Report No: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Waitohi Picton Ferry Precinct Redevelopment
2020-09-08 CONFIDENTIAL
Concept Design Report
DRAFT
Contact Details
Matthew Taylor WSP Morrison Square Level 1 77 Selwyn Place Private Bag 36, Nelson Mail Centre Nelson 7010 +64 3 548 1099 +64 27 243 2681 [email protected]
Document Details: Date: 07 September 2020 Reference: 5-MB97C.01 Status: Revision C
Prepared by Tim Evison, Campbell Keepa, Jeremy Jennings, Mike Davies, Shaun Tippett, Alastair McEwan, Hans-Peter Froeling and Helen Hendrickson
Reviewed by Matthew Taylor
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 i
Document History and Status Revision Date Author Reviewed by Approved by Status A 1/11/2019 Various M Taylor DRAFT Contributing Authors B 12/06/2020 Various M Taylor DRAFT Contributing Authors C 07/09/2020 Various M Davies M Taylor DRAFT Contributing Authors
Revision Details Revision Details A DRAFT Issue for Discussion B DRAFT Issue for Client Approval C DRAFT Issue for stakeholder engagement
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 ii
Contents
Disclaimers and Limitations ...... 1
1 Introduction ...... 2
2 Project Status ...... 2
3 Summary of Concept Design ...... 2 3.1 Design Scope ...... 2 3.2 Operational Requirements ...... 3
4 MARINE ...... 3 4.1 Key Assumptions and Parameters ...... 3 4.2 Key Risks ...... 4 4.3 Tide Levels ...... 4 4.4 Design Vessels ...... 4 4.5 Vertical Design Loads ...... 5 4.6 Dredging for Berth Pockets ...... 5 4.7 Wharves ...... 6 4.8 Fendering Systems ...... 8 4.9 Mooring Systems ...... 9 4.10 Passenger Walkways and Seaport boarding bridge ...... 9 4.11 Temporary Terminal ...... 11 4.12 Emergency Access ...... 12 4.13 Sea Walls ...... 13 4.14 Scour Protection ...... 15 4.15 Linkspans ...... 18
5 RAIL ...... 21 5.1 Design Train ...... 21 5.2 Rail Yard Layout ...... 21 5.3 Signals Design ...... 22 5.4 Maintenance Facilities ...... 22 5.5 Subgrade, Formation and Ballast ...... 22
6 CIVIL DESIGN ...... 23 6.1 Modifications to Roads ...... 23 6.2 Public Road Signage ...... 24 6.3 Site levels...... 24 6.4 Terminal Building Car Parking ...... 24
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 iii
6.5 Vehicle Marshalling Yard and Container Transfer Terminal...... 24 6.6 Pavement Design ...... 26 6.7 Security and Fencing ...... 34
7 TERMINAL BUILDING GEOTECHNICAL INPUTS ...... 35 7.1 Design assumptions...... 35 7.2 Concept Foundations ...... 35
8 LANDSIDE STRUCTURES ...... 35 8.1 Upper and Lower Linkspan Overpasses ...... 35 8.2 Lower Linkspan Overpass ...... 36 8.3 Upper Linkspan Overpass ...... 37 8.4 Dublin Street Overbridge ...... 37 8.5 Waitohi Culvert modifications ...... 39
9 UTILITIES ...... 41 9.1 Stormwater ...... 41 9.2 Potable Water Supply...... 42 9.3 Fire Water Supply ...... 43 9.4 Wastewater ...... 44 9.5 Maintenance Considerations ...... 46 9.6 Electrical ...... 46 9.7 Exterior Lighting ...... 47 9.8 Shore Power ...... 48 9.9 Telecommunications and SCADA ...... 49 9.10 CCTV ...... 50
10 Safety in Design ...... 51
11 Construction Methodology ...... 51
12 Conclusion ...... 51
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 iv
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Disclaimers and Limitations The Report should be read in full and WSP accepts no responsibility for the use of any part of the Report in any other context or any other purpose. WSP accepts no responsibility for the validity, appropriateness, sufficiency or consequences of the Client using this Report for any purpose other than those agreed.
WSP have prepared this Report in accordance with the usual degree of care, skill and thoroughness reasonably exercised by reputable consultants practising in the consulting profession. The Report is prepared based on generally accepted practices and standards which existed at the time it was prepared. No other warranty expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in the Report.
This Report is not intended for general publication or circulation, and is not intended for, and may not be issued by the Client to, or used by, any third parties, without prior agreement between the parties. WSP expressly disclaims and excludes liability for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred by or arising from, any third party resulting from the use of, or reliance on, any information contained in this Report.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 1
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
1 Introduction
Port Marlborough New Zealand Limited (PMNZ) and KiwiRail are proposing to develop the Picton Ferry Precinct (The Project) in association with KiwiRail’s plans to replace the current fleet of Interislander ferries with two new ships. WSP have been engaged to prepare engineering concept design components of The Project.
