Hill St / SH 1 Intersection Puhoi to Warkworth Project Submission - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Hill St / SH 1 Intersection

Puhoi to Warkworth Project – Submission to EPA to construct improvements at Hill Street Intersection prior to the ‘Project’ Construction Roger L Williams FIPENZ

Curriculum Vitae

 Cambridge Bypass Designation 12 options,  Te Puke Bypass Scheme Investigation,  Tauranga Route J Project Design Management  Katikati Bypass Designation Design  Rotorua Eastern Arterial Designation Study  Hong Kong Airport Rail Tunnel Project Design Manager

$150m project.

 King Hussain Tunnel Amman design and traffic study

using Saturn computer model for whole CBD

 Britomart Project Civil Design Engineer $250million  Waitemata Harbour Crossing Feasibility Study 2002

1 year study $2+ billion value, 6 route options.

The Issues to be addressed in this presentation are:-

 The Hill St/ SH 1 intersection is not

coping with current traffic.

 The ‘Project’ is not the solution to the

problems of the Hill Street Intersection.

 Further delay of improvements at Hill St

is unacceptable to the Warkworth Community.

 Construction Traffic from the Project will

significantly increase Hill St Congestion.

 Serious Options for Hill Street have not

been fully explored.

What is the problem?

 Delays occur not only at peak hours but occur

at any time of the day. This is a temperamental intersection.

 The current intersection configuration creates

very poorly managed traffic flows.

 It chokes very easily.  Truck and Trailer movements are particularly

problematic.

Hill St Intersection

Main Intersection on SH1

Elizabeth Street traffic

Who gives way to whom?

And here?

Informal Slip Lane SH1 North

Informal left lane SH1 South

SH1 northbound traffic blocked by right turn queue

Existing crossing facility

Pedestrians finally cross

More specifically.

 Traffic does not clear freely when the lights

• change. Queues are often blocked.

 Inadequate capacity on SH1 at this intersection.  Traffic exiting both Elizabeth St and Kowhai

Park are faced with 4 concurrent give ways.

 Pedestrians are badly catered for.  The basic problem is the proximity of Elizabeth

St to the Hill Traffic Signals.

Existing Traffic Flow 2009, Note AADT

Project and existing SH1 flows in 2026 Note AADT on SH1 with Project

Comment

 There is more traffic on the existing SH1

than on the new Project

 Traffic on SH1 in 2026 is just as heavy

as it was in 2009 despite having spent $800m on the Project.

 The Project is not taking enough traffic

• ff SH1.

How will the Project effect the Hill St Intersection?

Comment

 Project flow in error, AADT should be

8,000 higher.

The predicted effect of the Project

• n Hill St Intersection in 2026

using NZTA figures

 SH1 North traffic is 6% down and Elizabeth St

traffic is 11% up. (Project v Base Case).

 SH1 South traffic is down 32% and Hill St traffic

is up 30%

 Matakana Road and Sandspit traffic is much

the same in both cases.

 Traffic has also increased at 3-4 % pa in the in

the previous 12 years.

 THE COMPLETED PROJECT WILL NOT

REDUCE TRAFFIC AT THE HILL ST INTERSECTION.

Roundabout at north end of Project Turning percentage.

NZTA Data from D Mason Evidence 2026 pm peak

What does this tell us?

 Warkworth is the destination for half the traffic

using the Project and most of this will go through the Hill Street Intersection.

 It feels uncomfortable to go 2km north from Hill

Street in order to go south to Auckland.

 I suggest that adding south facing connection

to/from the Project south of McKinney Road will reduce traffic at Hill Street Intersection. It will reduce traffic on SH1 south and increase traffic

• n the Project. This will make the Project more

viable.

Timeline showing traffic growth and progress

Traffic going to the Project

 The Traffic going to the project from

Warkworth and Eastern suburbs will now make a more difficult right turn with a current clearance rate of typically 6 vehicles per traffic cycle. That is half the clearance rate for traffic turning left on SH1 south (towards Auckland). It will be more difficult to go to Auckland via the Project

Proposed Matakana Link Road

 At Hill Street Intersection only 40% of the eastern traffic

comes from Matakana Road while 60% comes from Sandspit Road

 A spot survey indicates that 33% of the Matakana Road

and Sandspit Road traffic turns off into Elizabeth Street.

 A similar % may be going to Woodcocks Road  The Link cannot reduce the eastern traffic at Hill St

Intersection by more than 20% (The figures above give

• nly a 17% reduction).

 This demonstrates that no serious origin/destination

surveys have been done to justify the link.

 MATAKANA LINK is useful but is NOT A SOLUTION for

the Hill Street Intersection.

