Casey Traffic & Freight Intelligence Report
Independent council-area traffic and freight report generated from SCATS and TIRTL project outputs. Generated: 2026-06-22 16:34
SCATS rank
4
By long-period SCATS movements
SCATS sites
187
Sites spatially assigned to council
SCATS movements
22,993.8M
Cumulative SCATS movements, 2014–2026
Metro share
4.70%
Share of matched metro SCATS movements
Key findings
Traffic load
- Casey ranks 4 of 31 councils by matched SCATS traffic movements.
- The report covers 187 matched SCATS sites and 22,993.8M cumulative signal movements.
Site-level pressure
- The highest-volume matched SCATS site is SOUTH GIPPSLAND Highway between STATION / LOCH in Cranbourne, with 377.1M movements.
- The top 5 matched SCATS sites account for about 7.6% of the council's ranked SCATS site movements.
- The top 10 matched SCATS sites account for about 13.8% of the council's ranked SCATS site movements.
Freight evidence
- The current evidence pack has 64 matched TIRTL detector sites for this council.
- Those matched TIRTL sites record 29.1M observed trucks, with an overall matched-site truck share of about 4.22%.
- The highest observed freight detector is M1 Inbound - Under Power Rd Overpass, with 0.9M observed trucks. Its truck share is about 4.65%.
TIRTL figures represent matched detector coverage only, not a complete council-wide truck census.
How to read this
- SCATS evidence shows long-period traffic signal movements at matched signal sites.
- TIRTL evidence shows observed detector coverage where matched detectors exist.
- Use the map first to locate the evidence, then use charts and tables for detail.
Useful questions for council / DTP
- Which of the highest-volume SCATS sites align with current local traffic, safety or corridor priorities?
- Do the mapped high-pressure sites match the locations residents and councillors complain about most often?
- Should the highest-ranked sites be reviewed for signal timing, pedestrian safety, freight impacts or state-road advocacy?
- Do the observed TIRTL freight sites require follow-up with DTP, freight stakeholders or neighbouring councils?
Suggested DTP follow-up themes
How to use this section: these themes translate the report evidence into possible questions for DTP or council officers. They should be treated as prompts for further investigation, not as formal engineering recommendations.
Signal timing / arterial optimisation review
- Why it appears relevant: Casey ranks 4 of 31 by matched SCATS traffic movements.
- Possible DTP / officer question: Can DTP review arterial signal coordination and corridor performance at the highest-volume matched SCATS sites?
- Evidence basis: SCATS rank 4/31; 22,993.8M movements across 187 matched SCATS sites.
Freight movement / truck exposure review
- Why it appears relevant: Matched TIRTL detector evidence shows 29.1M observed trucks.
- Possible DTP / officer question: Do the highest observed freight detector sites require a DTP freight movement or truck exposure review?
- Evidence basis: 64 matched TIRTL sites; top observed site: M1 Inbound - Under Power Rd Overpass.
State arterial / freeway interface advocacy
- Why it appears relevant: The highest-ranked SCATS sites appear to include state arterial, freeway or major corridor interfaces.
- Possible DTP / officer question: Which top-ranked sites are DTP-controlled or state-road interfaces, and what upgrades or operational changes are planned?
- Evidence basis: Top SCATS evidence includes SOUTH GIPPSLAND Highway between STATION / LOCH.
| Theme | Why | Possible question |
|---|---|---|
| Signal timing / arterial optimisation review | Casey ranks 4 of 31 by matched SCATS traffic movements. | Can DTP review arterial signal coordination and corridor performance at the highest-volume matched SCATS sites? |
| Freight movement / truck exposure review | Matched TIRTL detector evidence shows 29.1M observed trucks. | Do the highest observed freight detector sites require a DTP freight movement or truck exposure review? |
| State arterial / freeway interface advocacy | The highest-ranked SCATS sites appear to include state arterial, freeway or major corridor interfaces. | Which top-ranked sites are DTP-controlled or state-road interfaces, and what upgrades or operational changes are planned? |
Suggested reading order: start with the data-period note, use the map to locate the evidence, read the charts for the pattern, then use the SCATS and TIRTL tables for site-level detail.
Data periods and interpretation
SCATS
Long-period cumulative traffic signal movements from the project’s cleaned SCATS layer, labelled in these reports as 2014–2026.
Long-period cumulative traffic signal movements from the project’s cleaned SCATS layer, labelled in these reports as 2014–2026.
TIRTL
Observed classified-vehicle detector records from the project’s current TIRTL layer. TIRTL coverage is corridor/detector based, not universal council-wide coverage.
Observed classified-vehicle detector records from the project’s current TIRTL layer. TIRTL coverage is corridor/detector based, not universal council-wide coverage.
Spatial assignment
SCATS and TIRTL coordinates are assigned to official council/LGA polygons. Suburb labels are geocoded/locality labels and may differ from council boundaries.
SCATS and TIRTL coordinates are assigned to official council/LGA polygons. Suburb labels are geocoded/locality labels and may differ from council boundaries.
Sensor map
Bright blue circles show matched SCATS traffic signal sites. Bright orange-red circles show matched TIRTL detector sites where TIRTL coverage exists. The black outline shows the official council/LGA boundary. Sites are assigned to council areas by coordinate inside the official LGA polygon.