This Concept Design Report forms part of a set of information that summarises the concept design. The purpose of this report is to outline the current design assumptions and standards adopted by WSP while preparing the concept design. In addition to this report, documentation for the concept design includes:
• a set of drawings
• geotechnical reports
• a construction methodology report and associated draft construction management plan
• a concept design alternatives report. 2 Project Status
The concept design presented in this report is based on the currently available information and analysis undertaken to date:
• Geotechnical – a Geotechnical Assessment Report – Concept Design (29 May 2020) has been prepared. Site investigations have been completed, however some lab testing results are still pending. The geotechnical assessment report will be updated once the final lab test results are available.
• Topographical survey – has been completed for the purposes of the concept design. A more detailed survey using a total station is currently underway and will be used for the detailed design stage of The Project. Also, laser surveying of the port precinct is being considered to add detail to the total station survey.
• Principals Requirements – also known as User Requirements have been prepared in draft form and have been reviewed by PMNZ and KiwiRail. The User Requirements will be a live document being regularly updated through the life of the project. A system engineering approach to managing the User Requirements is being considered by KiwiRail.
• Linkspan – the concept design for the primary linkspan and the sea port boarding bridge (SPBB) has been carried out by Royal Haskoning. WSP have been working closely with Royal Haskoning to coordinate the linkspan and SPBB concept design with the civil and structural concept design.
• New Ships – the naval architect OSK has provided preliminary concept design drawings of the new ferries. The new ferry designs are necessary to size jetty structures and the linkspans. Further work is needed to coordinate the jetty structural concept design and the auto-mooring system with the new ferry design.
• Construction staging – a key component of the project is understanding how it will be constructed while the port continues to operate the Interislander ferry service and for other PMNZ customers. To date three construction staging workshops have been held as the concept design has developed. The current construction staging thinking is documented in the WSP construction methodology report. The construction methodology report will be updated as the design develops. 3 Summary of Concept Design
3.1 Design Scope Key aspects of the WSP engineering concept design which are described in this report include:
o Existing infrastructure which requires demolition
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 2
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
o Dredging of seabed o Seawalls and shore protection o Ground improvement o Jetty piling, jetty construction, and jetty fendering and mooring systems o Linkspan foundations o Walkway and gangway system o Civil works and marshalling yards o Construction of services to the terminal building and other new structures o Overbridges o Earthworks o Stormwater drainage and culvert works (culvert works - if undertaken) o Rail track construction
Items not included in this report are the concept design of the terminal building, and construction staging. The terminal building concept design has been prepared by Athfield Architects. The construction staging is included in the WSP Construction Methodology Report.
3.2 Operational Requirements
The facility is designed with the following key operational requirements: o The facility is required to operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year o The precinct is designed to accommodate each of the two new ferries completing three return sailings per day and achieving a 60-minute turnaround in Picton. The current design intends to meet this requirement however it is noted that there are operational issues that are beyond the influence of the design, and hence the 60 minute turnaround may not be achievable. o There are planned to be two rail sailings per day initially increasing to three rail sailings in the future to meet forecast demand o Avoiding and minimising conflicts between Interislander and other port users. 4 MARINE
4.1 Key Assumptions and Parameters
• Ground conditions – bore holes have been carried out and, where available, the results have been utilised within the concept design work.
• Pile driveability analysis has been carried out to assess 760dia close ended piles and 910dia open ended to determine whether the required toe depths are achievable. Due to criticality of the analysis an external peer review is currently underway.
• The latest OSK general arrangement plan, dated 24/03/2020, has been referenced as part of the concept design unless noted otherwise.
• Final details of the linkspans for the primary and back up berth were unavailable during the concept phase. Therefore, the associated civil works have been assumed based on earlier linkspan concepts and Engineering judgement.
• The nesting arrangement suitably controls ships movements at the berth to within the tolerances set out in RH linkspan design basis. Vessel motion analysis is required at the next stage of the project to confirm this assumption in conjunction with the proprietary mooring system supplier.
• The passenger walkway (or gangway) will be located on the western side of the jetty to permit vehicle access along the jetty.
• The passenger walkway will only service the new ferries on the primary berth (western side).
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 3
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
4.2 Key Risks
• Auto mooring system
o The concept design has been based on the automooring system being deck mounted and operated above the deck. If the mooring units are required to operate above and below deck level, the wharf design will need to be amended to incorporate cutouts for the mooring units.
o The operational limits of the automooring units need to align with the appropriate locations on the ships. Therefore, continued coordination between the naval architect and the designer of the automooring system is required. Ultimately the mooring positions on the ship may need to be adjusted.
o The performance of the automooring system in an earthquake has yet to be determined.
• Rock armour - for the revetment and scour protection, the rock has been sized based on the high-level power use analysis provided by KR. We understand vessel simulations will be carried out at a later stage. Any changes to the power usage will directly affect the size of the required rock armour.
• Cruise ship – Any additional requirements for the permitted use of the eastern side of the jetty for the cruise trade have not been considered as part of the concept design. Any requirements will need to be defined by the end user and the implications on the current arrangement assessed at that stage.
