Batemans Bay Bridge replacement€¦ · Docklands, Melbourne VIC 3008 . PO Box 23061 Docklands VIC...

Batemans Bay Bridge replacement Traffic and Transport Assessment NSW Roads and Maritime Services

Reference: 256009

Revision: 4

23 October 2017

Proposal number 256009 File BBBCD-ENM-RPT-Traffic and Transport_FINAL.doc, 23 October 2017 Revision 4 2

Document control record Document prepared by:

Aurecon Australasia Pty Ltd ABN 54 005 139 873 Aurecon Centre Level 8, 850 Collins Street Docklands, Melbourne VIC 3008 PO Box 23061 Docklands VIC 8012 Australia T F E W

+61 3 9975 3000 +61 3 9975 3444 [email protected] aurecongroup.com

A person using Aurecon documents or data accepts the risk of: a) Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original hard copy

version. b) Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by Aurecon.

Document control

Report title Traffic and Transport Assessment

Document ID Proposal number 256009

File path

Client NSW Roads and Maritime Services

Client contact Client reference

Rev Date Revision details/status Author Reviewer Verifier (if required)

Approver

0 11 September 2017 Draft GA/AJ JB LC

1 22 September 2017 Updated with RMS comments GA/AJ JB LC

2 3 October 2017 Additional RMS Comments GA / AJ JB LC

3 23 October 2017 Final GA / AJ JB LC

Current revision 4

Approval

Name Gillian Austin Name Lucia Coletta

Title Senior traffic planner Title Environmental Manager

Contents Glossary and acronyms ................................................................................................................................... 1

Executive summary .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Overview ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Strategic content ............................................................................................................................................ 2 Existing road network operation .................................................................................................................... 2 Do minimum option........................................................................................................................................ 3 Traffic benefits of the proposal ...................................................................................................................... 3 Maritime benefits ........................................................................................................................................... 3

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Proposal identification ............................................................................................................................ 5

1.1.1 Proposal location and setting ...................................................................................................... 5 1.1.2 Key features of the proposal ....................................................................................................... 5 1.1.3 Proposal background .................................................................................................................. 6

1.2 Purpose of the report ............................................................................................................................. 9 1.2.1 Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements .............................................................. 9

1.3 Structure of the report ............................................................................................................................ 9

2 Study methodology ................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Relevant guidelines ............................................................................................................................. 10 2.2 Study area............................................................................................................................................ 10 2.3 Study approach .................................................................................................................................... 12

3 Existing environment ................................................................................................................................ 14 3.1 Road network ....................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Road hierarchy and descriptions ......................................................................................................... 14

3.2.1 Arterial roads ............................................................................................................................. 14 3.2.2 Local roads ................................................................................................................................ 15 3.2.3 Intersections .............................................................................................................................. 16

3.3 Speed limits ......................................................................................................................................... 16 3.4 Heavy vehicle network ......................................................................................................................... 17 3.5 Traffic data ........................................................................................................................................... 21

3.5.1 Current traffic volumes .............................................................................................................. 21 3.5.2 Traffic growth and trends ........................................................................................................... 21

3.6 Crash data ........................................................................................................................................... 24 3.7 Transport mode share ......................................................................................................................... 25 3.8 Public transport .................................................................................................................................... 26

3.8.1 Bus routes ................................................................................................................................. 26 3.9 Cycling and pedestrian network .......................................................................................................... 27 3.10 Clyde River maritime environment ...................................................................................................... 27

3.10.1 General description ................................................................................................................... 27 3.10.2 Boat usage ................................................................................................................................ 30 3.10.3 Existing bridge lift span raises ................................................................................................... 30

3.11 Existing land uses ................................................................................................................................ 31

4 Existing road network performance ........................................................................................................ 33 4.1 Traffic data sources ............................................................................................................................. 33 4.2 Traffic volumes .................................................................................................................................... 33

4.3 Existing road network performance ..................................................................................................... 34 4.3.1 Capacity of the existing bridge .................................................................................................. 34 4.3.2 Bridge delays and queuing ........................................................................................................ 35 4.3.3 Capacity of intersections ........................................................................................................... 35

5 The proposal .............................................................................................................................................. 37 5.1 Changes in traffic movements ............................................................................................................. 37

5.1.1 Clyde Street and Wharf Road changes ..................................................................................... 38 5.1.2 Traffic growth ............................................................................................................................. 38

5.2 Future traffic movements ..................................................................................................................... 38 5.2.1 2021 volumes ............................................................................................................................ 39 5.2.2 2031 volumes ............................................................................................................................ 40

6 Assessment of operational traffic impacts ............................................................................................. 41 6.1 Do minimum ......................................................................................................................................... 41

6.1.1 Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout ......................................................................... 41 6.1.2 Princes Highway / North Street intersection .............................................................................. 41

6.2 Proposal ............................................................................................................................................... 41 6.2.1 Kings Highway roundabout ....................................................................................................... 42 6.2.2 Princes Highway / North Street intersection .............................................................................. 42 6.2.3 Corridor performance ................................................................................................................ 46 6.2.4 Local Batemans Bay town centre traffic impacts ...................................................................... 47

6.3 Heavy vehicles ..................................................................................................................................... 49 6.4 Impact on road safety .......................................................................................................................... 49 6.5 Active transport .................................................................................................................................... 49 6.6 Public transport .................................................................................................................................... 50

6.6.1 Regional services ...................................................................................................................... 50 6.6.2 Local services ............................................................................................................................ 50

6.7 Maritime traffic ..................................................................................................................................... 50 6.7.1 River traffic ................................................................................................................................ 53 6.7.2 Moorings .................................................................................................................................... 53

6.8 Parking ................................................................................................................................................. 54

7 Assessment of construction impacts ..................................................................................................... 55 7.1 Construction impact summary ............................................................................................................. 55 7.2 Construction staging ............................................................................................................................ 55 7.3 Ancillary facilities ................................................................................................................................. 56 7.4 Construction traffic ............................................................................................................................... 59

7.4.1 Construction vehicle movements .............................................................................................. 59 7.5 Construction impacts ........................................................................................................................... 60

7.5.1 Impacts on regional and local road network .............................................................................. 60 7.5.2 Cyclists and pedestrians ........................................................................................................... 61 7.5.3 Public transport .......................................................................................................................... 61 7.5.4 Maritime impacts ....................................................................................................................... 62 7.5.5 Parking ...................................................................................................................................... 62

8 Management and mitigation measures ................................................................................................... 63 8.1 Construction ......................................................................................................................................... 63 8.2 Operation ............................................................................................................................................. 63

Figures Figure 1-1: Location of the proposal ................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 1-2: Key features of the proposal ............................................................................................................ 8 Figure 2-1: Study area ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3-1: Posted speed limits within the study area ...................................................................................... 17 Figure 3-2: HML Network in study area ............................................................................................................ 18 Figure 3-3: Approved routes for 4.6m high vehicles......................................................................................... 19 Figure 3-4: 23m B ouble route .......................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 3-5: Daily volume for 2016 – Princes Highway ..................................................................................... 22 Figure 3-6: Hourly traffic profiles – typical summer and winter daily profiles ................................................... 23 Figure 3-7: Crash locations within and surrounding the study area between 2012 and 2016 ......................... 24 Figure 3-8: Local bus routes near the study area............................................................................................. 26 Figure 3-9: Pedestrian and cycle networks in Batemans Bay .......................................................................... 27 Figure 3-10: Maritime environment and features ............................................................................................. 29 Figure 3-11: Land use zoning ........................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 4-1: Current traffic volumes – typical weekday AM peak period 8:00am - 9:00am .............................. 33 Figure 4-2: Current traffic volumes – typical weekday PM peak period 3:00pm - 4:00pm .............................. 33 Figure 4-3: Current traffic volumes – weekend period 12:00pm – 1:00pm ...................................................... 33 Figure 4-4: Current traffic volumes – holiday peak period (Easter Friday 2017 12:00pm - 1:00pm) ............... 34 Figure 5-1: 2021 future traffic movements – typical weekday AM peak period 8:00am - 9:00am ................... 39 Figure 5-2: 2021 future traffic movements – typical weekday PM peak period 3:00pm - 4:00pm ................... 39 Figure 5-3: 2021 future traffic movements – weekend period 12:00pm – 1:00pm ........................................... 39 Figure 5-4: 2021 future traffic movements – holiday peak period (Easter Friday 2017 12:00pm - 1:00pm) ... 39 Figure 5-5: 2031 future traffic movements – typical weekday AM peak period 8:00am - 9:00am ................... 40 Figure 5-6: 2031 future traffic movements – typical weekday PM peak period 3:00pm - 4:00pm ................... 40 Figure 5-7: 2031 future traffic movements – weekend period 12:00pm – 1:00pm ........................................... 40 Figure 5-8: 2031 future traffic movements – holiday peak period (Easter Friday 2017 12:00pm - 1:00pm) ... 40 Figure 7-1 Ancillary facilities ............................................................................................................................. 57

Tables Table 1-1: Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements .................................................................... 9 Table 3-1: Intersections in the study area ........................................................................................................ 16 Table 3-2: Existing traffic data .......................................................................................................................... 21 Table 3-3: Summary of crashes in study area (2012-2016) ............................................................................. 24 Table 3-4: Modal share – journey to work data ................................................................................................ 25 Table 3-5: Clyde River maritime environment .................................................................................................. 27 Table 3-6: Typical boats passing under Batemans Bay Bridge ....................................................................... 30 Table 3-7: Average number of lifts per month .................................................................................................. 30 Table 3-8: Vessel types using lift spans ........................................................................................................... 31 Table 4-1: Queuing and delay when bridge is raised ....................................................................................... 35 Table 4-2: 2016 base case - modelled performance of Princes Highway / Kings Highway roundabout ......... 36 Table 4-3: 2016 base case - modelled performance of Princes Highway / North Street intersection .............. 36 Table 6-1: Weekday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / Kings Highway roundabout – for

the Do minimum and proposal options ........................................................................................... 43 Table 6-2: Weekend and holiday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / Kings Highway

roundabout – for the Do minimum and proposal options ............................................................... 44 Table 6-3: Weekday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / North Street intersection – for

the Do minimum and proposal options ........................................................................................... 45 Table 6-4: Weekend and public holiday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / North Street

intersection – for the Do minimum and proposal options ............................................................... 46 Table 6-5: Network performance summary ...................................................................................................... 47 Table 6-6: Local town centre trip diversions ..................................................................................................... 48 Table 6-7: Summary of vessels currently using link span affected by proposed bridge heights ..................... 51 Table 7-1: Ancillary facilities ............................................................................................................................. 58 Table 7-2: Preliminary construction traffic estimates........................................................................................ 59 Table 7-3: Construction traffic impact – access ............................................................................................... 60


Glossary and acronyms Term Definition

ADT Average Daily Traffic

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

Aimsun Integrated transport modelling software

ATC Daily automatic traffic counts for one week period

AM Morning peak hour

Base case Represents 2016 existing condition

HCM High Capacity Manual (2010)

HV Heavy Vehicles

Km/h Kilometres per hour

LGA Local Government Area

LoS Level of Service

LV Light Vehicles

NB Northbound

NSW New South Wales

PM Afternoon peak hour

Proposal Batemans Bay Bridge Replacement

Roads and Maritime NSW Roads and Maritime Services

Sec Seconds

SIDRA Traffic Intersection Analysis software

SB Southbound

SEARS Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements

TCS Traffic Control Signals

TMP Traffic Management Plan

TCAWS Traffic Works at Construction Sites, Roads and Maritime Guidelines

Veh Vehicle

Veh/h Vehicle per Hour

VHT Vehicle Hours Travelled

VKT Vehicle Kilometres Travelled

WB Westbound


Executive summary

Overview Roads and Maritime Services is proposing to construct a new Princes Highway bridge over the Clyde River at Batemans Bay known as the Batemans Bay Bridge Replacement proposal (the proposal). The new bridge would provide two lanes in both directions, improving traffic flow along the Princes Highway in Batemans Bay.

It is expected that early work for the proposal, such as relocation of existing utilities, would commence in 2018, with main construction commencing in 2019. The new bridge is planned to be completed and open to traffic in 2021. Once the new bridge is open to traffic, demolition of the existing bridge would commence. This work is expected to be completed by 2022.

The construction period for the proposal would be from 2018 to 2022, however the new bridge would be open to traffic in 2021. Removal of the existing bridge would only start once the new bridge is open to traffic. The removal of the existing bridge would be completed in 2022.

This report has assessed the potential traffic impacts on the road network of the proposal.

For the purpose of traffic assessment, modelling data was sourced from the GHD Batemans Bay Traffic Modelling – Options Assessment Report, 2017 and incorporated into SIDRA and Aimsun assessments for the proposal.

This traffic and transport assessment has been prepared to support the review of environmental factors (REF) and environment impact statement (EIS) for the proposal.

Strategic content The Princes Highway is the main north-south corridor linking Sydney to the NSW south coast and through to north-east Victoria. The highway is an important commuter, freight and tourist route with the latter function being particularly relevant for the road through Batemans Bay.

