STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF ROGER WILLIAMS 24-2-2014
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
1.
My full name is Roger Lewis Williams.
2.
I am currently retired. My previous employment was with OPUS International Consultants and my position
was of Civil Design Manager.
3.
I am a graduate of Queen Mary College, University of London, holding a BSc (Hons) in Civil Engineering. I
am a fellow of the Institute of Professional Engineers of New Zealand. I am a past member of the IPENZ
Transportation Group. I have 42 years of experience in most aspects of civil engineering including structural,
underground structures, highway design, transport engineering and road safety.
4.
I have led a number of transport planning projects that include:4.1
Cambridge Bypass Designation Study.
4.2
Te Puke Bypass Study.
4.3
Tauranga Route J Design.
4.4
King Hussain Road Tunnel, preliminary and final design, Amman, Jordan.
4.5
Waitemata Harbour Crossing Study 2002 (Construction Feasibility Report).
4.6
Development of the Strategy Study reporting system for Transit NZ and subsequent preparation of 7
separate strategy studies.
4.7
Team member for 4 area wide road safety audits in Waikato and Bay of Plenty.
5.
I have had published 14 technical engineering papers and received 8 awards for engineering excellence.
6.
My evidence with respect to the Puhoi to Warkworth Project is regarding the need to carry out improvements
to the Hill St Intersection prior to the construction of the new motorway (hereafter called the Project). My
evidence is based on the effect on the intersection both during construction and during subsequent operation of
the Project.
7.
The Hill St intersection has been recognised as a serious problem for SH1 traffic and for local Warkworth
traffic for many decades. Ten years ago Opus International Consultants was working on the design of SH1
improvements within Warkworth. Detailed design was carried out for the section of SH1 that includes
Woodcocks Road and Whitaker Street intersections on the understanding that the Hill Street Intersection
would follow on as a continuation of the same works. The Woodcocks Road and Whitaker Street intersections
have been completed for 3 years now but absolutely no progress has been made at the Hill Street Intersection.
In the last two years the Hudson Street intersection has been both designed and constructed whereas the more
pressing intersection problem, that of Hill Street Intersection has been totally ignored, except for a traffic
intersection monitoring camera and some pedestrian crossing improvements at SH1 for the disabled.
8.
The proposed Puhoi to Warkworth Project will take 5 years to construct. As the Project currently proposes to
delay all works on the Hill Street Intersection, it will be at least 7 years before a start is made on detailed
design of the Hill Street Intersection.
9.
The Hill St intersection project will then revert to an Auckland Transport project. I would suggest that unless
prior construction of improvements at Hill Street becomes a condition of the Project, it is unlikely that any
improvements will be constructed on site within the next ten years.
10. The major problems with the Hill Street Intersection are:a. The State Highway traffic lanes are running near capacity at peak hours even without the constraints
of the intersection.
b. Inadequate traffic stacking lanes/lengths on State Highway. On SH1 a two lane SH1 bridge over the
river near Shoesmith Street is a major constraint and once traffic stacks back towards this point
congestion rapidly compounds, sometimes as far as Puhoi.
c. The free stacking length for northbound SH1 traffic is only 40 metres before it gets blocked by
turning traffic.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
The free stacking length for traffic entering from Matakana is 16 metres. A truck and trailer is 20
metres long. A truck and trailer will therefore block all movements out of Elizabeth Street until it is
cleared.
The free stacking length on Matakana Road back from Elizabeth Street is 40 metres before it blocks
the otherwise free turn into Warkworth.
The problems in ‘e’ very quickly blocks traffic exiting Sandspit Road. This problem currently occurs
many times each day.
Traffic turning right out of Elizabeth Street towards Matakana or Sandspit must to give way to four
other directions of traffic flow concurrently. Traffic exiting Kowhai Park must to give way to five
other directions of flow concurrently. The safety risk is obvious.
The problems in ‘g’ above frequently block traffic back into Warkworth Town creating a gridlock.
These problems can occur at any time of the day. Only patience and goodwill allow this intersection
to operate at all.
Pedestrians from Matakana Road and the Totara Park Retirement Village have an informal crossing
point that is completely inconspicuous from all traffic and in particular from the turning traffic
mentioned in ‘e’ and ‘g’ above. Drivers have a lot of give way problems on their minds without
looking for pedestrians.
11. The problems above are well illustrated in the GIS plan view, item A. A truck and trailer is visible turning into
off SH1. A single truck is shown waiting on Matakana Road. If the single truck was a Truck and Trailer going
to the motorway construction then the intersection with Elizabeth Street would be completely blocked. Item B
is a photo of a logging truck and trailer just clearing the intersection and it is clear that the trailer has been
blocking Elizabeth Street.
12. Evidence from the applicant, T Parker clause 62, acknowledges that the Hill Street Intersection has been of
concern for some time.
13. In clause 63 he says that ‘undertaking the improvements after the Project is operational will assist with
providing a bypass around the construction works’. He fails to say that this is likely to be 10 years away and
that construction traffic for the Project will cause increased truck and trailer traffic at the Hill Street
Intersection in the meantime.
14. In clause 64 he accepts the advice from its expert (Mr Bell) that ‘the Project will not cause more than minor
adverse effects on the network (either during or post construction) that would require upgrade to Hill Street
intersection to take place prior to the commencement of the Project’. In effect he is saying that he is relying on
advice that justifies a ten year delay in any improvements at the Hill Street Intersection . I suggest that the
advice he received is seriously flawed.
15. In the evidence from the applicant, Mr A Bell Operational Report clause 68, concludes that Hill Street
Intersection ‘improvements are not required to mitigate any adverse construction effects of the Project’.