4.3 Tide Levels The table below gives the key tidal levels for Picton relative to NZVD and chart datum (CD):
Table 4-3: Design Tide Levels
NZVD Chart Datum (CD)
Highest Astronomical Tidal (HAT) 0.76m 1.76m1
Mean High Water Spring (MHWS) 0.62m 1.62m
Mean Sea Level (MSL) -0.13m 0.87m
Mean Low Water Spring (MLWS) -0.87m 0.13m
Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT) -1.00m 0.00m
4.4 Design Vessels
i. Ferries The primary and back up berth will be designed to suit the New Ferries in accordance with the details set out below;
Length (m): 220m
Beam (m): 30.8m (+0.3m belting on either side of the ferry)
Draft (m): 6.70m (ECO) / Max draft 7.0m. (Note: currently 6.75m maximum draft has been used for the concept design based on an earlier version of the OSK drawing)
Refer to OSK drawing 190511.0109.01 dated 24.03.2020
1 Heights relative to Chart Datum
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 4
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
ii. Cruise vessels and other craft. In addition to the requirements noted above the eastern side of the jetty will be used by small craft and potentially cruise ships.
For the purposes of the concept design and consideration of the required dredge depth, a maximum vessel draft of 9.0m has been advised by PMNZ.
Additional small craft may use the berth however a cruise ship is expected to dictate the design requirements. The ‘design vessel’ for the cruise trade is yet to be confirmed and will be dependent on external factors, which are yet to be finalized, including maximum overall length of the jetty, back up linkspan geometry, vessel simulations / navigation etc.
4.5 Vertical Design Loads In addition to berthing and mooring loads, the jetty structures will be designed to cater for the following design loads;
• Class 1 vehicles • 3t forklift • Concentrated imposed load of 200kN in accordance with AS 4997-2005 Table 5.1, with a contact area for the load of 0.4m x 0.7m. This load is applied on a 4.0m grid in both orthogonal directions. • Passenger gangway • Loads associated with the automooring system • Linkspan (nesting structure only)
Further consideration of imposed loads will be given when assessing the requirements for maintenance access / repairs to the jetty fixtures and fittings etc.
4.6 Dredging for Berth Pockets The maintained or target dredge level for both the primary and back up berths will be dictated by parameters including the vessel draft, vessel underkeel clearance (UKC), siltation allowance and dredging tolerance. For the concept design the following parameters have been used to establish the dredge levels.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 5
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Table 4-6-1 – Dredge Level Parameters
Parameter Ferry Cruise Comments
Maximum draft 7m 9m 9m draft for the cruise ship as advised by PMNZ. Refer to email dated 04/06/2020
Net UKC 0.85m 0.9m Minimum 10% draft or not less than 1m for a 'hard bottom'. However, an average of between 10% draft and 1m has been used for the ferry
a) Wave conditions 0m 0m Wave height unlikely to excite the vessels at the (0.9m wave height) berth therefore the allowance is assumed to be 0m (TBC)
b) Negative storm surge 0.2m 0.2m Refer to WSP water level memorandum Rev A 22/5/20 attached in Appendix C c) Other negative known 0.2m 0.2m long-term oscillations
Gross UKC 1.25m 1.3m = Net UKC + ∑ a) to c)
Maintained/target -8.25m CD -10.3m CD = LAT - Maximum draft - Gross UKC dredge level (-9.25m NZVD) (-11.3m NZVD)
d) Sedimentation 0.25 0.25 allowance
e) Dredge tolerance ± 0.3 0.3 allowance
f) Allowance above scour 0.2 0.2 To avoid damage to the scour protection or protection dredging equipment
Scour protection level = Maintained/target dredge level - ∑ d) to f) (top) -9.0m CD -11.05m CD Unrounded values
(-10.05m NZVD) (-12.05m NZVD)
-9m CD -11m CD Rounded values
(-10m NZVD) (-12m NZVD)
The capital dredging quantities will ultimately depend on the final choice and design of the scour protection option. Two options are presented on the concept design drawings; in-situ filled constant thickness concrete mattresses and traditional armourstone. The second option requires a greater depth of capital dredging.
As indicated in the table above an allowance has been made between the maintained dredge depth and the top of the scour protection. This allows for a degree of sedimentation, dredging tolerance and clearance to provide a safety tolerance during dredging to mitigate against potential damage to the scour protection and / or dredging equipment. These provisional allowances will be reviewed with PMNZ at the next design stage.
4.7 Wharves The deck level of the wharf structures (jetty and nesting structures), has been set at 4.1m NZVD (+5.1mCD) based on the;
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 6
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
a. Design water level (DWL): See below b. Clearance to the deck soffit: 0.5m c. Deck thickness: ~800mm thk to be confirmed during the design process. d. Additional tolerance: ~0.2m
The key parameters of the design water level are detailed below with further information provided in Appendix C;
Table 4-6-2: Design Water Level Parameters
Parameter Value m NZVD Value m CD
Fluctuations due to regular lunar cycles +0.62mCD (MHWS) +1.62mCD (MHWS) (tides)
Wind set-up +0.0m +0.0m
Barometric surge +0.3m +0.3m
Sea-level rise +1.0m +1.0m
Other long-term oscillations such as El +0.25m +0.25m Nino etc.