Within Batemans Bay, the capacity and reliability of the Princes Highway is reduced due to the existing Batemans Bay Bridge. The current bridge is a multi-span flat bridge with a central lift span. When the lift span is raised, the Princes Highway is closed to road traffic but maritime traffic with a height of up to 23 metres is able to pass under the raised central lift span. When the lift span is lowered, Princes Highway traffic can use the road but marine traffic over 3.6 metres in height cannot pass under the existing bridge.

The proposal would replace the existing bridge with a new bridge which would provide up to 12 metre clearance for marine vessels to pass under the bridge. The new bridge would not have a lift span – and therefore traffic flow on the Princes Highway would not be interrupted to allow marine traffic to pass under the bridge.

Existing road network operation The existing bridge is a narrow two lane bridge with footpath on the southern side of the bridge, and carries around 13,500 vehicles per day. The bridge is an approved road for maximum length 23 metre B Double and 4.6m high vehicles however it is not accessible for Higher Mass Limit (HML) vehicles.

Day to day traffic volumes are relatively similar, with typically 13 to 14 per cent of weekly traffic movements occurring on each day including Saturday and Sunday, the exception is a Friday which the average 2016 traffic volumes on the Roads and Maritime Traffic Viewer tool indicate as accounting for 17 per cent of weekly volumes.

However, traffic in the area experiences significant peaks during holiday periods, with some roads identified as having to cater for more than double the normal week day traffic volumes during 2017 Easter period from analysis of tube count data. The 2016 data indicates that during these peak periods the weekly profile is


less marked with Saturday to Thursday volumes typically between 13 and 15 per cent and Friday volumes equating to between 15 per cent and 16 per cent of weekly volumes.

During peak periods outside public holidays, the traffic modelling indicates that the road network operates well at Level of Service (LoS) C and better. However congestion can be caused on the road network when:

the central lift span on the existing bridge is raised – typically twice a day

there are mechanical problems with the central lift span on the existing bridge which result in Princes Highway traffic flow being interrupted for significant periods of time

peak holiday periods.

During peak holiday periods, traffic performance of the roundabout at Kings Highway and Princes Highway is poor with a LoS F on Princes Highway east and LoS E on Kings Highway approaches. Significant queueing is also experienced on both approaches with queues of 300 metres modelled on Kings Highway and 600 metres on Princes Highway east.

Furthermore the current operation on the central lift span can be uncertain as although there are scheduled lift times, maritime users can request the bridge to be open on an hour’s notice outside weekday peak traffic times.

Do minimum option The traffic implications of the Do minimum option include:

there would continue to be restrictions on HML vehicles using the Princes Highway crossing of the Clyde River at Batemans Bay

the reliability of the lift span may reduce as the infrastructure ages, requiring additional maintenance or increasing the risk of operating issues impacting traffic.

During public holidays, traffic at the roundabout between Kings Highway and Princes Highway would worsen significantly with two approaches experiencing LoS F and queuing of between 600 and 900 metres in length by 2021 and over one kilometre by 2031.

Travel times during peak periods are also anticipated to increase with expected travel times by 2031 being over nine minutes longer than the same journey during normal weekdays or weekends.

Traffic benefits of the proposal The proposal would provide motorists and public transport uses on the Princes Highway with more reliable journey times as the bridge would no longer close to road traffic to accommodate maritime traffic.

The capacity of the bridge crossing would be increased, from one lane either direction to two lanes either direction.

The associated works at the Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout would provide greater traffic efficiency by improving lane management to reflect actual volumes and signalling of particular approaches during peak periods.

Overall, the proposal is expected to improve future peak holiday period travel times, with travel times by 2031 being eight minutes quicker with the proposal than would occur in the Do minimum scenario for the same year.

Maritime benefits The proposal would provide improved movement along the Clyde River for boats with the bridge providing a navigational clearance of up to 12 metres mean high water springs level. The new bridge would also increase the navigational channel width.

There are currently close to 100 vessels that either moor near the river crossing or regularly pass under the bridge during their normal course of travelling, these include a tourist ferry, barges, houseboats, motor


cruises and yachts. These vehicles are all restricted to periods when the bridge is open to pass from one side to the other.

The new bridge would improve access for about 90 per cent of marine traffic that currently rely on the existing bridge lift span raise. This would enable 24 hour access beneath the bridge. In addition the new bridge would also enable smaller sailing dinghies to access water on both sides of the bridge.

Yachts with masts requiring more than 12 metres clearances would be unable to pass under the bridge, without dropping their masts. However the majority of these primarily moor and utilise water downstream of the existing bridge and therefore would not be impacted by the change.

The existing T-wharf downstream of the bridge would be replaced to provide a mooring opportunity for yachts that cannot pass under the bridge.


1 Introduction

1.1 Proposal identification Roads and Maritime Services is proposing to construct a new bridge on the Princes Highway over the Clyde River at Batemans Bay. The Batemans Bay Bridge replacement (the proposal) would remove the existing bridge and provide a new bridge with two lanes in each direction, improving traffic flow along the Princes Highway in Batemans Bay.

This report supports the environmental assessment for the proposal.

1.1.1 Proposal location and setting The proposal is located at the Princes Highway crossing of the Clyde River at Batemans Bay, between the Kings Highway and North Street (refer to Figure 1-1). Local roads including Clyde Street, Wharf Road and Old Punt Road would also be modified by the proposal.

The Batemans Bay Bridge is an important link for the Princes Highway. The Princes Highway is a classified State Highway (A1) and is the primary coastal route between Sydney and Melbourne. The Kings Highway, which is Canberra’s primary road connection to the NSW south coast, intersects with the Princes Highway in the north of the proposal area. The crossing over the Clyde River is also an important local connection between the commercial centre of Batemans Bay and areas north of the river such as North Batemans Bay.

On the southern side of the bridge is Bateman Bay’s main shopping and commercial area including a large supermarket and shopping mall. Key features adjacent to the proposal area on the south side of the bridge include holiday accommodation, commercial areas, river foreshore areas and facilities as well as an area mapped as a State Environmental Planning Policy No 14 Coastal Wetlands (SEPP14 wetland). On the northern side of the bridge are the suburbs of North Batemans Bay and Surfside. Other features near the proposal area include holiday accommodation, residences and commercial development.

1.1.2 Key features of the proposal The main features of the proposal include:

construction of a new bridge to the west (upstream) of the existing Batemans Bay Bridge across the Clyde River including:

− bridge approaches generally between Wharf Road on the northern side and Clyde Street on the southern side

− two traffic lanes in each direction (at least 3.5 metres wide)

− a three-metre-wide shared use path on the eastern side of the new bridge connecting the Kings Highway to North Street

− navigational clearance of about 12 metres from mean high water spring (MHWS) level

− no access to Clyde Street, which would pass under the new bridge

upgrade of the Princes Highway generally between North Street and the Kings Highway

upgrade of the Kings Highway / Princes Highway intersection

local road adjustments at Clyde Street, Wharf Road and Old Punt Road

earthworks, including cuttings and embankments and retaining walls to support the new bridge approaches

temporary ancillary facilities during construction including water quality controls, site offices, construction / demolition compounds, batching plants and stockpile sites

permanent operational water quality controls


utility relocations including optic fibre, telecommunications, electrical, water, drainage and sewerage

replacement of the T-wharf downstream of the existing bridge

removal of the existing bridge following opening of the new bridge

site rehabilitation and landscaping works.

The key features of the proposal are shown in Figure 1-2.

A number of temporary ancillary facilities and road diversions would be established for the proposal. These features would be removed and the relevant sites rehabilitated at completion of the proposal.

1.1.3 Proposal background The Batemans Bay Bridge is located on the Princes Highway around 270 kilometres south of Sydney and 150 kilometres east of Canberra. The existing bridge over the Clyde River at Batemans Bay was constructed in 1956 with a central lift span used to allow boats up to 23 metres in height to pass underneath. The bridge was constructed to replace a vehicle ferry across the Clyde River. While water traffic was originally related to the local timber and fishing industries, this has increasingly changed to recreational and commercial water traffic. The lift span is generally raised twice each day for a local tourist ferry but also for private yachts and commercial and recreational vessels. As the lift span is raised however, traffic along the Princes Highway is disrupted.

The existing bridge is structurally in poor condition, and does not conform to modern safety standards. Major structural components of the trusses are vulnerable to vehicle strike and there is evidence of significant vehicle impacts to the bridge occurring in the past. Higher Mass Limit (HML) vehicles are not permitted to use the bridge due to poor structural condition and height limitations. Issues with the central lift span have closed the bridge on numerous occasions resulting in local and regional traffic and economic impacts. The existing bridge provides a single, narrow lane in each direction, which can result in substantial congestion especially in peak holiday periods. Where there is an incident on the bridge or where the lift span has failed, the detour for highway traffic is around 350 kilometres.


Figure 1-1: Location of the proposal


Figure 1-2 Key features of the proposal


1.2 Purpose of the report The proposal is subject to assessment under two planning pathways, a review of environmental factors (REF) under Part 5 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and an environmental impact statement (EIS) under Part 4 of the EP&A Act.

This report has been prepared to support the REF and EIS for the proposal. This report has been prepared in accordance with relevant traffic guidelines and consideration of relevant policies, as well as the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) for the EIS proposal.

The purpose of this report is to describe the proposal, to document the likely impacts of the proposal on traffic and transport, and to detail management measures to be implemented.

1.2.1 Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements Part of the proposal is located within an area mapped as SEPP 14 wetlands. As such, an EIS has been prepared and approval is being sought under a Part 4 of the EP&A Act. As part of this process, SEARs have been issued, which stipulate the requirements for the EIS. The requirements relevant to the traffic and transport assessment are presented in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1: Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements

Reference Requirement Where addressed Traffic and transport

Consideration of the traffic impacts on the surrounding land uses during construction

Chapter 7

1.3 Structure of the report This report has been divided into the following sections:

Section 1 Introduction provides an overview of the proposal

Section 2 Study methodology provides the study approach, reference traffic data and model used in the assessment

Section 3 Existing environment provides the regional and local transport context of the proposal area. This section provides an overview of road network, historical traffic growth, current transport mode share, crash data, public transport and maritime transport

Section 4 Existing road network performance describes the existing transport network performance in the study area

Section 5 The proposal provides an overview of the traffic models used for this study. It describes the future land use assumptions and future traffic growth across the study area network

Section 6 Assessment of operational traffic impacts provides an assessment of the resulting traffic and transport impacts which are anticipated to occur from the operational stage of the proposal

Section 7 Assessment of construction impacts assessed potential traffic impacts during the construction stage of the proposal

Section 8 Management and mitigation measures summarises all measures included in the proposal to manage traffic and transport impacts


2 Study methodology

2.1 Relevant guidelines This report has been prepared with reference to the following documents:

Roads and Maritime Traffic Modelling Guidelines, February 2013 Version 1.0

Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2016)

Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, Issue 2.2, Roads and Maritime, October 2002

Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice

− Part 3 – Traffic Studies Analysis

− Part 6 – Intersections, Interchanges, Crossings.

2.2 Study area The primary study area for the traffic assessment is centred around the Princes Highway, between the Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout and the Princes Highway / North Street intersection. The study area includes local interconnecting roads including Clyde Street, Wharf Road and Peninsula Drive. The study area is shown in Figure 2-1.

For the purpose of modelling, the extent of the model to the south of the existing bridge includes the signalised intersection of Princes Highway / Beach Road and Princes Highway / Cranbrook Road.


Figure 2-1: Study area


2.3 Study approach For the purpose of the traffic and transport assessment, standard traffic engineering practices were adopted. The key steps undertaken included:

collation of previous modelling files

Previous Aimsun traffic modelling was undertaken by GHD for the purposes of the proposal. The model development and calibration was undertaken as part of that work.

collation of existing traffic data

Traffic data from the Roads and Maritime permanent traffic volume counter north of the Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout was obtained. This data has been used to assist in the understanding of long term trends in traffic volumes through the study area. It was also used in the development of a normal weekend peak period scenario.

Existing traffic data has been obtained to cover AM and PM weekday periods, weekend periods and public holiday periods.

Traffic counts were undertaken during 2015, 2016, and 2017 to provide hourly and daily vehicle count information for the Princes Highway.

Tube counts were sourced for a period over Easter 2017 on Princes Highway on either side of the Kings Highway roundabout, as well as on the Kings Highway approach to Princes Highway. This provided the peak holiday traffic volumes for the regional road network.

understanding the existing transport networks

A review of different transport networks and conditions was undertaken as part of this assessment. These networks include:

− public transport

− active transport

− private road based transport

− maritime transport.

existing network performance

The current performance of the local road network was assessed, including general capacity of the existing bridge, queueing and level of service at intersections on the road network. The existing road network performance was modelled in both SIDRA and Aimsun modelling.

future base case models

Future base case models were developed including the Do minimum and With Proposal scenarios for adopted future years of 2021 and 2031.

