princes highway upgrade program jervis bay road

Princes Highway Upgrade Program JERVIS BAY ROAD INTERSECTION UPGRADE

Traffic and Transport Assessment

30 March 2021

Copyright © 2015 Arcadis. All rights reserved. arcadis.com

http://www.arcadis.com/

i

TRANSPORT FOR NSW Princes Highway Upgrade Program – Jervis Bay Road Intersection Upgrade

Traffic and Transport Assessment

Author Wendy Hu

Checker Ghaith Farfour

Yvonne Approver Almandinger

Report No PHUPJB-ADAP-NWW-EN-RPT-000002

Date 30/03/2021

Revision Text C

This report has been prepared for Transport for New South Wales in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment for Jervis Bay Road Intersection Concept Design and Environmental Impact Assessment dated 1 July 2020. Arcadis Australia Pacific Pty Limited (ABN 76 104 485 289) cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party

REVISIONS Revision

A

Date

26/11/2020

Description

Draft

Prepared by

GF

Approved by

YA

B 11/02/2021 Draft Final GF YA

C 30/03/2021 Final WH, GF YA

Jervis Bay Road Intersection Upgrade

iii

CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1

GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................................ 2

1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 The proposal ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Purpose of this report ......................................................................................................... 3

2 STRATEGIC TRANSPORT AND PLANNING CONTEXT ....................................................... 6 2.1 Strategic context ................................................................................................................. 6

2.2 Population and employment projections .......................................................................... 7 2.3 Service needs ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.4 Land use ............................................................................................................................ 10

3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................... 12 3.1 Study area .......................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Relevant policy and guidelines ........................................................................................ 12 3.3 Operational traffic and transport assessment ................................................................ 13

3.4 Construction traffic and transport assessment.............................................................. 20

4 EXISTING TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT ENVIRONMENT ................................................... 21 4.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 21 4.2 Road hierarchy .................................................................................................................. 21 4.3 Route and speed environment ......................................................................................... 22 4.4 Commuter mode share ..................................................................................................... 22 4.5 Public transport ................................................................................................................. 22 4.6 Walking and cycling .......................................................................................................... 23 4.7 Heavy vehicles................................................................................................................... 24 4.8 Crash data .......................................................................................................................... 24 4.9 Traffic surveys ................................................................................................................... 27 4.10 Traffic results................................................................................................................... 29


iv

4.11 Intersection operational performance ........................................................................... 35

4.12 Existing intersection performance ................................................................................ 36

5 FUTURE ROAD NETWORK PERFORMANCE WITHOUT THE PROPOSAL ...................... 39 5.1 Traffic forecast .................................................................................................................. 39 5.2 “Do Nothing” (without the proposal) assessment ......................................................... 41

6 FUTURE ROAD NETWORK PERFORMANCE WITH THE PROPOSAL ............................. 43 6.1 Proposal assessment ....................................................................................................... 43 6.2 “Do Nothing” vs proposal comparison ........................................................................... 46

6.3 Sensitivity assessment – Disaster resilience ................................................................. 46 6.4 Impact on other transport modes .................................................................................... 48

7 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS ................................................................................................. 49 7.1 General construction impacts .......................................................................................... 49 7.2 Indicative construction staging ....................................................................................... 49

7.3 Construction traffic ........................................................................................................... 51 7.4 Construction duration and hours .................................................................................... 51 7.5 Construction activities ...................................................................................................... 51 7.6 Ancillary facilities .............................................................................................................. 53 7.7 Construction traffic impacts ............................................................................................ 55


v

8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MEASURES ................................................................ 58

9 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................... 60

10 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 61

DO NOTHING SIDRA RESULTS

PROPOSAL SIDRA RESULTS

SENSITIVITY TESTING SIDRA RESULTS

CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SIDRA RESULTS

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Transport for NSW proposes to upgrade the intersection of Jervis Bay Road and the Princes Highway in the vicinity of Falls Creek, NSW, located about 12 kilometres south of Nowra within the City of Shoalhaven local government area. The proposal would provide a grade separated through alignment for the Princes Highway with network access to Jervis Bay Road and Old Princes Highway provided via dual at grade roundabouts serviced by on and off ramps.

To support the concept design and review of environmental factors, Transport for NSW has engaged Arcadis to carry out traffic modelling for the current intersection performance and proposed upgrade for the intersection and prepare a traffic and transport assessment.

This traffic and transport assessment report has been prepared to support the review of environmental factors for the proposed intersection upgrade.

The following periods were assessed:

• AM peak hour – 7.30 am to 8.30 am (2019, 2029, 2039)

• PM peak hour – 3.30 pm to 4.30 pm (2019, 2029, 2039)

• Holiday peak hour – 3 pm to 4 pm (2019, 2029, 2039)

• Sensitivity peak hour – 10.15 am to 11.15 am (2019 existing conditions and 2039 proposed conditions).

Modelling results show that for the existing intersection configuration:

• The intersection currently operates at an acceptable level of service B and C in 2019 under typical traffic conditions for the morning and afternoon peak hours respectively, but operates at a level of service F with high delays during the peak holiday period

• By 2029, users of the priority intersection are expected to experience lengthy delays and queuing on the Jervis Bay Road eastern approach. The intersection is expected to operate at a level of service F for all assessed periods by 2029.

Modelling results for the upgrade assessment indicate that the proposed intersection upgrade, a grade separated Princes Highway over an at-grade double roundabout interchange, would result in the intersection operating at a similar level of service B or better for all assessed time periods.

The proposed intersection upgrade would improve road arrangements for pedestrians and cyclists by providing a shared path along the southern side of Jervis Bay Road between the Willowgreen Road connection, the eastern limit of works and the proposed bus bay location on the access road. A three metre wide shoulder would be provided alongside the Princes Highway and ramps to provide for cyclists past these shared path extents. The proposal would also result in the relocation of current bus stops to a consolidated bus bay located on the access road, south-east of the intersection. Reduced traffic delays resulting from the upgrade would likely benefit bus route performance.

2

GLOSSARY Definitions

Active transport

Relates to physical activity cycling.

carried out as a means of transport. For example, walking, running or

AusRAP

Australian Road Assessment Program. An analysis of the major highways and motorways in Australia, the program aims to reduce deaths and injuries on Australia’s roads by systematically assessing risk and identifying safety shortcomings that can be addressed with practical measures, and put risk assessment at the heart of strategic decisions on road improvements, crash protection and standards of road management.

Degree of saturation

Also known as the volume to capacity ratio, which is the ratio of demand or arrival flows at the intersection to the capacity available for throughput of vehicles at the intersection. Degree of saturation over one represents oversaturated conditions where demand flows exceed capacity, Degree of saturation under one represents spare capacity.

and a

Gap acceptance Acceptable gap between vehicles as one vehicle changes lane or enters traffic.

Headway The distance between vehicles, expressed as for the trailing vehicle to cover that distance.

a physical distance (ie metres) or as the time it will take

Level of Service (LoS)

A measure used to determine the effectiveness of intersection operation and is most to analyse intersections by categorising traffic flow conditions.

commonly used

Princes Highway Upgrade Program

Transport for NSW’s plan for the highway over the next 20 years. The program identifies what needs to be done in the short, medium and long term to deliver a vision for the Princes Highway as a safe, reliable, efficient and connected network.

Proposal construction footprint

The area of land that is directly impacted on by the proposal that is being assessed, including access roads, and areas used to store construction materials. It includes the construction and operational areas for the proposal.

Public transport

Buses, trains and other forms fixed routes.

of transport that are available to the public, charge set fares and run on

Queue length

The measure of length of vehicles (in number of vehicles or in metres), starting from the stop line and waiting a serviceable gap from opposing movements. It can be measured as either a mean queue length, which is the product of average vehicle delay and the movement flow rate, or the 95th percentile queue, which is queue length that has only a five per cent probability of being exceeded during the analysis time period.

SIDRA Signalised and unsignalised Intersection Design and Research Aid. The traffic engineering software used for the modelling produced in this assessment.

Study area The area surrounding the proposal, focussed on the Princes Highway Mortimer Road, that was subject to modelling and assessment.

from Jervis Bay Road to

3

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The proposal Transport for NSW proposes to upgrade the intersection of Jervis Bay Road and the Princes Highway in the vicinity of Falls Creek, NSW, located about 12 kilometres south of Nowra within the City of Shoalhaven local government area. The proposal would provide a grade separated through alignment for the Princes Highway with network access to Jervis Bay Road and Old Princes Highway provided via dual at grade roundabouts serviced by on and off ramps.

Key features of the proposal are shown in Figure 1 and would include:

• A new intersection between Jervis Bay Road and the Princes Highway, incorporating:

– Realignment of the existing Princes Highway, including widening from two lanes to a four-lane divided highway (two lanes in each direction), with median separation using flexible safety barriers, providing an uninterrupted through alignment for the Princes Highway

– An overpass bridge over Jervis Bay Road

– An unsignalised single-lane at-grade double roundabout interchange providing:

Direct access from Jervis Bay Road and Old Princes Highway to the Princes Highway

Direct access from the Princes Highway to Jervis Bay Road and Old Princes Highway.

– Direct connection to existing properties and businesses at the Old Princes Highway

– A connection from Willowgreen Road to Old Princes Highway

– Tie-ins with the Old Princes Highway and with Jervis Bay Road

• Access road to service Princes Highway properties south east of the intersection

• Shared user paths along Jervis Bay Road, connecting to the new bus bay and Jervis Bay Road and Old Princes Highway road shoulders

• Adjustments of drainage infrastructure and provision of new drainage infrastructure such as pit and pipe networks, culverts, open channels and retention basins

• Permanent water quality measures such as vegetated swales, bioretention swales and bioretention basins

• Adjustment, protection and relocation of existing utilities

• Other roadside furniture including safety barriers, bus stops, signage, line marking, lighting and fencing

• A bus bay adjacent to the interchange, including kiss and ride car spots

• Establishment and use of temporary ancillary facilities during construction

• Property works including acquisition, demolition and adjustments to accesses, and at-property noise treatments

• Rehabilitation of disturbed areas and landscaping.

A detailed description of the proposal is provided in Chapter 3 of the review of environmental factors.

1.2 Purpose of this report The purpose of this report is to:

• Provide a summary of models established for the traffic and transport assessment

• Define existing traffic and transport environment in the vicinity of the proposal, including active and public transport

• Detail design information used to inform the development of proposal design

4

• Present a summary of proposed traffic and transport conditions

• Identify potential construction and operational impacts associated with the proposal

• Identification of traffic and transport management measures, where required.

5

Figure 1 – Key features of the proposal

6

2 STRATEGIC TRANSPORT AND PLANNING CONTEXT

2.1 Strategic context There are a number of relevant state government plans, policies and strategies that outline the policy, vision and objectives for the Jervis Bay region. These relate to infrastructure investment, planning development growth and managing transport networks.

2.1.1 State Infrastructure Strategy 2018-2038 The State Infrastructure Strategy 2018-2038 (Infrastructure NSW, 2018) makes recommendations on a 20-year time horizon across each of NSW’s key infrastructure sectors, including transport, energy, water, health, education, justice, social housing, culture, sport and tourism.

The strategy sets out several cross-sectoral high level directions, including the continuous improvement of integration of land and infrastructure planning and delivery of an infrastructure program that represents the best possible investment and use of funds, optimising the performance and use of the State’s assets. A priority in ensuring the existing and future infrastructure is resilient to natural hazards and human-related threats was also highlighted by the strategy. Areas of regional NSW such as the Jervis Bay territory have a recognised need to be supported by good transport links to key markets.

2.1.2 Future Transport Strategy 2056 The Future Transport Strategy 2056 (NSW Government, 2018a) document was published in March 2018 and outlines a 40-year vision for the transport system across NSW, and is an overarching strategy to achieve the vision of a world class, safe, efficient and reliable transport system.

The strategy outlines a pipeline of initiatives planned across metropolitan and regional regions of NSW. A duplication of the Princes Highway between the Jervis Bay Road intersection and the town of Moruya has been identified as an initiative for investigation over the next 10 years, which would link with the Jervis Bay Road intersection upgrade this traffic and transport report has been produced to support.

2.1.3 NSW Freight and Port Plan 2018-2023 The Freight and Ports Plan 2018-2023 (NSW Government, 2018b) sets out a five-year vision of the NSW Government’s priorities for the sector, and includes over 70 initiatives to be delivered by 2023. The initiatives are targeted around achieving the objectives of economic growth, efficient and connected access, increased capacity, safety and sustainability.

The Jervis Bay territory has not been identified to be part of the regional NSW freight network, with the national land transport network between the south coast and Sydney stopping at Wollongong and the regional NSW freight rail network stopping at Nowra.

2.1.4 Princes Highway Upgrade Program The Jervis Bay Road intersection upgrade, which this traffic and transport report has been produced to support forms part of the Princes Highway Upgrade Program, which encompasses a large pipeline of road upgrade works between Sydney and the Victorian border. Figure 2 shows the extent of the program.

7

Figure 2 – Princes Highway Upgrade Program

2.2 Population and employment projections Jervis Bay Road provides east-west connectivity for traffic on the Princes Highway and town centres of Jervis Bay and St Georges Basin, including Vincentia, Huskisson, and Hyams Beach, as well as Falls Creek and Woollamia.

Understanding the existing and forecast population and employment in these areas may be used to confirm future traffic projections adopted for the traffic modelling.

Transport Performance and Analytics provides projections of population, employment and travel zones for the study area. For Jervis Bay Road, the travel zones considered are Falls Creek, Huskisson, Vincentia, and Erowal Bay.

Figure 3 highlights the population projections in the selected travel zones, and Figure 4 shows employment projections. Based on the projected socioeconomic figures for 2041, the population growth rate for the region accessed by Jervis Bay Road is 0.17 per cent per annum, based on the 25-year difference, whereas 1.7 per cent per annum is the growth rate for employment in the region.

8

Figure 3 – Population projections by Travel Zone(s) (Source: Transport for NSW, 2020a)

Figure 4 – Employment projections by Travel Zone(s) (Source: Transport for NSW, 2020a)

9

The P

2.3 Service needs rinces Highway is the primary north-south connector in the South Coast, extending to the Victorian

border, and provides a key freight route to Sydney. The location of the intersection and the communities Jervis Bay Road serves enables three customer types to be served:

1. Local population: Residents and the workforce of Huskisson, Vincentia, and Jervis Bay. Approximately 14 per cent of the workforce in the following suburbs have employment outside of Jervis Bay and the Shoalhaven region:

• Bream Beach

• Erowal Bay

• Hyams Beach

• Huskisson

• Falls Creek

• Jervis Bay

• Vincentia.

Out of the remaining 86 per cent of the workforce, approximately 46 per cent (956 workers) have employment in Nowra, while the remaining 40 per cent (937 workers) work within the above suburbs.

As such, catering for the workforce with employment outside of those suburbs to have better, safer accessibility from and to Jervis Bay Road during everyday regular peak hours needs to be addressed by the proposal.

2. Freight: According to the Freight Telematics for NSW (Transport Certification Australia, 2018), which sources its information from freight journey enrolled in the Intelligent Access Program (IAP), there were 16,400 journeys along the Princes Highway, and 646 freight trips on Jervis Bay Road annually in 2018. It is important to note that Freight Telematics data presents only data on heavy vehicles enrolled in a TCA certified program and therefore are not representative of all vehicles using the roads. Figure 5 highlights the annual freight journeys in the region in 2018.

Separating through traffic on the Princes Highway from the turning movements to and from Jervis Bay Road, Old Princes Highway and Willowgreen Road would improve the safety environment by minimising conflicts with high speed vehicles. The high volumes of freight demand on the Princes Highway emphasises the need for the proposed intersection upgrade.

3. Tourism: Tourist movements generally have a greater degree of irregularity across timing, distribution of trips throughout the day and peak hour volumes when compared to regular trips. The analysis takes into consideration tourists’ needs and arrival trends, and assesses their impacts on the intersection performance based on traffic surveys conducted during the 2019-2020 holiday period.

10

Figure 5 – Freight journeys in NSW (Source: Transport Certification Australia, 2018)

2.4 Land use The study area and surrounds are mainly characterised by rural landscapes (RU2) and large residential plots (R5), as classified in the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 (Figure 6). There is a commercial business on the western side of the Princes Highway adjacent to the intersection (JB Stockfeeds). South Coast Timber Supply and Contandino Olive Farm are within the study area, accessed via the Princes Highway.

11

Figure 6 – Land use zones (Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014)

12

3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

3.1 Study area The proposal study area focuses on the section of the Princes Highway from Jervis Bay Road to Mortimer Road. The modelling works will centre on the intersection location. Figure 7 shows the extent of the study area and modelled intersection for the operational traffic and transport assessment. A number of Falls Creek residential properties along the Princes Highway gain access directly from the Princes Highway. The proposal would change the Princes Highway to a divided carriageway with barriers along the verge, leading to changed access arrangements and therefore a re-distribution of local traffic extending to Mortimer Road. As part of the proposal, access to the properties along the south-eastern side of the intersection would be provided via an access road that is accessed via the southbound entry ramp and egress is provided to Jervis Bay Road westbound. Residents on Willowgreen Road would use the new connection to Old Princes Highway.

For the construction traffic and transport assessment, the study area includes the study area shown in Figure 7 as well as the proposal construction footprint.

Figure 7 – Study area

3.2 Relevant policy and guidelines The following guidelines were followed in carrying out this assessment:

• Heavy Vehicle (Mass, Dimension and Loading) National Regulation (National Heavy Vehicle Regulator, 2018)

• Traffic Modelling Guidelines (Roads and Maritime Services, 2013)

13

• Guide to Pavement Technology Part 4K: Selection and Design of Sprayed Seals Appendix B Austroads Vehicle Classification (Austroads, 2019)

• Interim Construction Noise Guidelines (DECCW, 2009).

3.3 Operational traffic and transport assessment

3.3.1 Base modelling development

3.3.1.1 Modelling platform SIDRA Intersection 8 software (version 8.0.7.7948) has been adopted for the assessment. Figure 8 shows an aerial image of the intersection layout, and Figure 9 shows the modelled SIDRA intersection.