Locally generated waves +0.45m +0.45m
Wave run-up +0.0m +0.0m
Design Water Level +2.62mCD +3.62mCD
4.7.1 Structural Form The structural form of the number one jetty comprises an insitu reinforced concrete deck ~290m long by 14m wide supported on 47 bents of vertical concrete filled tubular steel piles, with each bent having three rows of piles. The piles are designated Row A to Row C (west to east) and Bents 1 to 47 (landward to seaward direction). The pile bents are spaced at 6m centres longitudinally along the jetty, and piles are at 6m centres transversely across the jetty (along each bent). The nesting structure and linkspan support dolphins are of a deep insitu concrete suspended deck caps over pile groups of large diameter vertical steel tubes which are concrete filled. The linkspan and nesting structure are separated from land and separated from the No. 1 Jetty. The main jetty is connected to the seawall capping beam at +4.5mCD. Over the longitudinal distance of the first few bents, the jetty slopes up to its design level at +5.1mCD. A seismic joint separates the sloping jetty deck and main jetty deck. The seismic performance benefits are to separate the seawall and jetty response and to give similar stiffness to all main jetty piles, avoiding short column issues and reducing torsional response.
4.7.2 Seismic design A resilience study is currently underway which will confirm the agreed design standards and required seismic performance levels for primary structures. This approach will inform the design to meet the required ‘return to service’ periods. Design standards to be used in the design include the following. • ASCE 61-14 (2014) – Seismic Design of Piers and Wharves
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 7
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
• BS 6349 parts 2,4 and 8 – Maritime structures
• NZTA Bridge Manual SP/M/022 • NZS 1170.5:2004 – Structural design actions: Part 5: Earthquake actions – New Zealand
4.8 Fendering Systems
i. A robust fendering system must be provided in the Rail Berth and backup berth to protect the jetty from damage and to absorb kinetic energy from berthing ships.
ii. Fender systems must be designed to prevent ships lines from snagging on, under or around them.
iii. Consideration will be given to standardising fender units in the Rail Berth and Back-up Berth to provide efficiencies in procurement, installation, inspections, maintenance, spares and replacement. However, it is noted that fendering on the eastern side of the jetty is also required to be designed for the design vessels i.e. Ferries and potentially Cruise ships and therefore may differ from those used in the primary berth. However, it must remain functional for ferries.
iv. Berthing parameters to be used are as follows;
Table 4-8: Berthing Parameters
Ferries Cruise Approach angle 7 degrees Typically parallel to berth Approach velocity Side fendering 2.0kts Assumed 0.2kts TBC End fendering 0.5kts (TBC) Tug assisted? No No
v. Fender panels shall be sized to accommodate ships belting and maintain acceptable hull pressures in accordance with recognised industry standards.
vi. Rail Berth side fenders;
i. Intermediate fenders - Twin SCN 900 Parallel Motion Fenders (PMF) @ 24m c/c
ii. Continuous length fenders – SCN 1050 @ 2.5m c/c with a single facing panel. Adjacent fender panels to be connected together to provide a continuous face.
vii. Nesting structure stern fenders TBC. The fendering indicated on the general arrangement drawings is indicative only. Further work is required through collaboration with the naval architect and the linkspan designer.
viii. Fendering on the end of the jetty and nesting structure TBC. The fendering indicated on the general arrangement drawings is indicative only.
ix. Back-up Berth side fenders
i. Twin SCN 900 Parallel Motion Fenders (PMF) @ 24m c/c. Note: The spacing and proposed fenders will be reviewed at the next stage of the project to ensure it is suitable for smaller vessels.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 8
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
ii. Back-up Berth stern fenders TBC. The fendering indicated on the general arrangement drawings is indicative only. Further work is required through collaboration with the naval architect and the linkspan designer.
4.9 Mooring Systems
General
i. Allowance has been made for 100t bollards along the seaward edge of the primary and backup berth at nominally 18m c/c. Note: These bollards have been omitted from the concept drawings for clarity.
ii. Additional 100t bollards for bow and stern lines are located along the centerline of the jetty as shown on the general arrangement drawings. Flush mounted bollards will be considered in these locations to maximize the clear deck area.
Primary berth
i. A remote control (from the bridge) mooring system (referred to in earlier sections as ‘auto mooring’) will be provided in the Rail Berth to moor ships while they are in the berth.
ii. The remote control mooring system must align with the units on the New Ships.
iii. Mooring bollards will be provided in the Rail Berth as back-ups in case of damage to or failure of the remote control mooring system.
iv. Rail Berth automated mooring system (load rating, type, configuration, spacing, number etc.) TBC dependent on the manufacturer and mooring analysis which has yet to be carried out.
Back up berth
i. Mooring bollards must be provided in the Back-up Berth to suitably moor all design vessels while they are in the berth in accordance with good industry practice.
4.10 Passenger Walkways and Seaport boarding bridge
• An elevated passenger walkway (EPW) and seaport boarding bridge (SPBB) must be provided to enable Walk- on Passengers to embark and disembark the ferries in the primary berth. • No pedestrian gangways are required for the back-up berth with ferry Walk-on Passengers to be bused onto or walk onto the rail deck and take the stairs and lifts up to the passenger deck. • Cruise ship passengers will embark / disembark via PMNZ mobile gangways directly onto the wharf deck. Refer to the separate Preliminary Structure Design Statement (Concept Design) for further information.
