DOCSLIB.ORG

Options for Glebe Island Bridge Bridge Cost Benefit Analysis of Various Options for Glebe Island Bridge

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Options for Glebe Island Bridge Bridge Cost Benefit Analysis of Various Options for Glebe Island Bridge A C I L A L L E N CONSULTING SEPTEMBER 2013 OPTIONS FOR GLEBE ISLAND BRIDGECOST BENEFIT ANALYSI S OF VARIOUS BRIDGEOPTIONS FOR GLEBE ISLAND BRIDGE ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING PTY LTD ABN 68 102 652 148 LEVEL FIFTEEN 127 CREEK STREET BRISBANE QLD 4000 AUSTRALIA T+61 7 3009 8700 F+61 7 3009 8799 LEVEL TWO 33 AINSLIE PLACE CANBERRA ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA T+61 2 6103 8200 F+61 2 6103 8233 LEVEL NINE 60 COLLINS STREET MELBOURNE VIC 3000 AUSTRALIA T+61 3 8650 6000 F+61 3 9654 6363 LEVEL ONE 50 PITT STREET SYDNEY NSW 2000 AUSTRALIA T+61 2 8272 5100 F+61 2 9247 2455 SUITE C2 CENTA BUILDING 118 RAILWAY STREET WEST PERTH WA 6005 AUSTRALIA T+61 8 9449 9600 F+61 8 9322 3955 ACILALLEN.COM.AU COPYRIGHT IN THIS DOCUMENT IS AND REMAINS THE PROPERTY OF ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING PTY LTD. THIS DOCUMENT MUST NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING’S PRIOR CONSENT. ITS CONTENT MUST ONLY BE USED FOR THE PURPOSES OF EVALUATION WITH A VIEW TO CONTRACTING ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING TO CARRYING OUT THE WORK THAT IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE DOCUMENT. NO OTHER USE WHATSOEVER CAN BE MADE TO ANY MATERIAL OR ANY RECOMMENDATION, MATTER OR THING IN THE DOCUMENT WITHOUT ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING’S PRIOR WRITTEN AGREEMENT. © ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING 2013 ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING C o n t e n t s 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Context 1 1.2 Study objective and scope 2 1.3 Study approach 3 1.3.1 Desktop review 3 1.3.2 Stakeholder consultations 3 1.3.3 Cost-benefit analysis methodology 4 1.4 Report structure 4 2 Background 5 2.1 Glebe Island Bridge 5 2.1.1 Overview 5 2.1.2 Bridge design 5 2.1.3 Current condition of the bridge 6 2.1.4 Heritage significance 7 2.2 The Bays Precinct 8 2.2.2 Vessel movements through the Glebe Island Bridge channel 10 3 Options development 12 3.1 Long list of options 12 3.1.1 Preservation / restoration 13 3.1.2 Demolition 14 3.1.3 Replacement 17 3.2 Shortlisted options 18 4 Assessment of costs 20 4.1 Capital costs 20 4.1.1 Base Case 20 4.1.2 Full Demolition 20 4.1.3 Restoration 21 4.2 Recurrent costs 22 4.2.1 Base Case 22 4.2.1 Full Demolition 23 4.2.2 Restoration 23 4.3 Costs to NSW Government 25 5 Assessment of benefits 26 ii ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING 5.1 Full demolition option benefits 26 5.1.1 Avoided maintenance costs 26 5.1.2 Safety benefits 26 5.1.3 Time savings of maritime operators 28 5.2 Restoration option benefits 29 5.2.1 Avoided maintenance costs 29 5.2.2 Delays for vessel operators 29 5.2.3 Time savings of commuters 30 5.2.4 Amenity benefits 31 5.2.5 Heritage value 31 5.2.6 Option value for future light rail 32 5.2.7 Benefits for visitors to the Sydney Exhibition Centre @ Glebe Island 32 5.2.8 Residual value 33 6 Cost-benefit analysis results 34 6.1 Full Demolition option 34 6.1.1 Present value of incremental costs 34 6.1.2 Present value of incremental benefits 34 6.1.3 Net present value 34 6.1.4 Benefit-cost ratio 34 6.2 Restoration option 35 6.2.1 Present value of incremental costs 35 6.2.2 Present value of incremental benefits 35 6.3 Sensitivity analysis 36 6.3.1 Full Demolition option 36 6.3.2 Restoration option 37 6.4 Conclusion 38 List of figures Figure 1 The Bays Precinct 1 Figure 2 Glebe Island Bridge (2012) 5 Figure 3 Glebe Island Bridge elevation 6 Figure 4 Aerial view of the Bays Precinct 8 Figure 6 Preservation – option 3 14 Figure 7 Replacement – option 1 17 Figure 8 Replacement – option 2 18 Figure 9 Avoided maintenance costs of Full Demolition option, Year 1 to Year 30 (2013 dollars) 26 iii ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING Figure 10 Avoided maintenance costs of Restoration option, Year 1 to Year 30 (2013 dollars) 29 List of tables Table ES 1 Long list of options considered for Glebe Island Bridge vi Table ES 2 Present value of benefits of Full Demolition option, 2013 dollars ix Table ES 3 Present value of quantifiable benefits