3.3.1.2 Assessment years and periods Existing conditions models have been developed for the following periods:

• 2019 AM peak hour – 7.30 am to 8.30 am

• 2019 PM peak hour – 3.30 pm to 4.30 pm

• 2018/2019 holiday peak hour – 3 pm to 4 pm.

The peak hours were based on the highest total vehicle movements passing through the Princes Highway/ Jervis Bay Road intersection during each survey period.

Survey data provided traffic volumes counted at 15 minute intervals for the morning survey period (7 am to 10 am) and the afternoon survey period (2 pm to 6 pm). The 60 minute period with the highest vehicle throughput was selected from each survey period to form the morning and afternoon peak hours. For the holiday peak hour, the 60 minute period with the highest vehicle throughput throughout the day was selected for analysis.

Figure 8 – Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection aerial image

14

Figure 9 – Existing SIDRA intersection model

3.3.1.3 Modelling assumptions The following assumptions were incorporated into the SIDRA modelling of existing and future options models:

• June 2019 intersection surveys have been used to inform modelling of typical morning and afternoon peak hours

• Due to the bushfires in the south coast during the 2019 to 2020 holiday period, the holiday peak hour model was based on surveys conducted during the 2018 to 2019 holiday period

• Where SIDRA modelling reports delays of over 500 seconds (8.3 minutes), results have been reported in summary results tables as > 500 seconds. While the model may predict extreme delays, driver behaviour would change significantly in the event that traffic conditions deteriorate to that extent. Higher delay values beyond this threshold therefore are not deemed to accurately represent the future scenarios and have been omitted from summary tables. Detailed SIDRA results are shown in Appendix A and Appendix B

• Roundabout gap acceptance and follow-up headway parameters are set to SIDRA program defaults

• Where gap acceptance and follow-up headway must be defined (such as in priority intersections), values were selected so as to comply with Traffic Modelling Guidelines (Roads and Maritime Services, 2013) . Due to the limitations of the data available, an alternative modelling scenario was undertaken that used the traffic volumes obtained during the traffic survey and assumed a gap acceptance of seven seconds. These values have been selected to provide a more realistic representation of typical intersection operations, while remaining within the typical gap acceptance range defined in the Traffic Modelling Guidelines

• The Princess Highway/ Mortimer Road intersection located about two kilometres south of Jervis Bay Road is assumed to become a left in left out intersection in the future years. The right turning volumes

15

along Mortimer Road have been assumed to be directed to the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection in the future years.

3.3.1.4 Gap acceptance selection The gap acceptance selected for roundabouts was based on SIDRA program defaults and therefore were not defined. As such, the parameters were selected so as they were within the boundaries specified in Traffic Modelling Guidelines (Roads and Maritime Services, 2013).

Table 1 shows the gap acceptance and follow-up headway parameters modelled, as well as the range of values recommended by the Traffic Modelling Guidelines (Roads and Maritime Services, 2013). Table 1 – Gap acceptance parameters modelled

Movement

Modelling guidelines range Modelled

Gap acceptance (seconds)

Follow-up headway (seconds)



Merge onto Princes Highway from acceleration lane

2.5-3.5 1.5-2.5 2.5 2.0

Left turn onto Princes Highway 3-6 2-3.5 5.0 3.0

3.3.1.5 Traffic demand The 2019 morning and afternoon peak hour traffic demand has been based on the intersection counts carried out at the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection in June 2019. Holiday peak hour demand has been based on traffic surveys conducted on 2 January 2019.

Figure 10 and Figure 11 show the traffic volumes by light and heavy vehicles at the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection used to inform the SIDRA modelling for the morning and afternoon peak hours, respectively.

The 2018 holiday peak was also modelled, with traffic volumes shown in Figure 12.

16

Figure 10 – 2019 AM peak traffic demand

Figure 11 – 2019 PM peak traffic demand

17

Figure 12 – 2018 holiday peak traffic demand

18

3.3.1.6 SIDRA calibration The existing base case SIDRA model includes the AM peak period from 7.30 am to 8.30 am, and the PM peak hour from 3.30 pm to 4.30 pm.

Base SIDRA model calibration has been carried out through queue length validation, where modelled queue lengths by approach are compared to survey data collected. Table 2 shows queue length validation results by approach for each modelled period. Table 3 shows the gap acceptance and follow-up headway parameters modelled to achieve the calibrated queue lengths. Table 2 – Queue length validation results

Peak hour Approach Observed 95th percentile queues (metres)

Modelled queues (metres)

Observed vs modelled difference (metres)

AM peak hour (7.30 am to 8.30 am)

North – Princes Highway 0 10 10

East – Jervis Bay Road 110 90 -20

South – Princes Highway 0 0 0

PM peak hour (3.30 pm to 4.30 pm)


East – Jervis Bay Road 30 30 0

South – Princes Highway 10 0 10

Holiday peak hour (3 pm to 4 pm)


East – Jervis Bay Road 340 340 0

South – Princes Highway 20 0 -20

Note: Queue lengths are rounded to the nearest 10 metres.

Table 3 – Gap acceptance values from calibration

Approach Movement

Modelling guidelines range Modelled





North – Princes Highway Left turn 3-6 2-3.5 5.0 3.0

East – Jervis Bay Road

Left turn 3-6 2-3.5 6.0 3.5

Right turn 6-8 3-5 6.0 4.0

South – Princes Highway Right turn 4-5 2-3 4.5 2.5

19

3.3.2 Future year modelling Future year modelling was conducted with forecast 2029 and 2039 traffic volumes to determine future year traffic performance. Future year modelling assessed both the “do nothing” scenario which retains the existing configuration of the intersection, as well as with the proposed configuration of a grade separated Princes Highway over an at-grade double roundabout interchange connecting to Jervis Bay Road and the Old Princes Highway. The assessment of the “Do Nothing” condition provides a reference to understand the traffic performance improvements expected from the proposal through the following parameters:

• Vehicle delay

• Level of service

• Queue lengths.

3.3.2.1 Assessment years and periods Future year models have been developed for the 2029 and 2039 future years for the following peak periods:

• AM peak hour – 7.30 am to 8.30 am

• PM peak hour – 3.30 pm to 4.30 pm

• Holiday peak hour – 3 pm to 4 pm.

An additional sensitivity test was conducted to reflect traffic volumes surveyed during the 2019 to 2020 bushfire period, which severely affected the South Coast towns.

3.3.2.2 Traffic forecasting Forecast traffic volumes on key roads were prepared for two forecast years (2029 and 2039). A peak hour traffic growth between 2019 and 2039 was assumed to be 1.7 per cent per annum on the Princes Highway and 2.5 per cent per annum on Jervis Bay Road.

A detailed overview of traffic forecast volumes and assumptions can be found in Section 5.1.

3.3.2.3 Sensitivity analysis A large proportion of Australia is prone to bushfires, particularly during periods of extended drought. With climate change increasing the periods of hot and dry weather, the frequency of bushfires is expected to rise, and disaster resilience is an important consideration in assessing future network conditions.

Intersection turning counts were surveyed on 27 December 2019, during the 2019 to 2020 bushfires which severely affected the South Coast towns that use Jervis Bay Road and the Princes Highway. High volumes of northbound vehicles were recorded on both the Princes Highway and from the Jervis Bay Road approach as residents evacuated to the north.

A SIDRA assessment (Appendix C) was performed to assess the traffic performance of the intersection in 2039, for the purpose of ensuring that the proposed upgrades would be capable of servicing the traffic volumes expected during a natural disaster such as a bushfire.

3.3.3 Impacts on other transport modes An assessment of the existing pedestrian, cyclist and public transport network around the study area was performed to understand the current use and demand on each mode in the current condition. This assessment was used to inform an understanding of the potential impacts of the proposal during construction and operation.

20

3.4 Construction traffic and transport assessment Similar to the approach for operational traffic and transport assessment discussed in Section 3.2, the construction traffic assessment derives the base year transport patterns to assess the impact of construction vehicles and road closures on road and active transport users.

The construction assessment assumes no changes to traffic volumes on the intersection, given the relatively short time frame of proposal construction, and was carried out using the SIDRA calibrated and validated base model (as discussed in Section 3.3.1.6).

Construction traffic was added to the background traffic based on the location of the ancillary facilities, haulage routes and projected number of construction vehicles. To improve safety at the intersection during construction, the proposal introduces temporary traffic signals at the intersection with Jervis Bay Road for the duration of construction.

A high level assessment of the construction impact on existing active and public transport networks around the study area was also performed.

21

4 EXISTING TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT ENVIRONMENT

4.1 Background The Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway currently performs poorly in areas of:

• Safety – the intersection scored 2/5 stars against the Australian Road Assessment Program (AusRAP) road safety risk analysis and recorded 15 crashes in the five year period up to end of 2018

• Traffic – The intersection has one of the highest volumes of vehicle movements on the Princes Highway between Nowra and the border with Victoria. Delays and queuing have been observed on the Jervis Bay Road eastern approach to the intersection, particularly during the holiday peak hour. Right turning vehicles from Jervis Bay Road are required to give way to high volumes of through traffic on the Princes Highway, leading to significant delays on the approach.

Based on this, Transport for NSW has engaged Arcadis to carry out the concept design and review of environmental factors to the support the intersection upgrade.

4.2 Road hierarchy The Princes Highway is a major State Road and a vital transport corridor providing community connection between towns, regional centres, and attractions, linking Sydney and the Illawarra region with the NSW South Coast and beyond into Victoria. The Princes Highway is an important freight link, connecting with key east-west transport corridors such as the Kings Highway and Snowy Mountains Highway, and is a significant route for inter-regional business, tourism, and leisure travel.

Jervis Bay Road is a Regional road that functions as the main link to the regional centre of Vincentia and coastal villages of Huskisson, Hyams Beach and Jervis Bay and joins the Princes Highway at Falls Creek. Figure 13 shows the road hierarchy of the study area.

Figure 13 – Road hierarchy

22

4.3 Route and speed environment The Princes Highway currently has a posted speed limit of 100 kilometres per hour. The posted speed on Jervis Bay Road was recently reduced from 100 kilometres per hour to 90 kilometres per hour following a speed zone review completed in March 2020.

To the north of Jervis Bay Road, the Princes Highway is two lanes in each direction, reducing to one lane in each direction south of the intersection. Jervis Bay Road provides one lane in each direction.

Figure 14 shows the posted speed limits around the study area.

Figure 14 – Posted speed limits

4.4 Commuter mode share The Australian Bureau of Statistics provides journey to work data, including mode of transport which was collected during the 2016 Census.

For all work trips from Jervis Bay, Huskisson, Vincentia, and Falls Creek that utilise the intersection, 98 per cent use private vehicles as the main journey to work mode of transport, with the remaining two per cent completed using active and public transport.

4.5 Public transport There are three existing bus stops located within the study area at the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection. These bus stops are not formally signposted, are not accessible via footpaths and have no pull over areas. Further, there are no provisions such as benches or bus shelters. The bus stops are serviced by the following three private bus services:

• Route 102 – Bomaderry to Vincentia via Nowra and St Georges Basin

• Route 103 – Nowra to Hyams Beach via Erowal Bay

• Route 135 – Bomaderry Station to Berrara via Nowra, Tomerong and Sussex Inlet.

Figure 15 shows the bus routes that service the bus stops within the study area.

23

School buses also use these three bus stops and an additional bus stop on Willowgreen Road near the Princes Highway. School bus services in the region are provided by Shoal Bus. Students often catch these buses in combination with other school buses to access schools in Bomaderry, Nowra, Milton and Ulladulla. The bus stop on Willowgreen Road has an informal pull over area and a bus shelter.

The study area has no direct rail service, with the nearest railway station located in Bomaderry, about 16 kilometres north of the study area.

Figure 15 – Bus routes

4.6 Walking and cycling There are currently no formal footpaths for pedestrians along either the Princes Highway or Jervis Bay Road, however a dirt path along the southern side of Jervis Bay Road connects to the southbound bus stop on the Princes Highway. There is no formal way for pedestrians to access the northbound bus stop on the Princes Highway and no safe provisions for pedestrians to cross the Princes Highway.

There are no bicycle paths within the study area, however some cyclists use the paved shoulder of the Princes Highway. The existing Princes Highway shoulder width varies from three metres to one metre within the study area and is therefore not suitable for safe cyclist use. Acceptable shoulder widths for cyclist use along the Princes Highway are available north of the Parma Road intersection, 2.5 kilometres north of Jervis Bay Road.

24

A review of Strava data (2020) suggests that pedestrian and cycling activity is confined to the main residential and commercial areas away from the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection, and within the neighbouring national parks. There is some localised active transport to the east and south of the intersection, suggesting that the area can be accessed on foot and by bike.

4.7 Heavy vehicles Any single motor vehicle or combination which alone or together with its load exceeds the general access overall dimensions as defined in the Heavy Vehicle (Mass, Dimension and Loading) National Regulation (National Heavy Vehicle Regulator, 2018) is considered to be a Restricted Access Vehicle. The routes these vehicles can access are restricted due to the road network or infrastructure access capable of accommodating these vehicles. These include but are not limited to B-doubles.

A B-double is a combination of a prime mover towing two semi-trailers all connected by B-couplings. A route that is approved for a B–double can be used by a B–double with the same or shorter overall length (eg a 19 metre B–double can operate on 23 metre and 25 metre approved routes; a 23 metre B–double can operate on a 25 metre approved route).

Current approved heavy vehicle routes in and around the study area are shown in Figure 16. Section 4.10.5 provides an overview of heavy vehicle and B-double volumes recorded along the Princes Highway.

Figure 16 – B-double and Restricted Access Vehicle routes

4.8 Crash data This assessment is based on the crash data supplied by Transport for NSW (2019) for a 10-year period from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2019 for the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection. The crash data includes fatal, injury or vehicle damage accidents.

Table 4 summarises the severity of crashes at the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection during this period. Of the 26 crashes recorded:

• 73 per cent of crashes involved at least one person being injured

25

• 27 per cent of crashes were non-casualty crashes that involved towaways

• Seven crashes causing serious injury were recorded

• A total of 38 people were injured within the study area

• No fatal crashes were reported. Table 4 – Severity of crashes at Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection

Crash Severity Number of Crashes Percentage of total crashes

Total people injured

Injury proportions by severity (per cent)

Serious injury 7 27 11 people 29

Moderate injury 8 31 17 people 45

Minor/ other injury 4 15 10 people 26

Non-casualty (towaway) 7 27

Total 26 100 38 people 100 Source: Transport for NSW crash data recorded from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2019

The types of crashes recorded during this period are summarised in Table 5 and distribution is shown in Figure 17. The majority of crashes at the intersection are associated with vehicles travelling on Princes Highway southbound colliding with right turning vehicles existing Jervis Bay Road (cross traffic) and vehicles turning right from Princes Highway northbound into Jervis Bay Road (right through).

The number of crashes recorded at this single intersection are high, and the high-speed environment of the road network contributes towards greater risk of injury in its current configuration. Table 5 – Summary of crashes by road user movement

Road user movement Count Percentage

Right through 7 27%

Cross traffic 5 19%

Right near 5 19%

Rear end 4 15%

Head on (not overtaking) 1 4%

Lane sideswipe 1 4%

Other same direction 1 4%

Right off carriageway into object 1 4%

Off carriageway right on left bend into object 1 4%

Total 26 100% Source: Transport for NSW crash data recorded from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2019

26

Source: Transport for NSW crash data recorded from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2019 Figure 17 – Number of crashes by movement types

Cross traffic crashes at the intersection are considered the most dangerous crash type at the intersection, causing 32 per cent of all injuries at the intersection while accounting for 19 per cent of total crashes. In comparison, right through crashes which account for 27 per cent of total crashes at the intersection, caused 24 per cent of all recorded injuries. Table 6 shows the numbers of people injured in crashes by movement type. Table 6 – Injury severity by movement type

Road user movement

Seriously injured

Moderately injured

Minor/ other injury

Total injured people

Percentage of injured people

Cross traffic 5 3 4 12 32

Right through 2 4 3 9 24

Right near 3 4 0 7 18

Rear end 0 1 2 3 8

Head on 0 2 0 2 5

Right off carriageway into object

0 1 1 2 5

Lane sideswipe 0 1 0 1 3

Off carriageway right on left bend into object

1 0 0 1 3

Other same direction 0 1 0 1 3

Total 11 17 10 38 100 Source: Transport for NSW crash data recorded from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2019

27

4.9 Traffic surveys Traffic surveys were provided by Transport for NSW (2020b), including:

• Midblock traffic counts, collected using Automatic Tube Counters

• Intersection classified turning movement counts (including light and heavy vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians)

• Intersection queue length surveys.

The SIDRA assessment of the holiday peak hour was based on intersection surveys carried out on Wednesday 2 January 2019. While traffic data was made available for the 2019 to 2020 holiday period, the bushfires along the South Coast would have impacted traffic volumes significantly, and therefore surveys conducted the previous year were considered to be more reflective of typical holiday conditions.

Holiday peak midblock data was based on the 2019 to 2020 holiday period due to the absence of available surveys taken during previous holiday seasons.

Table 7 summarises the traffic surveys adopted for the traffic model development and assessment of typical conditions, and Table 8 shows surveys used to inform holiday peak conditions.

Figure 18 shows the indicative locations at which the traffic surveys relevant to this study were carried out.

Table 7 – Specifications of traffic surveys for typical traffic conditions

Survey Type Location Survey Method Survey Period

Midblock counts

• M-1: Princes Highway at Jervis Bay Road

Traffic counts using the automatic tube count method Vehicle classification as per Austroads 12 vehicle classes.

• 8 July 2019 – 14 July 2019

• 24 hours

Intersection movement counts

• I-1: Princes Highway/ Jervis Bay Road Movement counts using

video camera surveys Classification counts for light and heavy vehicles

Thursday 20 June 2019

• 7am-10am

• 2pm-6pm

• I-2: Princes Highway/ Mortimer Road

Friday 27 December 2019

• 6am-7pm

Intersection queue length surveys

• I-1: Princes Highway/ Jervis Bay Road

Surveyed 95th percentile queue lengths (in vehicles and metres) were collected by lane and approach at 15 minute intervals, using video camera surveys.