4.10.1 Principals Requirements
Based on the Principals Requirements, the walkway structure and seaport boarding bridge will: a. be provided between the departures lounge in the terminal building and the passenger deck of the ship. Note: The current design is based on connection to the New Ships at starboard side at deck 8. b. be able to board or discharge up to 800 Walk-on passengers to or from a ship respectively within 15-20 minutes; c. be fully enclosed; d. be climate controlled (to be verified with KR); e. provide high levels of amenity; f. be fully accessible; g. be able to be navigated by golf buggies carrying passengers;
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 9
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
h. have seating for up to 6 passengers located at the ship end of the walkway prior to the seaport boarding bridge; i. have a golf buggy parking and turn around area located at or near the ship end of the walkway prior to the seaport boarding bridge; j. have controls for the seaport boarding bridge at the boarding pod Note: An elevated passenger walkway and seaport boarding bridge for the backup berth has not been allowed for. k. have a minimum width between handrails at the boarding pod of 2100mm and a clear width inside the elevated walkway of 3500mm
4.10.2 Description of proposed structure The proposed structure comprises the following:
• 178m long structure between the terminal building and automated SPBB • Lightweight steel framed towers and walkway, all fully enclosed with lightweight cladding and roofing • Walkway comprises steel trusses with concrete or cross-laminated timber (CLT) deck (TBC by architect) • Walkway trusses span 38m between support towers with a short span cantilevering from the landward tower to a seismic gap at the terminal building interface • Steel framed towers provide vertical support and transverse and longitudinal restraint • Walkway structurally independent from the terminal building • Longitudinal thermal/seismic gaps at interfaces with the terminal building and SPBB and at the central tower • Fire egress stairs provided at two towers
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 10
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
4.10.3 Unresolved issues, design interfaces and assumptions Unresolved design issues and interfaces and assumptions are presented below.
Table 4-10: Design Issues and Assumptions for Passenger Walkway
Issue/interface Assumption(s) Design standards Assumed design in accordance with NZ Building Code and AS/NZS 1170 (not Bridge Manual). The gangway and boarding pod are designed in accordance with BS6349 Design requirements Assumed IL4 structure with 50-year design life. 5kPa live load. Nominally ductile (ductility = 1.25) seismic design. Fire protection/rating A sprinkler system may be required. The walkway is considered as a separate fire cell. Fire design philosophy is yet to be finalised. Steel protective coating Assumed structural components generally within interior environment (C1) with appropriate coating system. External steelwork will require industrial coating system suitable for marine environment (C5-M). SPBB design SPBB designed by separate consultant. Interaction required. Architectural design Architectural design by separate company. Interaction required, changes may impact on structural design. Interface with terminal building EPW is structurally independent from terminal building; however, coordination is required to resolve the interface between the two structures Tsunami loading The EPW is potentially subject to tsunami effects. As this is not covered by the NZBC or AS/NZS 1170, the provisions of the Bridge Manual will be applied. Stairs Egress stairs assumed to be exposed light steel frame Jetty design Coordination with jetty designer required for detailed design Impact protection requirements Impact protection may be required for the walkway support structures. To be confirmed during detailed design Fire fighting Not allowed for firefighting cannon on the walkway. This is to be clarified for detailed design Linkspan design Should the overall length of the linkspan increase, the location of the passenger boarding door in relation to the jetty will change. This will affect the length of the elevated walkway. Early coordination with the linkspan design is required.
4.11 Temporary Terminal For the temporary terminal two shortlisted options were further explored from the initial six options. These two options are referred to as Option 2C and 4Hybrid. Both options are based on reusing a wing of the existing NCTIR building from Christchurch, while reusing the existing baggage hall. The current 2-storey terminal building will need to be demolished to provide access for construction works. There are two options for the pedestrian access from the temporary terminal into the existing gangways. If set out in a matrix that would provide four combinations, as each pedestrian access option could be applied to each of the building options.
A temporary link of the existing gangways will be provided once the existing terminal building is demolished, enabling pedestrian access to Aratere and K-boats.
The PV marshalling area will be relocated to CV marshalling area with access from Lagoon Road.
A modified drop off / pick up area with short term carparking will be created in the existing precinct area, to remain clear from proposed construction areas. The rental car kiosks will be relocated to the lower carpark in their proposed new location.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 11
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Full details are described in the memorandum issued 6 May 2020.
In summary:
Option 2C Option 4Hybrid
Short term parking 54 + 6 buses 31 + 5 buses
Staff Single location Split over two locations
NCTIR building Departure lounge Check-in and departure lounge
Bullring area Used by temporary Available for operations terminal
Pedestrian access (see note, rating applied for option Covered, elevated, use Level crossing, use existing shown on the drawings) of temporary vertical ramp on short arm core
Mobility impaired pax By van By van
Waitohi culvert works No issues Proximity to temp terminal to be reviewed
K-boats in backup berth (stage 2) Adjustments needed for No adjustment for Aratere K-boat and Aratere pax pax access access
Decisions will need to be made prior to the next stage of design to confirm the location of the temporary terminal and the preferred pedestrian access.