of Restoration option, 2013 dollars x Table ES 4 NPV of quantifiable benefits of Restoration option and difference in NPV between Restoration and Full Demolition options, 2013 dollars x Table ES 5 Required heritage and amenity benefits for Restoration to be preferred option – 7% real discount rate, 2013 dollars xi Table 1 Maritime businesses in Rozelle and Blackwattle Bays 10 Table 2 Vessel movements data 11 Table 3 Long list of options considered for cost-benefit analysis 12 Table 4 Preservation - option 2 13 Table 5 Works required for each demolition option 15 Table 6 Demolition – option 1 15 Table 7 Demolition – option 2 16 Table 8 Demolition – option 3 16 Table 9 Demolition – option 4 17 Table 10 Capital cost of Base Case 20 Table 11 Capital cost of Full Demolition option 21 Table 12 Capital cost of Restoration option 21 Table 13 Recurrent costs under the Base Case, Year 1 to Year 30 23 Table 15 Total costs to Government over 30-year analysis period, bt option (2013 dollars) 25 Table 16 Assumptions used in estimating safety benefits of the Full Demolition option 27 Table 17 Assumptions used in estimating maritime timesavings of the Full Demolition option 28 Table 18 Assumptions used in estimating commuter time savings under the Restoration option 30 Table 19 Present value of benefits of Full Demolition option, 2013 dollars 34 Table 20 Present value of quantifiable benefits of Restoration option, 2013 dollars 35 iv ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING Table 21 NPV of quantifiable benefits of Restoration option and difference in NPV between Restoration and Full Demolition options, 2013 dollars 35 Table 22 Required heritage and amenity benefits for Restoration to be preferred option – 7% real discount rate, 2013 dollars 36 v ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING Executive summary ACIL Allen Consulting (ACIL Allen) was commissioned by Transport for NSW to undertake a cost-benefit analysis of options for the Glebe Island Bridge in Sydney. Opened in 1903, the Glebe Island Bridge was an electrically operated swing bridge which connected Rozelle to Pyrmont by road. The Bridge was closed in 1995, when the adjacent Anzac Bridge opened, and remains in a permanently open position with no access to pedestrians or vehicular traffic. A 2009 structural assessment found the Bridge to be in very poor condition, and it has since deteriorated further with the wooden access platform under the western span of the Bridge collapsing in January 2012. It is one of the few remaining swing bridges of its type in Australia and in the world. Options development ACIL Allen considered three broad categories of options for the Bridge: restoration / preservation removal / demolition replacement / adaptation. Within each category there were a number of options (see Table ES 1). TABLE ES 1 LONG LIST OF OPTIONS CONSIDERED FOR GLEBE ISLAND BRIDGE Category Option Description Cost Preservation / restoration $12.0 Option 1 Minimal repairs to ensure boating safety * million $37.5 Option 2 Restoration of the bridge for two lanes of traffic on the bridge million Restoration of central bridge for safety purposes, removal of Option 3 Not costed abutments Removal / demolition $39.3 Option 1 Demolish swing span superstructure only ** million $43.9 Option 2 Demolish swing span and central stone pier to bed level ** million $37.3 Option 3 Demolish swing span, approach spans and all 3 piers ** million Demolish swing span, approach spans and all 3 piers, as well $40.2 Option 4 as removal of approach embankments million Replacement / adaptation Option 1 Replacement of bridge with pedestrian footbridge Not costed Option 2 Replacement of bridge with modern swing span mechanism Not costed Option 3 Replacement of bridge with light rail capability Not costed NOTE: * ALLOWS FOR A MAINTENANCE LOAD OF 2.0KPA AND/OR A MEDIUM SIZE VEHICLE UP TO 9 TONNES ON THE BRIDGE ** FOR SAFETY REASONS, REMOVAL/DEMOLITION OPTIONS INCLUDE THE RESTORATION OF THE REMAINING INFRASTRUCTURE NOT DEMOLISHED, SUCH AS: RESTORATION OF THE EXISTING TIMBER FENDERS, RESTORATION OF STEEL BRIDGE APPROACHES AND SPANS WHERE APPLICABLE, AND RESTORATION OF SANDSTONE ABUTMENTS AND THE CENTRAL PIER WHERE APPLICABLE SOURCE: RMS The shortlisted options for this cost-benefit analysis are: Cost Benefit Analysis of various options for glebe island bridge vi ACIL ALLEN CONSULTING Base Case – Preservation / Restoration Option 1 Full Demolition – Demolition Option 4 Restoration – Preservation / Restoration Option 2. Preservation / Restoration Option 3 was eliminated as it does not preserve the integrity of the original Bridge design and therefore confers only partial heritage value to the preserved structure. It also does not restore the functionality of the original Bridge. The replacement options were eliminated because they provide similar transport functionality as Preservation / Restoration Option 2 without the heritage benefits of that option. Among the demolition options, Option 3 was shortlisted because it enables the channel to be widened relative to Options 1 and 2 (thereby improving the transit of boats through the channel and reducing the likelihood of an accident), while costing less than Option 4 (which would have widened the channel even more). It should also be noted that demolition options do not preclude the addition of replacement/adaptation options at a later point.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bays Community Coalition (Bacc) Comprises Community Representatives from Suburbs Surrounding the Bays - Annandale, Balmain, Glebe, Pyrmont, Rozelle, White Bay &Ultimo
    BaCC’s Submission – March 2017 Bays Community Coalition (BaCC) comprises community representatives from suburbs surrounding the Bays - Annandale, Balmain, Glebe, Pyrmont, Rozelle, White Bay &Ultimo. Subject: GSC’s Draft Central District Plan - November 2016 BaCC’s Submission – 31st March 2017 Page 1 BaCC’s Submission – March 2017 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 4 2. Preamble ......................................................................................................................................... 5 3. Draft Plan – Comments, Recommendations & Questions ............................................................ 5 1. Chief Commissioner’s Foreword ................................................................................................ 5 2. Our Vision ................................................................................................................................... 6 3. Productive City ........................................................................................................................... 7 4. Liveable City ................................................................................................................................ 8 5. The Liveable Framework .......................................................................................................... 10 6. The Central District’s People ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sydney Harbour Superyacht Guidelines
    Sydney Harbour superyacht guidelines Guidelines for Masters operating Superyachts on Sydney Harbour Contents Executive Summary 1 Qualifications and registration 9 Port procedures 2 Boat licences and certificates of competency 9 Directions for navigation 2 Registration of vessels 9 Directions and regulations to be observed 2 Protected animals 10 Required charts 2 Approach distances 10 Port services 2 Speed 10 Pilotage requirements 2 Approach directions 10 Wind and weather 3 Action if a marine mammal approaches 11 Port Authority of NSW Vessel Traffic Service 3 Communications 11 Pilot boarding place 3 VHF channels 11 Sydney Harbour – general considerations 3 Important contact details 11 General 3 Useful websites 12 Speed limits 3 Photographs 13 Speed restricted areas 4 Anzac Bridge 13 Conduct within Sydney Harbour 7 Rozelle Bay Superyacht Marina 13 Prohibited areas for general navigation 7 Campbells Cove 14 General 7 Sydney Cove – Circular Quay 15 Restricted access areas 7 Fort Denison 15 Collision or incident reports 8 Garden Island Naval Base 15 Berthing at commercial wharves 8 Walsh Bay 16 Pollution, nuisance or danger 8 Sydney Harbour Bridge 17 Marine Pollution Act 1987 8 Jones Bay Wharf, Pyrmont 17 Pump-out facilities 8 Kirribilli Point 17 Garbage 9 Anzac Bridge 18 Causing of nuisance or danger 9 Glebe Island Bridge 18 Farm Cove 18 Wind frequency analyses 19 FRONT COVER PHOTO: ANDREA FRANCOLINI Executive Summary Welcome to Sydney. The aim of these guidelines is to assist superyacht masters Superyachts are free to enter and move around with their preparations for a visit to Sydney Harbour and to Sydney Harbour subject to compliance with the provide a reference document during the visit.