The future models include growth as agreed with Roads and Maritime of 0.9 per cent per annum, which is consistent with the Princes Highway Corridor Strategy prepared in August 2016. The With Proposal scenario distributed traffic associated with the left in slip lane from the Princes Highway to Wharf Road, the connection of Wharf Road to Old Punt Road, and the closure of the Princes Highway / Clyde Street intersection.

Using assumptions provided by Roads and Maritime, the With Proposal scenario also included Higher Mass Limit (HML) vehicles on the Princes Highway and across the new bridge, growing at a rate of 10 per cent in the first year and four per cent per annum thereafter until 50 per cent of all heavy vehicle traffic is HML vehicles. As a conservative approach, no reduction in non-HML vehicles was considered.

assess future traffic performance

The impact of the proposal was assessed including:

− capacity of the four lane bridge which would be available to traffic 24 hours


− a reduced maximum clearance under the bridge for maritime transport

− the operation of the end of network intersections (Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout and Princes Highway / North Street intersection) either end of the bridge as well as intersections further southwest on the road network

− the operational changes to Wharf Road and Clyde Street from changes to the connections to Princes Highway.

As per the existing network, the future network was assessed for typical weekday, weekend and public holiday traffic volumes. A 1.2 per cent growth factor sensitivity test was also undertaken for the weekend and public holiday periods to test the robustness of the proposal.

construction activities and impacts

Construction activities and their associated traffic impacts were assessed.

management measures

Management measures for construction and operation traffic and transport impacts are provided.


3 Existing environment The existing traffic and transport conditions in the study area are described within this chapter and are, where appropriate, discussed in terms of regional and local context.

3.1 Road network The road network within the study area consists of:

Princes Highway (including the Batemans Bay Bridge and approaches)

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road and McLeod Street

Old Punt Road

Kings Highway (Braidwood Road)

Peninsula Drive

Mundarra Way.

In addition modelling has included Beach Road and Cranbrook Road which intersect with the Princes Highway at signalised intersections about 600 metres and 2.1 kilometres south of the existing bridge. While outside of the proposal area, the purpose of the inclusion of these intersections was to confirm that changes in the proposal area would not relocate queues further south on the Princes Highway.

3.2 Road hierarchy and descriptions

3.2.1 Arterial roads

A1 Princes Highway The A1 Princes Highway at Batemans Bay forms part of the main north south transport corridor that runs from Sydney to north east Victoria.

To the north of the existing bridge, the highway comprises a single carriageway with one lane in each direction with localised widening to incorporate overtaking sections and turning traffic at intersections. Intersections are generally provided in the form of unsignalised T- intersections or roundabouts.

To the south of the existing bridge, the highway is primarily provided as a single carriageway with a minimum of two lanes in each direction. Intersections in this area are generally controlled by traffic signals. The highway reverts to one lane in each direction about one kilometre south of the existing bridge.

Batemans Bay Bridge The existing Batemans Bay Bridge is about 300 metres in length and comprises a single traffic lane in each direction. The bridge has a central single lift span which can be raised to height of about 23 metres. Traffic lights are located at both ends of the lift span and are about 110 metres from the southern end of the bridge and about 90 metres from the northern end of the bridge. The traffic lights are only used to hold traffic when the lift span is open.

The central lift span of the bridge is raised twice a day at 11.45am and 2.20pm for a tourist ferry with additional openings for private maritime vessels (when requested). On average the central lift span is raised


about 10001 times each year. The central lift span is not raised during the peak periods of between 8am and 10am and 2.30pm and 6pm.

The raising of the central lift span generally takes about five minutes, during which traffic on the Princes Highway is stopped.

Kings Highway The Kings Highway (also known as Main Road 51), is the primary east-west route between the Canberra/Queanbeyan region and the south coast at Batemans Bay. The Kings Highway intersects with the Princes Highway immediately north of the proposal. The highway is predominately a two-way two lane single carriageway, however to the west of the Old Punt Road roundabout, there are overtaking / climbing lanes provided for north westbound traffic.

3.2.2 Local roads There are a number of local roads that would be impacted by the replacement of the existing bridge or during construction. These roads are described below.

North Street North Street is a local street that runs east–west from a signalised intersection with the Princes Highway to Clyde Street.

The road generally comprises a wide unmarked lane which accommodates a single lane of traffic in each direction and kerbside car parking.

Clyde Street Clyde Street is a local road that provides access to the riverfront, accommodation, retail shops and boat ramps in Smoke Point. It currently forms an unsignalised cross road with Princes Highway about 50 metres south of the existing bridge. All traffic movements at the intersection are permitted except for right turns out of Clyde Street south on to the Princes Highway. This movement is prohibited with signage and a traffic island that forces vehicles to make a left turn movement only.

Batemans Bay bus interchange, which caters for regional coach services, is located on Clyde Street just to the north of the North Street / Clyde Street intersection.

Wharf Road / McLeod Street Wharf Road is a local street that runs from a left in left out intersection with Princes Highway on the northern approach to Batemans Bay Bridge through to Mundarra Way and the residential area of Surfside. Wharf Road also provides access to Korners Park and the Clyde River foreshore and accommodation.

The road is generally unmarked and comprises of one traffic lane in each direction.

Old Punt Road Old Punt Road extends from a roundabout with the Kings Highway (about 100 metres north of the Princes Highway and Kings Highway roundabout) to the foreshore area just north of the existing bridge. The section of Old Punt Road near the Kings Highway provides access to the service centre and to residential areas north of the existing bridge. The section of Old Punt Road that would be directly impacted by the proposal provides access to a foreshore restaurant and boat ramp.

1 Roads and Maritime Bridge Opening times - http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/using-waterways/bridge-opening-times.html


Peninsula Drive Peninsula Drive is a local street that provides direct access to residential dwellings and a connection through to Batemans Bay Public School and Surfside.

The road generally comprises one lane in each direction with kerbside parking provided along the residential sections of the road. Due the roads horizontal and vertical alignment, overtaking is prohibited along much if its length.

Mundarra Way Mundarra Way is an access road to Batemans Bay Public School and a short link road that connects Peninsula Drive to McLeod Street. It is generally one lane in each direction.

Beach Road Beach Road provides a key link to the southern coastal suburbs of Batemans Bay as well as connecting into a recreational area on the western side of Princes Highway.

Beach Road is an east west connection, starting at an intersection with the Princes Highway and connecting to Mackay Park in the west, travelling east to the beachfront and providing access to Catalina. The intersection at Princes Highway is a four way signalised intersection. The road is generally two lanes in each direction.

Cranbrook Road Cranbrook Road is a local street that provides access to an area comprising of various commercial businesses to the west of the Princes Highway. Cranbrook Road intersects with the Princes Highway in a four way signalised intersection. It is generally one lane in each direction with on-street parking.

3.2.3 Intersections Intersections within the study area are summarised within Table 3-1.

Table 3-1: Intersections in the study area

Intersection Current Controls Princes Highway / Kings Highway / Peninsula Drive Roundabout

Princes Highway / Wharf Road Unsignalised left in left out

Peninsula Drive / Mundarra Way Roundabout

McLeod Street / Mundarra Way Unsignalised T

Princes Highway / Clyde Street Unsignalised Cross

Princes Highway / North Street Traffic Signals

Princes Highway / Beach Road Traffic Signals

Princes Highway / Cranbrook Road Traffic Signals

3.3 Speed limits Posted speed limits within the study area are shown in Figure 3-1. The highway speed limit, outside the study area, is 90 kilometres per hour in the south and 100 kilometres per hour in the north, which is standard for a highway away from towns and built up areas. Within the study area, the highway speed limit is reduced to account for local traffic and is 60 kilometres per hour.


Figure 3-1: Posted speed limits within the study area

3.4 Heavy vehicle network There are a number of constraints to heavy vehicle freight traffic movement through the study area. This includes:

the A1 Princes Highway is approved for use by heavy vehicles up to a 23 metre B-Double. Batemans Bay Bridge provides no current constraint to these vehicles

the Kings Highway is approved for use by heavy vehicles up to a 19 metre B-Double

twenty-five metre and 26 metre B-Doubles are prohibited on both the Princes Highway and Kings Highway

the A1 Princes Highway to the north of Batemans Bay Bridge and the Kings Highway are Higher Mass Limits (HML) short combination routes. The bridge is a constraint to these vehicles and as they are not permitted to use the bridge and must detour around the bridge for destinations south of the bridge

HML 25 metre and 26 metre B-Doubles and HML A-Double Type 1 road trains are prohibited on both the A1 Princes Highway to the north and south of the bridge and on the Kings Highway

the A1 Princes Highway is a 4.6 metre high vehicle route with conditions to the north and south and across Batemans Bay Bridge

the Kings Highway is a 4.6 metre high vehicle route without conditions.

These restrictions are shown in Figure 3-2 to Figure 3-4.


Figure 3-2: HML Network in study area


Figure 3-3: Approved routes for 4.6m high vehicles


Figure 3-4: 23m B Double route


3.5 Traffic data

3.5.1 Current traffic volumes Traffic volume data has been collated from the following sources:

Roads and Maritime permanent traffic counter

traffic reports and modelling undertaken by GHD

Easter holiday period tube counts

traffic counts undertaken in June 2017.

A summary of this data is provided within Table 3-2.

Table 3-2: Existing traffic data

ARTERIAL Date of latest Information

Average daily volumes

Average peak hour

Princes Highway North of Kings Highway (permanent counter 08.352)

2017 8,900 -

At Batemans Bay Bridge (counter 08.003, currently inactive)

2015 13,476 -

At Bridge 2016 13,364 1,262

Kings Highway1 GHD options report 2016 3,016 2851

LOCAL Peninsula Drive GHD options report 2016 3,524 333

Wharf Road GHD options report 2016 1,566 148

Clyde Street North GHD options report 2016 614 58

Clyde Street South GHD options report 2016 2,371 224

North Street GHD options report 2016 1,956 197

Beach Road GHD options report 2016 7,772 783

Cranbrook Road GHD options report 2016 6,720 677

Notes 1 The 2017 Easter holiday peak hour volume on Kings Highway was 1074 vehicles with a daily volume of 7,828 vehicles

3.5.2 Traffic growth and trends

Princes Highway

The Roads and Maritime permanent counter provided traffic data for the Princes Highway about 70 metres east of Kings Highway from 2008 (Figure 3-5 and Figure 3-6). From this data the following is noted: Current Patterns the average daily weekday traffic on this section of road is about 80002 vehicles, and ranges from

between 6000 to 7000 vehicles per day in low season to between 9000 and 11,000 vehicles per day during high season

2 2016 volumes


during 2016 on average, weekend daily traffic was 8 percent lower than weekday daily movements ranging between 6300 and 9300 vehicles per day depending on the season

high season for traffic appears to run from October through to April with lower volumes generally experienced between May and September

public holiday traffic on Princes Highway is similar to weekday traffic at 8800 vehicles per day

the PM peak accounts for 28 percent of daily traffic movements with about 2480 vehicle movements (47 percent of which is travelling southbound and 53 percent is travelling northbound)

the AM peak accounts for 23 percent of daily traffic movements with about 2050 vehicles movements (68 percent of which is southbound and 32 percent is northbound).

Figure 3-5: Daily volume for 2016 – Princes Highway


Summer (February) Traffic Profiles

Winter Traffic Profiles

Figure 3-6: Hourly traffic profiles – typical summer and winter daily profiles


3.6 Crash data The crash data analysis has been undertaken using crash data provided by Roads and Maritime for a five-year period between 2012 and 2016. Crash data was provided for A1 Princes Highway, Clyde Street, Kings Highway and Wharf Road. Figure 3-7 shows crash locations on key roads within the study area.

Figure 3-7: Crash locations within and surrounding the study area between 2012 and 2016

Between 2012 and 2016, a total of 22 crashes were reported on A1 Princes Highway, Clyde Street, North Street, Kings Highway and Wharf Road. While there were a number of different crash types, no fatalities were recorded within the period reviewed.

The type of crashes is summarised in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3: Summary of crashes in study area (2012-2016)

Crash description Crash severity Total % of total crashes Fatalities Serious Moderate Minor Non

casualty Right Through 2 1 3 14%

Off Left on L/H Bend Hit Object

1 1 5%

Cross Traffic 1 2 3 14%

Rear End 1 1 2 9%

Right Far 1 1 2 9%

Parking 1 1 5%

Right Rear 1 1 5%

Left Off Road into Object 1 1 5%

Head on 1 1 5%

Lane sideswipe 1 1 5%

On Road Out of Control 2 2 9%

Pedestrian Involvement 1 1 5%

Off Road to right 1 1 5%

Unknown / Other 1 1 2 5%

Total 0 7 4 0 11 22 100%


In the analysis period 15 crashes occurred along the Princes Highway or within 50 metres of its intersections. Intersection crashes accounted for 80 percent of Princes Highway incidents as follows: North Street / Princes Highway intersection - two crashes (serious) both of which involved right turning

traffic

Clyde Street / Princes Highway intersection – three crashes

− two crashes (one serious and one non-casualty) involving a cross movement and priority through movement

− one crash (non-casualty) involving a rear end collision to a vehicle turning right

Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout – seven crashes

− one crash (non-casualty) involving a cross movement

− two crashes (1 moderate and 1 non-casualty) involving right far side collisions

− one head on crash (moderate) within undivided carriageway

− one lane sideswipe crash (non-casualty)

− one off road to the left of carriageway into an object (serious)

− one on road out of control (serious).