Thursday 20 June 2019

• 7am-10am

• 2pm-6pm

28

Table 8 – Specifications of traffic surveys for holiday traffic conditions

Survey Type Location Survey Method

• M-1: Princes Highway at Jervis Bay Road Traffic counts using the

automatic tube count (ATC) Midblock counts method

Survey Period

• 16 January 2020 – 22 January 2020

• 24 hours

Vehicle classification as per • 28 December 2019 – 22 • M-2: Jervis Bay Road Austroads 12 vehicle classes. January 2020

• 24 hours


• I-1: Princes Highway/ Jervis Bay Road Movement counts using video

camera surveys Classification counts for light and heavy vehicles

Wednesday 2 January 2019

• 8am-6pm

• I-2: Princes Highway/ Mortimer Road

Friday 27 December 2019

• 6am-7pm




Wednesday 2 January 2019

• 8am-6pm

Figure 18 – Traffic survey locations

29

During the 2020/2021 holiday period, additional traffic surveys were carried out, which include midblock, intersection turning counts and queue length surveys. Table 9 shows the specifications of the traffic surveys conducted during the 2020/2021 holiday period relevant to this assessment. Table 9 – Specifications of traffic surveys carried out in 2020/2021

Survey Type Location Survey Method Survey Period

Midblock counts

• M-1: Princes Highway north of Jervis Bay Road

Traffic counts using the automatic tube count (ATC) method Vehicle classification as per Austroads 12 vehicle classes.

• 16 December 2020 – 26 January 2021

• 24 hours • M-2: Jervis Bay Road east

of Princes Highway



Movement counts using video camera surveys Classification counts for light and heavy vehicles

Friday 15 January 2021

• 9.30am-5.30pm




Friday 15 January 2021

• 9.30am-5.30pm

4.10 Traffic results

4.10.1 Daily traffic volumes Midblock traffic volumes were collected continuously over a five-week period. Two weeks of surveys were selected from the sample to represent the range of traffic behaviour that can be expected during typical periods and holiday periods. The following survey periods were selected:

• Typical week – 8 July 2019 to 14 July 2019

• Holiday week – 16 January 2020 to 22 January 2020.

The critical day was taken as the single day during the peak week with the highest traffic volumes in one day.

4.10.2 Typical weekly traffic Traffic surveys were carried out during the period from 8 July 2019 to 14 July 2019 and were considered to assess the typical traffic environment for this study. As no midblock data was available for Jervis Bay Road, typical weekly traffic is shown for the Princes Highway only.

Figure 19 shows the weekday and weekend average traffic volumes along the Princes Highway in a typical week and Table 10 provides a more detailed breakdown of analysed survey results.

30

Figure 19 – Typical daily traffic volumes

Table 10 – Typical daily traffic volumes

ID Site Location

Daily Traffic Comparison

Weekly average (seven days)

Weekday average (five days)

Weekend average (two days)

Critical day Critical day vs weekly

Weekend vs weekday

M-1

Princes Highway at Jervis Bay Road

23,070 25,410 17,210 27,920 21 per cent -9 per cent

Note: Traffic volumes are rounded to the nearest 10

The following points are noted in relation to daily traffic volumes:

• When considering typical operations, the Princes Highway at Jervis Bay Road services volumes of about 23,070 vehicles per day

• The highest traffic activity on Jervis Bay Road is typically recorded on Fridays, with volumes of about 27,920 vehicles per day, about 21 per cent higher than the weekly average

• The traffic activity on weekends is about nine per cent lower than the weekday average, at 17,210 vehicles per day.

Figure 20 shows the hourly traffic distribution for the weekday average during a typical period.

31

Figure 20 – Typical weekday hourly distribution

4.10.3 Holiday weekly traffic Traffic surveys were carried out during the period from 16 January 2020 to 22 January 2020 and were considered to assess the typical holiday traffic environment for this study. The surveys were conducted during the NSW school holidays, a period during which Jervis Bay typically sees high volumes of local tourism. However, it is important to note that the New South Wales South Coast was ravaged by bushfires during the 2019 to 2020 New Year period, which would have affected the vehicle movements.

Figure 21 shows the weekday and weekend average traffic volumes during the holiday week, and Table 11 provides a more detailed breakdown of analysed survey results.

32

Figure 21 – Holiday daily traffic volumes

Table 11 – Holiday daily traffic volumes

ID Site Location

Daily Traffic Comparison

Weekly average (seven days)

Weekday average (five days)

Weekend average (two days)

Critical day

Critical day vs weekly

Weekend vs weekday

M-1

Princes Highway at Jervis Bay Road

24,650 26,470 20,120 27,750 13 per cent -24 per cent

M-2

Jervis Bay Road, east of Princes Highway

9,050 9,830 7,100 10,730 19 per cent -28 per cent

Note: Traffic volumes are rounded to the nearest 10.

The following points are noted in relation to daily traffic volumes:

• When considering holiday operations, the Princes Highway near Jervis Bay Road services volumes of about 26,470 vehicles per day, and Jervis Bay Road services about 9,830 vehicles per day.

• Weekend traffic on both roads is about 24 to 28 per cent lower than weekday traffic.

Figure 22 shows the hourly traffic distribution for the average weekday during the holiday period.

33

Figure 22 – Holiday weekday hourly traffic distribution

4.10.4 2020/21 holiday period volumes Additional traffic surveys were carried out during the 2020/21 holiday period, which included midblock, intersection and queue length surveys. Due to the increased detection of COVID-19 in the lead-up to the holiday season however, these traffic surveys should not be taken to reflect typical holiday conditions.

When comparing the intersection turning counts during this period with the 2018/19 surveys used for holiday peak hour modelling, it can be observed that the total volume of traffic moving through the intersection is similar for both years. However, changes in traffic distribution can be observed, with higher turning volumes into and out of Jervis Bay Road during the 2020/21 holiday period. An additional SIDRA assessment was performed for the existing condition and is documented in Section 4.12.2. Table 12 shows a comparison of traffic movements recorded across the two surveyed periods. Table 12 – Comparison of holiday traffic volumes

Approach Movement 2018/2019 holiday volumes

2020/2021 holiday volumes

North – Princes Highway Left turn 650 940

Through 1,240 1,040

East – Jervis Bay Road Left turn 3 30

Right turn 190 320

South – Princes Highway

Right turn 20 20

Through 1,070 850

Overall 3,173 3,200

Note: Traffic volumes are rounded to the nearest 10

4.10.5 Heavy vehicle volumes The midblock traffic surveys recorded vehicle volumes by vehicle classification type. According to the Austroads vehicle classification system (Austroads, 2019), light vehicles include regular short commuter vehicles and those with towing attachments such as caravans or boats. Heavy vehicles include trucks with two or more axles, buses, semi-trailers and B-doubles.

Table 13 shows the daily heavy vehicle volumes recorded on the Princes Highway under typical operations, taken as the week from 8 July to 14 July 2019. Table 14 shows heavy vehicle volumes by type, classified as rigid trucks, semi-trailers and B-doubles.

34

Table

ID

M-1

13 – Daily heavy vehicle volumes

Site Location All vehicles

Princes Highway at Jervis 22,610 Bay Road

Heavy vehicles

3,090

Heavy vehicle proportion to total traffic

12 per cent


Table 14 – Daily heavy vehicle volumes by vehicle type

Volumes by Type Percentage by Type ID Site Location

Rigid Semi B-double Rigid Semi B-double

M-1 Princes Highway at Jervis Bay Road 2,650 390 50 86 13 2


The following points can be noted in relation to heavy vehicle traffic:

• The heavy vehicle traffic within the study area during typical weekday operations account for about 12 per cent of total traffic on the Princes Highway near Jervis Bay Road

• On the Princes Highway near Jervis Bay Road, the proportion of rigid vehicles account for about 86 per cent of all heavy vehicle traffic, followed by semi-trailers at 13 per cent and B-doubles at two per cent.

The design vehicle for the Princes Highway Upgrade Program is a 30 metre long combination vehicle with Higher Mass Limit. With the completion of the program of upgrade works, these proportions of heavy vehicle volumes may differ.

35

4.11 Intersection operational performance Intersection operational performance is evaluated by assessing the following key measures:

• Queue lengths

• Degree of saturation

• Delays and level of service.

4.11.1 Queue lengths Queue lengths are the measure of length of vehicles (in number of vehicles or in metres), starting from the stop line and waiting a serviceable gap from opposing movements. It can be measured as either a mean queue length, which is the product of average vehicle delay and the movement flow rate, or the 95th percentile queue, which is queue length that has only a five per cent probability of being exceeded during the analysis time period.

Queue lengths do not fall under any Transport for NSW guidelines for maximum level of acceptability and are mainly used to calibrate traffic models. They are, however, used to compare road improvement based on the reduction of queue lengths on critical movements (ie better improvements will likely result in lower queues).

4.11.2 Degree of saturation Degree of saturation is also known as the volume to capacity ratio, which is the ratio of demand or arrival flows at the intersection to the capacity available for throughput of vehicles at the intersection. Degree of saturation over one represents oversaturated conditions where demand flows exceed capacity, and a Degree of saturation under one represents spare capacity.

The acceptable levels of degree of saturation as defined in the Traffic Modelling Guidelines (Roads and Maritime Services, 2013) and are shown in Table 15. Table 15 – Maximum practical degree of saturation

Intersection type Maximum practical degree of saturation

Signals 0.90

Roundabouts 0.85

Sign-controlled 0.80

Continuous lanes 0.98

4.11.3 Delays and level of service Level of service is a measure used to determine the effectiveness of intersection operation and is most commonly used to analyse intersections by categorising traffic flow conditions.

Level of service for this study is reported in accordance with the Transport for NSW guidelines. It recommends that for priority intersections such as roundabout and sign-controlled intersections, the level of service value is determined by the critical movement with the highest delay. With these types of intersection controls (roundabout, Stop and Give Way sign controls), some movements may experience high levels of delay while other movements may experience a minimal delay. For a signalised intersection, level of service criteria is related to the average intersection delay measured in seconds per vehicle. Table 16 shows the Transport for NSW standard level of service criteria for intersection operation. The target performance for SIDRA models of the proposal on a 20-year horizon is level of service D or better.

36

Table 16 – Level of service criteria for intersections

Level of Service

Average Delay per Vehicle (secs/veh) Traffic Signals, Roundabout Give Way & Stop Signs

A <14 Good operation Good operation

B 15 to 28 Good with acceptable delays & spare capacity Acceptable delays & spare capacity

C 29 to 42 Satisfactory Satisfactory, but accident study required

D 43 to 56 Operating near capacity Near capacity & accident study required

E 57 to 70

At capacity; at signals, incidents will cause excessive delays Roundabouts require other control mode

At capacity, requires other control mode

F >70 Unsatisfactory with excessive queuing

Unsatisfactory with excessive queuing

4.12 Existing intersection performance The AM, PM and holiday peak hours were modelled to assess the performance of the signalised intersection during construction, with gap acceptance parameters calibrated to reflect the queueing conditions observed on the date the surveys were conducted. The level of service, degree of saturation of queue lengths under the existing configuration in 2019 across the various peak hours are reported in Table 17. Table 17 – 2019 existing intersection level of service results

Peak hour Approach Degree of saturation Delay (sec) Level of

service

95th percentile queue lengths (m)

AM peak hour (7.30am to 8.30am)

North – Princes Highway 0.208 9 A 5

East – Jervis Bay Road 0.896 25 B 90

South – Princes Highway 0.594 10 A 0

Overall 0.896 25 B 90

PM peak hour (3.30pm to 4.30pm)


East – Jervis Bay Road 0.813 30 C 30

South – Princes Highway 0.280 22 B 0

Overall 0.813 30 C 30

Holiday peak hour (3pm to 4pm)


East – Jervis Bay Road ≥ 1.0 472 F 340


37


service


Overall ≥ 1.0 472 F 340 Note: Delays are rounded to the nearest second, queue lengths are rounded to the nearest 10 metres.

It can be noted from the modelling results that there appear to be no capacity issues under typical weekday peak operations. During the holiday peak period, the intersection operates at a level of service F with lengthy delays of about 496 seconds. Queues on Jervis Bay Road have been surveyed to extend to around 630 metres during the holiday peak hour due to the high volumes of through traffic on the Princes Highway.

4.12.1 Sensitivity analysis The traffic modelling has been based on traffic surveys carried out in June 2019. During this survey, the observed queue length during the morning peak was 110 metres and would clear within 25 seconds. This queuing pattern does not appear to align with the traffic patterns that are experienced by transport users on a daily basis and the queue lengths observed during site visits. The traffic volumes align with a traffic survey carried out in November 2018, however, no queue lengths were surveyed at that time.

Due to the limitations of the data available, an alternative modelling scenario was carried out that used the traffic volumes obtained during the traffic survey and assumed a gap acceptance of seven seconds (Transport for NSW modelling guidelines provide a range of six to eight seconds gap acceptance for this intersection type). Table 18 shows the modelling results for seven second gap acceptance to better align with observed queue lengths. This new modelling scenario indicates a queue length of 235 metres on Jervis Bay Road due to the increased gap acceptance parameters, reflecting more cautious right-turn movements.

The modelling results show that based on a standard seven second gap acceptance, Jervis Bay Road operates at LOS E during weekday peak operations. Table 18 - AM peak hour, seven-seconds gap acceptance intersection level of service results

Peak hour Approach Degree of saturation

Delay (sec)

Level of service


AM peak hour (seven second gap) (7.30am to 8.30am)


East – Jervis Bay Road ≥ 1.0 68 E 230


Overall ≥ 1.0 68 E 230

4.12.2 2020/21 holiday period Data from new traffic surveys carried out during the 2020/21 holiday period were used to inform SIDRA modelling of the intersection. Due to the increased detection of COVID-19 in the lead-up to the holiday season, these traffic surveys should not be taken to reflect typical holiday conditions, but do provide an insight into alternate traffic distributions that may be observed at the intersection. The traffic model was calibrated against queue length surveys carried out on the same day. Table 19 shows the results of this analysis.

38

Table 19 – 2020/21 holiday peak hour intersection level of service results

Degree of Delay Peak hour Approach saturation (sec)

North – Princes 0.612 8 Highway

Level of service

A


30

Holiday peak East – Jervis Bay hour ≥ 1.0 597 Road F 670

(10.45am to South – Princes 11.45am) 0.464 16 Highway B 0

Overall ≥ 1.0 597 F 670

39

5 FUTURE ROAD NETWORK PERFORMANCE WITHOUT THE PROPOSAL The SIDRA assessment of a “do nothing” (without the proposal) model and the proposal have been carried out for the years 2029 and 2039 for the three peak hour scenarios.

5.1 Traffic forecast As observed in the land use and population projections in Section 2.2, population and employment projections in the suburbs accessed by Jervis Bay Road have growth rates of 0.17 and 1.7 per cent per annum, respectively. Accordingly, growth rates of 1.7 per cent and 1.25 per cent per annum were assumed for the Princes Highway and Jervis Bay Road respectively, until the future year 2039. These growth rates are as per the growth rates from the Jervis Bay Territory TRACKS model (TDG, 2018), which were communicated to Arcadis by Transport for NSW. The report will highlight the proposed growth rates and impacts on traffic volumes for the horizon years.

Due to a lack of surveys at the Old Princes Highway intersection, it was assumed that, based on the number of properties on the Old Princes Highway, 10 vehicles would turn each onto the Princes Highway (north and south) and Jervis Bay Road during peak hour in 2019. These volumes were grown at a conservative rate of two per cent per annum until 2039.

The traffic assessment also considers the impact of the proposed Princes Highway cross-section to a grade separated mainline on the residential and farming plots south of the intersection and the change of traffic operations on Mortimer Road.

It is assumed that under the future upgrade scenarios, the Princes Highway/ Mortimer Road intersection, located about 2.1 kilometres south of Jervis Bay Road, will be converted to allow for left in and left out movements only. Right turning vehicles on Mortimer Road are therefore assumed to exit via Jervis Bay Road, and northbound right-turning vehicles from the Princes Highway are assumed to perform a U-turn movement at the upgraded Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection.

Figure 23, Figure 24 and Figure 25 show the forecast traffic volumes in 2029 and 2039 for the AM peak, PM peak and holiday peak hours, respectively.

40

Figure 23 – AM peak forecast traffic volumes

Figure 24 – PM peak forecast traffic volumes

41

Figure 25 – Holiday peak forecast traffic volumes

5.2 “Do Nothing” (without the proposal) assessment SIDRA modelling has been conducted to assess the performance of the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection in the 2029 and 2039 future years under the existing intersection configuration.

Table 20 and Table 21 report the intersection performance in 2029 and 2039 respectively, assuming a “Do Nothing” scenario.

Assuming that no upgrades are implemented at the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection, Jervis Bay Road will become increasingly congested by 2029, with the intersection operating at a level of service F across all tested peak hours, and delays of over 500 seconds along the Jervis Bay Road approach. The intersection performance further degrades as traffic volumes increase in the years between 2029 and 2039. Table 20 – 2029 “Do Nothing” (without the proposal) scenario intersection level of service


service


AM peak hour (7.30 am to 8.30 am)


East – Jervis Bay Road ≥ 1.0 161 F 460


Overall ≥ 1.0 161 F 460

42

Peak hour


Approach

North – Princes Highway


0.718

Delay (sec)

9

Level of service

A


20

East – Jervis Bay Road ≥ 1.0 >500 F 550

South – Princes Highway 0.331 40 C 0

Overall ≥ 1.0 >500 F 550





Overall ≥ 1.0 >500 F 1200 Note: Delays are rounded to the nearest second.

Table 21 – 2039 “Do Nothing” (without

Peak hour Approach

North – Princes Highway

the proposal) scenario


0.292

intersection level of service

Level of Delay (sec) service

9 A


10

East – Jervis Bay AM peak hour Road (7.30 am to

≥ 1.0 496 F 1170

8.30 am) South – Princes Highway 0.833 11 A 0

Overall ≥ 1.0 496 F 1170




South – Princes Highway 0.773 296 F 20

Overall ≥ 1.0 >500 F 1300




South – Princes Highway 0.880 35 C 0

Overall ≥ 1.0 >500 F 1870 Note: Delays are rounded to the nearest second.

