and subject to low traffic volumes along all of the access roads as well as Road R 577 (Lydenburg Roossenekal Road). The ADT (Average daily traffic volumes) off all the movements through the counted intersections are summarised in table 2 below. TABLE 2: PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COUNTS Intersection 2017 Count Peak hour R 577 / D874 D 874 / Village Access ADT TRAFFIC Peak hour Factor 389 Vehicles through intersection (sum of all directions) 133 Vehicles through intersection (sum of all directions) AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC R 577 / D :00 07:00am 0.61 D 874 / Village Access 17 06:15 07:15am 0.61 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC R 577 / D :30 16:30pm 0.68 D 874 / Village Access 21 16:00 17:00pm 0.75 The observed traffic volumes are shown in Appendix A to this report. A 12 hour traffic flow graph of traffic along road D 874 is depicted in figure 2 below. 6 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

15 FIGURE 2: 12 HOUR TRFAFFIC FLOW GRAPH ALONG ROAD D Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

16 4. ANALYSIS: EXISTING SCENARIO AM AND PM: PEAK ANALYSIS The Traffix for Windows as well as Sidra Intersection 5.0 software package was used to determine the existing levels of service, V/C ratios and the total delay experienced at the analysed intersections. Analysis performed by the software is based on the method dictated in the Highway Capacity Manual. It is evident from table 3 below that all of the analysed intersections are currently (2017) operating at acceptable level of service during all peak hour periods. No intersection upgrading is required in order to accommodate the existing background traffic from an intersection capacity point of view. TABLE 3: PEAK HOUR EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE (2017) LEVELS OF SERVICE AND DELAY (s) INTER-SECTION Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay R 577 / D874 D 874 / Village Access WEEKDAY AM A 6.1 A 9.0 A 7.4 A 7.4 A 9.1 A 7.4 A 0 n/a n/a A 8.9 A 8.9 WEEKDAY PM R 577 / D874 A 9.4 A 8.7 A 0 A 7.4 A 9.4 D 874 / Village Access A 7.4 A 0 n/a n/a A 8.6 A 8.6 Note that the delays at the approaches are the worst movement per approach while the intersection delay is the average delay at signalised intersection and worst delay at all other. 8 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

17 5. TRIP GENERATION & TRIP DISTRIBUTION The Booysendal South Expansion Project includes a number of upgrading / maintenance activities (not influencing traffic volumes other than traffic during construction phase). This includes expansions to Waste management facilities, Water pipelines, Airway vents, stormwater dams etcetera. Expansion in terms of increased future production capacity of the mine is estimated to be approximately 450, 000 tons per month of which not all is being transported by truck from the mine. The above figure has been used to estimate the anticipated daily traffic and peak hour traffic demand in comparison to other mines in the area and based on recent experience. All of the trips generated by this mine will divert via Road D 874 and R 577 towards Lydenburg and Roossenekal. 5.1 DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT TO THE ROAD NETWORK TRIP GENERATION Typical trip generation for mining activities is not included in the South African Trip Data Manual Version 1.0 (TMH 17). At the time of this report, expected future traffic volumes were not yet made available by the client and has the engineer made assumptions in terms of the development trip generation. These assumptions are based on a comparison of traffic volumes of similar mines located in the same area. The assumptions made are listed below: a) AFTER DEVELOPMENT COMPLETION Traffic Studies and traffic counts done at the intersection of Road D212 / Matotolo Mine Road were utilised to forecast expected traffic volumes at the Booysendal Mine. This existing access road provides access to the following mines: Thorncliff; Magareng; Helena; Matotolo. 9 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

18 An average daily traffic demand 3247 v/day was found to be applicable (sum of both directions) and average of a 7 day count. The directional split was 50 : 50 for a day and the peak hour directional split is as follow: Am peak hour: 85 : 15 (85 % in; 15 % out); Pm peak hour: 20 : 80 (20 % in; 80 % out). Given the above, the Booysendal Mine trip generation is expected to be as follow: Land Use Trips TABLE 4: DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION Trip Increase Adjusted Volume Directional Split IN DIRECTIONAL SPLIT OUT ADT DAILY TRIPS Booysendal Mine % ; WEEKDAY AM TRIP GENERATION Booysendal Mine % ; WEEKDAY PM TRIP GENERATION Booysendal Mine 94 20% ; b) CONSTRUCTION PHASE The construction phase trip generation was induced from previous experience. A summary table of the anticipated construction trip generation is tabled in table 5 below. A more detailed calculation table is attached to the report as annexure D. The trips below are considered conservative and will most likely be less. TABLE 5: ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION PHASE TRIP GENERATION AREA /UNITS TOTAL TRIPS (IN & OUT) DIRECTIONAL SPLIT (peak hour) ACTIVITY No RATE IN Construction Workers (Manager / Foreman / site agents) No Workers (workers) No 800 OUT 16/midi bus Construction vehicles Total Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