Three mid block crashes were recorded, consisting of two rear end collisions (one moderate and 1 non-casualty) and 1 off road to the left into object (non-casualty). No crashes were recorded on the existing bridge although one crash was recorded on the southern approach.

3.7 Transport mode share To gauge modal share for traffic movements within Batemans Bay, data from the Bureau of Transport Statistics (BTS) Journey to Work Portal was used. This provides basic information in relation to modal share of work trips which are likely to represent approximately a third of daily trips.

It is noted that the BTS data does not identify cycle trips. The Eurobodalla Shire Council community profile portal provided some data on cycle trips and indicated similar car and walking modal share but also identified cycle and motorbike trips.

Table 3-4: Modal share – journey to work data

Work trip modal share Private motorised transport Public transport Active transport Car as driver

Car as passenger

Motorbike Bus Taxi Cycle Walk

Bateman’s Bay as place of work (BTS)

84% 8% - 1% - - 3%

Batemans Bay resident work trips (BTS)

82% 8% 1% 0% 5%

Batemans Bay resident work trips (Eurobodalla web site)

84% 9% 0.5% 0.5% 0 1% 5%

The data shows that driving in a private vehicle is the preferred mode to get to work. Public transport is low at one per cent for people who work in Batemans and is less for those residents going to work. Active transport, in particular walking, comprises between three and five per cent. These trips are assumed to be undertaken by those that live and work in Batemans Bay and suburbs due to the good network of pathways.


3.8 Public transport

3.8.1 Bus routes The A1 Princes Highway is a strategic bus corridor, used by frequent bus services that connect major regional centres.

Regional bus services are provided by 14.5 metre coaches that currently turn from Princes Highway into Clyde Street to access the bus interchange located at the intersection of Clyde Street and North Street. On leaving the interchange, buses access Princes Highway via the North Street intersection.

In addition, three local bus routes operate within Batemans Bay although only one route uses the bridge. Local buses are 12.5 metre vehicles. The local routes are:

Route 757 Long Beach/Maloneys Beach via Surfside (30 to 40 minutes frequency peak, two hour frequency off-peak)

Route 760 Batemans Bay to Moruya (40 to 60 minutes frequency)

Route 761 Sunshine Bay via Catalina (60 minutes frequency)

The local bus routes near the study area are shown in Figure 3-8.

Figure 3-8: Local bus routes near the study area

There are no bus stops along the Princes Highway approaching the existing bridge. Route 757, from Long Beach to Batemans Bay, crosses the bridge and includes a stop at Wharf Road. From Wharf Road, buses turn left onto the Princes Highway to cross the Clyde River into Batemans Bay. Services travelling out from Batemans Bay do not use Wharf Road but travel along Peninsula Drive to McLeod Street.


3.9 Cycling and pedestrian network The Eurobodalla Shire Council has developed a Pathway Strategy (2017) to guide the provision of footpaths and shared use pathways throughout the shire. The aim of the strategy is to increase the safety of pedestrians and cyclists through separation from vehicles and encourage active transport within the region. The network is partially complete and Figure 3-9 shows existing and proposed pathways.

Figure 3-9: Pedestrian and cycle networks in Batemans Bay

3.10 Clyde River maritime environment

3.10.1 General description The Clyde River is an active maritime environment, which is navigable by small vessels up to Nelligen from Batemans Bay. A report by NSW Maritime in 2009 defines the use of Batemans Bay and the Clyde River to the east of the Bridge as moderate and low to moderate. Further details are provided in Table 3-5.

Table 3-5: Clyde River maritime environment

Section Degree of Usage

Type of Usage Facilities

Batemans Bay

Moderate A broad expanse of water popular for fishing, cruising, sailing and charter operations. Area is used for sailing regattas and fishing competitions.

Corrigans and Caseys beaches located on the southern side of the bay and Long Beach on the northern side are popular for boaters and swimmers, especially near camping and picnic areas.

Batemans Bay Downstream of bridge

Low to Moderate

An area that includes the Clyde River bar, a narrow navigation channel, moorings, the marina and Batemans Bay township. Little or no towing activity. Batemans Marine Park sanctuary zone at Cullendulla Creek.

Boat ramps at Hanging Rock and the Boat Harbour. Swing moorings and the Batemans Bay. Marina are also located in this area. Public wharves located at Hanging Rock and adjacent to Batemans Bay town centre.

Clyde River Upstream of bridge

Low Intensive aquaculture (oyster) activity in this area. Some fishing and small sailing craft. Little or no towing activity. NB the area is used for sailing activities for people with a disability.

Boat ramps immediately west of the Princes Highway traffic bridge, on northern and southern banks of the river. A number of boatsheds are located on the northern shore.


Source: NSW Maritime Clyde Estuary Safe Boating Plan 2009-2013

The general maritime features of the area are shown in Figure 3-10.

Key components of the maritime environment near the proposal are:

the current maximum clearances available for maritime vessels under the existing bridge are:

− Closed 3.6 metres above mean high water mark

− Open 22.8 metres above mean high water mark.

the raised span of the bridge is about 23 metres wide and the navigable water varies depending on vessel draft

no anchoring is permitted either side of the bridge due to submarine cabling

there are two boat ramps that are located either side of the Clyde River, upstream of the existing bridge. The facilities provided at each launching facility include:

− Southern bank – Lions Park boat ramp

Hard surface / formed ramp

Trailer parking facilities – 13 spaces

Car parking spaces – 24 spaces

Toilets

Picnic facilities

− Northern bank – Old Punt Road boat ramp

Hard surface / formed ramp

Informal trailer parking accommodating about 10 vehicles plus trailer

Picnic facilities

ferry wharf located to the south of the bridge where the commercial tourist ferry picks up and drops off tourists

public toilet facilities are located on the east side of the existing bridge on the southern foreshore with a footpath provided underneath the bridge

there are about 112 private moorings and 45 commercial moorings within the Clyde River / Batemans Bay area, the majority of which are located either side of Batemans Bay Bridge.


Source: Roads & Maritime Online Boating Maps

Figure 3-10: Maritime environment and features


3.10.2 Boat usage Data provided by Roads and Maritime provides an indication of the number of boats that currently pass under the bridge and the minimum clearances (See Table 3-6).

The frequency of these vessels passing under the existing bridge is not known, however, commercial operators such as the tourist ferry are likely to require multiple bridge passages per day.

Table 3-6: Typical boats passing under Batemans Bay Bridge

Type Roads and Maritime boat usage data Vessel type Minimum required

clearance above Mean High Water

Approximate number of vessels in group

Commercial operators ‘Escapade’ Tourist Ferry 8m 1

Houseboats 8.5m 9

Barges 8m 1

Private mooring licenses Yacht 17m downstream of bridge 11m upstream of bridge

45 – 50 7

Houseboat 7m 11 (at least)

Motor Cruisers 7m 15 (at least)

Tourist / visiting Transportable sail boat / dinghy / yacht

12m -

Yacht 18m (in the known regular

users)

-

Large Yacht or other Up to 23m (potentially – current maximum

clearance)

-

[1] It is assumed that the maximum required clearance figure provided within the Roads and Maritime data includes an appropriate clearance between the upper part of the vessel and the underside of the bridge

3.10.3 Existing bridge lift span raises The average number of bridge lifts between July 2012 and June 2016 was provided by the current bridge operator and are shown in Table 3-7. It also shows the number of passing vessels during the lift spans. The type of vessels that used the lift spans are shown in Table 3-8.

Table 3-7: Average number of lifts per month

Period (inclusive) Total number of lifts

Average number of lifts per month

Total vessels passing

Average number of vessels per month

July 2012 to February 2013 524 33 593 37

March 2013 to February 2014 802 67 897 75



March 2016 to June 2016 228 76 245 82

Total 3054 56 3422 62

Note: March 2015 to February 2016 period includes approximately 4 months of inactivity for maintenance, explaining lower values


Table 3-8: Vessel types using lift spans

Period (inclusive) Number of passages in period (% of total for period) Ferries Yachts Houseboats Cruiser /

charter / pleasure

Roads and Maritime

maintenance

Other

July 2012 to February 2013 436 (74%) 45 (8%) 1 (0%) 41 (7%) 67 (11%) 3 (0%)

March 2013 to February 2014 645 (72%) 73 (8%) 7 (1%) 58 (6%) 110 (12%) 4 (1%)



March 2016 to June 2016 180 (73%) 18 (7%) 2 (1%) 9 (4%) 32 (13%) 4 (2%)

Total 2389 (70%) 271 (8%) 14 (0%) 206 (6%) 504 (15%) 38 (1%)

Note: March 2015 to February 2016 period includes about 4 months of inactivity for maintenance, explaining lower values

3.11 Existing land uses The land uses within the Batemans Bay area influence the volume and type of traffic that use Batemans Bay Bridge.

The general land zoning within Batemans Bay is provided within the Eurobodalla Shire Council Local Environmental Plan. This is indicated within Figure 3-11. Key features of land uses in and around the study area are:

uses on the northern side of the bridge are primarily residential in nature

there are large areas that are currently undeveloped but are identified for future development including:

− large lot residential development to the north east of Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout

− an area of business uses to the south west of Kings Highway / Old Punt Road roundabout

immediately to the south of the existing bridge, land is zoned as mixed use and contains the main shopping and commercial precinct of Batemans Bay

to the north of the southern approach to the bridge at Smoke Point there is a small area of residential and accommodation facilities

the other industrial business uses within the Batemans Bay are located further south of the study area, to the west of the Princes Highway (Vesper Street).


Figure 3-11: Land Use Zoning


4 Existing road network performance

4.1 Traffic data sources The majority of the traffic data undertaken for the purpose of this proposal was sourced from the previous GHD modelling study. This was supplemented by tube counts done during peak Easter holiday period and traffic volumes from the Roads and Maritime traffic volume viewer. Ideally intersection counts would have been available for the weekend and holiday peak periods however these were not available so demand adjustments were made using the tube count data only.

4.2 Traffic volumes The daily traffic volumes near the proposal are described in Table 3-2, with the current traffic volumes on the network from the traffic model indicated within Figure 4-1 to Figure 4-3.

These volumes have been provided from the calibrated base model and therefore represent what has been used for the traffic analysis. Note that these are demand volumes, not throughput volumes.

11 L 122 L539 T 7 8 9 297 T 126 12 29

7 R R T L 548 T 158 R R T LL R 14 L T 782 L T R R 3826 T 704 138 L 20 103 11 23 T 615

683 93 L 202 L 66T L

T R R 47539 48 L 28

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 4-1: Current traffic volumes – typical weekday AM peak period 8:00am - 9:00am

17 L 145 L735 T 8 11 13 536 T 162 8 40


445 79 L 134 L 12T L

T R R 175626 74 L 68

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 4-2: Current traffic volumes – typical weekday PM peak period 3:00pm - 4:00pm

37 L 396 L807 T 7 0 22 390 T 117 6 3728 R R T L 829 T 44 R R T L

L R 12 L T 422 L T R R 15559 T 350 66 L 30 16 18 17 T 319

348 88 L 127 L 14T L

T R R 119799 52 L 46

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 4-3: Current traffic volumes – weekend period 12:00pm – 1:00pm


11 L 159 L734 T 6 7 7 466 T 908 110 145


1219 199 L 434 L 59T L

T R R 45746 51 L 27

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 4-4: Current traffic volumes – holiday peak period (Easter Friday 2017 12:00pm - 1:00pm)

4.3 Existing road network performance The key indicators of the road network performance within the study area are considered to be:

capacity of the existing bridge based on average periods where it is open for vehicles to cross

delays and queuing resulting during periods when the bridge is raised for maritime traffic

capacity of intersections being Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout and Princes Highway / North Street intersection.

The existing road network performance has been assessed against the Level of Service rating. Level of Service is a common measure of effectiveness adopted for transport related studies. This has been colour coded as follows:

LoS A – C Considered to represent good to acceptable levels of service

Where traffic is still with the limits of stable flow with most vehicles being able to travel at the desired speed

LoS D Still within capacity

Close to the limit of stable flow with desired speed and manoeuvring restricted. Small increases in traffic flows could cause operational problems

LoS E Traffic volumes are close to capacity and queuing and delays can be considered significant

LoS F Traffic flows generally exceed capacity and / or average delays are significant for the type of intersection or road.

Or where a particular movement would experience a degree of saturation (volume over capacity) over 1.0

4.3.1 Capacity of the existing bridge The existing Batemans Bay Bridge contains a single traffic lane in each direction. Each lane is about 3.0 metres wide, which is less than current road standards and does not allow overtaking.

In general, the capacity of a single lane road with uninterrupted flow is considered to be about 1800 vehicles per hour when flow is constant and not impeded by controls at either end. Austroads suggests that mid block urban roads can accommodate about 900 vehicles per hour where parking is not permitted although this can increase to 1200 to 1400 based on a number of conditions including absence of crossing or entering traffic at minor intersections and good coordination of signals.