43

6 FUTURE ROAD NETWORK PERFORMANCE WITH THE PROPOSAL

6.1 Proposal assessment The proposal would involve a grade separated Princes Highway mainline over an at-grade double roundabout interchange that connects to Jervis Bay Road and the Old Princes Highway.

Figure 26 shows the SIDRA layout modelled.

Figure 26 –Princes Highway mainline over dumbbell – SIDRA layout

Table 22 and Table 23 show the proposal intersection performance for the future years 2029 and 2039, respectively.

The results table above indicates that in 2029 and 2039, the intersection operates at an acceptable level of service of A in the morning, afternoon and holiday peak hours.

44

Table 22 – 2029 proposal intersection performance

Degree of Peak hour Approach saturation

North – Princes 0.205 Highway

Delay (sec)

10

Level of service

A


0

East – Jervis Bay 0.477 Road 4 A 10

South – Princes 0.034 AM peak Highway 13 A 0

hour West – Old Princes

(7.30 am to 0.052 Highway 8.30 am)

7 A 0

Northbound ramp to 0.398 Princes Highway 4 A 0

Southbound ramp to 0.012 Princes Highway 4 A 0

Overall 0.477 13 A 10

PM peak


East – Jervis Bay Road 0.288 4 A 10


hour (3.30 pm to 4.30 pm)

West – Old Princes Highway 0.041 7 A 0

Northbound ramp to Princes Highway 0.226 4 A 0

Southbound ramp to Princes Highway 0.321 4 A 0

Overall 0.467 13 A 10

Holiday peak




hour (3 pm to 4 pm)


Northbound ramp to Princes Highway 0.188 4 A 0


Overall 0.556 12 A 20 Note: Delays are rounded to the nearest second, queue lengths are rounded to the nearest 10 metres

45

Table 23 – 2039 proposal intersection performance

Degree of Peak hour Approach saturation

North – Princes 0.241 Highway

Delay (sec)

10

Level of service

A


0


South – Princes 0.044 Highway AM peak 13 A 0

hour West – Old Princes 0.068 (7.30 am to Highway 10 A 0

8.30 am) Northbound ramp to 0.439 Princes Highway 4 A 0

Southbound ramp to 0.014 Princes Highway 4 A 0

Overall 0.533 13 A 20

PM peak hour (3.30 pm to





4.30 pm) Northbound ramp to Princes Highway 0.247 4 A 0


Overall 0.551 13 A 20

Holiday peak hour (3 pm to 4





pm) Northbound ramp to Princes Highway 0.204 4 A 0


Overall 0.655 12 A 20 Note: Delays are rounded to the nearest second, queue lengths are rounded to the nearest 10 metres

46

6.2 “Do Nothing” vs proposal comparison Overall, the proposed upgrade scenario performs better than the “Do Nothing” scenario from a traffic perspective across all assessed intersection performance indicators, as discussed below.

6.2.1 Queue lengths In the “Do Nothing” scenario, significant queueing is expected on the Jervis Bay Road approach due to the right turn movement. By 2029, queues on Jervis Bay Road are expected to be around 460 metres in the weekday morning peak and 550 metres in the weekday afternoon peak. During the holiday peak hour where high volumes of tourists visit suburbs in Jervis Bay, the queue is expected to extend to 1200 metres. The queueing would increase further by 2039 due to the growth in vehicle volumes.

Under the proposed upgrade scenario, the grade separation of through movements on the Princes Highway reduces the queueing at the intersection significantly. In 2039, the longest queues in the weekday morning peak hour would be expected to be about 20 metres on Jervis Bay Road, and in the weekday afternoon and holiday peak hours about 20 metres on the northern approach to the roundabout for southbound vehicles turning off the Princes Highway.

6.2.2 Degree of saturation In the “Do Nothing” scenario, the degree of saturation in 2029 for all assessed time periods is expected to be greater than 1.0 at the Jervis Bay Road approach, indicating that forecast volumes exceed the required capacity. The degree of saturation is expected to increase in 2039, with higher vehicle demand at the intersection.

Under the proposed upgrade scenario, the degree of saturation is 2039 is highest in the holiday peak hour at the Princes Highway north approach to the roundabout, servicing southbound vehicles turning off the highway. The degree of saturation is expected to be 0.655, which is considered acceptable as it is lower than the 0.85 degree of saturation maximum practical degree of saturation for roundabout intersections.

6.2.3 Delays and level of service By 2029 in the “Do Nothing” scenario, delays at the intersection would exceed 500 seconds at the Jervis Bay Road approach for all assessed time periods, and the intersection would operate at LOS F. The intersection performance would deteriorate further by 2039 due to the growth in vehicle volumes.

In contrast, under the proposed upgrade scenario, the highest intersection delays by 2039 would be about 13 seconds, with the intersection operating at LOS A.

6.3 Sensitivity assessment – Disaster resilience Using intersection turning counts surveyed on 27 December 2019 during the 2019/20 bushfires, a SIDRA assessment (Appendix C) was performed to assess the traffic performance of the intersection to ensure the proposed upgrades would be capable of servicing the traffic volumes expected during a natural disaster such as a bushfire.

Figure 27 shows the volumes used for the sensitivity assessment, based on traffic volumes surveyed at the intersection in 2019. Figure 28 shows the forecast traffic volumes in 2039.

Table 24 shows the overall intersection level of service from sensitivity testing of the 2019 to 2020 bushfire peak hour.

47

Figure 27 – 2019 sensitivity testing peak hour traffic volumes

Figure 28 – 2039 sensitivity testing peak hour traffic volumes

Table 24 – Sensitivity testing modelling results

Degree of Scenario Modelled year saturation

Existing 2019 ≥ 1.0 conditions

Delay (seconds)

>500

Level of service

F

95th percentile queue length (metres)

1110

Proposed conditions 2039 0.533 14 A 10

Note: Delays are rounded to the nearest second, queue lengths are rounded to the nearest 10 metres.

48

The following points can be noted from the results of the sensitivity assessment:

• The performance of the intersection in 2019 under the existing intersection configuration is level of service F during the bushfire evacuation peak hour. Queues of over 1.1 kilometres can be expected along the Jervis Bay Road eastern approach due to right turning northbound vehicles

• In 2039, the proposed intersection upgrade operates at an acceptable level of service A, and is sufficient to service evacuation movements

• While the 2029 traffic demand was not modelled, the intersection upgrade is expected to operate at an acceptable level of service until 2039.

6.4 Impact on other transport modes

6.4.1 Active transport Improving multimodality at the intersection is a proposal objective. Assuring continuity of pedestrian and cyclist links and separation between the heavier vehicular flows and active journeys is crucial to the proposal.

A shared user path would be provided along the southern side of Jervis Bay Road with the opportunity to add a shared path along the northern side through the interchange in the future. The shared path extents from the Willowgreen Road connection to the eastern limit of works and the proposed bus bay. In addition, they connect directly to the three metre wide road shoulders along the ramps used by cyclists and a three metre shoulder is provided alongside the Princes Highway.

Active transport users intending to cross the at-grade double roundabout would utilise the refuge islands separating opposing vehicle movements in the roundabout, and a storage width of two metres will be provided at each island. Ramps connecting to the road level from the kerb will be provided near the refuges to indicate crossing locations.

The proposal would remove the high volumes of through vehicles on the Princes Highway. The separation of movements on the minor roads from the highway provides for safer active transport links between Jervis Bay Road and the Old Princes Highway. The south facing ramps have very low traffic volumes which makes the ramp crossings even safer. Compared to the existing condition where there are no formal provisions for pedestrians or cyclists, the proposed shared user paths and refuge islands would significantly improve the road safety environment for active transport users.

6.4.2 Public transport For public transport, the proposal would result in the relocation of the bus stops servicing routes 102, 103 and 135.

Bus routes that travel through the intersection would benefit from the improved traffic performance, including lower delays and shorter queues, particularly regular and school bus services operating during the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours. To improve safety and efficiency transferring between bus services, the bus stops have been consolidated into one bus bay on the access road south east of the intersection. The bay accommodates two standard buses and three kiss and ride spots and can be reached via shared paths from Old Princes Highway and Jervis Bay Road. Full connectivity is provided to and from the intersection via the roundabout, southbound entry ramp and Jervis Bay Road.

49

7 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

7.1 General construction impacts The construction of the proposal would likely result in traffic and transport impacts for all modes. Below summarises the general construction impacts on mobility:

• Speed limit restrictions on existing corridors connecting to the proposed construction area and in the construction activities zones

• Temporary signalised intersection during Stage 2 at the intersection of the Princes Highway and Jervis Bay Road

• Increased traffic as a result of construction vehicles hauling material between the work areas and ancillary facilities

• Changes to the safe operating profile of the road network given the addition of construction traffic including heavy vehicles as well as temporary traffic controls

• Temporary traffic diversions for the northbound/southbound movements on Princes Highway

• Altered property access arrangements during construction for properties located south of the intersection

• Safety impacts through temporary work areas.

As there is currently no significant active transport occurring at the intersection, impacts on active transport journeys would be minimal.

7.2 Indicative construction staging

Construction activities would be carried out in accordance with a construction environmental management plan to ensure work complies with Transport for NSW’s commitments and legislative requirements.

Additionally, the construction of the proposal would be subject to comprehensive traffic management measures to ensure the ongoing functionality of the Princes Highway, Jervis Bay Road, Old Princes Highway and Willowgreen Road, and the safety of members of the public, motorists and construction workers.

For the purposes of this assessment, an indicative construction work methodology and traffic management arrangements are described in the following sections.

7.2.1 Stage 1 – Site establishment Stage 1 would generally focus on establishing the construction site as well as the ancillary facilities, which include:

• Site compounds

• Stockpile sites for materials, spoil and cleared vegetation

• Laydown areas.

The site establishment includes the following activities:

• Site survey, geotechnical and other investigations

• Pre-clearing biodiversity surveys

• Vegetation clearing and grubbing

• Mobilisation and establishment of ancillary facilities

• Construction of the temporary diversion of Jervis Bay Road.

50

The following traffic management arrangements would take place during Stage 1:

• The speed limit would be reduced to 80 kilometres per hour on Princes Highway and 60 kilometres per hour on Jervis Bay Road during the site establishment

• The existing intersection layout would remain.

7.2.2 Stage 2 – Intersection construction The core of the proposal construction occurs during Stage 2, where approximately 60 workers would be mobilised.

Intersection construction typically includes the following activities:

• Utilities relocation/protection including overhead power lines

• Construct access road for south-eastern properties

• Construct new Princes Highway alignment

• Construct Old Princes Highway connection

• Construct eastern and western ramps and associated fill embankment

• Construct bridge and bridge abutments

• Construct roundabouts and connecting roads

• Tie-in works

• Construction of new drainage structures and extension or replacements of existing drainage structures. Construction of open channels at the toe of batters

• Construction of pavement layers including selected material, sub-surface drainage, subbase and base layers and surfacing.

• Installation of lighting, safety barriers, traffic signs and bus shelters

• Line marking and raised pavement markers

• Fencing

• Property accesses adjustments.


• Jervis Bay Road traffic would first be diverted onto the temporary diversion with temporary traffic signals at the intersection with the Princes Highway

• Later in Stage 2, Jervis Bay Road would be moved onto its final alignment, utilising the eastern roundabout. The intersection with Princes Highway would remain a T-intersection during this stage, using a partially completed western roundabout in a temporary configuration and temporary traffic signals

7.2.3 Stage 3 – Finishing work The final stage of the proposal construction includes the following activities:

• Rehabilitation of disturbed areas and landscaping in accordance with the urban design and landscape plan

• Completion of north facing ramps, western roundabout, Old Princes Highway and Willowgreen Road

• Installation of safety barriers, street lighting, fencing and roadside furniture

• Decommission and rehabilitation of ancillary facilities.

51


• Princes Highway through traffic would be diverted onto the new mainline. New southbound on and off ramps and eastern roundabout would function in their ultimate arrangement

• Northbound ramp traffic would use the existing Princes Highway carriageways under traffic control while the proposed northbound on and off ramps would be constructed along with the completion of the western roundabout

• Vehicles turning right from Jervis Bay Road to the Princes Highway northbound would use a temporary prioritised right turn

• Minor tie-in works on the mainline and on and off ramps would be completed under traffic control.

7.3 Construction traffic It is estimated that the proposal would generate up to 140 heavy vehicle movements per day and 50 light vehicle movements per day.

7.4 Construction duration and hours Subject to planning approval, construction of the proposal is planned to commence in 2022 and would take about two years.

Construction hours would be in accordance with the standard construction hours as defined in the Interim Construction Noise Guidelines (DECCW, 2009):

• 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday

• 8am to 1pm Saturday

• No works on Sunday.

Work outside standard construction hours would be required at times. Potential construction work that would be carried out outside of standard construction hours include:

• Installation of temporary traffic barriers along Princes Highway and Jervis Bay Road

• Utility adjustments

• Delivery and placement of large precast concrete components

• Installation of large precast concrete components

• Construction of major drainage structures

• Completion of tie-ins to the Princes Highway and temporary traffic facilities, and completion of temporary diversions and traffic switches.

7.5 Construction activities Table 25 lists details of both the construction activities and the type of plant and equipment expected to be used. It gives an indication on the duration each construction activity is expected to take, therefore providing an indication of the intensity and scale of the construction effort.

52

Table 25 – Construction activities and indicative plants and equipment

Construction activity Plant required

Small cranes and lifting equipment, Site establishment excavators, front end loaders, road

trucks, light vehicles

Equipment required

Fences, portable sheds, portable ablutions, fuel storage, generators, waste tanks

Duration (months)

2

Utilities relocation protection

and

Small cranes, elevated work platforms, excavators, backhoes, front end loaders, trenching machines, dump trucks, road trucks, light vehicles, agitator trucks

Jack hammers, concrete saws and other small handheld equipment

2-3

Vegetation clearing and grubbing and topsoil stripping

Excavators, bulldozers, graders, water carts, front end loaders, dump trucks, fuel trucks, road trucks, scrapers, light vehicles

Not required 2

Bulk earthworks and materials haulage including water quality structures

Excavators, bulldozers, graders, water carts, front end loaders, vibratory rollers, dump trucks, road trucks, scrapers, fuel trucks, light vehicles

Hand-held compactors 12-14

Road surface construction

Excavators, bulldozers, graders, water carts, front end loaders, compactors, road sweepers, fuel trucks, asphalt pavers, bituminous spray sealing trucks, vibratory rollers, rubber-tyre rollers, road trucks, line marking machines, light vehicles

Hand-held compactors, jack hammers, concrete saws and other small handheld equipment

4-6

Drainage structures construction

Underborers, excavators, mobile cranes, front end loaders, agitator trucks, concrete pumps, vibratory rollers, road trucks, light vehicles

Hand-held compactors other small tooling

and 3

Overpass bridge construction including heavy vehicle deliveries of over-size loads

Excavators, elevated work platforms, mobile cranes, agitator trucks, piling rigs, concrete pumps, vibratory rollers, road trucks, light vehicles


and 7-9

Signposting Excavators, elevated work platforms, mobile cranes, agitator trucks, road trucks, light vehicles

Hand-held compactors, jack hammers and other small tooling

1-2

Lighting and roadside furniture installation

Excavators, elevated work platforms, mobile cranes, agitator trucks, road trucks, light vehicles


and 1-2

Landscaping, waste disposal and rehabilitation of disturbed areas

Excavators, bulldozers, water carts, front end loaders, graders, road trucks, light vehicles

Small tooling 2-3

Most material are expected to be delivered from north of Jervis Bay Road intersection. Access to site would be provided directly off the Princes Highway via access points separate from the Jervis Bay Road intersection. Egress would be provided onto Jervis Bay Road under traffic control, where the trucks would join the normal Jervis Bay Road traffic to turn right onto the Princes Highway. The access road south east

53

of the intersection would be built early in the proposal construction phase to be utilised by haulage vehicles and light construction vehicles. Stockpile areas would be accessed off Jervis Bay Road and Old Princes Highway. Ancillary Facility 2 (see Figure 29) would be used for materials such as topsoil that need to be stored longer term to minimise haulage crossing the Princes Highway.

7.6 Ancillary facilities

A number of ancillary facilities would be required to support the proposal construction, including:

• Site compounds

• Stockpile sites for materials, spoil and cleared vegetation

• Laydown areas.

Three ancillary facilities are identified as described in Table 26 and shown in Figure 29. Table 26 Ancillary facilities

Facility Location Approximate size (hectares) Purpose

Ancillary Facility 1

• 24 Jervis Bay Rd, Lot 7 DP1093336

• 921 Princes Highway, Lot 59 DP15507

1.0

• Offices

• Amenities

• Workshops

• Stockpile and laydown areas

• Car park

• Storage areas

Ancillary Facility 2 • 24 Willowgreen Rd, Lot 1 DP871596 1.5

• Stockpile and laydown area

• Car park

Ancillary Facility 3 • 132 Jervis Bay Rd, Lot 4 DP773881 1.9 • Stockpile and laydown area

54

Figure 29 – Ancillary facilities

55

7.7 Construction traffic impacts All construction activities for the proposal would be completed while maintaining access to Jervis Bay Road and through movements on the Princes Highway.

Construction vehicles and work zone environments would likely change the current operation. The use of temporary directional and advisory signage as well as Variable Message Signs would be used within the proposal construction footprint and surrounding areas as required.

It is estimated that the proposal would generate up to 140 heavy vehicle movements per day and 50 light vehicle movements per day.

The following assumptions are used for the traffic modelling carried out for construction traffic and will be reviewed and confirmed through the further design development:

• At the commencement of the workday, 10 per cent of the daily heavy vehicle trips (15 trips) to the sites occur during the AM peak hour (8:00 am to 9:00 am)

• At the completion of the workday, 30 per cent of the daily heavy vehicle trips leaving (57 trips) the sites occur during the PM peak hour (4:00 pm to 5:00 pm)

• For work activities occurring during holiday peak hour, 20 per cent of the daily heavy vehicle trips (28 trips) are assumed to leave the ancillary site and use Jervis Bay Road to access the construction site

• Trips from and to the proposal construction footprint are assumed to be carried out through Jervis Bay Road.