4.12 Emergency Access
Requirements for emergency access include the provision of ladders along the faces of the jetty. Ladders must be: a. located at maximum of 30m (tbc) centres along the jetty;
b. positioned so that they are not at risk of damage from berthing ships so that people can use them when ships are in the berth;
c. designed so that they are easy to use for emergency situations and for inspection and maintenance activities including by divers;
d. have the bottom rung of the ladders at least 500mm below lowest astronomical tide (LAT);
e. have a life ring positioned next to the ladder for use in emergency situations;
f. painted yellow; and
g. have clear and highly visible signage to ensure that they are identifiable from the water and from (on) the jetty.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 12
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
4.13 Sea Walls
4.13.1 Design Requirements All seawalls have a 100 year design life. Superimposed dead loads and live loads are yet to be confirmed as are deflection tolerances for each section of the wall. The seawall importance level and seismic performance requirements will be confirmed following a Resilience Study which is in progress. For the purposes of this concept level design, seawall importance levels have been assumed as
• Importance level 4 behind the new primary and back up linkspans, and the new jetty • Importance level 3 for the commercial jetty where the wall also protects the terminal building
4.13.2 Seawall concept The walls along the margins of the reclamation are designed to protect the back-lands including the linkspan approach bridge, other marine structures and the terminal building. Several structural wall, backfill, ground improvement and revetment slope arrangements have been considered. The wall supports the southern end of the lower linkspan on a seated abutment. At the back up berth, the wall supports gravity loads at the landward end of the ramp to the floating pontoon and resists lateral loads from the pontoon through props from the pontoon fenders.
The concept design includes a 220 m long seawall that comprises a tied-back combi pile structural retaining wall and a revetment slope that buttresses the wall and prevents scour in front of the wall. The combi pile wall extends from the commercial jetty to the western side of the new link span. Beyond the western end of the combi pile wall is a 15 m long section comprising a concrete cantilever wall on an armoured revetment slope.
New reclamation is required behind the seawall. This may be constructed from imported fill, dredgings for the new berths or mudcrete made from mixing dredgings exsitu with cement and other additives and placed behind the wall. The existing reclamation fill below water level and the sand and low plasticity silt marine sediments are potentially liquefiable or subject to considerable softening in earthquake loads. Where necessary to reduce ground movement in earthquakes, demands on the seawall structural elements and adjacent infrastructure, ground improvement will be installed behind the wall. The type of ground improvement best suited to this project will depend on the type of backfill selected, construction space and staging constraints and the seismic performance requirements which are the subject of the resilience study.
The merits and constraints with three reclamation options and suitable ground improvement techniques for each are summarised in Table 4-13 and will be considered further in preliminary design.
Table 4-13 – Reclamation and ground improvement options
Description Ground improvement Comments Reclaim with imported granular fill Tamping or stone columns to Technically the most straight forward and • Construct combi wall compact the new fill and prevent will have greatest flexibility with construction • Strip existing armourstone to liquefaction in the area immediately staging stockpile behind the wall and incorporating All dredge material and undercut soils behind • Remove and dispose of soft deadman or anchor pile the combi pile wall will need to be disposed sediments behind combi wall offsite with suitable disposal of • Reclaim behind wall to high tide contaminated soils level with imported granular fill and Some temporary retaining or retreat of the install tie-backs existing reclamation may be required to • Construct the revetment slope excavate soft soils behind the combi pile wall • Ground improvement It may be possible to optimise the combi-wall • Fill to finished levels or replace sections of it with a concrete cantilever wall. This can be considered further in preliminary design Reclaim with dredge material and In-situ treatment achieved through Some dredge material able to be used onsite. treat in-situ jet grouting or deep soil mixing to Trial required to confirm effectiveness of in- • Construct combi wall solidify the hydraulic fill and situ treatment and residual effects of liquefiable or soft sediments in the contaminants.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 13
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Description Ground improvement Comments • Strip existing armourstone to area immediately behind the Dredging will need to be coordinated with stockpile seawall. the seawall construction. • Install tie backs Alternatively this could involve Higher construction risk because of • Construct reclamation with dredged consolidating the hydraulic fill via uncertainties in rate and magnitude of soils from the berth pocket to surcharge or by vacuum settlement and strength gain in the hydraulic highwater level consolidation then construction of a fill. This could cause delays during • Construct an approximately 1 m reinforcement lattice to improve construction to avoid overstressing the steel thick working platform seismic performance elements of wall during construction • Ground improvement to improve Relatively expensive ground improvement seismic performance techniques required to improve seismic • Construct revetment slope performance. • Fill to finished levels and surcharge areas not treated with ground improvement to mitigate settlement Backfill with ex-situ treated dredged Jet grouting may be required to Some dredge material able to be used onsite materials improve seismic performance in Dredging and backfill can be undertaken at • Construct combi wall areas where it is not practical to separate times but will need to be • Strip existing armourstone to remove insitu soft or liquefiable coordinated. stockpile sediments behind the combi wall A containment, dewatering and mixing area • Remove and dispose of soft is needed to treat the dredged soil. Water sediments behind combi wall from the dredged soils may require • Backfill with exsitu cement treated treatment before disposal. dredged materials High seismic resilience. Opportunity to reduce cost by use of imported granular fill in some areas in conjunction with treated soils
Durability requirements for the steel components, are met through a combination of sacrificial steel allowance and detailing for an impressed current cathodic protection system. Painting of the tops of the sheet piles will also be considered however it is expected that the paint will be damaged during driving.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 14
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
4.14 Scour Protection Scour protection is required within the berth pockets along the length of the proposed jetty to protect the piles, and the seawall revetment toe at its landward end, from wash currents caused by the vessel propulsion systems during berth approach and departure manoeuvres.