Given that the traffic on the bridge would be constant for the length of the bridge with no potential for any vehicles to exit or leave the road via individual accesses, a rate of 1200vph has been adopted for the assessment.

When the central lift span of the bridge is raised for maritime traffic, the capacity of the bridge reduces. Raising the bridge can result in vehicle throughput closures for up to 14 minutes, although more typically the


road is closed for five minutes. The impact of this closure on the theoretical hourly throughput is indicated below:

hourly theoretical throughput – no bridge raise 1200vph

hourly theoretical throughput – 14 minute bridge lift 920vph

hourly theoretical throughput – five minute bridge lift 1100vph

4.3.2 Bridge delays and queuing Delays and queuing as a result of raising the central lift span would typically occur twice a day. This would typically occur out of peak hours, although during public holidays these may coincide, as peak volumes would generally occur outside of typical network weekday peaks.

During peak times the bridge carries around 1300 to 1500 vehicles per hour, which equates to between 10 and 13 vehicle arrivals per minute in either direction. However, at scheduled opening periods, traffic volumes may be lower as regular road uses would be more likely to avoid these periods. For the purpose of analysis it has been assumed that vehicle arrival rates at the bridge during the 15 minutes that it is open would range between 8 and 10 vehicles per minute.

For the purpose of this analysis it is assumed that traffic would be halted by around five minutes which would include:

clearance time for vehicles to clear central lift span

bridge raising

maritime traffic passing through

bridge lowering.

A SIDRA assessment has been undertaken to identify the delays and queuing on the bridge that are potentially experienced based on the above assumed operational parameters.

It should be noted that the SIDRA assessment was based on a 10 minute model around a bridge opening event representing the peak queue and average delays that traffic would occur during that period.

Table 4-1: Queuing and delay when bridge is raised

Existing delays for bridge queuing

2017 base public holiday operation Average delay (seconds) Level of Service Queuing (metres)

Northern approach 77 E 709

Southern approach 85 F 971

4.3.3 Capacity of intersections

Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout

During peak times, the traffic modelling and SIDRA indicates that this roundabout currently operates with a very poor level of service and significant delays on a number of approaches during peak holiday periods. These results are summarised within Table 4-2.


Table 4-2: 2016 base case - modelled performance of Princes Highway / Kings Highway roundabout

Standard weekday traffic AM peak PM peak Average

delay (seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Peninsula Drive 9 A 8 8 A 2

Princes Highway from east 6 A 24 6 A 10

Kings Highway 10 A 5 11 A 7

Princes Highway from bridge 6 A 13 5 A 19

Overall Performance 7 A - 6 A - Weekend and public holiday peaks Weekend peak Public holiday peak

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Peninsula Drive 8 A 2 21 B 23

Princes Highway from east 7 A 13 205 F 604

Kings Highway 10 A 5 57 E 356


Overall Performance 6 A - 79 F -

Anecdotally, it is understood that queues can be significantly longer than modelled however these tend to be due to:

issues with the current mechanical operation of the bridge

one off annual peaks during holiday periods such as at Easter.

Princes Highway / North Street intersection

During the weekday peak periods, there is sufficient capacity at this signalised intersection as demonstrated by the SIDRA results (and consistent with the Aimsun results) in Table 4-3.

Table 4-3: 2016 base case - modelled performance of Princes Highway / North Street intersection

Standard weekday traffic AM peak PM peak Average

delay (seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Princes Highway from bridge 13 A 56 16 B 38

North Street 24 B 9 24 B 30

Princes Highway from south 7 A 40 9 A 54

Overall Performance 11 A - 14 A - Weekend and public holiday peaks Weekend peak Public Holiday peak

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Princes Highway from bridge 15 B 29 40 C 192

North Street 23 B 20 21 B 7


Overall Performance 13 A - 29 C -


5 The proposal The key features of the proposal have been identified in Section 1.1.2 of the report.

The Princes Highway would be realigned slightly to the north west of its existing alignment for about 250 metres between about 50 metres south of the Kings Highway and Princes Highway roundabout and the northern abutment for the new bridge.

The northern approach would consist of four 3.6 metre lanes (two lanes in each direction) with 0.5 metre shoulders on each side. A three-metre-wide shared use path would be provided connecting the new bridge north to the Kings Highway and Princes Highway roundabout.

The new bridge would be located to the west of the existing bridge and would have nine spans with eight piers and an overall length of about 430 metres. The end spans would be about 39 metres in length with main spans about 50 metres in length. The new bridge would have a constant curve with a radius of about 600 metres.

One span near the centre of the bridge would be designated as the navigational span. The navigational span would likely be one of the middle spans over the deepest section of the river. Permanent signage and lighting would be provided on the bridge and piers to delineate the navigation channel.

The new bridge would have two land based piers and six piers in the Clyde River. The piers would generally consist of piles bored into the river bed or ground, a pile cap which would be visible at the base of the pier and the piers which support the superstructure on the pile caps.

To the south of the Clyde River, the Princes Highway would be realigned slightly to the north west of its existing alignment for about 250 metres between about 80 metres north of the North Street and Princes Highway intersection and the southern abutment of the new bridge.

The new southern approach would be constructed on an embankment with retaining walls to achieve the required minimum of 4.6 metres clearance over Clyde Street.

The new southern approach would consist of four 3.8 metre lanes (two lanes in each direction) with 0.5 metre shoulders on each side. A three-metre shared use path would be provided connecting North Street, the Kings Highway and Clyde River foreshore areas to the new bridge.

Changes to local roads include:

Wharf Road to have a slip lane from the realigned Princes Highway, providing for a left-in to Wharf Road. There would be no direct access from Wharf Road to the Princes Highway. However, access would be provided to Old Punt Road under the highway

Clyde Street would no longer intersect with the Princes Highway, rather Clyde Street North and Clyde Street South would connect under the southern-most span of the new bridge.

5.1 Changes in traffic movements The traffic and transport assessment has focused on the changes to the road network from the proposal including:

increased road capacity of the new bridge and ability for slower moving vehicles on the new bridge to be overtaken

constant traffic flow across the new bridge, with no closures due to bridge openings

no access to / from Clyde Street from Princes Highway

additional traffic turning into and out of North Street due to the closure of Clyde Street at Princes Highway

additional local traffic accesses Peninsula Drive to access the Princes Highway

additional local traffic on Old Punt Road due to new connection between Wharf Road to Old Punt Road to access the Princes Highway/ Kings Highway.


5.1.1 Clyde Street and Wharf Road changes To enable a comparison of the future proposal traffic volumes with the Do minimum volumes it is anticipated that the closure of these streets would result in the following typical changes in local traffic movements, based on traffic volumes within the GHD model:

Clyde Street traffic diverting onto North Street

− about 610 vehicles per day and 40 trips per hour to and from Clyde Street North

− about 2370 vehicles per day and 210 trips per hour that currently turn into Clyde Street South directly from Princes Highway

Wharf Road traffic exiting onto the Princes Highway, diverting onto Peninsula Drive

− about 1300 vehicles per day and 100 trips per hour.

5.1.2 Traffic growth

Natural growth The traffic model for the proposal has assumed the following basic growth:

from the previous GHD modelling, a growth rate of 0.84 per cent per annum was obtained for the AM period and 1.9 per cent for the PM period

for the weekend and public holiday period an assumed growth rate of 0.9 per cent per annum this is in accordance with the traffic growth rates listed in the Princes Highway Corridor Strategy (2016). A sensitivity test was also undertaken with a growth rate of 1.2 per cent per annum for the proposed scenario in 2031.

Class 10 vehicles growth3 10 per cent in year 1 and 4 per cent growth per annum until a 50 per cent growth from 2017 figures had been established after which time the growth in this class of vehicle was assumed to remain steady. As a conservative approach, the growth for the other heavy vehicle classes was assumed not to reduce.

5.2 Future traffic movements The 2021 and 2031 future year Do minimum scenario traffic movements are presented in Figure 5-1 to Figure 5-8. Note that these are demand volumes, not throughput volumes.

3 As advised by Roads and Maritime – Aurecon Option Testing Memo dated 18th August


5.2.1 2021 volumes

11 L 133 L561 T 7 8 9 328 T 138 13 32


751 101 L 211 L 72T L

T R R 52593 53 L 31

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 5-1: 2021 future traffic movements – typical weekday AM peak period 8:00am - 9:00am

23 L 171 L780 T 11 13 14 596 T 192 6 5814 R R T L 794 T 113 R R T L

L R 14 L T 535 L T R R 40101 T 462 92 L 31 36 13 21 T 400

520 117 L 151 L 15T L

T R R 204700 79 L 69

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Figure 5-2: 2021 future traffic movements – typical weekday PM peak period 3:00pm - 4:00pm

38 L 432 L837 T 7 0 23 425 T 127 6 4029 R R T L 860 T 47 R R T L

L R 12 L T 437 L T R R 16861 T 363 69 L 31 18 20 18 T 348

362 92 L 131 L 16T L

T R R 123828 54 L 47

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Figure 5-3: 2021 future traffic movements – weekend period 12:00pm – 1:00pm

11 L 168 L738 T 6 6 7 493 T 971 118 155


1249 203 L 443 L 66T L

T R R 46749 51 L 27

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Figure 5-4: 2021 future traffic movements – holiday peak period (Easter Friday 2017 12:00pm - 1:00pm)


5.2.2 2031 olumes

12 L 144 L610 T 8 9 10 359 T 149 14 35


818 109 L 229 L 78T L

T R R 56647 57 L 34

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Figure 5-5: 2031 future traffic movements – typical weekday AM peak period 8:00am - 9:00am

25 L 185 L848 T 12 14 15 651 T 208 7 6316 R R T L 863 T 122 R R T L

L R 15 L T 582 L T R R 44109 T 502 100 L 34 39 14 22 T 438

567 126 L 164 L 16T L

T R R 221763 86 L 75

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 5-6: 2031 future traffic movements – typical weekday PM peak period 3:00pm - 4:00pm

42 L 473 L916 T 8 0 25 466 T 139 7 4332 R R T L 941 T 53 R R T L

L R 13 L T 479 L T R R 18467 T 397 75 L 34 19 22 20 T 382

396 100 L 144 L 17T L

T R R 135906 58 L 53

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 5-7: 2031 future traffic movements – weekend period 12:00pm – 1:00pm

12 L 184 L808 T 7 7 8 539 T 1061 128 169


1367 222 L 485 L 73T L

T R R 51820 56 L 31

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway

Princes Highway

North Street

Clyde Street

Wharf Road

Kings Highway

Princes Highway Figure 5-8: 2031 future traffic movements – holiday peak period (Easter Friday 2017 12:00pm - 1:00pm)


6 Assessment of operational traffic impacts The impact assessment considers both quantitative and qualitative impacts using modelling and design guidance references.

6.1 Do minimum In the Do minimum scenario the existing single lane in each direction bridge would remain and would continue to need to be raised twice or more a day for maritime vessels.

The Do minimum scenario predicted traffic volumes have been generated for the future years of 2021 and 2031. It has also been assumed that the bridge would operate in a similar manner as currently. However, it is noted that as maritime transport increases, demand for the bridge to rise could increase and due to the age of the bridge, maintenance issues may also increase.

There also would be no modification to any of the intersections.

6.1.1 Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout

There would no real change in the weekday peak performance of this intersection between 2021 and 2031 and it would continue to function with a high level of service (LoS) (See Table 6-1). However, during the peak holiday period the traffic (Aimsun) modelling and SIDRA indicates that between 2021 and 2031 the roundabout would experience increasing delays on a number of approaches (See Table 6-2). Vehicles on the Kings Highway approach and the eastern Princes Highway approach would experience substantial increases in delay and queuing during holiday peak period, with queues over one kilometre predicted. These results are summarised in the Do minimum sections of Table 6-1 and Table 6-2. The SIDRA model does not consider the impacts of the open bridge lift span during the Easter peak period, however the overall intersection performance results are generally in line with the Aimsun traffic model which does consider the bridge opening.

6.1.2 Princes Highway / North Street intersection During the weekday peak periods, there is sufficient capacity at this signalised intersection to cater for 2031 traffic volumes and it would continue to have a good LoS (See Table 6-3). However, during public holiday peak times the LoS would deteriorate between 2021 and 2031, with the North Street approach to access the Princes Highway experiencing significant delays in 2031 (See Table 6-4). Also during weekday AM peak periods, vehicles on North Street would experience minor increased delays in accessing the Princes Highway.

6.2 Proposal The proposal includes the replacement of the existing Batemans Bay Bridge and additional works including changes to the Kings Highway roundabout, Clyde Street intersection and Wharf Road access.

While existing traffic performance and capacity of the existing two lane bridge and road corridor is satisfactory (apart from the when the central lift span is raised and during peak holiday periods), the need for additional capacity to meet future typical demand needs to be considered. While it may be possible to replace the existing bridge with a new two lane bridge and propose to provide a second “new” bridge when required in the future, the environmental, social and economic costs of building a second “new” bridge are substantial and possibly prohibitive. Consequently it is important to ensure that the new bridge has sufficient capacity to meet traffic demand in the future.