A Bell in his Construction Evidence says

Problems with Project Construction Traffic at the Hill St Intersection

 Clearance rate of traffic on SH1 through the signals per

cycle is low. Typically a max of 15 to 20 vehicles/cycle.

 An addition of 2 vehicles per cycle of construction traffic

• n SH1 is NOT MINOR.

 Concrete and Metal truck and trailer units from Matakana

have a very poor clearance rate because of stacking problems around Elizabeth Street and choking.

 Truck and trailer units can block Elizabeth St. . Even a

small increases are NOT MINOR.

 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC IS A VERY

SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM

A truck and trailer blocks the intersection

Another truck blocks the intersection

What are the options for Hill St Intersection?

 NZTA 2009 Proposal or similar.  Large Roundabout  Do Minimum (for 10 years only?)  Do Nothing  Lets look at NZTA 2009 first

Current (2009) NZTA proposal Main Features

 This proposal does offer a MANAGED solution  Stacking lengths/lanes are improved on SH1.  Proposal includes traffic Signals at both Sandspit Road

and Hill St.

 It addresses the basic problem of the proximity of

Elizabeth St by putting it through the main intersection, however intersection now has 5 legs increasing signal delays.

 Intersection is more than twice as large creating longer

delays while signals change.

 No widening of SH1 bridge south of Shoesmith Street is

proposed.

 No right turn into Hill St from SH1 north.

NZTA current proposed upgrade (2009)

 NZTA say the upgrade will not be started

until after the Project is completed. This suggests that Hill Street Improvements will not be complete for 10 years.

 With a growth rate of 3-4% Hill St

Intersection problems only get worse making the construction of the upgrade in 10 years time more difficult.

Large Roundabout

 I submitted a proposal for a large rotary

intersection to NZTA for consideration in September 2013.

Advantages of the Large Roundabout

 Rotary intersections require simple ‘give way to

the right’ decisions.

 Large size means one decision is taken at a

time

 Addition of a SH1 straight through only lane

with traffic signals gives a direct path for the major flow. This is only required for SH1 traffic while the Project is being constructed.

 Traffic signals intercept the major flow giving

minor legs the opportunity to enter the rotary intersection.

 Hill St can be entered from the north via the

roundabout.

Advantages continued

 Construct now and future Project

construction traffic will be catered for.

 Warkworth residents will have better

access to use the completed Project.

 Access from all nearby properties is

improved.

 May be possible to simplify after Project

is complete.

Advantage to pedestrians

 The new road crossing over the stream

allows pedestrians and mobility scooters access to the traffic signals via an underpass.

 The traffic signal sequence allows more

time to cross to Warkworth.

 Traffic is one way and there is no threat

to pedestrians from turning traffic.

Construction Advantages

 A large part of the alternative design can be

constructed off the highway. This reduces total construction time to less than 1 year.

 Note that the balance of improvements uses the

existing construction as a base.

 Services are largely unaffected.  Land purchase is not required.  Note also that NZTA have not responded to this

suggestion.

Do Minimum (for 10 years only?) Anticipating NZTA compromise

 Increases capacity SH1 both ways  Some improvement to traffic flow from Sandspit

but still chokes.

 Improves access for pedestrians and provides

access to Kowhai park if crossing added.

 This option is still TEMPERMENTAL.  The ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM is that it does

nothing to solve the Elizabeth Street/Hill St proximity problem.

 Option CANNOT BE RECOMMENDED.

Do Nothing

 Problems get worse during the

construction of the Project.

 Project does not solve the Hill St

intersection, congestion only gets worse

 NZTA will ALIENATE both the SH1

users and the Warkworth/ Mahurangi residents FOR THE NEXT 7-10 years.

Reasons for Hill St Upgrade Now

 Congestion must be addressed now.  Project Completion will not reduce congestion.  Do Minimum solutions do not address the real problem of

the proximity of Elizabeth St.

 Redesign with a ROBUST solution such as NZTA 2009

• r a large roundabout will.

 Impact of Project Construction Traffic will be minimised

by the upgrade.

 Responsibility for Hill St Upgrade must be kept with

NZTA.

 Warkworth Businesses need a user friendly gateway to

the town NOW to mitigate the negative effects of the Project.

Conclusions

 The Project is NOT A SOLUTION for the Hill

Street Intersection.

 Construction Traffic for the Project will

significantly INCREASE THE PROBLEM.

 Growth will INCREASE THE PROBLEM.  Procrastination is NOT A SOLUTION.  My considered conclusion is that :-  Prior improvement of Hill St Intersection to a

ROBUST solution such as the NZTA 2009 plan or the Large Roundabout must be a condition of the Project

Thank you for your attention

Roger Williams FIPENZ June Turner