19 5.1.2 TRIP DISTRIBUTION The trip distribution was deduced from the existing traffic counts. The development trips are expected to distribute in accordance with figure 3 below. FIGURE 3: TRAFFIX ROAD NETWORK & TRIP DISTRIBUTION 10% 5% 85% The anticipated trip generation and distribution as per this section was added to the existing background traffic (as per section 3) and analysed as such. The aforesaid analysis is included in sections 6 & 7 of this report. 11 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

20 6. IMPACT ASSESSMENT: BASE YEAR ANALYSIS WITH DEVELOPMENT (2017) The trips that are expected to be generated by this development ( mining), refer paragraph 5.1.1) was assigned to the existing background traffic and distributed in accordance with paragraph and analysed as such. A peak hour factor of 0.85 has been used in the analysis. It is evident from table 6 below that all of the analysed intersections are expected to be operating at acceptable level of service after development completion during the operational phase. No intersection upgrading is therefore required in order to accommodate the development. TABLE 6: BASE YEAR WITH DEVELOPMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE (2017) LEVELS OF SERVICE AND DELAY (s) INTER-SECTION Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay R 577 / D874 D 874 / Village Access WEEKDAY AM B 11.3 A 9.2 A 7.4 A 7.7 B 11.3 A 7.5 A 0 n/a n/a A 9.7 A 9.7 WEEKDAY PM R 577 / D874 A 9.9 A 9.0 A 0 A 7.5 A 9.9 D 874 / Village Access A 7.6 A 0 n/a n/a A 9.2 A 9.2 Note that the delays at the approaches are the worst movement per approach while the intersection delay is the average delay at signalised intersection and worst delay at all other. 12 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

21 7. IMPACT ASSESSMENT: CONSTRUCTION PHASE The trips that are expected to be generated during the construction phase, refer paragraph 5.1.1) was assigned to the existing background traffic and distributed in accordance with paragraph and analysed as such. A peak hour factor of 0.85 has been used in the analysis. It is evident from table 7 below that all of the analysed intersections are expected to be operating at an acceptable level of service during the construction phase. TABLE 7: BASE YEAR WITH DEVELOPMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE (2017) LEVELS OF SERVICE AND DELAY (s) INTER-SECTION Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay R 577 / D874 D 874 / Village Access WEEKDAY AM B 13.5 A 9.5 A 7.4 A 7.8 B 13.5 A 7.7 A 0 n/a n/a B 11 B 11 WEEKDAY PM R 577 / D874 B 11.8 A 9.8 A 0 A 7.6 B 11.8 D 874 / Village Access A 7.9 A 0 n/a n/a B 10.7 B 10.7 Note that the delays at the approaches are the worst movement per approach while the intersection delay is the average delay at signalised intersection and worst delay at all other. 13 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

22 8. IMPACT ASSESSMENT: HORIZON YEAR ANALYSIS (2022) A five year horizon analysis has been conducted in order to determine the longer term sustainability of the roads infrastructure. A conservative 5% background traffic growth rate has been assumed for the purposes of this study. It is evident from table 8 below that all of the analysed intersections are expected to be operating at an acceptable level of service by the horizon year TABLE 8: HORIZON YEAR LEVELS OF SERVICE (2022) LEVELS OF SERVICE AND DELAY (s) INTER-SECTION Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay R 577 / D874 D 874 / Village Access WEEKDAY AM B 11.4 A 9.3 A 7.4 A 7.7 B 11.4 A 7.5 A 0 n/a n/a A 9.7 A 9.7 WEEKDAY PM R 577 / D874 A 9.9 A 9.1 A 0 A 7.5 A 9.9 D 874 / Village Access A 7.7 A 0 n/a n/a A 9.2 A 9.2 Note that the delays at the approaches are the worst movement per approach while the intersection delay is the average delay at signalised intersection and worst delay at all other. 14 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

23 9. ACCESS ROAD 9.1 ACCESS ROAD D874 Access to the mine will be provided via Road D 874 towards Road R 577, a distance of approximately 3.5 km. The village access road also forms part of Road D 874 and is currently a gravel road. The posted speed limit on the road is initially 80 km/h and is reduced to 60km/h at the approach to the steep downhill portion (northbound direction). The above mentioned access road is depicted in figure 4 below for ease of reference. FIGURE 4: BOOYSENDAL ACCESS ROAD Village Rd The above mentioned Road D 874 is extremely steep with a negative gradient (northbound direction) of approximately 18% at distance 2.45km from the R577 intersection and 400m from the Village Access Road intersection. The longitudinal section which is depicted in figure 5 below was deduced from a GPS measurement and provides approximate values only. A Negative gradient of -18.3% (northbound direction) was measured at distance 2.45km at an average mean height above sea level of 1809m. 15 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