Based on the typical growth rate of 0.9 per cent per annum identified for the area and 2015 surveyed volumes of 13,500 vehicles per day, it is likely that traffic volumes will reach 17,000 per day by 2041 and


18,000 vehicles per day by 2048. These volumes are well within the range where a four lane bridge is required to provide appropriate capacity and performance for this critical local and State road corridor.

To future proof the river crossing, the proposal has been designed around a four lane bridge with two lanes in each direction and a shared pedestrian and cycle path.

6.2.1 Kings Highway roundabout A modified Princes Highway/ Kings Highway roundabout design was modelled based on the following changes:

Kings Highway through and right lane reallocated as right turn only lane

Kings Highway through and left lane reallocated as through, left and right turn

signal metering provided on the Princes Highway west approach.

These works would effectively provide an additional right turn lane for vehicles from Kings Highway heading towards Batemans Bridge and at peak times would allow additional gaps to be generated to enable heavier movements to operate more efficiently that would occur naturally based on the current volume imbalance between approaches.

This modified roundabout with the proposal has been assessed using predicted future traffic volumes for 2021 and 2031. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 6-1 and Table 6-2. Table 6-2 also provides the results of a 1.2% growth sensitivity analysis to confirm the robustness of the proposal.

During the weekday and weekend peak periods there would only be a very minor improvement in the intersection performance with the proposal as the intersection has a high LoS in this period with or without the proposal. However during the public holiday peak there would a substantial improvement in intersection performance with the proposal. Queue lengths for the Kings Highway and Princes Highway approaches would decrease from over one kilometre in 2031 Do minimum public holiday peak scenario to under 75 metres on all approaches with the 2031 proposal scenario.

Overall the proposal does result in substantial improvements in the busiest peak holiday periods. These busiest holiday periods would generally be the several hours at the start of the peak holiday periods, such as Easter, Christmas, and intermittent long weekends.

6.2.2 Princes Highway / North Street intersection No intersection specific works are proposed for the Princes Highway / North Street Intersection as proposal however it is noted that duplicating the river crossing to tie in with the duplicated Princes Highway would improve the capacity of the intersection by removing the river bound merge that currently is located 70 metres from the intersection. This would increase the use of the Princes Highway riverbound kerb side lane, making this approach operate more efficiently which may enable green time to be redistributed to accommodate the additional traffic movements associated with closing the Princes Highway intersections with Clyde Street.

This is demonstrated with an anticipated minor improvement in intersection performance for the North Street approach during the weekday AM peak periods (See Table 6-3). During the public holiday peak period there would also be a more substantial improvement in the performance of the North Street approach with the proposal (See Table 6-4). For other periods and other approaches the proposal would have little effect on the performance of the intersection as the performance is high under all scenarios. Table 6-4 also provides the results of a 1.2% growth sensitivity analysis to confirm the robustness of the proposal.


Table 6-1: Weekday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / Kings Highway roundabout – for the Do minimum and proposal options

Weekday AM peak PM peak Average

delay (seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

2021 – Do minimum





Overall Performance 7 A - 7 A -

2021 – with proposal




Princes Highway from Bridge 6 A 14 5 A 22


2031 – Do minimum













Table 6-2: Weekend and holiday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / Kings Highway roundabout – for the Do minimum and proposal options

Weekend and Public Holiday Peaks Weekend peak Public holiday peak Average

delay (seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

2021 – Do minimum



Kings Highway 10 A 6 118 F 680






Kings Highway 10 A 4 15 B 40



2031 – Do minimum



Kings Highway 11 A 7 242 F 1307









2031 – with proposal at 1.2 per cent growth per annum







Table 6-3: Weekday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / North Street intersection – for the Do minimum and proposal options

Weekday AM peak PM peak Average

delay (seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

2021 – Do minimum


North Street 42 C 15 21 B 27








2031 – Do minimum


North Street 46 D 18 22 B 34









Table 6-4: Weekend and public holiday peak 2021 and 2031 performance of Princes Highway / North Street intersection – for the Do minimum and proposal options

Weekend and Public Holiday Peaks Weekend peak Public holiday peak Average

Delay (seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

Average Delay

(seconds)

Level of Service

Queuing (metres)

2021 – Do minimum


North Street 27 B 21 67 E 19


Overall Performance 10 A 61 7 A -



North Street 26 B 23 29 C 11



2031 – Do minimum


North Street 26 B 21 63 E 19




Princes Highway from bridge 15 B 29 12 A 108




2031 – with proposal at 1.2 per cent growth per annum

Princes Highway from bridge 15 B 30 12 A 118




6.2.3 Corridor performance From the Aimsun network model, a vehicle kilometres, travel times and average speeds of the overall Princes Highway corridor, including side roads, was estimated with and without the proposal for the base case and for 2021 and 2031 traffic volumes (See Table 6-5). In the weekday and weekend peaks, the proposal has little impact on traffic performance with vehicle kilometres, travel times and average speeds remaining similar for all scenarios. However, during the holiday peak vehicle kilometres, travel times and average speeds were substantially improved with the proposal for both 2021 and 2031.

It is noted that for the Do minimum holiday period scenario the network is constrained and this means that not all of the predicted traffic volumes for the peak hour would be able transverse the corridor within the 60 minute peak period but would fall within the shoulder periods either side of the peak. Improving the network reduces the constraints for the peak period resulting in more vehicles able to transverse the network during the reported peak period, this in turns with a higher vehicle kilometres being able to be achieved.


Table 6-5: Network performance summary

AM peak period Scenario Total

vehicles Vehicle hours

Vehicle kilometres

Average speed (km)

Average travel time

(min)

2016 Base 3,009 112 5,474 48.9 2.2 2021 Do minimum 3,361 130 6,092 46.7 2.3 2021 With proposal 3,351 126 6,174 49.2 2.2 2031 Do minimum 3,622 142 6,570 46.3 2.3 2031 With proposal 3,625 140 6,686 47.9 2.3

PM peak period Scenario Total


Vehicle kilometres

Average speed (km)

Average travel time

(min)


Weekend peak period Scenario Total


Vehicle kilometres

Average speed (km)

Average travel time

(min)


Holiday peak period Scenario Total


Vehicle kilometres

Average speed (km)

Average travel time

(min)


6.2.4 Local Batemans Bay town centre traffic impacts Traffic that would be diverted on to North Street as a result of the closure of the Clyde Street / Princes Highway intersections would be local traffic. This traffic would be either accessing the boat ramp and facilities to the north of the Princes Highway or the Batemans Bay shopping centre which includes Clyde Street, Perry Street and Orient Street. In addition, regional buses would be diverted onto North Street to access the bus interchange on Clyde Street.

Whilst the proposal is anticipated to result in the diversion of approximately 3000 vehicles per day and 250 vehicles per hour this may result in some roads experiencing a reduction in trips whilst others will experience an increase in trips depending on the type of trip that is diverted as indicated in Table 6-6.


Table 6-6: Local town centre trip diversions

Trip Type Current Trip Route Future Trip Route Local Street Impact to Traffic

Volumes Batemans Bay North to Clyde Street On Street parking and wharf parking

Inbound Left turn into Clyde Street Outbound Right turn onto North Street

Inbound Left turn into North Street, left turn into Clyde Street Outbound As existing

Clyde Street Highway

South of Princes Decrease

Clyde Street Street

North of Orient Increase

North Street Street

east of Perry Increase

North Street Street

west of Perry Increase

Orient Street N/A

Batemans Bay North to Perry Street and Town Centre Car Parking

Inbound Left turn into Clyde Street, right turn onto North Street and left turn onto Perry Street Outbound Left turn onto North Street

Inbound Left turn into North Street, right turn into Perry Street Outbound As existing



Clyde Street Street

North of Orient Decrease

North Street Street


North Street Street

west of Perry Decrease

Orient Street N/A

Trips from Batemans Bay North to Orient Street

Inbound Left turn into Clyde Street onto Orient Street Outbound Right turn onto Beach Road

Inbound Left turn into North Street, right turn into Orient Street Outbound As existing



Clyde Street Street

North of Orient Decrease

North Street Street


North Street Street


Orient Street No change

Trips from Princes Highway to Clyde Street North destinations

Inbound Left or right turn into Clyde Street Outbound Left or right turn from Clyde Street.

Inbound Left turn into North Street, left turn into Clyde Street Outbound North Street


South of Princes Increase

Clyde Street Street

North of Orient Increase

North Street Street


North Street Street


Orient Street N/A

Trips from Princes Highway to Woolworths Shopping Centre Car park

Inbound North Street into car park Outbound North Street

As existing Clyde Street Highway

South of Princes N/A

Clyde Street Street

North of Orient N/A

North Street Street

east of Perry No change

North Street Street

west of Perry N/A

Orient Street No change


The Clyde Street / North Street / Orient Street intersection is an unsignalised T intersection with Clyde Street and North Street catering for two way movements and Orient Street accommodating only one way traffic out of the intersection. It is anticipated that there would be an increase in right turning movements out of North Street, however this is likely to be offset by a decrease in through and turning movements from Clyde Street.

Perry Street and North Street intersection is a relatively recently signalised intersection. This intersection is anticipated to experience an increase in the right turning movements and ahead movements from North Street and a decrease in the left turn movement into Perry Street. It is unlikely that movements out of Perry Street would be significantly impacted as it is considered there would be relatively little demand for traffic from this street to turn left onto Princes Highway at Clyde Street. Minor modifications in the signal timings may be required to mitigate the change in the balance of traffic volumes through the intersection.

6.3 Heavy vehicles The existing constraints on HML vehicles would be removed with the proposal and HML vehicles would be able to use the new bridge to access destinations south of the Clyde River without having to detour about 350 kilometres. Other restrictions on the height and length of heavy vehicles due to the existing bridge would be removed. However, while there would be an increase in the proportion of heavy vehicles that are HML, the increase is not expected to be significant as there are still height and weight restrictions on other locations south and west of the proposal.

6.4 Impact on road safety Along the Princes Highway between North Street and Kings Highway there have been 12 crashes recorded. These crashes have been attributed to a number of causes and the implication of the proposal on the potential for these accidents to occur in the future has been assessed.

The proposal would have an overall neutral impact to the existing crash rate over the bridge. However, there may be some minor positive improvements due to the removal of the Clyde Street intersection and removal of merging on the Princes Highway approaches.

Installation of traffic signals at the Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout could also improve road safety through improving traffic flow on the Kings Highway onto the Princes Highway.

These minor positive impacts may be counterbalanced with potential negative impact on road safety occurring on North Street as a result of additional traffic volumes using this road, however it is noted that this is a slower environment with traffic limited to 40 kilometres per hour which helps to reduce crash severity than occur in higher speed environments.

6.5 Active transport The proposal would improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians by the provision of a 3 metre wide shared use path along the eastern side of the bridge. The shared use path would be physically separated from the traffic lane by a 0.5 metres shoulder and a safety barrier.

This pathway would connect into the existing pedestrian path along Princes Highway just north of North Street and into the existing pedestrian pathway south of the Kings Highway roundabout. The shared use pathway would also navigate across the slip lane into Wharf Road.

The gradients adopted within the shared path design are as followed:

southwest side of the bridge 5 per cent

northeast side of the bridge 4.5 per cent

These gradients equal or are less than the maximum gradients for bicycle and pedestrian paths as set out within Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 6A.


6.6 Public transport

6.6.1 Regional services As stated in Section 3.8 regional coaches serving Batemans Bay currently turn left from Princes Highway into Clyde Street to access the Batemans Bay bus interchange, which is located to the west of the Clyde Street / North Street / Orient Street intersection.

The proposal would remove the intersection between Princes Highway and Clyde Street and would result in regional buses needing to turn off the Princes Highway at North Street to access the bus interchange. This would result in a minor increase in travel time and distance to the bus interchange.

There would also be a need for the regional buses to be able to turnaround at the northern end of Clyde Street to provide return services. A bus turning circle would be provided for 14.5 metre buses.

However, as the new bridge would not close for maritime traffic and there would be improved traffic performance of Kings Highway / Princes Highway roundabout, bus times and reliability, particularly during peak holiday periods would improve.

It is noted that although where possible, regional bus services generally cross the Bridge outside the scheduled opening times those services that run into Batemans Bay either before 8am, between 10am and 2.30pm and after 6pm could be impacted by requested bridge openings.

6.6.2 Local services One local bus service, Route 757, would be impacted by the proposal as this passes across the bridge and has a stop on Wharf Road.

Route 757’s current timetable indicates that the bus crosses Batemans Bay Bridge at least 20 minutes outside the scheduled morning lift span opening and within 10 minutes of the afternoon scheduled lift, however as with regional buses, any services that run before 8am, between 10am and 2.30pm and after 6pm could be impacted by requested bridge openings. On Saturdays and public holidays only two services run, both during periods when the bridge could be opened on request. Clearly this potential delay to services would not occur with the new bridge.