    [Show full text]
  • 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Background 3.0 Existing Waterway Navigation and Usage
    Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd ABN 90 009 679 734 Level 18 2 ‐ 12 Macquarie Street Parramatta NSW 2150 Tel +612 9354 2600 Fax +612 9325 2695 www.hanson.com.au 1.0 Introduction This report is prepared in relation to a State Significant Development Application (SSDA) for an Aggregate Handling and Concrete Batching facility at Glebe Island (SSD 8854). Glebe Island currently operates as a working industrial port under the management of Ports Authority of NSW (Port Authority). The aggregate handling and concrete batching facility is proposed adjacent to the existing Glebe Island Berth 1 (GLB1) terminal. Aggregate is proposed to be delivered by ship to the GLB1 berth at Glebe Island. This report provides information relating to marine traffic, navigation and safety and outlines any potential maritime safety issues, and measures required to minimise and mitigate any impacts resulting from the proposed development. 2.0 Background The SSDA was submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) in March 2018 and subsequently placed on formal public exhibition for 5 weeks, between 11 April 2018 and 15 May 2018. On 20 August 2018, a Request for Additional Information (RFI) was issued by the DP&E. This report responds to the additional information sought in relation to the maritime traffic, safety and navigation impact assessment (Issues 30 – 32 under Schedule 1) for the new facility at Glebe Island. For the purposes of this SSDA, this statement provides a preliminary navigation impact assessment and outlines the general processes and guidelines in place that governs marine traffic flow within the context of the site at GLB1, Glebe Island and Sydney Harbour.
    [Show full text]
  • Bays West Draft Place Strategy
    Draft Bays West Place Strategy NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment March 2021 Welcome to Country The stretch of Country now known as Bays West Welcome to Country provided by Shannon Foster, has been known for millennia as Gari Gurad/ D'harawal Sydney Traditional Owner and Knowledge Nura (Saltwater Country) and Nattai Gurad/ Keeper. Artwork titled 'Guriwal Dreaming' by Shannon Nura (Freshwater Country). This Country is Foster. celebrated for vast expanses of garaban (rock Within the Bays West Place Strategy, you will and sandstone) which in some places provides encounter stories of the Bays West location gibbaragunya (stone/cave shelters), and in other specifically. These are a small selection of the places creates yiningmah (steep cliffs) where D'harawal stories of this place. They are shared by a ceremony can be performed privately without contributor to this document, D'harawal Knowledge uninitiated onlookers. Keeper Shannon Foster, whose Ancestors kept these knowledges alive, and whose Elders and Knowledge For thousands of generations, local Aboriginal Keepers still celebrate, live by and share them today. people have lived an abundant and sustainable lifestyle within a complex kinship system of The cultural Intellectual Property (IP) of all Aboriginal numerous families and clans on this Country peoples, including the cultural IP of these stories, including the D’harawal, Dharug, Eora, Gai- remains with the people they belong to and can never maragal, Gundangara and Guringai peoples, be vested or assigned. In this case the stories belong among others. We pay our respects to their to the D'harawal people of the Sydney region who Ancestors and Elders past, present and know themselves as Iyora here, and these stories emerging and acknowledge that through may not be duplicated or used without the express honouring Country, we also honour their timeless permission of Sydney D'harawal Elders or Knowledge connections to Country.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridge Types in NSW Historical Overviews 2006