24 FIGURE 5: ROAD D874 LONGITUDINAL SECTION Rumble Strips Rumble Strips Speedhump The portion of Road D874 from distance 1.85km up to distance 3.0km is considered to be dangerous and subject to a high accident probability. Although warning signs had been provided, it is advised that a speed hump (designed for a speed of 40 km/h) be provided at the start of the downhill approach, followed by two sets of rumble strips / Cosbi lines combination between the speed hump and the Road D874 / Village Access Road intersection. The speed hump and Cosbi lines shall be designed by a geometric roads engineer / traffic engineer in accordance with the SCIR standard. A photo of the above mentioned downhill portion of Road D 874 (taken from the Village Access Road) towards the south is depicted in figure 6 below. 16 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

25 FIGURE 6: STEEP GRADIENT ALONG ROAD D VILLAGE ACCESS ROAD The village access road is currently a gravel road under ownership of the Mpumalanga Department of public works: Roads and Transport. Although the road is currently subject to low traffic volumes, the surface does deteriorate fast especially following summer rains. The site has been visited following rainy weather. Although the road was still manoeuvrable, it was subject to low riding comfort. The road needs to be re-gravelled at certain sections with the upgrading of stormwater control required. It is however advised that the provision of a light pavement and double seal be considered in the near future. FIGURE 7: VILLAGE ACCESS ROAD 17 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

26 9.3 D874 / VILLAGE ACCESS ROAD AND D874 / R577 INTERSECTION SHOULDER SIGHT DISTANCES 9.3.1: AVAILABLE SIGHT DISTANCE D874 / Village Rd intersection Sight distance towards the south (over left shoulder) is 220m and sight distance towards the north (right shoulder) is +300m (subject to bush clearing). D874 / R577 intersection Sight distance towards the east (over left shoulder) is +320m and sight distance towards the west (right shoulder) is +300m : REQUIRED SIGHT DISTANCE The following elements have an influence on the sight distance calculation and consequently need to be considered prior to the sight distance calculation: Vehicular speeds along D 874 & R577 Grade of Access; Road D 874 & R577 cross section (width and number of lanes). The above elements are discussed below as bulleted above : VEHICULAR SPEED ROAD D 874 & R577 A design speed of 60 km/h (at the intersection locality) and 100 km/h along R577 has been assumed for the purposes of this analysis : GRADIENT OF ACCECSS ROAD The access gradient is less than 4% and will therefore not have any impact on the site distance calculation : ROAD CROSS SECTIONS AT THE ACCESS INTERSECTIONS Both R577 and Road D 874 are two lane single carriageway roads with shoulders and a width of approximately 10.0m wide (including shoulders). Standard gap size requirements are applicable at both intersections. 18 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

27 : GAP ACCEPTANCE SIGHT DISTANCE (SHOULDER SIGHT DISTANCE) Having taking cognisance of the discussion above, the relevant shoulder and stopping sight distances are discussed in the remainder if this section. The shoulder sight distance (as described by the Committee of State Road Authorities) or the Gap acceptance sight distance is the sight distance required by drivers entering an intersection to enable them to establish that it is safe to do so and then carry out the manoeuvres necessary either to join or to cross the opposing traffic stream. Sight distance values are based on the ability of the driver of a vehicle to see an approaching vehicle along the main road. Shoulder sight distances are measured from an eye height of 1.05m to an object height of 1.3m (passenger car). The eye height from trucks is 1.8m Since the volume of heavy vehicles that will make use of this entrance is unsubstantial, the sight distance requirements of a light vehicle will be applicable to this sight distance calculation. Sight distance calculations are based on speeds as discussed in section above : REQUIRED GAP ACCEPTANCE SIGHT DISTANCE CALCULATION The TMH 16 Vol. 2 (South African Traffic Impact and Site Impact Assessment Standards & Requirements Manual) prescribes a sight distance that will be equal to a gap size of 7.5s (for passenger cars) for right turn and 6.5s for left turn. Gap size requirements for trucks are 11.5s for right turn trucks and 10.5s for left turning trucks. The sight distance calculation is therefore as follow (truck sight distance requir ements has been adopted for the purposes of this study due to the relative high truck percentage) The following attributes are applicable to Road D874 & R577: Gradient : < 4%; Gap size adjustment due to gradient not applicable; Speed (D874) : 60 km/h; Speed (R577): 100km/h 19 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