187 SCATS sites
64 TIRTL detector sites
SCATS site
TIRTL detector
Council boundary
Charts
Chart note: These charts summarise the same evidence shown in the tables. SCATS shows long-period traffic signal movements; TIRTL shows observed matched detector coverage where available.
Top SCATS traffic sites
Casey's busiest matched SCATS sites by cumulative movements.
SCATS traffic concentration
Shows how much traffic is carried by the top five sites, next five sites and remaining sites.
Top observed TIRTL freight sites
Observed truck volumes at matched TIRTL detector sites, where coverage exists.
Matched evidence coverage
Comparison of matched SCATS sites and matched TIRTL detector sites for this council.
Top SCATS traffic sites
| Rank | Site ID | Site / intersection | Geocoded locality | Movements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1156 | SOUTH GIPPSLAND Highway between STATION / LOCH | Cranbourne | 377.1M |
| 2 | 3174 | Narre Warren - Cranbourne / Greaves | Narre Warren South | 363.0M |
| 3 | 604 | Princes Highway East / NARRE WARREN-CRANBOURNE | Narre Warren | 340.7M |
| 4 | 3172 | Dandenong-Hastings / Thompsons | Cranbourne West | 338.2M |
| 5 | 256 | STH GIPPS'D Highway / THOMPSONS | Cranbourne | 335.5M |
| 6 | 530 | MONASH / Princes Highway East | Narre Warren | 293.7M |
| 7 | 3108 | HEATHERTON near JAMES COOK | Endeavour Hills | 291.8M |
| 8 | 529 | WESTERN PORT Highway / MORETON BAY | Lyndhurst | 285.5M |
| 9 | 257 | STH GIPPS'D Highway (HIGH) near BAKEWELL | Cranbourne | 280.9M |
| 10 | 508 | Clyde / Greaves / O'Shea | Berwick | 271.9M |
| 11 | 399 | Berwick-Cranbourne / Bemersyde (Nth) | Berwick | 270.8M |
| 12 | 258 | STH GIPPSLAND Highway / CAMMS RD. | Cranbourne | 269.8M |
TIRTL freight coverage
This council has matched TIRTL detector coverage in the current input layer. TIRTL figures below are observed at matched detector sites, not a complete council-wide freight census.
Corridor caution: Freeway/bridge/tunnel/ramp detector: interpret as corridor coverage, assigned by detector coordinate.
TIRTL coverage
Matched
Detector coverage status
Observed TIRTL trucks
29.1M
At matched TIRTL sites only
Truck % at matched sites
4.22%
Observed detector share
Top observed freight site
M1 Inbound - Under Power Rd Overpass
By observed truck count
Top observed TIRTL freight sites
| Rank | TIRTL site | Observed site | Vehicles | Trucks | Truck % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | TIRTL_24 | M1 Inbound - Under Power Rd Overpass | 19.5M | 0.9M | 4.65% |
| 2 | TIRTL_26 | M1 Inbound - Before Heatherton Rd Exit | 19.4M | 0.9M | 4.65% |
| 3 | TIRTL_25 | M1 Outbound - Under Power Rd Overpass | 18.4M | 0.9M | 4.80% |
| 4 | TIRTL_18 | M1 Inbound - After Heatherton Rd Entry Ramp | 18.1M | 0.9M | 4.87% |
| 5 | TIRTL_22 | M1 Inbound - Heatherton Rd Exit Ramp | 16.9M | 0.9M | 5.21% |
| 6 | TIRTL_23 | M1 Outbound - Heatherton Rd Entry Ramp | 16.1M | 0.9M | 5.38% |
| 7 | TIRTL_21 | M1 Outbound - Heatherton Rd Exit Ramp | 15.7M | 0.8M | 5.26% |
| 8 | TIRTL_20 | M1 Inbound - Heatherton Rd Entry Ramp Bullnose | 11.8M | 0.6M | 4.71% |
| 9 | TIRTL_27 | M1 Outbound - After Heatherton Rd | 11.1M | 0.5M | 4.91% |
| 10 | TIRTL_32 | M1 Inbound - After Belgrave-Hallam Rd | 14.3M | 0.5M | 3.55% |
| 11 | TIRTL_40 | M1 Inbound - Before Belgrave Hallam Rd Exit Ramp | 14.2M | 0.5M | 3.41% |
| 12 | TIRTL_42 | M1 Inbound - Ernst Wanke Rd Entry Ramp | 12.9M | 0.5M | 3.71% |
CSV evidence pack
Method and interpretation notes
SCATS site coordinates and TIRTL detector coordinates are assigned to official council/LGA polygons using point-in-polygon spatial joins. SCATS figures are long-period cumulative traffic signal movements from the project’s cleaned SCATS layer. TIRTL figures are observed classified-vehicle counts from matched detector sites and should be interpreted as corridor/detector evidence rather than a full council-wide truck census.
The “Geocoded suburb/locality” column comes from the site lookup/geocoding layer. It is useful for orientation, but the council assignment is controlled by the site coordinate falling within the official council/LGA polygon.
Executive summary
Casey ranks 4 across Greater Melbourne councils by matched SCATS traffic movements, with 187 matched SCATS sites and 22,993.8M cumulative movements in the current project layer.
The busiest matched SCATS site is SOUTH GIPPSLAND Highway between STATION / LOCH in/near Cranbourne, with 377.1M movements.