    Bridge Types in NSW Historical overviews 2006 These historical overviews of bridge types in NSW are extracts compiled from bridge population studies commissioned by RTA Environment Branch. CONTENTS Section Page 1. Masonry Bridges 1 2. Timber Beam Bridges 12 3. Timber Truss Bridges 25 4. Pre-1930 Metal Bridges 57 5. Concrete Beam Bridges 75 6. Concrete Slab and Arch Bridges 101 Masonry Bridges Heritage Study of Masonry Bridges in NSW 2005 1 Historical Overview of Bridge Types in NSW: Extract from the Study of Masonry Bridges in NSW HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO MASONRY BRIDGES IN NSW 1.1 History of early bridges constructed in NSW Bridges constructed prior to the 1830s were relatively simple forms. The majority of these were timber structures, with the occasional use of stone piers. The first bridge constructed in NSW was built in 1788. The bridge was a simple timber bridge constructed over the Tank Stream, near what is today the intersection of George and Bridge Streets in the Central Business District of Sydney. Soon after it was washed away and needed to be replaced. The first "permanent" bridge in NSW was this bridge's successor. This was a masonry and timber arch bridge with a span of 24 feet erected in 1803 (Figure 1.1). However this was not a triumph of colonial bridge engineering, as it collapsed after only three years' service. It took a further five years for the bridge to be rebuilt in an improved form. The contractor who undertook this work received payment of 660 gallons of spirits, this being an alternative currency in the Colony at the time (Main Roads, 1950: 37) Figure 1.1 “View of Sydney from The Rocks, 1803”, by John Lancashire (Dixson Galleries, SLNSW).
    [Show full text]
  • Contextual Analysis and Urban Design Objectives
    Rozelle Interchange Urban Design and Landscape Plan Contextual Analysis and Urban Design Objectives Artists impression: Pedestrian view along Victoria Road Caption(Landscape - Image shown description at full maturity and is indicative only). 03 White Bay Power Station Urban Design Objectives 3 Contextual analysis 3.1 Contextual analysis Local context WestConnex will extend from the M4 Motorway at The Rozelle Interchange will be a predominately Parramatta to Sydney Airport and the M5 underground motorway interchange with entry and Motorway, re-shaping the way people move exit points that connect to the wider transport through Sydney and generating urban renewal network at City West Link, Iron Cove and Anzac opportunities along the way. It will provide the Bridge. critical link between the M4 and M5, completing Sydney’s motorway network. Iron Cove and Rozelle Rail Yards sit on and are adjacent to disconnected urban environments. While the character varies along the route, the These conditions are the result of the historically WestConnex will be sensitively integrated into the typical approach to building large individual road built and natural environments to reconnect and systems which disconnect suburbs and greatly strengthen local communities and enhance the reduce the connectivity and amenity of sustainable form, function, character and liveability of Sydney. modes of transport such as cycling and walking. Rather than adding to the existing disconnection, An analysis of the Project corridor was undertaken the Project will provide increased
    [Show full text]
  • Existing Port Facilities CHAPTER 3
    Existing Port Facilities CHAPTER 3 Summary of key outcomes: Sydney’s ports provide a vital economic gateway for the Australian and NSW economies. In 2001/02, Sydney’s ports handled approximately $42 billion worth of international trade which represents 17% of Australia’s total international trade and 56% of NSW’s international air and sea cargo trade by value. Due to its proximity to the Sydney market, Port Botany is and will remain the primary port for the import and export of containerised cargo in NSW. Currently, over 90% of container trade passing through Sydney’s ports is handled at Port Botany. Port Botany Expansion Environmental Impact Statement – Volume 1 Existing Port Facilities CHAPTER 3 3 Existing Port Facilities 3.1 Role and Significance of Sydney’s Ports The port facilities of Sydney are located at Port Botany and within Sydney Harbour. These ports, along with the airport, are the economic gateways to NSW. This is reflected by the fact that in 2001/02 Sydney’s ports handled approximately $42 billion worth of international trade. This represents: $10,000 for each person in the greater Sydney region, which has a population of close to 4 million; 56% of NSW’s total international air and sea cargo trade by value; and 17% of Australia’s total international trade. Cargo throughput through Sydney’s ports (Sydney Ports Corporation owned and private berths) during 2001/02 was 24.3 million mass tonnes, with containerised cargo accounting for 43.9%. This trade comprised more than 1 million TEUs, 183,000 motor vehicles and about 13.6 million mass tonnes of bulk and general cargo.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 5 Customer Induction and Fact Sheet