The changes to Wharf Road would mean that the bus service would need to turnaround at the end of Wharf Road and travel along Wharf Road and Peninsula Drive to access the Princes Highway. This would result in increased travel time and distance travelled for services, and could result in an increase in the length of journey for customers. The current proposal includes a roundabout at the western end of Wharf Road that could be used as a bus turnaround facility. Roads and Maritime would continue to consult with local bus companies through the future stages of the project.

6.7 Maritime traffic The new bridge would be located between 50 and 80 metres further upstream of the existing bridge. It would provide a navigational clearance of about 12 metres mean high water spring. One span near the centre of the bridge would be designated as the navigational span. The navigational span would include permanent signage and lighting and would be about 45 metres wide.

A number of different navigational clearances were assessed during the development and assessment of options of the bridge replacement. Two navigational clearance options (3.6 metres and seven metres) were eliminated as they did not meet the criteria of providing navigational clearance suitable for all existing commercial marine traffic (at least eight metres).

Bridges with 18 metre or 23 metre navigational clearance would not allow for a shared use path along the bridge to have a maximum grade of less than five per cent for pedestrian and mobility access, without impacting on the existing intersections of Princes Highway and Kings Highway and Princes Highway and North Street. These options would also result in an adverse urban design and visual impact. The 18 and 23 metre clearances were therefore eliminated as being unfeasible. The options assessment process identified that the 12 metre and other navigational clearance options should be considered for further assessment.


During the course of the project a number of workshops were held and those matters raised by participants in relation to the navigational clearance are summarised below:

greater clearance heights are unlikely to provide greater benefit for the greater costs involved

most coastal cruising is likely to stay east of the bridge and the future is likely to favour more motor cruising which would be in water craft of a lower height than yachts. Boat sizes are increasing but not much greater in height

higher clearances would open up greater stretches of the Clyde River for use to most boats moored in the marina (east of the bridge) and provide opportunities for a marina upstream of the bridge. Also with the entrance to the Clyde River being dredged more regularly and the potential for a greater bridge clearance could attract more boats heading up the coast and provide a greater economic benefit to Batemans Bay

higher clearances would require a bridge that would have a major change to the landscape in terms of greater visual impact, steeper grades for the road over the bridge to get to the increased height and then down the other side, it would require a greater footprint which in turn would impact on the SEPP 14 wetlands and the difference in levels to obtain the grade would require major retaining walls very close to the CBD

the oyster farming community would not support greater number of boats upstream due to the potential pollution risk to their industry

when built in 1956, the existing lift span bridge was designed to cater for timber-related and fishing industries which initially navigated through the bridge. These have been mostly replaced by recreational water traffic and over the years there are fewer commercial craft using the waterway west of the bridge that require the greater clearance

it was put that most boats are likely to stop downstream of the bridge and the extra funds for bridge clearance could be better used for greater water access to attract boats as a destination to the CBD.

The conclusion was that the clearance height needed to be resolved following further investigations including an assessment of the maritime traffic and discussions with relevant stakeholders.

After the workshop a boat study was undertaken to assess the impact of different navigational clearances on marine traffic. Three navigational clearance options were identified based on typical vessel clearances and assessed, namely eight, 12 and 15 metres.

Table 6-7 summarises the vessels that would be affected by each of the three clearance options. Ticks indicate vessels that would remain able to access the upstream area of the bridge with the clearance proposed. Crosses indicate those vessels that can pass under the current lift span, but would be unable to pass under the proposed bridge height. The affect is then summarised as a percentage of each category of vessels that would be affected by the proposed bridge height.

Table 6-7: Summary of vessels currently using link span affected by proposed bridge heights

8m 12m 15mTourist ferry 1 Houseboat 9 Barge 1

82% 0% 0%Private yacht (downstream of bridge) 50 Private yacht (upstream of bridge) 7 Houseboat 11 Motor cruiser 15

69% 60% 60%Visiting Transportable sail boat / yacht ? Visiting yacht ? Visiting yacht or other ?

? ? ?70% 53% 53%Proportion of total vessels affected by proposed bridge

Vessel category No vessels

Proposed clearance to MHWS

Proportion of category unable to pass under bridge



Commercial operators

Private mooring licensees

Tourist / visiting

Note: Tourist vessels ignored when calculating proportions, as numbers not known.


The table shows that the eight metre clearance option would prevent a significant proportion of the existing maritime users from passing upstream of the new bridge. The main difference between this and the higher clearance options, based on these values, is that it affects the houseboat vessel category, which the other options allow to pass (note a small increase to nine metres clearance would allow all houseboats). Both the 12 metres and 15 metres height clearance would have no impact on current commercial operators in the area and equal impact on private licensees, according to the data provided by Roads and Maritime.

It is noted that the data available on vessel clearance requirements are coarse, in that they assume a single clearance requirement for relatively wide ranges of vessel categories. Proportions calculated for two categories of vessel are affected by the coarse nature of clearance requirements, commercial houseboats and private yachts. Also the numbers do not consider the frequency of use of each category.

The 8.5 metres clearance stated as required for all nine commercial houseboats appears likely conservative. Available information regarding the fleets of local operators (Clyde River Houseboats and Batemans Bay Houseboat Hire) suggest that the 8.5 metres required clearance would apply only to the largest two storey houseboats, which form a relatively small proportion of the current fleet. The proportion of vessels affected by the eight metre clearance option is expected to be over-stated because of this assumption.

Likewise, not all the private yachts with moorings upstream or downstream of the bridge location would have the same mast height. If these clearance heights represent the highest yacht mast in each group of vessels then the proportion of vessels affected would also be over-stated as a result, however these may be averages in which case the proportion affected would be under-stated.

For reference, the potential bridge clearances indicated of 12 metres and 15 metres are likely to allow yachts of up to six metres and nine metres lengths respectively (note these are estimates, as yacht mast heights vary somewhat for fixed length). These lengths can be compared with data from the NSW Boat Ownership and Storage: Growth Forecasts to 2026 report (NSW Government Maritime, July 2010), which indicates that of all recreational and commercial vessels registered in the South Coast region, about 90 per cent are below six metres in length and 97 per cent are below nine metres length (refer Figure 2 from that document). This data is useful to understand the proportion of all maritime users that may be affected, but the below limitations are to be noted when considering this comparison:

boats stored on-water at moorings such as those near the new bridge and covered by the yacht category in the Roads and Maritime data are typically greater than six metres in length and the proportion of this subset may be of more relevance to Roads and Maritime. When considering the on-water subset (ie vessels over six metres in length), the 12 metre clearance option, which allows about six metres and shorter yachts through is likely to only allow the smaller of the vessels with moorings in the area to pass. The 15 metres clearance option, allowing up to about nine metres lengths, is estimated to accommodate in the order of 70 per cent of on-water storage vessels

the NSW Boat Ownership and Storage Report statistics are for all vessels (including yachts and others), which may skew the data relative to data that includes yachts only.

Overall the 12 metres navigational clearance would provide upstream access for about 90 per cent of boats, and the requirement that larger yachts wanting to travel upstream to lower their masts is not considered overly restrictive. Roads and Maritime would also upgrade the wharf on the southern bank immediately downstream of the existing bridge to provide additional mooring and land access opportunities for larger boats. Consequently a 12 metre navigational clearance has been adopted for the design of the proposal.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj6hvmqiKTWAhUMF5QKHZ_ADNwQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.harbourtrust.gov.au%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Fpages%2Fea957bd6-1611-4b37-8336-abf8b7979f38%2Ffiles%2F2-nsw-boat-ownership-storage-2010.pdf&usg=AFQjCNF-rbHo7Nv8lUNhVj3Jm5wZ67TleQ

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj6hvmqiKTWAhUMF5QKHZ_ADNwQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.harbourtrust.gov.au%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Fpages%2Fea957bd6-1611-4b37-8336-abf8b7979f38%2Ffiles%2F2-nsw-boat-ownership-storage-2010.pdf&usg=AFQjCNF-rbHo7Nv8lUNhVj3Jm5wZ67TleQ


6.7.1 River traffic

Merinda River Cruise Ferries At present the current ferries are unable to pass under the existing bridge unless the central lift span is open. However, with the increase in navigational clearance from the new bridge, the ferries would be able to pass underneath the new bridge at any time.

Yachts Mast heights of yachts vary depending on the make and model of vessel. Generally yachts greater than six metres in length would need to drop their masts to pass under the new bridge. Moorings upstream of the bridge generally cater for yachts less than six metres, while moorings downstream of the bridge are generally used by larger yachts

Small sailing boats The existing bridge prevents all but the smallest sailing boats (optimists and mirrors) being able to pass underneath other than when the central lift span is raised.

A review of small sail boat specifications indicate that the generally non fixed keel dinghies have heights well below the 12 metre clearance. The International 14, one of the largest small sail boats, can have a mast height of around 12 metres, however the majority of these types of boats typically have mast heights of less than eight metres. Some of larger class of small sail boats that are raced in the Batemans Bay area include Hobie Cat 14 (mast height of 6.8 metres), Hobie Cat 16 (mast height of 8.1 metres) and Taipan 4.9 (mast height of 8.5 metres). With the new bridge, all these classes of small sail boats would be able to travel up river at any time. Currently, these small sail boats are restricted to one side of the existing bridge, unless the central lift span is raised.

In addition some fixed keel dinghies would also be able to pass under the bridge with boats such as the Flying Fifteen and the Flying Dutchman having mast heights of around seven metres.

General private power boats Some smaller power boats are able to pass under the existing bridge without the central lift span being raised, however larger cabin cruisers have difficulties during high tide. The new bridge would enable most privately owned cabin cruisers to pass under the bridge at any time. A review of larger cabin cruisers made by Delphia has indicated heights of between 2.5 metres (Delphia BluEscape 1200) and four metres (Delphia Escape 1350).

6.7.2 Moorings There are currently moorings on either side of the existing bridge and those west within the new bridge alignment may be relocated.

The new bridge would not be high enough to allow passage by taller mast yachts, although yachts that can drop their masts would be able to pass under the bridge to moorings at any time. Yachts that are unable or it is inconvenient to drop a mast may need to reconsider their mooring location.

The upgrade of the existing T wharf and associated mooring immediately downstream of the new bridge is proposed to accommodate those boats with greater clearance requirements than accommodated under the new bridge.

For power boats however, the proposal would make access to these moorings more convenient as they would have 24 hour access rather than restricted to when the bridge is raised, as is the current situation.

Overall it is considered that the new bridge would have a positive impact on the majority of maritime traffic.


Roads and Maritime would continue to work with local council to review impacts to mooring and the need to identify additional mooring sites.

6.8 Parking During operation, through the changes to the foreshore areas at the existing bridge abutments, the proposal would provide additional public parking in the foreshore areas. The location and design of car parking areas would be undertaken in consultation with Council. No impacts would occur on existing on-street parking apart from in Clyde Street. A bus turning circle would be provided at the end of Clyde Street which would result in the loss of up to 17 car parking spaces.

There may be some impacts to a part of the supermarket car park as a result of the bridge retaining wall, however this is not anticipated to impact car parking numbers in the long term. During the detailed design minimising long terms impacts to car parking would be further investigated. Consultation would be undertaken with the supermarket operators to confirm any permanent impacts on parking spaces and any management measures required (eg easement for continual parking or need for parking offsets).


7 Assessment of construction impacts

7.1 Construction impact summary Construction of the proposal would commence early 2018/2019 including early works to relocate existing utilities and would be complete and open to traffic in 2022.

During this period, there would be varying impacts to traffic and transport near the construction area. Generally, the impacts relating to traffic and transport would include:

temporary increases to travel times for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians due to:

− speed limit restrictions required around construction zones

− diversions around areas of works that are located or impinge on the existing road and footpath carriageway

− increased traffic on the surrounding road network from:

heavy construction vehicles hauling material to or from the site

additional movements in the vicinity of the ancillary sites associated with smaller deliveries and workforce movements

changes to the operating profile of the site given traffic and diversions associated with the works

altered property access arrangements

possible bus timetable delays due to temporary traffic control measures

removal of some local road connections

safety impacts through temporary work areas.

7.2 Construction staging The construction sequencing for the proposal would be:

establishment works including construction compounds and ancillary facilities

utility relocations

building removal

earthworks and drainage

construction of bridge approaches

bridge construction

pavement construction including local road works

landscaping and finishing works

demolition of existing bridge when the new bridge is open to traffic

removal of construction compounds, ancillary facilities and site rehabilitation.

Detailed construction staging of works would developed as the design progresses in consultation with Roads and Maritime and other relevant stakeholders.


7.3 Ancillary facilities The works would include establishment of ancillary facilities. Six sites have been identified as potential construction compounds or laydown areas including:

Old Punt Road site - vacant land east of roundabout at the Old Punt Road and Kings Highway roundabout

Bay Waters Motel site - part of a property that is currently part of a motel on the northern bank

Korners Park site - foreshore park on the northern bank

southern car park site - vacant land and part of the supermarket car park east of the southern approach to the existing bridge

Reef Motor Inn site - land to be acquired north of the southern approach to the existing bridge

former bowling club site - current unused site to be leased from Eurobodalla Shire Council.