4.14.1 Design Guidance Scour protection requirements have primarily been assessed using the following industry guidance, in accordance with KiwiRail’s supplied principal requirements document (Beca report “Picton Terminal Requirements – KiwiRail Project iReX” Revision C dated 25th June 2019):
• PIANC WG180 (2015). MarCom WG180 - Guidelines for protecting berthing structures from scour caused by ships. PIANC, 2015.
The cross referenced, but still current, earlier PIANC guidance was also used:
• PIANC WG22 (1997). MarCom WG22 - Guidelines for the design of armoured slopes under open piled quay walls. Supplement to Bulletin 96, 38 pp. PIANC, 1997.
4.14.2 Key Assumptions
4.14.2.1 Vessel Propulsion Systems New ferry
Particulars for the new ferry propulsion systems were received from KiwiRail (email correspondence dated 13/01/2020) and from the naval architect’s (OSK) general arrangement drawing no. 190510.0109.01 Rev B (dated 14/12/2019):
• Main propulsion system of 2 no. ABB MO 1800 azipod units (11.8 MW delivered power each) with 5.04 m blade diameter and a centreline offset of 10.86 m from the ferry stern. The dimension measurements were taken from OSK drawing 190510.0109.01 Rev B dated 14/12/2019.
• Thruster propulsion system of 3 no. unknown bow thruster units (3.2MW delivered power each) with 2.1 m blade diameter, a thruster group axis height above the keel of 2.878 m, a spacing between the thruster centres of 4.278 m and a distance from the main propulsion centreline to the centre of the thruster group of 176.98 m. The dimension measurements were taken from OSK drawing 190510.0109.01 Rev B dated 14/12/2019. It is noted that the latest drawings indicate 4 no. bow thrusters. The effect of this increase in thruster numbers will be assessed at the next stage of the project, however at present, it is considered that the azipod main propulsion system will remain the governing design case.
Cruise ship (back-up berth)
The design cruise ship has not been defined at this stage.
4.14.2.2 Applied Power New ferry
Having considered the KiwiRail supplied Beca drawings (ref. 3323757-00-CE-23 Rev B and 24 Rev A both dated 06/03/2020) of estimated power usage for arrival and departure manoeuvres on the primary berth, the following maximum applied propulsion system powers have been assumed for determining the ferry scour protection requirements:
• Azipod main propulsion system
• 20% power at the stern linkspan zone (departure case). • 40% power at the along jetty zone (arrival and departure cases).
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 15
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Previously 50% power had been assumed at the stern linkspan zone.
• Bow thruster propulsion system
• 100% power at the jetty outer end zone in accordance with PIANC recommendations (Beca drawings show up to 40% power for arrival and departure cases).
Previously 100% power had been assumed at the jetty outer end zone.
NOTE: the azipod main propulsion system governs the scour protection at the jetty outer end zone.
Cruise ship (back-up berth)
The applied powers of the cruise ship propulsion systems have been assumed to be no greater than the ferry for stern-in berthing.
4.14.2.3 Design Levels New ferry (primary berth)
• Berth pocket target dredge level -9.25 m NZVD2016 (-8.25 m CD). • Top of scour protection level -10 m NZVD2016 (-9 m CD).
Cruise ship (back-up berth)
• Berth pocket target dredge level -11 m NZVD2016 (-10 m CD). • Top of scour protection level -11.75 m NZVD2016 (-11.0 m CD).
NOTE: On 04/06/2020 PMNZ indicated in email correspondence that a cruise ship draft of 9 m would be a more appropriate design assumption for deriving a berth pocket target dredge level at the back-up berth to cater for the draft variation in the class of cruise ships anticipated to call at the port (LOA ≤ 300 m). The previously assumed cruise design levels were thus increased by 1 m to the values now shown above. Given time constraints the armourstone scour protection requirements for the cruise ship case have not been recalculated and have simply been assumed to be equivalent in mass grading and layer thicknesses to those for the ferry on the primary berth. This assumption will need to be re-checked at an appropriate point in the future design.
4.14.2.4 Set-back from Revetment Sensitivity checks for the ferry azipod main propulsion system at 50% power on the back-up berth identified a minimum set-back of 29 m from the toe of the revetment slope to achieve an armourstone mass grading of 3 to 6 tonnes. This was considered the maximum practicable grading at the initial stages of the concept design.
This minimum set-back was maintained when the power application was subsequently reduced to 20% (Section 4.14.2.2) to achieve project economies of a reduced median armourstone mass requirement. Further sensitivity checks on the effects of trying to decrease the set-back distance at 20% power demonstrated significant increases in the required median armourstone mass.