Two scenarios were investigated for this assessment of the proposed intersection and compared to existing intersection condition without construction traffic:

• Unsignalised intersection similar to existing layout

• T- intersection with temporary traffic signals.

During the AM peak, the Jervis Bay Road east approach level of service would deteriorate with an increase in average vehicle delay as a result of the construction traffic generated by the proposal. During the PM peak, the Princes Highway south approach level of service would deteriorate from LOS B to LOS D with an increase in average vehicle delay of 21 seconds as a result of the construction traffic generated by the proposal. The introduction of traffic signals during construction would generally improve the level of service on Jervis Bay Road at the expense of the north approach on Princes Highway. The overall intersection performance would be improved for AM peak and holiday peak and maintained for the PM peak. These impacts would be managed via the environmental safeguards and management measures outlined in Section 8, which includes the implementation of a Traffic Management Plan to be completed following the confirmation of necessary construction planning details during detailed design.

Table 27 details the assessment of the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection during construction. Detailed SIDRA results are shown in Appendix D. Table 27 - Construction traffic impact on intersection operation

Peak hour Approach Existing Condition With Construction

Traffic (Unsignalised) With Construction Traffic (Signalised)

Delay (seconds)

Level of service

Delay (seconds)

Level of service

Delay (seconds)

Level of service

AM peak hour (7.30am to 8.30am)

North – Princes Highway 9 A 9 A 15 B

East – Jervis Bay Road 25 B 32 C 18 B

South – Princes Highway 10 A 10 A 0.3 A

Overall 25 B 32 C 9 A

56

Peak hour Approach Existing Condition With Construction

Traffic (Unsignalised) With Construction Traffic (Signalised)

Delay (seconds)

Level of service

Delay (seconds)

Level of service

Delay (seconds)

Level of service

AM peak hour (seven second gap) (7.30 am to 8.30 am)


East – Jervis Bay Road 68 E 105 F 18 B

South – Princes Highway 10 A 10 A 0.3 A

Overall 68 E 105 F 9 A

PM peak hour (3.30pm to 4.30pm)


East – Jervis Bay Road 30 C 36 C 52 D

South – Princes Highway 22 B 43 D 4 A

Overall 30 C 43 D 19 D



East – Jervis Bay Road 472 F 1002 F 75 F

South – Princes Highway 25 B 25 B 1 A

Overall 472 F 1002 F 14 A

7.7.1 Active transport impacts

As highlighted in Section 4.6, there are currently no formal pedestrian and cycling facilities in the study area of the proposal. Traffic survey data further show very low volumes of pedestrian and cyclist activity at the intersection during a typical weekday, likely attributable to the high-speed vehicle environment, lack of formal active transport facilities and distance from active transport generators. The Traffic Management Plan would detail provisions required to ensure safe access for active transport is not adversely impacted by the works, such as ensuring shoulder widths are not reduced compared to existing. For the temporary traffic signals, a pedestrian crossing with pedestrian push button on the southern side of the intersection would be considered to allow for safe crossing of the Princes Highway.

7.7.2 Public transport impacts There are three existing bus stops located within the study around at the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection. Two bus stops are located on the Princes Highway, and one is located on Jervis Bay Road. Currently, the stops are serviced by three private bus routes and multiple school bus routes. There is an additional bus stop on Willowgreen Road near the Princes Highway that is also used by school bus routes.

During construction, bus routes would continue running without significant disruptions from temporary intersection configurations. However, it is likely that the bus stops located at the intersection would not be useable during the construction phase.

Due to the location of the bus stops and the poor pedestrian environment surrounding the road, there is low demand for boarding and alighting bus services at the intersection. Therefore, it is expected that the

57

services would be able to adapt to the temporary closure of the bus stops without adversely affecting a high number public transport users.

7.7.3 Property access impacts

Access to properties and businesses would be maintained for the full construction duration. Alternative access arrangements would be provided where the proposal would impact access.

7.7.3.1 Princes Highway The Princes Highway would be upgraded to a dual carriageway with median barrier and continuous barriers along the verge, therefore a new access road along the western side of the Princes Highway would connect the adjacent properties to the Princes Highway via Jervis Bay Road. This access road would be built during the first stage of the proposal construction.

The driveway to Lot 11 of DP1042235 would retain its current driveway to the Princes Highway with potential minor tie-in works. A separate access road along the eastern side of Princes Highway may be provided as part of the next stage of the Princes Highway Upgrade Program. This is not part of the proposal and would be subject to separate environmental assessment and approval.

7.7.3.2 Jervis Bay Road Access arrangements to properties along Jervis Bay Road will generally be maintained, with minor works required to re-connect the existing driveways. The access to privately owned bushland properties north of Jervis Bay Road would also be reinstated.

7.7.3.3 Old Princes Highway Most properties along the Old Princes Highway would retain their driveway connection with minor adjustments to tie-ins. Lot 1 and 2 of DP32247 would be connected to the Old Princes Highway via the proposed Willowgreen Road connection.

7.7.3.4 Willowgreen Road The current direct connection between Willowgreen Road and the Princes Highway would be removed and replaced with a connection to the Old Princes Highway near the proposed western roundabout. This would impact properties with driveway access to Willowgreen Road and properties on the Old Princes Highway south of the proposed western roundabout.

58

8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MEASURES Environmental management measures to minimise potential traffic and transport impacts are described in Table 28. Table 28 Environmental management measures

Impact Environmental management measure Responsibility Timing

Traffic management during construction

A Traffic Management Plan will be prepared and implemented in accordance with Transport for NSW Specification D&C G10 Traffic Management (Transport for NSW, 2020c) and Traffic Control at Worksites Technical Manual (Roads and Maritime Services, 2018). The Traffic Management Plan will include:

• Confirmation of haulage routes

• Measures to maintain access to local roads and properties

• Identification and management of any haulage vehicle marshalling areas

• Site-specific traffic control measures, including signage and reduced speed zones, to manage and regulate traffic movement

• Signage targeting critical access points to businesses and residences located along the Princes Highway, Old Princes Highway, Jervis Bay Road and properties in the vicinity of the intersection, as required

• Measures to manage active transport movements throughout construction

• Safe access to ancillary facilities including entry and exit locations and measures to prevent queuing of construction vehicles

• A response plan for any construction road traffic incident.

Contractor Pre-construction

Public transport impacts

Consultation will be carried out with local and regional bus services that operate in the area before and during construction to confirm any bis diversions and bus stop relocations during construction, and any operational road network changes. Advanced notification will be provided to affected bus customers of bus stops changes. Disruption to bus customers will be minimised by relocating the bus stops to the closest practical alternative.

Transport for NSW Contractor

Detailed design Pre-construction Construction

Consultation with emergency services

Consultation will be carried out with local emergency services during the development of the Traffic Management Plan to ensure an unrestricted and safe environment for emergency service vehicles to pass through the proposal construction footprint. Updates will be provided on the staging and progress of construction.

Contractor Pre-construction

Road closures during construction

Partial road closures or short-term full road closures will be avoided during peak periods such as holiday periods when vehicle traffic is high along the Princes Highway and Jervis Bay Road.


Construction

59

Impact Environmental management measure Responsibility Timing

Changes to local roads and property access during construction

Regular communication and consultation will be carried out with affected landowners and residents where temporary property access changes are required. Landowners and residents will be provided with advance notification of construction schedules and any changes to local roads and property access.


Pre-construction Construction

Changes to property access during operation

Property access that is impacted by the proposal will be reinstated or relocated in consultation with affected landowners.


Detailed design Construction

60

9 CONCLUSIONS The future network performance was assessed for the 2029 and 2039 future years, for the morning peak, afternoon peak and holiday peak hours. A grade separated mainline over an at-grade double roundabout interchange has been proposed.

Table 29 provides a comparison of the overall intersection delay and level of service for the “Do Nothing” and proposal scenarios assessed. Table 29 – Overall intersection level of service comparison

Scenario Peak hour 2029 2039

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOS

Do nothing

AM peak 161 F 496 F

PM peak >500 F >500 F

Holiday peak >500 F >500 F

Sensitivity peak >500 F

Proposal

AM peak 13 A 13 A

PM peak 13 A 13 A

Holiday peak 12 A 12 A

Sensitivity peak 14 A Note: Delays are rounded to the nearest second.

The target performance for upgrade options modelled in SIDRA on a 20 year horizon (future year 2039) is level of service D or better.

In the event that no upgrades are carried out, the Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway intersection would be expected to experience high delays and length queuing for road users during the morning, afternoon and holiday peak hours from 2029.

With the proposed upgrade, it can be observed that the intersection would operate at an acceptable level of service of A across all assessed peak hours in 2029 and 2039.

Heavy vehicle traffic would not have adverse impacts on the traffic operations during construction.

The proposed intersection upgrade would improve road arrangements for pedestrians and cyclists by providing shared paths along the southern side of Jervis Bay Road between Willowgreen Road, the eastern limit of work and the bus bay. Three metre wide shoulders along the Princes Highway and the entry and exit ramps would further improve safety for cyclists on the Princes Highway.

For public transport, the proposal would also result in relocation of current bus stops to one consolidated bus bay located on a low traffic access road that can be safely accessed by active transport and provides kiss and ride spots to pick up and drop of passengers by private vehicles. Reduced traffic delays resulting from the upgrade would likely benefit bus route performance.

61

10 REFERENCES Austroads 2019, Guide to Pavement Technology Part 4K: Selection and Design of Sprayed Seals: Appendix B Austroads Vehicle Classification.

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water [DECCW] 2009, Interim Construction Noise Guidelines, NSW Government.

Infrastructure NSW 2018, State Infrastructure Strategy 2018-2038, Infrastructure NSW, Sydney.

National Heavy Vehicle Regulator 2018, Heavy Vehicle (Mass, Dimension and Loading) National Regulation.

NSW Government 2018a, Future Transport Strategy 2056, Transport for NSW, Sydney.

NSW Government 2018b, NSW Freight and Ports Plan 2018 – 2031, Transport for NSW, Sydney.

Roads and Maritime Services 2013, Traffic Modelling Guidelines, NSW Roads and Maritime Services.

Roads and Maritime Services 2018, Traffic Control at Worksites Technical Manual.

TDG 2018, Jervis Bay Territory TRACKS model, Shoalhaven City Council.

Transport Certification Australia 2018, Freight Telematics for NSW.

Transport for NSW 2019, Jervis Bay Road and Princes Highway Intersection crash data – 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2019.

Transport for NSW 2020a, Transport Performance and Analytics: Populations and employment projections by travel zones.

Transport for NSW 2020b, Traffic and Transport Data (Collected by Matrix).

Transport for NSW 2020c, Specification D&C G10 Traffic Management.

DO NOTHING SIDRA RESULTS

SITE LAYOUTSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak ]

2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak Site Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: ARCADIS AUSTRALIA PACIFIC PTY LIMITED | Created: Monday, 31 August 2020 1:33:22 PMProject: C:\Users\whaz4229\ARCADIS\Farfour, Ghaith - Modelling\SIDRA\JBR do nothing model.sip8

LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak ]


Lane Use and PerformanceDemand Flows Deg. Lane Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Lane Lane Cap. Prob. Total HV Cap. Satn Util. Delay Service Veh Dist Config Length Adj. Block.

veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %South: Princes HighwayLane 1 1129 4.0 1900 0.594 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 5 20.0 1065 0.005 100 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.2 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 1135 4.1 0.594 0.2 NA 0.0 0.2

East: Jervis Bay RoadLane 1 548 3.6 612 0.896 100 24.8 LOS B 12.9 93.1 Full 500 0.0 0.0Approach 548 3.6 0.896 24.8 LOS B 12.9 93.1

North: Princes HighwayLane 1 232 10.5 1547 0.150 100 8.6 LOS A 0.7 5.2 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 372 14.4 1783 0.208 100 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Approach 603 12.9 0.208 3.3 LOS A 0.7 5.2

Intersection 2286 6.3 0.896 6.9 NA 12.9 93.1

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: ARCADIS AUSTRALIA PACIFIC PTY LIMITED | Processed: Friday, 28 August 2020 2:17:55 PMProject: C:\Users\whaz4229\ARCADIS\Farfour, Ghaith - Modelling\SIDRA\JBR do nothing model.sip8

MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak ]


Movement Performance - VehiclesMov Turn Demand FlowsID Total HV

veh/h %South: Princes Highway2 T1 1129 4.03 R2 5 20.0

Deg.Satn

v/c

0.5940.005

AverageDelay

sec

0.19.6

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A

95% Back Vehicles

veh

0.00.0

of QueueDistance

m

0.00.2

Prop. Queued

0.000.45

Effective Stop Rate

0.000.63

Aver. No.Cycles

0.000.45

AverageSpeed

km/h

99.359.7

Approach

East: Jervis Bay Road4 L26 R2

1135

3545

4.1

0.03.7

0.594

0.8960.896

0.2

24.424.8

NA

LOS BLOS B

0.0

12.912.9

0.2

93.193.1

0.00

0.880.88

0.00

1.671.67

0.00

2.912.91

99.0

47.847.1

Approach

North: Princes Highway7 L28 T1

548

232372

3.6

10.514.4

0.896

0.1500.208

24.8

8.60.0

LOS B

LOS ALOS A

12.9

0.70.0

93.1

5.20.0

0.88

0.040.00

1.67

0.620.00

2.91

0.040.00

47.1

62.899.9

Approach

All Vehicles

603

2286

12.9

6.3

0.208

0.896

3.3

6.9

LOS A

NA

0.7

12.9

5.2

93.1

0.02

0.22

0.24

0.47

0.02

0.70

81.3

74.9

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road movements.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.


LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak ]

2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak Site Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)


veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %South: Princes HighwayLane 1 517 8.6 1847 0.280 100 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 14 15.4 244 0.056 100 22.3 LOS B 0.2 1.4 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 531 8.7 0.280 0.6 NA 0.2 1.4

East: Jervis Bay RoadLane 1 281 4.1 346 0.813 100 29.1 LOS C 4.4 31.6 Full 500 0.0 0.0Approach 281 4.1 0.813 29.1 LOS C 4.4 31.6


Intersection 2541 4.5 0.813 5.3 NA 4.4 31.6



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak ]




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.2800.056

AverageDelay

sec

0.022.3

Level ofService

LOS ALOS B

95% Back Vehicles

veh

0.00.2

of QueueDistance

m

0.01.4

Prop. Queued

0.000.86

Effective Stop Rate

0.000.96

Aver. No.Cycles

0.000.86

AverageSpeed

km/h

99.849.5

Approach


531

15266

8.7

7.14.0

0.280

0.8130.813

0.6

22.229.5

NA

LOS BLOS C

0.2

4.44.4

1.4

31.631.6

0.02

0.950.95

0.02

1.331.33

0.02

2.282.28

97.3

44.344.7

Approach


281

5731157

4.1

2.93.4

0.813

0.3590.606

29.1

8.50.1

LOS C

LOS ALOS A

4.4

2.10.0

31.6

14.80.0

0.95

0.080.00

1.33

0.610.00

2.28

0.080.00

44.7

62.999.3

Approach

All Vehicles

1729

2541

3.2

4.5

0.606

0.813

2.9

5.3

LOS A

NA

2.1

4.4

14.8

31.6

0.03

0.13

0.20

0.29

0.03

0.28

83.2

78.1



LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peak]

2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peakSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)



East: Jervis Bay RoadLane 1 207 3.0 140 1.481 100 472.0 LOS F 46.7 335.7 Full 500 0.0 0.0Approach 207 3.0 1.481 472.0 LOS F 46.7 335.7


Intersection 3346 1.8 1.481 31.3 NA 46.7 335.7



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peak]


Movement Performance - VehiclesMov Turn Demand Flows Deg. Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Prop. Effective Aver. No. AverageID Total HV Satn Delay Service Vehicles Distance Queued Stop Rate Cycles Speed

veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/hSouth: Princes Highway2 T1 1131 2.4 0.589 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.43 R2 22 0.0 0.109 25.1 LOS B 0.3 2.4 0.90 0.97 0.90 48.0Approach 1153 2.4 0.589 0.6 NA 0.3 2.4 0.02 0.02 0.02 97.4

East: Jervis Bay Road4 L2 3 0.0 1.481 477.8 LOS F 46.7 335.7 1.00 3.88 14.03 6.96 R2 204 3.1 1.481 472.0 LOS F 46.7 335.7 1.00 3.88 14.03 6.9Approach 207 3.0 1.481 472.0 LOS F 46.7 335.7 1.00 3.88 14.03 6.9

North: Princes Highway7 L2 684 0.9 0.428 8.5 LOS A 2.7 18.8 0.12 0.60 0.12 62.98 T1 1302 1.5 0.674 0.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.1Approach 1986 1.3 0.674 3.0 LOS A 2.7 18.8 0.04 0.21 0.04 82.6

All Vehicles 3346 1.8 1.481 31.3 NA 46.7 335.7 0.09 0.37 0.90 50.6



LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak]

2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM PeakSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 10 years



East: Jervis Bay Road11Lane 1 621 3.6 539 1.151 100 161.2 LOS F 64.3 464.1 Full 500 0.0 2.811Approach 621 3.6 1.151 161.2 LOS F 64.3 464.1


Intersection 2678 6.3 1.151 38.4 NA 64.3 464.1


11 Level of Service is worse than the Level of Service Target specified in the Parameter Settings dialog.


MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak]

2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM PeakSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 10 years



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.7030.006

AverageDelay

sec

0.210.0

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A

95% Back Vehicles

veh

0.00.0

of QueueDistance

m

0.00.2

Prop. Queued

0.000.50

Effective Stop Rate

0.000.65

Aver. No.Cycles

0.000.50

AverageSpeed

km/h

98.959.3

Approach


1343

4617

4.1

0.03.7

0.703

1.1511.151

0.2

160.8161.2161.2

8.60.03.3

38.4

NA

11LOS FLOS F11

0.0

64.364.3

0.2

464.1464.1464.1

6.30.06.3

464.1

0.00

1.001.001.00

0.040.000.02

0.24

0.00

4.364.364.36

0.620.000.24

1.08

0.00

11.8511.85

98.6

17.117.0

Approach


621

274440

3.6

10.514.4

1.151

0.1770.247

LOS F11

LOS ALOS A

64.3

0.80.00.8

64.3

11.85

0.040.00

17.0

62.799.8

Approach

All Vehicles

714

2678

12.9

6.3

0.247

1.151

LOS A

NA

0.02

2.75

81.2

45.4




LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak]

2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM PeakSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 10 years


veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %South: Princes HighwayLane 1 612 8.6 1847 0.331 100 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 16 15.4 110 0.147 100 40.3 LOS C 0.4 3.4 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 628 8.7 0.331 1.1 NA 0.4 3.4



Intersection 2993 4.5 1.551 58.2 NA 75.9 550.1




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak]



veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/hSouth: Princes Highway2 T1 612 8.6 0.331 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.83 R2 16 15.4 0.147 40.3 LOS C 0.4 3.4 0.94 0.98 0.95 39.8Approach 628 8.7 0.331 1.1 NA 0.4 3.4 0.02 0.03 0.02 96.0

East: Jervis Bay Road4 L2 17 7.1 1.551 518.3 LOS F11 75.9 550.1 1.00 5.34 19.71 6.26 R2 302 4.0 1.551 526.5 LOS F11 75.9 550.1 1.00 5.34 19.71 6.2Approach 318 4.1 1.551 526.1 LOS F11 75.9 550.1 1.00 5.34 19.71 6.2


All Vehicles 2993 4.5 1.551 58.2 NA 75.9 550.1 0.13 0.71 2.12 36.4





2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peakSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 10 years

Lane Use and PerformanceDemand Flows 95% Back of Queue

Cap.Deg.Satn

LaneUtil.