The proposed ancillary facility sites are indicated in Figure 7-1.


Figure 7-1 Ancillary facilities


The access to each of these ancillary facility sites is described in Table 7-1.

Table 7-1: Ancillary facilities

Site Potential uses Access and impact Old Punt Road site

The site could accommodate: • site offices, sheds, workshops and storage • concrete batch plant • stockpile sites for materials, temporary

spoil storage and mulch.

Via Kings Highway and a new temporary access from the roundabout into the site. Limited impact to local roads however, could impact on the Old Punt Road access to the Kings Highway roundabout

Bay Waters Motel site

The site could accommodate: • site offices, sheds, workshops and storage • areas for the delivery and storage of bridge

structural elements • stockpile sites for materials, temporary

spoil storage and mulch • bridge launching facility.

Via Kings Highway on to Old Punt Road access via existing sealed access points to motel site Would result in some additional traffic, particularly heavy vehicles on Old Punt Road.

Korners Park site

The site could accommodate: • demolition compound for the dismantling of

the existing bridge structure. The site could also provide access to the piling/construction barges.

Access via Wharf Road or via Peninsula Drive if approaching northbound on Princes Highway. Would impact on Wharf Road and would remove the parking at Korners Park.

Southern carpark site

This site could accommodate: • areas for the delivery and storage of bridge

structural elements • areas for treating water • stockpile sites for materials, temporary

spoil storage and mulch • temporary construction side track .

Access from Clyde Street Would impact on local and regional traffic in Clyde Street. Could have limited impacts (ie minor increase in travel time) to travellers seeking to access the southern foreshore and residents travelling to the Batemans Bay CBD and southern suburbs.

Reef Motel Inn site

The site could accommodate: • site offices, sheds, workshops and storage, • areas for the delivery and storage of bridge


spoil storage and mulch

Access from Clyde Street Would impact on Clyde Street North with mostly residential and accommodation traffic. Could have limited impacts (ie minor increase in travel time) to travellers seeking to access the southern boat ramp and foreshore.

Former bowling club site

This site could accommodate: • site offices, sheds, workshops and storage • areas for the delivery and storage of bridge


spoil storage and mulch

Access from existing signalised Princes Highway / Beach Road intersection May result in some parking associated with the adjacent mix of recreation uses, however peak for the uses is likely to be outside peak construction working hours.

All construction access routes would be identified in the Construction Traffic Management Plan to be developed by the construction contractor prior to construction. Any traffic management or controls would be identified in that plan.


7.4 Construction traffic Construction traffic for the proposal would comprise light and heavy vehicles and would depend on the stages of construction or demolition.

Heavy vehicle movements would be associated mainly with:

delivery of construction materials, in particular concrete and its components

delivery of imported fill

delivery and removal of construction equipment and machinery

removal of existing bridge sections

spoil and waste removal

Light vehicle movements would be associated with the construction workforce travelling to, from and within the construction site and from deliveries.

7.4.1 Construction vehicle movements Construction vehicle movements would vary depending on the stage of construction. The peak period would be during excavation works due to high heavy vehicle movements associated with the movement of cut and fill as well as concrete truck movements. To provide a comparison with average traffic movements, traffic numbers have been estimated for a typical period of bridge construction when concrete batching is occurring.

Traffic movements during these periods are summarised in Table 7-2.

Table 7-2: Preliminary construction traffic estimates

Type Vehicle movements per day Average period Peak construction periods

Employee Light Vehicle Movements

240 260

Heavy Vehicle Movements 7 40

Light Commercial Vehicles 10 10

Total (rounded up to nearest 10 trips)

260 310

Construction vehicle movements would be within the capacity of the highway and local road network. All these light vehicle movements would not occur in one location, and would be spread around the different ancillary facilities and work sites.

In addition to the main period of construction it is estimated that once the new bridge is open the demolition of the old bridge would result in about 50 car movements a day, including about 20 heavy vehicles.


7.5 Construction impacts

7.5.1 Impacts on regional and local road network From Table 7-2 the construction of the proposal would generate peak traffic movements between 260 and 310 trips per day. This would decrease to 50 movements per day for the final demolition phases.

The distribution of these movements on the road network would depend on the stage of work (and hence the auxiliary facility accessed by the workforce), the home destinations of the workforce, the source of imported material and destination of exported material. Commercial vehicles have been assumed to be split equally between approaching the site via Princes Highway north, south and Kings Highway.

This construction traffic has been compared against daily traffic movements on individual roads in the vicinity of the works (See Table 7-3).

Table 7-3: Construction traffic impact – access

Existing daily traffic

Average construction period Peak construction period Construction

traffic (Number of

trips)

Percent increase

Construction traffic

(Number of trips)

Percent increase

Arterial network

Princes Highway South

13,500 150 1% 170 1.3%

Princes Highway North

8,900 80 <1% 95 1.1%

Kings Highway / Princes Highway

2,800 120 4.3% 130 4.6%

Kings Highway North

2,800 15 < 1% 15 < 1%

Bridge 13,500 110 < 1% 155 1.1%

Local roads

Old Punt Road Unknown but likely to be low

134 144

Bowls and Recreation Centre Access

Unknown but likely to be low

126 159

Wharf Road (demolition phase only)

1,600 50 3% - -

The construction traffic assessment indicates that daily traffic movements would increase. However these increases would be minor and would not affect the performance of local and regional roads.

Throughout the construction period, haulage or traffic movements would be required along the highway and local road network. Traffic management plans and construction staging would be progressively developed and refined during construction to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of traffic through and around the proposal area and ancillary facilities.

In addition, depending on the proximity of works to the side track temporary speed limit restrictions may be required to provide protection for construction workers. These would be identified as part of the final construction traffic management plan.


Highway intersection performance Interaction between construction traffic and highway traffic would occur along the proposal area. The greatest impact would be during public holiday times, when the use of the highway is at its highest. However, during normal use, construction traffic is not anticipated to adversely affect the highway.

While the construction of the new bridge would be undertaken clear of existing highway traffic, traffic delays could be expected on the highway at the tie-in locations. The need for partial or full closure of the highway would depend on the construction method adopted by the construction contractor.

Local road network During construction, there would be temporary closures of some local road accesses to the Princes Highway. This would include:

Wharf Road may require temporary short term closures, particularly when the reconfiguration of the Wharf Road / Princes Highway intersection. Access to Wharf Road would be via Peninsula Drive

Old Punt Road access to the parking and boat ramp on the northern foreshore would be closed during construction. It is anticipated that heavy vehicles may use the road to access the bridge site, however, the road between the Pier Restaurant and to the Kings Highway would not be closed to public traffic

Clyde Street, late in the construction period would be closed to allow the removal of the existing bridge structure. This could isolate properties on Clyde Street North until Clyde Street is reopened however alternative access would be provided.

Access to local roads, properties and businesses would be maintained throughout the construction of the proposal, where practicable. However, interruptions may occur for short periods, but only on the agreement with the affected property owner, business or government agency. Some delays on local roads may occur where heavy vehicles are accessing the ancillary facilities.

The construction contractor would be responsible for liaising with Roads and Maritime and other key stakeholders including the local council to ensure road closures and disruptions are managed safely and efficiently.

7.5.2 Cyclists and pedestrians A pedestrian and cyclist crossing of the river would be maintained throughout the construction period. These modes would continue to use the existing bridge until the new bridge is open. The new sections of shared pedestrian and cycle path that would be provided between North Street and the new bridge and the Kings Highway roundabout and the bridge would not be open until the new bridge works are fully completed.

Therefore impacts to cyclists and pedestrians to the current bridge access during construction would be minimal.

Should construction staging impact connections to the pedestrian and cyclist network, dedicated areas would be fenced directing these modes safely across the construction site.

7.5.3 Public transport One bus route would be impacted by the proposed works. Route 757 currently has a stop on Wharf Road and uses this road to access Princes Highway.

Provided the construction of the proposed bus turnaround in Wharf Road is completed before the closure of Wharf Road, no impact would occur to local bus services during construction.

Regional coaches that currently turn on to Clyde Street would need to be diverted when the Clyde Street access to Princes Highway is closed. These services would be diverted via North Street, Orient Street and Beach Road. The existing bus interchange area on Clyde Street may have to be temporarily relocated further south onto Orient Street with potentially some loss of car parking to allow bus movements.


7.5.4 Maritime impacts The construction of the new bridge and the demolition of the existing bridge would require the use of boats, barges and other maritime vessels. The number and type of maritime vessels required and any land based facilities and wharves to service the maritime operations is currently unknown and would be determined by the construction contractor and methodology selected to construct the bridge.

The use of maritime vessels and need to provide construction areas on the water would introduce new impediments into the river for recreational and commercial boat users.

During the demolition of the existing bridge, there would be a short period of time (around a month), where there would be limited maritime access, as the lift span, lift towers and counterweights are removed. During this period of time, only vessels with a height of less than 3.6m would be able to pass under the bridge. As part of the construction traffic management plan, Roads and Maritime and the construction contractor would develop plans for this stage and would provide appropriate notification of any closure or restriction to navigational clearance.

7.5.5 Parking Where practicable, public parking along the foreshore areas would be maintained. However, as mentioned above, Old Punt Road near the northern foreshore would be closed during construction, which would remove access to the public parking area. On the southern foreshore, impacts to parking would be minimised, however, some deliveries and use of the boat ramp may result in short term restrictions or closure.

Should the regional bus interchange at Clyde Street need to change for the construction period, some on-street parking on Clyde Street would be affected. However, this would be confirmed prior to construction by the construction contractor.

The use of the former bowling club site could impact on available parking for the adjoining oval. However, it is anticipated that parking requirements for the oval may be highest during the weekends, where construction activities would be lower than during the week.

There would be the temporary loss of parking spaces at the supermarket adjacent to the southern approach. This includes both formal parking spaces (about 60) and an informal parking area adjacent to the supermarket. The formal parking spaces and the majority of the informal parking area would be returned to parking at the completion of construction. Further consultation would be undertaken with the supermarket and the local council to ensure that adequate parking is available during construction.


8 Management and mitigation measures Management and mitigation of traffic impacts from the proposal are presented in the following sections.

8.1 Construction Measures to be implemented to manage potential traffic impacts during construction are:

a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) will be prepared and implemented for road and marine traffic during construction. The TMP will be prepared in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Traffic Control at Work Sites Manual (RTA, 2010) and QA Specification G10 Control of Traffic (Roads and Maritime, 2008). The TMP will include:

− confirmation of haulage routes

− measures to maintain access to local roads, properties and the waterway

− site specific traffic control measures (including signage) to manage and regulate traffic movement

− measures to maintain pedestrian and cyclist access

− requirements and methods to consult and inform the local community of impacts on the local road network and the waterway

− access to ancillary sites including entry and exit locations and measures to prevent construction vehicles queuing on public roads

− a response plan for any construction road or marine traffic incident

− consideration of other developments that may be under construction to minimise traffic conflict and congestion that may occur due to the cumulative increase in construction vehicle traffic

− monitoring, review and amendment mechanisms.

consultation would be undertaken with all local and regional bus companies that operate in Batemans Bay before and during construction to confirm any bus diversions and bus stop relocations including at Wharf Road and Clyde Street during construction and any operational road network changes

partial road closures (or any short-term full road closures) will be timed to avoid peak periods such as holiday periods when vehicle traffic is high along the highway, where practicable

pedestrian and cyclists connectivity across the construction area will be maintained, where feasible and reasonable, during construction. The community would be notified of any access changes including alternative routes

access to private properties would be maintained during construction, wherever possible. Where changes to access arrangements or disruption to access are necessary, owners and occupiers would be consulted regarding alternative access arrangements

impacts to parking along the northern and southern foreshores of the Clyde River will be minimised during construction where possible. Where impacts are unavoidable, the community will be notified in advance

a Road Occupancy Licence would be obtained, where required

traffic control plans would be prepared for the construction area and progressively updated as the works progress. The plans would be prepared and implemented by suitably qualified personnel.

8.2 Operation Measures to manage potential traffic impacts and changes during operation include:

Roads and Maritime will consult with local and regional bus companies that operate in Batemans Bay regarding road network changes and impacts to local and regional services.

Roads and Maritime will consult with boat owners with moorings that will need to be relocated as a result of the new bridge.

Aurecon offices are located in: Angola, Australia, Botswana, China, Ghana, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Kenya, Lesotho, Macau, Mozambique, Namibia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Philippines, Qatar, Singapore, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Vietnam.

Document prepared by Aurecon Australasia Pty Ltd ABN 54 005 139 873 Aurecon Centre Level 8, 850 Collins Street Docklands, Melbourne VIC 3008 PO Box 23061 Docklands VIC 8012 Australia T F E W

+61 3 9975 3000 +61 3 9975 3444 [email protected] aurecongroup.com

Batemans Bay Bridge replacement€¦ · Docklands, Melbourne VIC 3008 . PO Box 23061 Docklands VIC...

Documents

Transcript of Batemans Bay Bridge replacement€¦ · Docklands, Melbourne VIC 3008 . PO Box 23061 Docklands VIC...