28 Road D874: Required sight towards the north (left turn): (60km/h / 3.6) x (10.5) = 175m Required sight towards the south (right turn): (60 km/h / 3.6 x (11.5) = 192m Road R577 Required sight towards the west (left turn): (100km/h / 3.6) x (10.5) = 292m Required sight towards the east (right turn): (100 km/h / 3.6 x (11.5) = 319m The above sight distance calculations are compared with prescribed norms and are tabled in table 9 below for ease of reference. INTERSECTION TABLE 9: SUMMARY OF SIGHT DISTANCE CALCULATIONS (60 km/h) REFERENCE SIGHT DISTANCE TOWARDS REQUIRED (m) AVAILABLE RESULT D 874 /Village Access TMH 16 Towards north (left turn) OK Towards south (right turn) OK D 874 / R577 TMH 16 Towards west (left turn) OK Towards east (right turn) OK Following all of the above, it is evident that sufficient shoulder sight distances do exist at both of the existing intersections. It is however advised that the existing wattle trees located in the marked area below be removed. FIGURE 8: WATTLE TREES TO BE REMOVED 20 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

29 9.4 ACCESS STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE 9.4.1: STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE The stopping sight distance is defined as the required distance along the main road to bring a vehicle safely to a standstill if required. Stopping sight distance is measured from an eye height of 1.05m to an object height of 0.15m (eye height of 1.8m for truc ks). Stopping sight distance is expresses as: S = 0.694v + v 2 /254f The required stopping sight distance is calculated to be 106m. The required stopping sight distance is available on site at the access intersections locality. 21 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

30 10. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Public transport will be provided by the mine for mine workers and staff as well as possible private transportation service providers. Transportation will be in the form of busses and midi bus taxi that will stop at a demarcated safe parking area within the confines of the mine and within walking distance from respective working stations. The possible security clearance of the vehicles at the access gate and possible delays because of this is a study on its own and fall beyond the scope of this study. It is however advised that an access gate operational procedure be determined in consultation with the mine security control and a traffic engineer. 22 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

31 11.1 CONCLUSIONS 11. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS It has been found that: Both of the counted intersections have been found to be very quiet and subject to low traffic volumes along all of the access roads as well as Road R 577 (Lydenburg Roossenekal Road); The ADT (Average daily traffic volumes) off all the movements through the counted intersections are less than 500 v/ day; All of the analysed intersections are currently (2017) operating at acceptable level of service during all peak hour periods; Traffic Studies and traffic counts done at the intersection of Road D212 / Matotolo Mine Road were utilised to forecast expected traffic volumes at the Booysendal Mine. An average daily traffic volume along Matotolo Mine Road of 3247 v/day has been counted previously; The Booysendal Mine is expected to generate approximately 850 daily trips. The latter has been increased with 20% for analysis purposes; The Booysendal peak hour traffic demand (operational phase) is expected to be as follow: o o Am peak : 153 v/h (130 in; 23 out); Pm peak: 112 v/h (22 in; 90 out); The Booysendal peak hour construction phase traffic demand is expected to be 210 vehicles per peak hour and as follow: o o Am peak hour: 123 in; 88 out; Pm peak hour: 88 in; 123 out. Trip distribution is expected to be in accordance with figure 2, section 5.1.2; All of the analysed intersections are expected to be operating at acceptable level of service after development completion during the operational phase as well as during the 23 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

32 construction phase. No intersection upgrading accommodate the development; is therefore required in order to All of the analysed intersections are expected to still be operating at an acceptable level of service by the horizon year 2022; Road D 874 is extremely steep with a negative gradient (north bound direction) of approximately 18% at distance 2.45km from the R577 intersection and 400m from the Village Access Road intersection. The longitudinal section which is depicted in figure 4, section 9 was deduced from a GPS measurement and provides approximate values only; The portion of Road D874 from distance 1.85km up to distance 3.0km is considered to be dangerous and subject to a high accident probability; The village access road is currently a gravel road under ownership of the Mpumalanga Department of public works: Roads and Transport. Although the road is currently subject to low traffic volumes, the surface does deteriorate fast especially following summer rains; That sufficient shoulder and stopping sight distances do exist at both of the analysed intersections; Public transport will be provided by the mine for mine workers and staff as well as possible private transportation service providers. Transportation will be in the form of busses and midi bus taxi that will stop at a demarcated safe parking area within the confines of the mine and within walking distance from respective working stations RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the conclusions that have been derived from this study, the following are recommended: That a speed hump (designed for a speed of 40 km/h) be provided at the start of the downhill approach (along Road D874), followed by two sets of rumble strips / Cosbi lines combination between the speed hump and the Road D874 / Village Access Road intersection. The speed hump and Cosbi lines shall be designed by a geometric roads engineer / traffic engineer in accordance with the SCIR standard; That the existing village access road be re-gravelled at certain sections with the upgrading of stormwater control. It is however advised that the provision of a light pavement and double seal be considered. 24 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