AverageDelay

Level ofService

Lane Config

Lane Length

Cap.Adj.

Prob. Block.Total HV Veh Dist


East: Jervis Bay RoadLane 1 438 1.4 177 2.476 100 1349.7 LOS F11 170.0 1204.0 Full 500 0.0 46.5Approach 438 1.4 2.476 1349.7 LOS F11 170.0 1204.0


Intersection 3805 2.1 2.476 157.1 NA 170.0 1204.0





2029_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peakSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 10 years

Movement Performance - VehiclesDemand Flows 95% Back of QueueMov

ID Turn Deg.

SatnAverage

Delay Level ofService

Prop. Queued

Effective Stop Rate

Aver. No.Cycles

AverageSpeed Total HV Vehicles Distance


East: Jervis Bay Road4 L2 11 0.0 2.476 1352.3 LOS F11 170.0 1204.0 1.00 7.22 28.72 2.66 R2 428 1.4 2.476 1349.6 LOS F11 170.0 1204.0 1.00 7.22 28.72 2.6Approach 438 1.4 2.476 1349.7 LOS F11 170.0 1204.0 1.00 7.22 28.72 2.6


All Vehicles 3805 2.1 2.476 157.1 NA 170.0 1204.0 0.14 0.94 3.33 18.3





2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak Site Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 20 years





Intersection 3138 6.4 1.530 112.2 NA 161.7 1167.5





2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak Site Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 20 years



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.8330.009

AverageDelay

sec

0.410.6

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A

95% Back Vehicles

veh

0.00.0

of QueueDistance

m

0.00.3

Prop. Queued

0.000.54

Effective Stop Rate

0.000.68

Aver. No.Cycles

0.000.54

AverageSpeed

km/h

97.858.7

Approach


1590

4699

4.1

0.03.7

0.833

1.5301.530

0.5

495.2495.6495.6

8.60.03.3

112.2

NA

11LOS FLOS F11

0.0

161.7161.7

0.3

1167.51167.51167.5

7.70.07.7

1167.5

0.00

1.001.001.00

0.050.000.02

0.23

0.00

8.018.018.01

0.620.000.24

1.86

0.00

25.1225.12

97.5

6.66.6

Approach


703

324521

3.6

10.514.4

1.530

0.2100.292

LOS F11

LOS ALOS A

161.7

1.00.01.0

161.7

25.12

0.050.00

6.6

62.799.8

Approach

All Vehicles

845

3138

12.9

6.4

0.292

1.530

LOS A

NA

0.02

5.64

81.2

23.6

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major roadmovements.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.



LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak]



veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %South: Princes HighwayLane 1 724 8.6 1847 0.392 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0

11Lane 2 19 15.4 25 0.773 100 295.7 LOS F 2.2 17.7 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 743 8.7 0.773 7.7 NA 2.2 17.7



Intersection 3526 4.5 4.048 286.8 NA 179.4 1300.3




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak]



veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/hSouth: Princes Highway2 T1 724 8.6 0.392 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.7

113 R2 19 15.4 0.773 295.7 LOS F 2.2 17.7 1.00 1.04 1.30 10.5Approach 743 8.7 0.773 7.7 NA 2.2 17.7 0.03 0.03 0.03 81.7

East: Jervis Bay Road114 L2 19 7.1 4.048 2763.7 LOS F 179.4 1300.3 1.00 5.22 20.44 1.3

6 R2 341 4.0 4.048 2770.3 LOS F11 179.4 1300.3 1.00 5.22 20.44 1.3Approach 360 4.1 4.048 2770.0 LOS F11 179.4 1300.3 1.00 5.22 20.44 1.3


All Vehicles 3526 4.5 4.048 286.8 NA 179.4 1300.3 0.14 0.67 2.12 11.0




LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peak ]

2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peak Site Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 20 years


veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %South: Princes HighwayLane 1 1691 2.3 1922 0.880 100 0.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 24 0.0 135 0.178 100 34.9 LOS C 0.5 3.7 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 1715 2.2 0.880 1.1 NA 0.5 3.7



Intersection 4343 2.1 5.618 470.4 NA 264.3 1871.7

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major roadlanes.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peak ]

2039_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - Holiday peak Site Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)Design Life Analysis (Final Year): Results for 20 years


veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/hSouth: Princes Highway2 T1 1691 2.3 0.880 0.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 96.83 R2 24 0.0 0.178 34.9 LOS C 0.5 3.7 0.94 0.98 0.96 42.4Approach 1715 2.2 0.880 1.1 NA 0.5 3.7 0.01 0.01 0.01 95.1

East: Jervis Bay Road114 L2 12 0.0 5.618 4195.4 LOS F 264.3 1871.7 1.00 5.32 20.71 0.9

6 R2 475 1.4 5.618 4179.0 LOS F11 264.3 1871.7 1.00 5.32 20.71 0.9Approach 487 1.4 5.618 4179.4 LOS F11 264.3 1871.7 1.00 5.32 20.71 0.9


All Vehicles 4343 2.1 5.618 470.4 NA 264.3 1871.7 0.14 0.70 2.35 7.1




PROPOSAL SIDRA RESULTS

NETWORK LAYOUTNetwork: N101 [2029 AM peak]

Grade separated mainline over dumbbell

Network Category: (None)

SITES IN NETWORKSite ID CCG ID Site Name

N NA PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through North

S NA PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through South

OPH NA OPH - AM Peak - 2029 -Roundabout

JBR NA JBR - AM Peak - 2029 - Roundabout

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: ARCADIS AUSTRALIA PACIFIC PTY LIMITED | Created: Monday, 31 August 2020 1:45:50 PMProject: C:\Users\whaz4229\ARCADIS\Farfour, Ghaith - Modelling\SIDRA\Scenario 2009 - Peak Hour Analysis - Dumbbell.sip8

LANE SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - AM Peak - 2029 - Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 AM

peak]JBR - AM Peak - 2029 - RoundaboutSite Category: (None)Roundabout

Lane Use and PerformanceDemand Arrival Flows Deg. Lane Average Level of Aver. Back of Queue Lane Lane Cap. Prob.

Flows Cap. Satn Util. Delay Service Config Lengt Adj. Block.Total HV Total HV Veh Dist h

veh/h % veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %East: Jervis Bay RoadLane 1d 746 3.2 746 3.2 1565 0.477 100 4.4 LOS A 1.7 12.2 Full 500 0.0 0.0Approach 746 3.2 746 3.2 0.477 4.4 LOS A 1.7 12.2

NorthWest: PH SB Off RampdLane 1 292 10.1 292 10.1 1420 0.205 100 4.2 LOS A 0.5 3.9 Full 100 0.0 0.0

Approach 292 10.1 292 10.1 0.205 4.2 LOS A 0.5 3.9

West: dLane 1 37 2.9 37 2.9 1726 0.021 100 6.9 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 100 0.0 0.0

Approach 37 2.9 37 2.9 0.021 6.9 LOS A 0.0 0.0

Intersectio 1075 5.1 1075 5.1 0.477 4.4 LOS A 1.7 12.2n

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Roundabout LOS Method: SIDRA Roundabout LOS.Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

d Dominant lane on roundabout approach

SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: ARCADIS AUSTRALIA PACIFIC PTY LIMITED | Processed: Monday, 31 August 2020 1:45:42 PMProject: C:\Users\whaz4229\ARCADIS\Farfour, Ghaith - Modelling\SIDRA\Scenario 2009 - Peak Hour Analysis - Dumbbell.sip8

MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - AM Peak - 2029 - Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 AM

peak]JBR - AM Peak - 2029 - RoundaboutSite Category: (None)Roundabout

Movement Performance - VehiclesMov Turn Demand Flows Arrival FlowsID Total HV Total HV

veh/h % veh/h %East: Jervis Bay Road4a L1 3 0.0 3 0.05 T1 743 3.3 743 3.3

Deg.Satn

v/c

0.4770.477

AverageDelay

sec

3.94.4

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A

Aver. Back of QueueVehicles Distance

veh m

1.7 12.21.7 12.2

Prop. Queued

0.210.21

Effective Stop Rate

0.390.39

Aver. No.AverageCycles Speed

km/h

0.21 51.40.21 51.4

Approach 746 3.2

NorthWest: PH SB Off Ramp27a L1 279 10.629b R3 13 0.0

746

27913

3.2

10.60.0

0.477

0.2050.205

4.4

3.910.0

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

1.7

0.50.5

12.2

3.93.9

0.21

0.170.17

0.39

0.410.41

0.21

0.170.17

51.4

53.136.6

Approach

West: 11 T112b R3

292

1918

10.1

5.60.0

292

1918

10.1

5.60.0

0.205

0.0210.021

4.2

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.5

0.00.0

3.9

0.00.0

0.17

0.000.00

0.41

0.580.58

0.17

0.000.00

52.8

51.633.7

Approach

All Vehicles

37

1075

2.9

5.1

37

1075

2.9

5.1

0.021

0.477

6.9

4.4

LOS A

LOS A

0.0

1.7

0.0

12.2

0.00

0.19

0.58

0.40

0.00

0.19

47.2

51.7

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Roundabout LOS Method: SIDRA Roundabout LOS.Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.


LANE SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - AM Peak - 2029 -Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 AM

peak]OPH - AM Peak - 2029 -Roundabout

Site Category: (None)Roundabout



veh/h % veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %SouthEast: PH NB Off RampLane 1d 24 4.3 24 4.3 715 0.034 100 12.0 LOS B 0.1 0.6 Full 100 0.0 0.0Approach 24 4.3 24 4.3 0.034 12.0 LOS B 0.1 0.6

East: Lane 1d 757 3.2 757 3.2 1723 0.439 100 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 100 0.0 0.0Approach 757 3.2 757 3.2 0.439 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0

West: Old Princes HighwaydLane 1 39 0.0 39 0.0 747 0.052 100 9.1 LOS A 0.1 0.9 Full 500 0.0 0.0

Approach 39 0.0 39 0.0 0.052 9.1 LOS A 0.1 0.9





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - AM Peak - 2029 -Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 AM

peak]OPH - AM Peak - 2029 -Roundabout

Site Category: (None)Roundabout


veh/h % veh/h %SouthEast: PH NB Off Ramp21a L1 13 0.0 13 0.023b R3 12 9.1 12 9.1

Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0340.034

AverageDelay

sec

8.915.4

Level ofService

LOS ALOS B


veh m

0.1 0.60.1 0.6

Prop. Queued

0.700.70

Effective Aver. No.AverageStop Cycles Speed Rate

km/h

0.69 0.70 46.10.69 0.70 25.1

Approach

East: 5 T16b R3

24

26731

4.3

0.03.3

24

26731

4.3

0.03.3

0.034

0.4390.439

12.0

4.19.8

LOS B

LOS ALOS A

0.1

0.00.0

0.6

0.00.0

0.70

0.000.00

0.69

0.680.68

0.70

0.000.00

40.4

49.130.2

Approach 757 3.2

West: Old Princes Highway10a L1 13 0.011 T1 26 0.0

757

1326

3.2

0.00.0

0.439

0.0520.052

9.6

8.99.3

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.10.1

0.0

0.90.9

0.00

0.700.70

0.68

0.660.66

0.00

0.700.70

31.7

46.646.6

Approach

All Vehicles

39

820

0.0

3.1

39

820

0.0

3.1

0.052

0.439

9.1

9.6

LOS A

LOS A

0.1

0.1

0.9

0.9

0.70

0.05

0.66

0.68

0.70

0.05

46.6

33.5



LANE SUMMARYSite: N [PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through North] Network: N101 [2029 AM

peak]PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through NorthSite Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)



veh/h % veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %South: RoadNameLane 1 716 4.0 716 4.0 2276 0.314 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0Lane 2 644 4.0 644 4.0 2276 0.283 907 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0Approach 1360 4.0 1360 4.0 0.314 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0

North: RoadNameLane 1 293 10.1 293 10.1 2140 0.137 100 7.8 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Short 200 0.0 NALane 2 235 14.4 235 14.4 2137 0.110 100 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0

7Lane 3 212 14.4 212 14.4 2137 0.099 90 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0Approach 740 12.7 740 12.7 0.137 3.1 NA 0.0 0.0

SouthWest: RoadNameLane 1 743 3.3 743 3.3 1869 0.398 100 4.4 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 100 0.0 0.0Approach 743 3.3 743 3.3 0.398 4.4 NA 0.0 0.0

Intersectio 2843 6.1 2843 6.1 0.398 2.0 NA 0.0 0.0n

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

7 Lane under-utilisation specified by the user


MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: N [PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through North] Network: N101 [2029 AM



veh/h % veh/h %South: RoadName2 T1 1360 4.0 1360 4.0

Deg.Satn

v/c

0.314

AverageDelay

sec

0.1

Level ofService

LOS A


veh m

0.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.00


km/h

0.00 0.00 99.8Approach 1360

North: RoadName7a L1 2938 T1 447

4.0

10.114.4

1360

293447

4.0

10.114.4

0.314

0.1370.110

0.1

7.80.0

NA

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.00.0

0.0

0.00.0

0.00

0.000.00

0.00

0.700.00

0.00

0.000.00

99.8

82.8100.0

Approach 740

SouthWest: RoadName30a L1 743

12.7

3.3

740

743

12.7

3.3

0.137

0.398

3.1

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.28

0.51

0.00

0.00

92.4

55.2Approach

All Vehicles

743

2843

3.3

6.1

743

2843

3.3

6.1

0.398

0.398

4.4

2.0

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.20

0.00

0.00

55.2

85.3

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road movements.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.


LANE SUMMARYSite: S [PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through South] Network: N101 [2029 AM

peak]PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through SouthSite Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)

Lane Use and PerformanceDemand Arrival Flows Deg. Lane Average

Flows Cap. Satn Util. Delay Level ofService

Aver. Back of Queue Lane Config

Lane Lengt

Cap.Adj.

Prob. Block.