    Appendix 5 Customer induction and fact sheet Welcome to the Sydney Superyacht Marina, Rozelle Bay. Rozelle Bay offers deep water24/7 access and a sheltered, calm water environment. The predominant wind direction in summer is North-East, where the Anzac Bridge offers good protection. In winter we experience South-Easterly and Westerly winds which sometimes can whip-up a bit and make berthing challenging. These SE’ly and W’ly wind conditions generally don’t last long and settle around sunset. The Bay also accommodates a number of other commercial and recreational users including charter boat and barge operators, rowing clubs (including the famous Sydney Dragons). The Marina is considered “private property” and access to the marina is for boat owners (including nominated crew) and their guests only. Marina operating hours are from 8am to 5pm, 7 days a week. The general public is welcome along the foreshore, but not on the marina pontoons. Rozelle Bay is a No-Wash / 4 knots zone, and it is a requirement that powered vessels give way to passive recreational craft at all times. Especially Superyachts must keep a proper look-out when arriving and departing at the marina. The marina notifies marina clients of the weather conditions and the anticipated level of recreational use within Rozelle Bay via our notice board. On this board you’ll also find information about upcoming marina events, aquatic events and other notices that are relevant. The Glebe Island Bridge (1903) shall remain in the open position for the passage of vessels. Yacht owners should approach the Bridge with extreme caution.
    [Show full text]
  • Glebe Island and White Bay Master Plan Incorporating the Ports Improvement Program and SEPP 61 Exempt and Complying Development November 2000 Introduction
    Glebe Island and White Bay Master Plan Incorporating the Ports Improvement Program and SEPP 61 Exempt and Complying Development November 2000 Introduction Glebe Island and White Bay form part of the area covered by State Regional Environmental Plan 26 (SREP 26). The State Government is committed to Sydney Harbour continuing to be a working harbour. Under the provisions of the SREP the site is zoned for “Port and Employment” uses. SREP 26 provides that development consent for development in the Glebe Island and White Bay Port Area is subject to a Master Plan adopted by the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning. The Glebe Island and White Bay Master Plan will control and direct the future development of the Port facilities. The consent authority must take the Master Plan into consideration when determining a development application. The Master Plan requires a Ports Improvement Program to be established. The Ports Improvement Program includes guidelines that will enhance the appearance of the port through landscaping, signage and selected colour schemes and provide standards against which development will be assessed. This document is divided into two parts: Part A Master Plan Part B Ports Improvement Program Each part is an independent document. Future development needs to consider both parts. In order to provide a comprehensive set of planning instruments relating to the Glebe Island and White Bay Master plan area, a copy of State Environmental Planning Policy 61 is attached. This provides a simpler approvals process for routine proposals and clarifies the extent of exempt and complying development on port land. Letters from the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning indicating adoption of the Master Plan, approval of the Port Improvement Program and gazettal of SEPP 61 have also been inserted in front of each relevant part.