33 That the existing Black Wattle trees at the north western corner of the D874 / Village Access Road intersection be removed in order to enhance sight distance towards the north (refer figure 8) The possible security clearance of the vehicles at the access gate and possible delays as a result thereof requires its own assessment and falls beyond the scope of this study. It is however advised that an access gate operational procedure be determined in consultation with the mine security control and a traffic engineer. 25 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

34 REFERENCES 1. Akcelik & Associates (Pty) Ltd, 2002, aasidra- Signalised and Unsignalised Intersection Design Research Aid- Version Committee of State Road Authorities, 1988, TRH 17 Geometric design of Rural Roads, National Department of Transport, Pretoria. 3. Committee of Transportation Officials, 2012, South African Trip Data Manual, TMH17, National Roads Agency Limited, Pretoria. 4. Dowling Associates Inc, 1997, Traffic for Windows Version National Department of Transport, 1995, Manual for Traffic Impact Studies, Research Report PR 93/635, BKS (Pty) Ltd, Pretoria. 6. South African National Roads Agency Limited, 2002, Geometric Design Guidelines, Version 1.0, CSIR, Pretoria. 7. Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Washington D.C. 26 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

35 ANNEXURE A: TRAFFIC VOLUMES 27 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44 ANNEXURE B: ANALYSIS OUTPUT 28 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

45 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 1-1 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Command: Default Command Volume: PM Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: PM Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: Default Configuration PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 2-1 Trip Generation Report Forecast for AM Zone Rate Rate Trips Trips Total % Of # Subzone Amount Units In Out In Out Trips Total MINING CONSTRUCTION Zone 1 Subtotal TOTAL

46 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 3-1 Trip Distribution Report To Gates Zone Percent Of Trips DEF PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 4-1 Turning Movement Report AM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 Base Added Total #2 Base Added Total

47 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 5-1 Link Volume Report AM Volume NB Link SB Link EB Link WB Link Total Type In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Volume #1 Base Added Total PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 6-1 Intersection Volume Report Base Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #2 Base Added Total

48 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 7-1 Intersection Volume Report Future Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 8-1 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 A B D/V # 2 A A D/V

49 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 9-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.4] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 15 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1493 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1493 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.4 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 820 xxxx 982 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 9.4 xxxxx 8.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 10-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

50 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 11-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 2.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 12.1] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 23 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1483 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1483 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.09 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.3 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.7 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 515 xxxx 929 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 12.1 xxxxx 9.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * B * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 12-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

51 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 13-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 8.6] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 12 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1497 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1497 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 1009 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 8.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * A * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 8.6 ApproachLOS: * * * A Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 14-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

52 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 15-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 1.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.5] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 39 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1462 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1462 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.5 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 831 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 7.5 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 9.5 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * * * * * * * A * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 9.5 ApproachLOS: * * * A Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 16-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

53 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 17-1 Turning Movement By Zone Report AM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=B,Del=2.1,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 18-1 Project Trips Report AM Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R Zone #1: #2 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=A,Del=1.2,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total

54 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 19-1 Lane Geometry Report Number of approach lanes: (L) (LT) (T) (RT) (R) (LTR) Node Intersection NB SB EB WB PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 20-1 Base Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

55 PM Fri Mar 17, :24:18 Page 21-1 Future Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.3 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

56 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 1-1 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Command: Default Command Volume: PM Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: PM Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: Default Configuration PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 2-1 Trip Generation Report Forecast for PM Zone Rate Rate Trips Trips Total % Of # Subzone Amount Units In Out In Out Trips Total MINING CONSTRUCTION Zone 1 Subtotal TOTAL

57 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 3-1 Trip Distribution Report To Gates Zone Percent Of Trips DEF PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 4-1 Turning Movement Report PM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 Base Added Total #2 Base Added Total

58 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 5-1 Link Volume Report PM Volume NB Link SB Link EB Link WB Link Total Type In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Volume #1 Base Added Total PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 6-1 Intersection Volume Report Base Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #2 Base Added Total

59 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 7-1 Intersection Volume Report Future Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 8-1 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 A A D/V # 2 A A D/V

60 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 9-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.4] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 15 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1493 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1493 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.4 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 820 xxxx 982 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 9.4 xxxxx 8.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 10-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

61 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 11-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 5.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.9] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 16 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1492 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1492 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.02 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.1 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.5 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 736 xxxx 995 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.4 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 9.9 xxxxx 9.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 12-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

62 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 13-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 8.6] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 12 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1497 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1497 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 1009 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 8.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * A * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 8.6 ApproachLOS: * * * A Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 14-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

63 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 15-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.2] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 118 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1366 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1366 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.7 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 866 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 7.7 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 9.2 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * * * * * * * A * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 9.2 ApproachLOS: * * * A Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 16-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