16. In clause 69 he admits that he had assumed ‘that improvements would be made to the Hill Street Intersection in
line with designs produced by the Transport Agency’. Item C attached shows the proposed improvements he is
referring to.
17. He goes on to say that with the Project in place, the ‘intersection performed similarly or better than without the
Project in place’. By this he appears to be saying that the Project really does very little to solve the
Warkworth’s traffic problems at the Hill Street Intersection. I would agree.
18. In clause 71 Table 1 Mr Bell gives travel times through the intersection with no improvements (also note that
Sandspit Road traffic in not addressed).
19. The delays given are significant. In all cases they are considerably greater than the 1.5 – 2.0 minute cycle time
for the light sequence indicating that all routes are queuing. This proves that improvements are required at the
intersection whether or not the Project goes ahead.
20. The delays shown in the table on SH1 vary from 3 to 6 minutes. Compare this delay with the time to drive 15.5
km from Warkworth to Puhoi at say 80kph ie. 11.6 minutes. This confirms that the intersection is indeed a
significant problem.
21. The Peak Intersection Delays at the intersection, given in table 1, probably does not tell the true story as
journey times that pass through the intersection at any holiday peak hour are commonly increased by up to one
hour.
22. From the delays given in the table it is clear that when the Project is in place anyone who lives south of the Hill
Street Intersection will find it quicker to go to Auckland via the old SH1.
23. Anyone going to Auckland who plans to go through the intersection to get to the Project will still be subject to
significant delays at the intersection. This is before they decide whether to drive the increased distance of
driving north to go south to Auckland, over and above accepting the delay at the intersection.
24. In the evidence from the applicant, Mr A Bell Construction Report Clause 50, he states ‘this extra traffic will
equal a maximum of two vehicles per traffic cycle in each direction’. He goes on to say ‘I consider this level of
additional traffic would only result in minor effects’. I completely disagree when you consider that many of
these vehicles will be trucks.
25. In clause 48 he suggests that if all the pavement materials came from the quarry this would amount to only 4
vehicles per hour. Somehow this does not tally with his estimate of 10 - 55 vehicles per hour overall increase
through the intersection. He also makes no mention of concrete trucks from Matakana that will obviously use
Matakana Road.
26. Any increase in truck and trailer units on the side arms of this intersection will be a significant problem. Refer
to the intersection plan in item A and the photo in item B. I should add that I had to wait over an hour to get
the photo under current off peak traffic conditions so truck and trailer units on the side arms of this intersection
are currently not common.
27. The current NZTA proposal for Hill Street Intersection, see item D, is shown for the information of the
Commissioners.
The proposal turns all Elizabeth Street northward lanes into the main traffic signal controlled intersection so
that right turn traffic is controlled. In the current situation right turns run the gauntlet as they give way to four
other legs with priority over them.
The proposal compensates for the adding the extra phase in the traffic signal sequence by adding a little more
stacking capacity in the other legs by adding extra lanes to them.
The features of the NZTA proposal are:a. Traffic Signals at both Sandspit Road and Hill Street intersections.
b. All Elizabeth St north traffic goes through the main traffic signalised intersection.
c. Intersection is more than twice as large as the existing intersection (creating longer delays to clear the
intersection while lights change).
d. Stacking lengths have been slightly improved.
e. Additional lanes are provided from Shoesmith Street but no widening of the SH1 bridge.
f. No right turn into Hill Street from SH1 north allowed (use Hudson Street).
The proposal is much more ordered but I have doubts that the capacity is significantly improved.
The Project deems that the improvements are at least 10 years away.
24. My suggested alternative proposal is as follows, see item E.
Objectives
a.
b.
c.
d.
To increase the capacity of the intersection.
To maintain priority for SH1 traffic while freeing up local traffic circulation.
To simplify the decision making and thus minimize conflict.
To create a solution that is robust enough to cater with large changes in traffic flows now, during
the construction phase of the Project and into the period when it reverts to be part of the local
road network.
e. To improve pedestrian access across the intersection.
Proposed Solution
a. The solution proposed is basically a large rotary intersection.
b. Giving way to the right only at all junctions makes it simple and safe.
c. The size of the rotary means that decisions can be made one at a time.
d. Rotary intersections are free flow and generally respond well to varying flows however if a
dominant flow exists the other legs may not get adequate breaks.
e. To overcome the problem ‘d’ above, this rotary is modified by having a signal controlled
intersection to allow a straight through flow for SH1 traffic.
f. This maximizes SH1 flow while providing a controlled interception of its flow allowing the
remaining flows to get the breaks they need.
g.
The phasing of the signals can be controlled to allow for the wide variation of flows that can
potentially occur.
h. Traffic from SH1 North can enter Hill St via the roundabout (not available in the NZTA
proposal)
i. The proposal has taken into account access from all nearby properties.
j. Pedestrian access is facilitated by allowing access from the Kowhai Park, Matakana road area and
to the Totara Park Retirement village to the centre of the roundabout via a subway. From there
the traffic signals facilitate pedestrian access to Warkworth or to Hill Street. The traffic signal
sequence allows more time to cross to (and from) Warkworth from the north. Traffic is one way
at this point and there is no threat from turning traffic.
k. The design minimizes effects on services.
l. The design maximizes the use of existing pavements.
m. The construction of the new leg of the roundabout can be carried out first to ease congestion
during construction.
25. I have spoken to NZTA and they acknowledge that this alternative proposal is a new solution and agree that it
does have operational advantages. They also say that the current NZTA proposal is likely to change when the
Project traffic is taken into consideration.
28. My conclusion is to ask that
a. A condition is applied to any consent for the Project that the Hill St Intersection improvements be
completed prior to the construction of the new motorway.
b. The alternative design solution (as proposed above) for the Hill Street Intersection is considered by
NZTA.
Item A
Item B
Item C
Item D