Total HV Total HV Veh Dist hveh/h % veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %

South: RoadNameLane 1 24 4.3 24 4.3 2223 0.011 100 7.7 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Short 200 0.0 NALane 2 716 4.0 716 4.0 2276 0.314 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0Lane 3 644 4.0 644 4.0 2276 0.283 907 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0Approach 1384 4.0 1384 4.0 0.314 0.2 NA 0.0 0.0

NorthEast: RoadNameLane 1 22 0.0Approach 22 0.0

2222

0.00.0

1912 0.0120.012

100 4.44.4

LOS ANA

0.00.0

0.00.0

Full 100 0.0 0.0

North: RoadNameLane 1 235 14.4 235 14.4 2137 0.110 100 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0Lane 2 212 14.4 212 14.4 2137 0.099 790 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 1000 0.0 0.0Approach 447 14.4 447 14.4 0.110 0.0 NA 0.0 0.0

Intersectio 1854 6.5 1854 6.5 0.314 0.2 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: S [PH - AM Peak - 2029 - Through South] Network: N101 [2029 AM



veh/h % veh/h %South: RoadName1a L1 24 4.3 24 4.32 T1 1360 4.0 1360 4.0

Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0110.314

AverageDelay

sec

7.70.1

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.000.00


km/h

0.69 0.00 82.80.00 0.00 99.8

Approach 1384

NorthEast: RoadName24a L1 22

4.0

0.0

1384

22

4.0

0.0

0.314

0.012

0.2

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.01

0.51

0.00

0.00

99.5

55.4Approach 22

North: RoadName8 T1 447

0.0

14.4

22

447

0.0

14.4

0.012

0.110

4.4

0.0

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.00

0.00

0.00

55.4

100.0Approach

All Vehicles

447

1854

14.4

6.5

447

1854

14.4

6.5

0.110

0.314

0.0

0.2

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.00

0.00

100.0

98.8



LANE SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - PM Peak - 2029 - Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 PM

peak]JBR - PM Peak - 2029 - RoundaboutSite Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 702 2.8 702 2.8 0.467 4.2 LOS A 1.6 11.4


Approach 47 4.4 47 4.4 0.028 6.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - PM Peak - 2029 - Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 PM

peak]JBR - PM Peak - 2029 - RoundaboutSite Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.2880.288

AverageDelay

sec

3.94.3

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.8 5.80.8 5.8

Prop. Queued

0.170.17


km/h

0.39 0.17 51.80.39 0.17 51.8

Approach 440 3.1


440

68913

3.1

2.90.0

0.288

0.4670.467

4.3

4.110.1

LOS A

LOS ALOS B

0.8

1.61.6

5.8

11.411.4

0.17

0.260.26

0.39

0.410.41

0.17

0.260.26

51.8

53.035.7

Approach

West: 11 T112b R3

702

2918

2.8

7.10.0

702

2918

2.8

7.10.0

0.467

0.0280.028

4.2

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

1.6

0.00.0

11.4

0.00.0

0.26

0.000.00

0.41

0.550.55

0.26

0.000.00

52.9

52.234.7

Approach

All Vehicles

47

1189

4.4

3.0

47

1189

4.4

3.0

0.028

0.467

6.2

4.3

LOS A

LOS A

0.0

1.6

0.0

11.4

0.00

0.21

0.55

0.41

0.00

0.21

49.2

52.4



LANE SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - PM Peak - 2029 -Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 PM

peak]OPH - PM Peak - 2029 -RoundaboutSite Category: (None)Roundabout




East: dLane 1 437 2.9 437 2.9 1726 0.253 100 9.4 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 100 0.0 0.0

Approach 437 2.9 437 2.9 0.253 9.4 LOS A 0.0 0.0


Approach 39 0.0 39 0.0 0.041 6.5 LOS A 0.1 0.6





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - PM Peak - 2029 -Roundabout] Network: N101 [2029 PM

peak]OPH - PM Peak - 2029 -RoundaboutSite Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0370.037

AverageDelay

sec

6.212.5

Level ofService

LOS ALOS B


veh m

0.1 0.60.1 0.6

Prop. Queued

0.550.55


km/h

0.64 0.55 47.90.64 0.55 28.0

Approach

East: 5 T16b R3

34

26411

6.3

0.03.1

34

26411

6.3

0.03.1

0.037

0.2530.253

10.2

4.19.8

LOS B

LOS ALOS A

0.1

0.00.0

0.6

0.00.0

0.55

0.000.00

0.64

0.680.68

0.55

0.000.00

40.1

49.330.3

Approach 437 2.9


437

1326

2.9

0.00.0

0.253

0.0410.041

9.4

6.26.6

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.10.1

0.0

0.60.6

0.00

0.550.55

0.68

0.550.55

0.00

0.550.55

33.0

49.049.0

Approach

All Vehicles

39

509

0.0

2.9

39

509

0.0

2.9

0.041

0.253

6.5

9.3

LOS A

LOS A

0.1

0.1

0.6

0.6

0.55

0.08

0.55

0.67

0.55

0.08

49.0

35.7



LANE SUMMARYSite: N [PH - PM Peak - 2029 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2029 PM

peak]PH - PM Peak - 2029 - Through North Site Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)







Intersectio 3140 4.3 3140 4.3 0.321 2.3 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: N [PH - PM Peak - 2029 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2029 PM




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.148

AverageDelay

sec

0.0

Level ofService

LOS A


veh m

0.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.00


km/h

0.00 0.00 99.9Approach 622


8.6

2.83.4

622

7021393

8.6

2.83.4

0.148

0.3130.321

0.0

7.70.1

NA

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.00.0

0.0

0.00.0

0.00

0.000.00

0.00

0.690.00

0.00

0.000.00

99.9

82.799.8

Approach 2095


3.2

3.0

2095

423

3.2

3.0

0.321

0.226

2.6

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.23

0.51

0.00

0.00

93.4

55.3Approach

All Vehicles

423

3140

3.0

4.3

423

3140

3.0

4.3

0.226

0.321

4.4

2.3

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.22

0.00

0.00

55.3

87.8



LANE SUMMARYSite: S [PH - PM Peak - 2029 - Through South] Network: N101 [2029 PM

peak]PH - PM Peak - 2029 - Through SouthSite Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)


Flows Cap. Satn Util. Delay Total HV Total HV

veh/h % veh/h % veh/h v/c % secSouth: RoadName

Level ofService

Aver. Back of

Veh

Queue

Distm

Lane Config

Lane Lengt

hm

Cap.Adj.

%

Prob. Block.

%

Lane 1 35 6.1 35 6.1 2197 0.016 100 7.7 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Short 200 0.0 NALane 2 327 8.6 327 8.6 2212 0.148 100 0.0Lane 3 295 8.6 295 8.6 2212 0.133 907 0.0

LOS ALOS A

0.00.0

0.00.0

FullFull

10001000

0.00.0

0.00.0

Approach 657 8.5 657 8.5 0.148 0.4 NA 0.0 0.0

NorthEast: RoadNameLane 1 35Approach 35

3.03.0

3535

3.03.0

1872 0.0190.019

100 4.44.4

LOS ANA

0.00.0

0.00.0

Full 100 0.0 0.0

North: RoadNameLane 1 733Lane 2 660

3.43.4

733660

3.43.4

2285 0.3212285 0.289

100790

0.10.1

LOS ALOS A

0.00.0

0.00.0

FullFull

10001000

0.00.0

0.00.0

Approach 1393 3.4 1393 3.4 0.321 0.1 NA 0.0 0.0

Intersectio 2084n

5.0 2084 5.0 0.321 0.3 NA 0.0 0.0




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: S [PH - PM Peak - 2029 - Through South] Network: N101 [2029 PM

peak]PH - PM Peak - 2029 - Through SouthSite Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0160.148

AverageDelay

sec

7.70.0

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.000.00


km/h

0.69 0.00 82.80.00 0.00 99.9

Approach 657


8.5

3.0

657

35

8.5

3.0

0.148

0.019

0.4

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.04

0.51

0.00

0.00

98.9

55.3Approach 35


3.0

3.4

35

1393

3.0

3.4

0.019

0.321

4.4

0.1

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.00

0.00

0.00

55.3

99.8Approach

All Vehicles

1393

2084

3.4

5.0

1393

2084

3.4

5.0

0.321

0.321

0.1

0.3

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.00

0.00

99.8

98.8



LANE SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday

peak]JBR - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 836 0.9 836 0.9 0.556 4.3 LOS A 2.1 15.1


Approach 58 0.0 58 0.0 0.033 5.9 LOS A 0.0 0.0





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.2350.235

AverageDelay

sec

3.94.3

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.6 4.50.6 4.5

Prop. Queued

0.160.16


km/h

0.39 0.16 51.80.39 0.16 51.8

Approach 356 2.4


356

82313

2.4

0.90.0

0.235

0.5560.556

4.3

4.210.3

LOS A

LOS ALOS B

0.6

2.12.1

4.5

15.115.1

0.16

0.320.32

0.39

0.420.42

0.16

0.320.32

51.8

52.734.8

Approach

West: 11 T112b R3

836

4018

0.9

0.00.0

836

4018

0.9

0.00.0

0.556

0.0330.033

4.3

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

2.1

0.00.0

15.1

0.00.0

0.32

0.000.00

0.42

0.530.53

0.32

0.000.00

52.6

53.035.6

Approach

All Vehicles

58

1249

0.0

1.3

58

1249

0.0

1.3

0.033

0.556

5.9

4.4

LOS A

LOS A

0.0

2.1

0.0

15.1

0.00

0.26

0.53

0.42

0.00

0.26

50.8

52.3



LANE SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - Holiday Peak - 2029 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday

peak]OPH - Holiday Peak - 2029 -Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 366 2.3 366 2.3 0.212 9.4 LOS A 0.0 0.0


Approach 39 0.0 39 0.0 0.039 6.1 LOS A 0.1 0.6





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - Holiday Peak - 2029 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0440.044

AverageDelay

sec

5.811.8

Level ofService

LOS ALOS B


veh m

0.1 0.70.1 0.7

Prop. Queued

0.510.51


km/h

0.64 0.51 47.80.64 0.51 28.2

Approach

East: 5 T16b R3

44

26340

0.0

0.02.5

44

26340

0.0

0.02.5

0.044

0.2120.212

10.1

4.19.8

LOS B

LOS ALOS A

0.1

0.00.0

0.7

0.00.0

0.51

0.000.00

0.64

0.680.68

0.51

0.000.00

38.1

49.330.4

Approach 366 2.3


366

1326

2.3

0.00.0

0.212

0.0390.039

9.4

5.86.2

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.10.1

0.0

0.60.6

0.00

0.510.51

0.68

0.520.52

0.00

0.510.51

33.5

49.349.3

Approach

All Vehicles

39

449

0.0

1.9

39

449

0.0

1.9

0.039

0.212

6.1

9.1

LOS A

LOS A

0.1

0.1

0.6

0.7

0.51

0.09

0.52

0.66

0.51

0.09

49.3

36.3



LANE SUMMARYSite: N [PH - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday

peak]PH - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Through North Site Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)







Intersectio 4118 1.7 4118 1.7 0.368 2.0 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: N [PH - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.311

AverageDelay

sec

0.1

Level ofService

LOS A


veh m

0.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.00


km/h

0.00 0.00 99.8Approach 1361


2.4

0.91.5

1361

8371567

2.4

0.91.5

0.311

0.3680.357

0.1

7.60.1

NA

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.00.0

0.0

0.00.0

0.00

0.000.00

0.00

0.690.00

0.00

0.000.00

99.8

82.799.8

Approach 2404


1.3

2.4

2404

353

1.3

2.4

0.368

0.188

2.7

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.24

0.51

0.00

0.00

93.1

55.3Approach

All Vehicles

353

4118

2.4

1.7

353

4118

2.4

1.7

0.188

0.368

4.4

2.0

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.18

0.00

0.00

55.3

91.7



LANE SUMMARYSite: S [PH - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Through South ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday

peak]PH - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Through South Site Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)




Lane Lengt

Cap.Adj.

Prob. Block.




0.00.0

2222

0.00.0

1912 0.0120.012

100 4.44.4

LOS ANA

0.00.0

0.00.0

Full 100 0.0 0.0


Intersectio 2996 1.9 2996 1.9 0.357 0.2 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: S [PH - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Through South ] Network: N101 [2029 Holiday

peak]PH - Holiday Peak - 2029 - Through South Site Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0200.311

AverageDelay

sec

7.50.1

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.000.00


km/h

0.69 0.00 82.80.00 0.00 99.8

Approach 1406


2.3

0.0

1406

22

2.3

0.0

0.311

0.012

0.3

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.51

0.00

0.00

99.2

55.4Approach 22


0.0

1.5

22

1567

0.0

1.5

0.012

0.357

4.4

0.1

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.00

0.00

0.00

55.4

99.8Approach

All Vehicles

1567

2996

1.5

1.9

1567

2996

1.5

1.9

0.357

0.357

0.1

0.2

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.01

0.00

0.00

99.8

99.2



LANE SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - AM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 AM

peak]JBR - AM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 340 9.9 340 9.9 0.241 4.3 LOS A 0.6 4.7


Approach 44 2.4 44 2.4 0.026 6.9 LOS A 0.0 0.0





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - AM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 AM

peak]JBR - AM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.5330.533

AverageDelay

sec

4.04.5

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

2.1 14.92.1 14.9

Prop. Queued

0.250.25


km/h

0.39 0.25 51.10.39 0.25 51.1

Approach 824 3.2


824

32416

3.2

10.40.0

0.533

0.2410.241

4.5

4.010.0

LOS A

LOS ALOS B

2.1

0.60.6

14.9

4.74.7

0.25

0.200.20

0.39

0.420.42

0.25

0.200.20

51.1

52.936.2

Approach

West: 11 T112b R3

340

2222

9.9

4.80.0

340

2222

9.9

4.80.0

0.241

0.0260.026

4.3

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.6

0.00.0

4.7

0.00.0

0.20

0.000.00

0.42

0.590.59

0.20

0.000.00

52.7

51.633.6

Approach

All Vehicles

44

1208

2.4

5.1

44

1208

2.4

5.1

0.026

0.533

6.9

4.5

LOS A

LOS A

0.0

2.1

0.0

14.9

0.00

0.23

0.59

0.41

0.00

0.23

46.9

51.4



LANE SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - AM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 AM

peak]OPH - AM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 833 3.2 833 3.2 0.483 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0

West: Old Princes HighwaydLane 1 47 0.0 47 0.0 701 0.068 100 10.1 LOS B 0.2 1.1 Full 500 0.0 0.0

Approach 47 0.0 47 0.0 0.068 10.1 LOS B 0.2 1.1





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - AM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 AM

peak]OPH - AM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0440.044

AverageDelay

sec

9.916.3

Level ofService

LOS ALOS B


veh m

0.1 0.70.1 0.7

Prop. Queued

0.740.74


km/h

0.72 0.74 45.30.72 0.74 24.0

Approach

East: 5 T16b R3

29

32801

3.6

0.03.3

29

32801

3.6

0.03.3

0.044

0.4830.483

12.9

4.19.8

LOS B

LOS ALOS A

0.1

0.00.0

0.7

0.00.0

0.74

0.000.00

0.72

0.680.68

0.74

0.000.00

39.7

49.130.2

Approach 833 3.2


833

1632

3.2

0.00.0

0.483

0.0680.068

9.6

9.810.2

LOS A

LOS ALOS B

0.0

0.20.2

0.0

1.11.1

0.00

0.740.74

0.68

0.700.70

0.00

0.740.74

31.9

45.645.6

Approach

All Vehicles

47

909

0.0

3.0

47

909

0.0

3.0

0.068

0.483

10.1

9.7

LOS B

LOS A

0.2

0.2

1.1

1.1

0.74

0.06

0.70

0.68

0.74

0.06

45.6

33.7



LANE SUMMARYSite: N [PH - AM Peak - 2039 - Through North] Network: N101 [2039 AM








Intersectio 3262 6.1 3262 6.1 0.439 2.0 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: N [PH - AM Peak - 2039 - Through North] Network: N101 [2039 AM




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.366

AverageDelay

sec

0.1

Level ofService

LOS A


veh m

0.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.00


km/h

0.00 0.00 99.8Approach 1582


4.0

9.914.4

1582

340520

4.0

9.914.4

0.366

0.1590.128

0.1

7.80.0

NA

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.00.0

0.0

0.00.0

0.00

0.000.00

0.00

0.700.00

0.00

0.000.00

99.8

82.899.9

Approach 860


12.6

3.2

860

820

12.6

3.2

0.159

0.439

3.1

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.28

0.51

0.00

0.00

92.4

55.2Approach

All Vehicles

820

3262

3.2

6.1

820

3262

3.2

6.1

0.439

0.439

4.4

2.0

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.20

0.00

0.00

55.2

85.8



LANE SUMMARYSite: S [PH - AM Peak - 2039 - Through South] Network: N101 [2039 AM





Lane Lengt

Cap.Adj.

Prob. Block.



NorthEast: RoadNameLane 1 26 0.0Approach 26 0.0

2626

0.00.0

1912 0.0140.014

100 4.44.4

LOS ANA

0.00.0

0.00.0

Full 100 0.0 0.0


Intersectio 2158 6.4 2158 6.4 0.366 0.2 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: S [PH - AM Peak - 2039 - Through South] Network: N101 [2039 AM




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0130.366

AverageDelay

sec

7.60.1

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.000.00


km/h

0.69 0.00 82.80.00 0.00 99.8

Approach 1612


4.0

0.0

1612

26

4.0

0.0

0.366

0.014

0.2

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.01

0.51

0.00

0.00

99.4

55.4Approach 26


0.0

14.4

26

520

0.0

14.4

0.014

0.128

4.4

0.0

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.00

0.00

0.00

55.4

99.9Approach

All Vehicles

520

2158

14.4

6.4

520

2158

14.4

6.4

0.128

0.366

0.0

0.2

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.00

0.00

99.9

98.8



LANE SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - PM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 PM

peak]JBR - PM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 818 2.8 818 2.8 0.551 4.4 LOS A 2.1 15.1


Approach 57 5.6 57 5.6 0.033 6.3 LOS A 0.0 0.0





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - PM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 PM

peak]JBR - PM Peak - 2039 - Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.3200.320

AverageDelay

sec

4.04.4

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.9 6.70.9 6.7

Prop. Queued

0.200.20


km/h

0.39 0.20 51.50.39 0.20 51.5

Approach 481 3.3


481

80216

3.3

2.90.0

0.320

0.5510.551

4.4

4.310.3

LOS A

LOS ALOS B

0.9

2.12.1

6.7

15.115.1

0.20

0.320.32

0.39

0.420.42

0.20

0.320.32

51.5

52.634.7

Approach

West: 11 T112b R3

818

3522

2.8

9.10.0

818

3522

2.8

9.10.0

0.551

0.0330.033

4.4

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

2.1

0.00.0

15.1

0.00.0

0.32

0.000.00

0.42

0.550.55

0.32

0.000.00

52.5

52.034.5

Approach

All Vehicles

57

1356

5.6

3.1

57

1356

5.6

3.1

0.033

0.551

6.3

4.4

LOS A

LOS A

0.0

2.1

0.0

15.1

0.00

0.27

0.55

0.42

0.00

0.27

48.9

52.0



LANE SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - PM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 PM

peak]OPH - PM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 479 3.1 479 3.1 0.278 9.4 LOS A 0.0 0.0


Approach 47 0.0 47 0.0 0.051 6.8 LOS A 0.1 0.8





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - PM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 PM

peak]OPH - PM Peak - 2039 -Roundabout Site Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0470.047

AverageDelay

sec

6.512.9

Level ofService

LOS ALOS B


veh m

0.1 0.80.1 0.8

Prop. Queued

0.580.58


km/h

0.66 0.58 47.70.66 0.58 27.7

Approach

East: 5 T16b R3

41

32447

7.7

0.03.3

41

32447

7.7

0.03.3

0.047

0.2780.278

10.5

4.19.8

LOS B

LOS ALOS A

0.1

0.00.0

0.8

0.00.0

0.58

0.000.00

0.66

0.680.68

0.58

0.000.00

40.0

49.330.4

Approach 479 3.1


479

1632

3.1

0.00.0

0.278

0.0510.051

9.4

6.56.9

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.10.1

0.0

0.80.8

0.00

0.570.57

0.68

0.570.57

0.00

0.570.57

33.2

48.948.9

Approach

All Vehicles

47

567

0.0

3.2

47

567

0.0

3.2

0.051

0.278

6.8

9.3

LOS A

LOS A

0.1

0.1

0.8

0.8

0.57

0.09

0.57

0.67

0.57

0.09

48.9

36.1



LANE SUMMARYSite: N [PH - PM Peak - 2039 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2039 PM








Intersectio 3625 4.3 3625 4.3 0.373 2.3 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: N [PH - PM Peak - 2039 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2039 PM




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.172

AverageDelay

sec

0.0

Level ofService

LOS A


veh m

0.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.00


km/h

0.00 0.00 99.9Approach 724


8.6

2.83.4

724

8181621

8.6

2.83.4

0.172

0.3640.373

0.0

7.70.1

NA

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.00.0

0.0

0.00.0

0.00

0.000.00

0.00

0.690.00

0.00

0.000.00

99.9

82.799.8

Approach 2439


3.2

3.2

2439

462

3.2

3.2

0.373

0.247

2.6

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.23

0.51

0.00

0.00

93.3

55.2Approach

All Vehicles

462

3625

3.2

4.3

462

3625

3.2

4.3

0.247

0.373

4.4

2.3

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.22

0.00

0.00

55.2

88.2



LANE SUMMARYSite: S [PH - PM Peak - 2039 - Through South ] Network: N101 [2039 PM

peak]PH - PM Peak - 2039 - Through South Site Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)




Lane Lengt

Cap.Adj.