64 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 17-1 Turning Movement By Zone Report PM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=A,Del=5.9,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 18-1 Project Trips Report PM Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R Zone #1: #2 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=A,Del=0.8,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total

65 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 19-1 Lane Geometry Report Number of approach lanes: (L) (LT) (T) (RT) (R) (LTR) Node Intersection NB SB EB WB PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 20-1 Base Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

66 PM Fri Mar 17, :25:33 Page 21-1 Future Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.1 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

67 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 1-1 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Command: Default Command Volume: PM Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: PM Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: Default Configuration PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 2-1 Trip Generation Report Forecast for CONST AM Zone Rate Rate Trips Trips Total % Of # Subzone Amount Units In Out In Out Trips Total CONSTRUCTION Zone 1 Subtotal TOTAL

68 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 3-1 Trip Distribution Report To Gates Zone Percent Of Trips DEF PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 4-1 Turning Movement Report CONST AM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 Base Added Total #2 Base Added Total

69 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 5-1 Link Volume Report CONST AM Volume NB Link SB Link EB Link WB Link Total Type In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Volume #1 Base Added Total PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 6-1 Intersection Volume Report Base Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #2 Base Added Total

70 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 7-1 Intersection Volume Report Future Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 8-1 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 A B D/V # 2 A B D/V

71 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 9-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.4] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 12 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1497 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1497 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.4 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 833 xxxx 989 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 9.4 xxxxx 8.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 10-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

72 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 11-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 14.2] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 24 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1482 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1482 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.14 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.5 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.8 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 397 xxxx 930 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 14.2 xxxxx 9.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * B * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 12-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

73 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 13-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 8.6] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 9 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1500 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1500 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 1013 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 8.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * A * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 8.6 ApproachLOS: * * * A Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 14-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

74 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 15-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 10.7] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 134 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1347 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1347 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.7 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 663 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 7.7 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 10.7 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 10.7 ApproachLOS: * * * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 16-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

75 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 17-1 Turning Movement By Zone Report CONST AM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=B,Del=3.4,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 18-1 Project Trips Report CONST AM Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R Zone #1: #2 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=B,Del=0.9,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total

76 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 19-1 Lane Geometry Report Number of approach lanes: (L) (LT) (T) (RT) (R) (LTR) Node Intersection NB SB EB WB PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 20-1 Base Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

77 PM Fri Mar 17, :27:37 Page 21-1 Future Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.5 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

78 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 1-1 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Command: Default Command Volume: PM Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: PM Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: Default Configuration PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 2-1 Trip Generation Report Forecast for CONS PM Zone Rate Rate Trips Trips Total % Of # Subzone Amount Units In Out In Out Trips Total CONSTRUCTION Zone 1 Subtotal TOTAL

79 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 3-1 Trip Distribution Report To Gates Zone Percent Of Trips DEF PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 4-1 Turning Movement Report CONS PM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 Base Added Total #2 Base Added Total

80 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 5-1 Link Volume Report CONS PM Volume NB Link SB Link EB Link WB Link Total Type In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Volume #1 Base Added Total PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 6-1 Intersection Volume Report Base Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #2 Base Added Total

81 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 7-1 Intersection Volume Report Future Volume Alternative Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 8-1 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 A B D/V # 2 A B D/V

82 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 9-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.4] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 12 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1497 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1497 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.4 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 833 xxxx 989 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 9.4 xxxxx 8.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 10-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

83 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 11-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 6.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 11.8] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 4.3 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 2.4 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 18 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1490 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1490 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.08 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 0.2 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 7.6 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 533 xxxx 975 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx 0.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 11.8 xxxxx 9.8 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * B * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 12-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

84 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 13-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 3.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 8.6] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 9 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1500 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1500 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 1013 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 8.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * A * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 8.6 ApproachLOS: * * * A Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 14-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

85 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 15-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 10.7] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Lefts: Include Include Include Include Lanes: ! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: Added Vol: PasserByVol: Initial Fut: User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: FinalVolume: Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 2.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 241 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1227 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1227 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx 7.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * A * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx 1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 659 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx 7.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 10.7 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * A * * * * * * * B * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 10.7 ApproachLOS: * * * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 16-1 Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Future Volume Alternative Intersection #2 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R HevVeh: 20% 20% 20% 20% Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: Pedestrian Walk Speed: 1.20 meters/sec LaneWidth: 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters 3.66 meters Time Period: 0.25 hour

86 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 17-1 Turning Movement By Zone Report CONS PM Volume Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Type Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Volume #1 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=B,Del=6.0,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 18-1 Project Trips Report CONS PM Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R Zone #1: #2 [Base(LOS=A,Del=3.3,V/C=0.000)][Future(LOS=B,Del=0.6,V/C=0.000)][ V/C] Base Growth InitBs Zn Added PassBy Future UseAdj Total