    [Show full text]
  • A Realistic Method of Strengthening Iron Cove Bridge
    Strengthening of Bridge over Iron Cove, Sydney NSW - A Realistic Design Load Wije Ariyaratne, B.Sc (Eng), M.Eng.Sc, Grad Dip Bus, FIE Aust. Manager Bridge Engineering, Bridge Section, RTA Operations Parvez Shah, B.Sc (Eng), M.Eng (Struc.), Grad Dip Bus, MIE Aust. Manager, Bridge Evaluation and Assessment, Bridge Section, RTA Operations Henry Fok, B.Sc (Eng), M.E Eng.Sc, MIStructE Project Engineer, Bridge Evaluation and Assessment, Bridge Section, RTA Operations ABSTRACT The bridge over Iron Cove on Victoria Road consists of seven steel truss spans of 52m and four continuous plate girder approach spans of 18m. The bridge has a carriageway width of 13.7m between kerbs and it carries four lanes of traffic. In addition it has one 3.1m wide dedicated BUS lane on the southern side and one footway on the northern side. The bridge is on a major arterial road and carries B-Doubles. The bridge was built in 1955 when the design load was MS18 (33t), which was significantly less than current legal loads (eg 42.5t Semi- Trailers and 62.5t B-Doubles). Generally, strengthening of bridges is carried out in accordance with the 1996 AUSTROADS Bridge Design Code (’96 ABDC). However, because of the earlier studies conducted in assessing the bridge, it was evident that strengthening the bridge as per ’96 ABDC would have been exceptionally expensive. In addition, it was thought that the bridge would not experience the live loads stipulated in the ’96 ABDC for the next 50 years or during its expected life. Therefore, the Bridge Section proposed a realistic method of determining live loads for strengthening the bridge for legal loads based on the current legal loads experienced by the bridge, the probability of multiple presences of legal loads and the predicted future growth of legal loads over the route.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridge Aesthetics
    Bridge Aesthetics Design guideline to improve the appearance of bridges in NSW Centre for Urban Design | February 2019 The curved bridge over the Woronora River with its pedestrian and bicycle foot bridge hung below the road deck and the remodelling of its foreshores, fits in with the river, topography and sandstone and bush landscape of Sutherland. With its ten spans, 30 metre high piers, and approaches cut into the opposing hillsides the bridge produces a sweeping, dramatic and elegant built form. Acknowledgments This document has been prepared by the TfNSW Centre for Urban Design with input from Bridge Section, Environmental Branch, and the Government Architects. The information in this document is current as at February 2019. All photographs are sourced from Transport for NSW unless otherwise indicated. Cover image: Yandhai Nepean Crossing. Contents Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Purpose and structure of the guideline 6 1.2 Urban design policy 8 1.3 Aesthetics 8 1.4 Perception of bridges 13 1.5 Responsibility of the designers 15 Design approach .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade
    Transport for NSW Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade Western Harbour Tunnel delivers a new Benefitscrossing of Sydney at Harboura glance and creates Westerna western Harbour bypass Tunnel of delivers the Sydney a new CBD. Upgrading crossing of Sydney Harbour and creates the Warringah The project includes upgrading four Freeway a western bypass of the Sydney CBD. The kilometresproject includes of one upgrading of Australia’s four busiest kilometresroads, ofthe one Warringah of Australia’s Freeway. busiest Ernest St roads, the Warringah Freeway. Falcon St OFF The project includes upgrading RAMP Integrated Miller St y a four kilometres of one of w transport ON e RAMP for faster, more e Berry St r Australia’s busiest roads,reliable the journeys F h a Warringah Freeway. g n i r r New B-Line and bus commuters to a W shared cycle interchange and pedestrian with Sydney Metro pathways and Sydney Trains Waverton Birchgrove Sydney Harbour Bridge Sydney Harbour Tunnel Harbour Sydney Less congestion New direct Rozelle bus routes Anzac Bridge City West Link Providing a western bypass To western of the Harbour CBD Sydney via New M4 To south west Sydney and Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport via New M5 Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade The Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade are major transport infrastructure projects that will make it easier, faster and safer to get around Sydney. By creating a western bypass of the Sydney CBD, the Western Harbour Tunnel will take pressure off the congested Sydney Harbour Bridge, Sydney Harbour Tunnel and Anzac Bridge; while the Warringah Freeway Upgrade will streamline the way the road operates, reduce merging, provide a continuous dedicated bus lane, and provide connections to the new tunnels.
    [Show full text]