Prob. Block.




2.62.6

4141

2.62.6

1878 0.0220.022

100 4.44.4

LOS ANA

0.00.0

0.00.0

Full 100 0.0 0.0


Intersectio 2427 5.0 2427 5.0 0.373 0.3 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: S [PH - PM Peak - 2039 - Through South ] Network: N101 [2039 PM

peak]PH - PM Peak - 2039 - Through South Site Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0190.172

AverageDelay

sec

7.80.0

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.000.00


km/h

0.70 0.00 82.80.00 0.00 99.9

Approach 765


8.5

2.6

765

41

8.5

2.6

0.172

0.022

0.4

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.04

0.51

0.00

0.00

98.8

55.3Approach 41


2.6

3.4

41

1621

2.6

3.4

0.022

0.373

4.4

0.1

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.00

0.00

0.00

55.3

99.8Approach

All Vehicles

1621

2427

3.4

5.0

1621

2427

3.4

5.0

0.373

0.373

0.1

0.3

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.00

0.00

99.8

98.7



LANE SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday






Approach 974 0.9 974 0.9 0.655 4.6 LOS A 3.0 21.1


Approach 68 0.0 68 0.0 0.039 5.9 LOS A 0.0 0.0





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: JBR [JBR - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.2600.260

AverageDelay

sec

3.94.3

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.7 5.10.7 5.1

Prop. Queued

0.190.19


km/h

0.39 0.19 51.60.39 0.19 51.6

Approach 387 2.4


387

95816

2.4

0.90.0

0.260

0.6550.655

4.3

4.510.5

LOS A

LOS ALOS B

0.7

3.03.0

5.1

21.121.1

0.19

0.420.42

0.39

0.440.44

0.19

0.420.42

51.6

52.133.5

Approach

West: 11 T112b R3

974

4622

0.9

0.00.0

974

4622

0.9

0.00.0

0.655

0.0390.039

4.6

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

3.0

0.00.0

21.1

0.00.0

0.42

0.000.00

0.44

0.530.53

0.42

0.000.00

52.0

52.935.5

Approach

All Vehicles

68

1429

0.0

1.3

68

1429

0.0

1.3

0.039

0.655

5.9

4.6

LOS A

LOS A

0.0

3.0

0.0

21.1

0.00

0.34

0.53

0.43

0.00

0.34

50.5

51.8



LANE SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - Holiday Peak - 2039 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday






Approach 399 2.4 399 2.4 0.231 9.3 LOS A 0.0 0.0


Approach 47 0.0 47 0.0 0.049 6.3 LOS A 0.1 0.7





MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: OPH [OPH - Holiday Peak - 2039 -Roundabout ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0540.054

AverageDelay

sec

6.012.1

Level ofService

LOS ALOS B


veh m

0.1 0.80.1 0.8

Prop. Queued

0.530.53


km/h

0.65 0.53 47.70.65 0.53 28.0

Approach

East: 5 T16b R3

53

32367

0.0

0.02.6

53

32367

0.0

0.02.6

0.054

0.2310.231

10.3

4.19.8

LOS B

LOS ALOS A

0.1

0.00.0

0.8

0.00.0

0.53

0.000.00

0.65

0.680.68

0.53

0.000.00

38.2

49.430.5

Approach 399 2.4


399

1632

2.4

0.00.0

0.231

0.0490.049

9.3

6.06.4

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.10.1

0.0

0.70.7

0.00

0.540.54

0.68

0.540.54

0.00

0.540.54

33.9

49.149.1

Approach

All Vehicles

47

499

0.0

1.9

47

499

0.0

1.9

0.049

0.231

6.3

9.1

LOS A

LOS A

0.1

0.1

0.7

0.8

0.54

0.11

0.54

0.66

0.54

0.11

49.1

36.8



LANE SUMMARYSite: N [PH - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday








Intersectio 4764 1.7 4764 1.7 0.428 2.0 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: N [PH - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Through North ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.362

AverageDelay

sec

0.1

Level ofService

LOS A


veh m

0.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.00


km/h

0.00 0.00 99.8Approach 1583


2.4

0.91.4

1583

9741824

2.4

0.91.4

0.362

0.4280.415

0.1

7.70.1

NA

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.00.0

0.0

0.00.0

0.00

0.000.00

0.00

0.690.00

0.00

0.000.00

99.8

82.699.8

Approach 2798


1.2

2.5

2798

383

1.2

2.5

0.428

0.204

2.7

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.24

0.51

0.00

0.00

93.0

55.3Approach

All Vehicles

383

4764

2.5

1.7

383

4764

2.5

1.7

0.204

0.428

4.4

2.0

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.18

0.00

0.00

55.3

91.9



LANE SUMMARYSite: S [PH - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Through South ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday

peak]PH - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Through South

Site Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)




Lane Lengt

Cap.Adj.

Prob. Block.




0.00.0

2626

0.00.0

1912 0.0140.014

100 4.44.4

LOS ANA

0.00.0

0.00.0

Full 100 0.0 0.0


Intersectio 3486 1.8 3486 1.8 0.415 0.2 NA 0.0 0.0n




MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: S [PH - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Through South ] Network: N101 [2039 Holiday

peak]PH - Holiday Peak - 2039 - Through South




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0230.362

AverageDelay

sec

7.50.1

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.000.00


km/h

0.69 0.00 82.80.00 0.00 99.8

Approach 1636


2.3

0.0

1636

26

2.3

0.0

0.362

0.014

0.3

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.51

0.00

0.00

99.1

55.4Approach 26


0.0

1.4

26

1824

0.0

1.4

0.014

0.415

4.4

0.1

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.00

0.00

0.00

55.4

99.8Approach

All Vehicles

1824

3486

1.4

1.8

1824

3486

1.4

1.8

0.415

0.415

0.1

0.2

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.01

0.00

0.00

99.8

99.1



SENSITIVITY TESTING SIDRA RESULTS

LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019 Sensitivity - Existing configuration]

2019 Sensitivity - Existing configurationSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)

Lane Use and PerformanceDemand Flows Deg. Lane Average Level of 95% Back of Queue Lane Lane Cap. Prob.

Total HV Cap. Satn Util. Delay Service Veh Dist Config Length Adj. Block.veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %

South: Princes HighwayLane 1 1262 2.3 1922 0.657 100 0.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 18 0.0 417 0.043 100 15.4 LOS B 0.1 1.0 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 1280 2.2 0.657 0.4 NA 0.1 1.0



Intersection 3267 2.1 2.591 175.3 NA 157.5 1114.9


SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: ARCADIS AUSTRALIA PACIFIC PTY LIMITED | Processed: Tuesday, 1 September 2020 12:42:38 PMProject: C:\Users\whaz4229\ARCADIS\Farfour, Ghaith - Modelling\SIDRA\Bushfire - sensitivity testing.sip8

MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019 Sensitivity - Existing configuration]

2019 Sensitivity - Existing configurationSite Category: (None)Stop (Two-Way)





All Vehicles 3267 2.1 2.591 175.3 NA 157.5 1114.9 0.14 0.85 2.81 16.7



LANE SUMMARYSite: JBR [2009 - JBR - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - JBR - 2039 SensitivitySite Category: (None)Roundabout





Approach 783 3.0 783 3.0 0.533 4.4 LOS A 2.0 14.2


Approach 63 0.0 63 0.0 0.036 6.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0


Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: JBR [2009 - JBR - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - JBR - 2039 SensitivitySite Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.4320.432

AverageDelay

sec

4.04.4

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

1.5 10.41.5 10.4

Prop. Queued

0.220.22


km/h

0.39 0.22 51.30.39 0.22 51.3

Approach 667 1.3


667

76716

1.3

3.00.0

0.432

0.5330.533

4.4

4.310.3

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

1.5

2.02.0

10.4

14.214.2

0.22

0.330.33

0.39

0.430.43

0.22

0.330.33

51.3

52.534.6

Approach

West: 11 T112b R3

783

4122

3.0

0.00.0

783

4122

3.0

0.00.0

0.533

0.0360.036

4.4

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

2.0

0.00.0

14.2

0.00.0

0.33

0.000.00

0.43

0.540.54

0.33

0.000.00

52.4

52.735.2

Approach

All Vehicles

63

1514

0.0

2.1

63

1514

0.0

2.1

0.036

0.533

6.1

4.5

LOS A

LOS A

0.0

2.0

0.0

14.2

0.00

0.27

0.54

0.42

0.00

0.27

50.1

51.9

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.


LANE SUMMARYSite: OPH [2009 - OPH - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - OPH - 2039 SensitivitySite Category: (None)Roundabout



veh/h % veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %SouthEast: PH NB Off RampLane 1d 47 0.0 47 0.0 798 0.059 100 12.1 LOS A 0.1 1.0 Full 100 0.0 0.0Approach 47 0.0 47 0.0 0.059 12.1 LOS A 0.1 1.0


Approach 669 1.3 669 1.3 0.385 9.5 LOS A 0.0 0.0


Approach 47 0.0 47 0.0 0.060 8.4 LOS A 0.1 1.0


Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: OPH [2009 - OPH - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - OPH - 2039 SensitivitySite Category: (None)Roundabout



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0590.059

AverageDelay

sec

8.114.2

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.1 1.00.1 1.0

Prop. Queued

0.670.67


km/h

0.72 0.67 46.00.72 0.67 25.5

Approach

East: 5 T16b R3

47

32638

0.0

0.01.3

47

32638

0.0

0.01.3

0.059

0.3850.385

12.1

4.19.8

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.1

0.00.0

1.0

0.00.0

0.67

0.000.00

0.72

0.680.68

0.67

0.000.00

36.7

49.230.2

Approach 669 1.3


669

1632

1.3

0.00.0

0.385

0.0600.060

9.5

8.18.5

LOS A

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.10.1

0.0

1.01.0

0.00

0.670.67

0.68

0.640.64

0.00

0.670.67

32.4

47.547.5

Approach

All Vehicles

47

764

0.0

1.1

47

764

0.0

1.1

0.060

0.385

8.4

9.6

LOS A

LOS A

0.1

0.1

1.0

1.0

0.67

0.08

0.64

0.68

0.67

0.08

47.5

34.4

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.


LANE SUMMARYSite: N [2009 - PH - Through North - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - PH - Through North - 2039 SensitivitySite Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)







Intersectio 4665 1.9 4665 1.9 0.400 2.0 NA 0.0 0.0n

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: N [2009 - PH - Through North - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - PH - Through North - 2039 SensitivitySite Category: (None)Giveway / Yield (Two-Way)



Deg.Satn

v/c

0.400

AverageDelay

sec

0.1

Level ofService

LOS A


veh m

0.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.00


km/h

0.00 0.00 99.8Approach 1758


1.7

3.01.7

1758

7831471

1.7

3.01.7

0.400

0.3490.335

0.1

7.70.1

NA

LOS ALOS A

0.0

0.00.0

0.0

0.00.0

0.00

0.000.00

0.00

0.690.00

0.00

0.000.00

99.8

82.799.8

Approach 2254


2.1

1.3

2254

654

2.1

1.3

0.349

0.345

2.7

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.24

0.51

0.00

0.00

93.1

55.3Approach

All Vehicles

654

4665

1.3

1.9

654

4665

1.3

1.9

0.345

0.400

4.4

2.0

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.19

0.00

0.00

55.3

89.5

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road movements.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.


LANE SUMMARYSite: S [2009 - PH - Through South - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - PH - Through South - 2039 Sensitivity





Lane Lengt

Cap.Adj.

Prob. Block.




0.00.0

3535

0.00.0

1912 0.0180.018

100 4.44.4

LOS ANA

0.00.0

0.00.0

Full 100 0.0 0.0


Intersectio 3311 1.7 3311 1.7 0.400 0.2 NA 0.0 0.0n

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Lane LOS values are based on average delay per lane.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road lanes.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: S [2009 - PH - Through South - 2039 Sensitivity] Network: N101 [2039

Sensitivity - 2009]2009 - PH - Through South - 2039 Sensitivity




Deg.Satn

v/c

0.0210.400

AverageDelay

sec

7.50.1

Level ofService

LOS ALOS A


veh m

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

Prop. Queued

0.000.00


km/h

0.69 0.00 82.80.00 0.00 99.8

Approach 1805


1.6

0.0

1805

35

1.6

0.0

0.400

0.018

0.3

4.4

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.51

0.00

0.00

99.2

55.4Approach 35


0.0

1.7

35

1471

0.0

1.7

0.018

0.335

4.4

0.1

NA

LOS A

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.51

0.00

0.00

0.00

55.4

99.8Approach

All Vehicles

1471

3311

1.7

1.7

1471

3311

1.7

1.7

0.335

0.400

0.1

0.2

NA

NA

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.02

0.00

0.00

99.8

99.0

Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (RTA NSW). Site LOS Method is specified in the Network Data dialog (Network tab).Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement.Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road movements.SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.


CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SIDRA RESULTS





South: Princes HighwayLane 1 1129 4.0 1900 0.594 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 5 20.0 1065 0.005 100 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.2 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 1135 4.1 0.594 0.2 NA 0.0 0.2



Intersection 2306 6.8 0.946 8.9 NA 17.8 130.6


SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.comOrganisation: ARCADIS AUSTRALIA PACIFIC PTY LIMITED | Processed: Tuesday, 24 November 2020 11:30:28 AMProject: C:\Users\whaz4229\OneDrive - ARCADIS\`Local\Jervis Bay Road\SIDRA\Updated models\Traffic and Transport report\JBR do nothing model - construction traffic.sip8




veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/hSouth: Princes Highway2 T1 1129 4.0 0.594 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.33 R2 5 20.0 0.005 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.2 0.45 0.63 0.45 59.7Approach 1135 4.1 0.594 0.2 NA 0.0 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.0

East: Jervis Bay Road4 L2 3 0.0 0.946 31.6 LOS C 17.8 130.6 0.93 1.96 3.83 43.66 R2 565 6.0 0.946 32.2 LOS C 17.8 130.6 0.93 1.96 3.83 42.8Approach 568 5.9 0.946 32.2 LOS C 17.8 130.6 0.93 1.96 3.83 42.8


All Vehicles 2306 6.8 0.946 8.9 NA 17.8 130.6 0.24 0.55 0.95 71.7



LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak - Gap Acceptance 7s]




South: Princes HighwayLane 1 1129 4.0 1900 0.594 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 5 20.0 1065 0.005 100 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.2 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 1135 4.1 0.594 0.2 NA 0.0 0.2



Intersection 2306 6.8 1.068 26.7 NA 45.3 333.3



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - AM Peak - Gap Acceptance 7s]



veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/hSouth: Princes Highway2 T1 1129 4.0 0.594 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.33 R2 5 20.0 0.005 9.6 LOS A 0.0 0.2 0.45 0.63 0.45 59.7Approach 1135 4.1 0.594 0.2 NA 0.0 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.0



All Vehicles 2306 6.8 1.068 26.7 NA 45.3 333.3 0.25 0.86 1.88 53.0



LANE SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak ]




South: Princes HighwayLane 1 517 8.6 1836 0.281 100 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 43 56.1 133 0.323 100 42.6 LOS D 1.1 11.4 Short 115 0.0 NAApproach 560 12.2 0.323 3.3 NA 1.1 11.4



Intersection 2600 6.1 0.865 6.6 NA 5.2 37.8



MOVEMENT SUMMARYSite: 1 [2019_BASELINE - PH/JBR Intersection - PM Peak ]



veh/h % v/c sec veh m km/hSouth: Princes Highway2 T1 517 8.6 0.281 0.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.83 R2 43 56.1 0.323 42.6 LOS D 1.1 11.4 0.93 1.01 1.07 38.3Approach 560 12.2 0.323 3.3 NA 1.1 11.4 0.07 0.08 0.08 88.8

East: Jervis Bay Road4 L2 15 7.1 0.865 27.1 LOS B 5.2 37.8 0.96 1.43 2.72 41.46 R2 266 4.0 0.865 35.3 LOS C 5.2 37.8 0.96 1.43 2.72 41.8Approach 281 4.1 0.865 34.9 LOS C 5.2 37.8 0.96 1.43 2.72 41.7


All Vehicles 2600 6.1 0.865 6.6 NA 5.2 37.8 0.16 0.31 0.36 75.6





Lane Use and PerformanceDemand Flows

Total HV Cap.Deg.Satn

LaneUtil.

AverageDelay

Level ofService

95% Back of QueueVeh Dist

Lane Config

Lane Length

Cap. Prob. Adj. Block.

veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec m m % %South: Princes HighwayLane 1 1131 2.4 1920 0.589 100 0.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 Full 500 0.0 0.0Lane 2 22 0.0Approach 1153 2.4

203 0.1090.589

100 25.10.6

LOS BNA

0.30.3

2.42.4

Short 115 0.0 NA



Intersection 3376 2.6 2.076 72.3 NA 82.4 651.2









All Vehicles 3376 2.6 2.076 72.3 NA 82.4 651.2 0.10 0.47 1.29 32.0



princes highway upgrade program jervis bay road

Documents