87 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:38 Page 19-1 Lane Geometry Report Number of approach lanes: (L) (LT) (T) (RT) (R) (LTR) Node Intersection NB SB EB WB PM Fri Mar 17, :28:39 Page 20-1 Base Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.0 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

88 PM Fri Mar 17, :28:39 Page 21-1 Future Queue Report (cars) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Node Intersection L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R L -- T -- R #1 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.2 #2 [2Way95thQ]: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

89 ANNEXURE C: 12 HOUR COUNT D874 / VILLAGE ROAD INTERSECTION Time Mov 1 Mov 2 Mov 3 Mov 4 Mov 5 Mov 6 15 From To LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV Min Hourly 05:00 05: :15 05: :30 05: :45 06: :00 06: :15 06: :30 06: :45 07: :00 07: :15 07: :30 07: :45 08: :00 08: :15 08: :30 08: :45 09: :00 09: :15 09: :30 09: :45 10: :00 10: :15 10: :30 10: :45 11: :00 11: :15 11: :30 11: :45 12: :00 12: :15 12: :30 12: :45 13: :00 13: :15 13: :30 13: :45 14: :00 14: :15 14: :30 14: :45 15: :00 15: :15 15: :30 15: Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

90 Time Mov 1 Mov 2 Mov 3 Mov 4 Mov 5 Mov 6 15 From To LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV Min Hourly 15:45 16: :00 16: :15 16: :30 16: :45 17: :00 17: :15 17: :30 17: :45 18: Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

91 D874 / R577INTERSECTION Time Mov 1 Mov 2 Mov 3 Mov 4 Mov 5 Mov 6 Mov 7 Mov 8 Mov 9 Mov 10 Mov 11 Mov 12 From To LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV 15min Hourly 05:00 05: :15 05: :30 05: :45 06: :00 06: :15 06: :30 06: :45 07: :00 07: :15 07: :30 07: :45 08: :00 08: :15 08: :30 08: :45 09: :00 09: :15 09: :30 09: :45 10: :00 10: :15 10: :30 10: :45 11: :00 11: :15 11: :30 11: Traffic Impact Statement: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers 1

92 Time Mov 1 Mov 2 Mov 3 Mov 4 Mov 5 Mov 6 Mov 7 Mov 8 Mov 9 Mov 10 Mov 11 Mov 12 From To LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV 15min Hourly 11:45 12: :00 12: :15 12: :30 12: :45 13: :00 13: :15 13: :30 13: :45 14: :00 14: :15 14: :30 14: :45 15: :00 15: :15 15: :30 15: :45 16: :00 16: :15 16: :30 16: :45 17: :00 17: :15 17: :30 17: :45 18: Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

93 ANNEXURE D: CONSTRUCTION PHASE TRIP GENERATION 1 Traffic Impact Statement: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

94 CONSTRUCTION PHASE TRIP GENERATION ACTIVITY No AREA /UNITS RATE TOTAL TRIPS (IN & OUT) DIRECTIONAL SPLIT (peak hour) PEAK HOUR TRUCKS / BUSSES LV MIDI BUSSES IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT Construction Workers (Manager / Foreman / site agents) No DAILY (SUM OF BOTH DIRECTIONS) LV TRUCKS / BUSSES MIDI BUSSES Workers (workers) No /midi bus Construction vehicles Total Traffic Impact Statement: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers 1

95 ANNEXURE E: CV- HW SWART 1 Traffic Impact Statement: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

96 CURRICULUM VITAE: H.W SWART 1. PERSONAL PARTICULARS: Name Date & Place of Birth Hendrikus Wouterus Swart 18 October 1971, Nelspruit Places of Tertiary Education Technikon Pretoria University of South Africa Professional Awards ECSA: Pr Tech 2. QUALIFICATIONS: No Qualification Academic institution Year obtained 1 MBL (Masters in business leadership) UNISA B.Tech Civil Engineering (Transportation) PTA Technikon 1996 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS (MEMBERSHIP) No Professional Body Registration Number 1 SIACE (South African Institution of Civil Engineering- Member) 2 Engineering Council of South Africa (Professional Technologist) CURRENT EMPLOYER : SELF EMPLOYED POSITION : SOLE PROPRIETOR 4. OVERVIEW OF POST-GRADUATE EXPERIENCE No Period Employer Position Tshwane Metropolitan Council Maintenance & Construction Mbombela Local Municipality Technician Planning & Design (Jun) Endecon Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd Senior Traffic Engineer to present H.W. Swart Civil & Traffic Engineer / Hamatino Consulting Sole Proprietor 5. RECENT EXPERIENCE THAT HAS A BEARING ON THE SCOPE OF WORK Mr. H.W Swart is a design / traffic engineer with experience in roads, traffic studies & municipal infrastructure projects. He is currently self employed and a sole proprietor of his company H.W. Swart Civil & Traffic Engineer. His most recent experience is listed Below:

97 RECENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES ( ) No ACTIVITIES PLACE LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY DATE 1 Traffic Impact Study- Kenleaf, Benoni Benoni- Gauteng Full Dec-16 2 Traffic Impact Study Pongola Shopping Centre Pongola -KZN Full Nov-16 3 Traffic Impact Study-Erf 3242 NST 14 Mbombela- NST 14 Full Nov-16 4 Traffic Impact Study- Simbithi Natal Shaka`s Rock-KZN Full Nov-16 5 Traffic Impact Study Erf 1314 Stonehenge Mbombela - Stonehenge Full Oct Traffic Impact Study - Ketshe Natal Ketshe, Newcastle KZN Full Oct-16 7 Traffic Impact Study- Newcastle KZN JBC Precicnt Natal Full Oct-16 8 Traffic Impact Study Mogale Ext 28 Mogale City Full Sept-16 9 Traffic Impact Study-Greengate Ext 74 Mogale City Full Sept Traffic Impact Study & Services Rep Zhakeni Full Sept Traffic Impact Study - Limpopo Filling Station - Bushbuckridge Full Sept Traffic Impact Study - Mbombela Kingstonvale School Full July Access Report Van Wyksvlei- Gauteng Full July Access Report Burgershall Port 140 Full July Traffic Impact Study Mogale Ext 18 Full June Traffic Impact Study UIF Building -Tshwane Full May Traffic Impact Statement Tarentaal Centre Bingo Hall Full Apr Traffic Impact Statement Uitsig Landgoed Full March Traffic Impact Study Karino Ext 5 Full Feb Access & Manoeuvrability Erf 3384 Roodepoort Full Feb Traffic Impact Study Erf Sonheuwel Full Feb Traffic Impact Study Matola Mall - Maputo Full Jan Traffic Impact Study Cairn School Full Dec Traffic Impact Study Tekwane South Ext 3 Full Nov Traffic Impact Study Homes Haven Mogale City Full Nov Traffic Impact Study Drum Rock- Mbombela Full Oct Traffic Impact & parking study Rob Ferreira Hospital- Mbombela Full Oct-15

98 RECENT CIVIL PROJECTS (FROM 2013) No ACTIVITIES VALUE LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY DATE 1 Access to filling station: Furrow Rd Mogale R 1.5 Million Full Current 2 Civil Engineering Services: LVCC R 2.0 Million Full June-16 3 Civil Engineering Services: Stone 12 R Full June-16 4 Civil Engineering Services: Erf 99 Hazyview R Full May Access to Filling Station: Skeerpoort North West. Access to filling station: Homes Haven Krugerdorp Access to filling station: Country Place Krugersdorp 2.5 Million Full May-16 Planning only to date Full Nov-2015 Planning only to date Full Oct Access from Roundabout at Casterbridge Planning only to date Full Sept Access to Filling Station Hekpoort Gauteng Planning only to date Full Aug Civil Engineering Service: Sekelbos Est R Full Oct April Upgrading of Roads - Sekhukune R 8.0 Million Full Sept-March Design of municipal services: Baker St development, Nelspruit Design of civil engineering services: Kiaat Ridge Design of civil engineering services: Engen filling station Rocky Drift Civil Engineering Services: Jorge Lodge, Steelpoort R Full Sept-14 R 15.0 Million Full June-14 R 4.0 Million Full Dec-13 R 3.5 Million Full Sept Joubert & Seuns Access Intersection R Full Aug Civil Engineering Services, Bosjesspruit, Secunda R 4.0 Million Full May-13

99 ANNEXURE F: DECLARATION OF INTEREST 2 Traffic Impact Study: Booysendal South Everest Mine Compiled by Hamatino Consulting Engineers

100 13 Hooggelegen Street Tel : White River Fax: Cell: hendrikusswart@gmail.com OUR REF: P31_16/TIA/Booysendal DATE: 16 March 2017 YOUR REF: ENQUIRIES: H.W Swart TO WHO IT CONCERNS DECLARATION OF INTEREST: BOOYSENDAL TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Further to the traffic study compiled by this office (Mr. Hendrikus Wouterus Swart), it is herewith confirmed that the traffic impact study has been done as an independent consultant (No relatives at Booysendal) Should you have any questions, or require any further information regarding any of the above, kindly contact our office. Yours faithfully, H.W. SWART Pr Tech Eng; MBL H. W. Swart Pr Tech Eng ; MBL Sole Proprietor