The minimum set-back from the revetment toe will need to be re-checked at an appropriate point in the future as the design geometry of the pontoon link-span is further refined. Extending the primary linkspan length will also influence these decisions.
4.14.3 Protection Options and Extents Two scour protection options were considered for vessel wash currents in the berth pockets and seawall revetment toe. The first option was conventional armourstone and the second a proprietary in-situ filled constant-thickness concrete mattress system.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 16
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
4.14.3.1 Armourstone With an assumed armourstone density of 2,600 kg/m3 the following preliminary scour protection requirements were determined for the new ferry on the primary berth:
Stern linkspan zone
For 20% azipod power.
Cover layer:
• Two-stone thickness (1.4 m nom.) of 490-1,490 kg graded armourstone.
• M50 = 910 kg.
• Dn50 = 0.7 m.
Under layer:
• Two-stone thickness (0.6 m nom.) of 40-190 kg graded armourstone.
• M50 = 90 kg.
• Dn50 = 0.3 m.
“Falling edge” toe:
• Three-stone thickness (2 m nom.) of 490-1,490 kg graded armourstone.
• M50 = 910 kg.
• Dn50 = 0.7 m.
The extent of the stern zone scour protection is 20 m fore of the vessel azipod centreline in accordance with the PIANC WG180 guidance. The aft extent reaches the revetment toe. The 40 m protection width off the fender line of both berth pockets extends beyond the beam of the design vessel. The protection is also present under the 14 m width of the jetty.
Along jetty zone
For 40% azipod power.
Cover layer:
• Two-stone thickness (1.4 m nom.) of 560-1,670 kg graded armourstone.
• M50 = 1,030 kg.
• Dn50 = 0.7 m.
Under layer:
• Two-stone thickness (0.6 m nom.) of 40-190 kg graded armourstone.
• M50 = 90 kg.
• Dn50 = 0.3 m.
The 210 m extent of the along jetty scour protection projects 10 m beyond the outer end of the jetty extents. The reduced projection width off the fender line of both pockets is to the centreline of the vessel. This is a departure from the PIANC WG180 guidelines. While it is accepted that scour holes will occur beyond the centreline, the protection width is considered sufficient to limit the empirically calculated scour hole depths having any adverse effect on the fixity of the jetty piles.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 17
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Cruise ship (back-up berth)
Given time constraints the armourstone scour protection requirements for the cruise ship case on the back-up berth have not been recalculated and have been assumed to be equivalent in mass grading and layer thicknesses to those for the ferry on the primary berth, albeit at a deeper level (Section 4.14.2.3). This assumption will need to be re- checked at an appropriate point in the future design.
4.14.3.2 Concrete mattresses This option offers a reduced scour protection thickness and in doing so has the potential to reduce the project dredging / disposal and armourstone quantity requirements.
For in-situ filled constant-thickness concrete mattress protection a nominal 200 mm thickness has been assumed based upon preliminary calculations of the vessel scour jet velocities and mattress stability requirements. Mattress thickness would need to be confirmed during any further design stages with specialist proprietary sub-consultants / suppliers (e.g. Proserve, UK).
The extent of the mattress protection would be the same as for the armourstone option.
Armourstone would still be required for the “falling edge” margins that prevent undermining at the perimeter of the concrete mattress system.
Given time constraints the mattress scour protection requirements for the cruise ship case on the back-up berth have not been recalculated and have been assumed to be equivalent to that for the ferry on the primary berth. This assumption will need to be re-checked at an appropriate point in the future design.
There remains a significant risk with regards to the installation and curing of the in-situ concrete mattresses given the proximity to the existing operational ferry berth. Further work is required to confirm the constructability of this option alongside existing ferry operations.
4.15 Linkspans The project includes the provision of a primary and secondary linkspan as set out below.
4.15.1 Primary linkspan The primary linkspan is to be located on the western side of the jetty and will be a double deck linkspan. The lower deck is intended to primarily accommodate rail traffic with the upper deck intended to accommodate road traffic. Royal Haskoning DHV have been engaged to develop a performance specification for the primary linkspan structure. To date the following documents have been received. • Basis of design PB9474-RHD-ZZ-XX-RP-Z-0002 25/09/2019 • Concept Stage Performance Specification PB9474-RHD-ZZ-XX-SP-Z-0001 22/11/2019 • Drawings;
– PB9475-RHD-ZZ-XX-DR-S-1001 P01 – Rail & Road linkspan GA – PB9475-RHD-ZZ-XX-DR-S-1002 P01 – Rail & Road Linkspan Cross Sections – PB9475-RHD-ZZ-XX-DR-S-1003 P01 – Rail & Road Linkspan Load Reactions
These documents should be referenced for further details of the primary linkspan.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 18
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
It is noted that these documents have been based on key parameters and assumptions which have more recently been clarified;
Parameter Initial assumptions Latest parameters Draft 6.75m max 6m light draft / 7m fully laden Depth to deck 3 (rail) 10.0m 9.8m Max gradient 1 in 45 for MLWS to MHWS 1 in 45 ~1 in 40 for LAT Sea Level Rise 0.45m (based on 50yrs) -
The initial assumptions have resulted in a proposed two span linkspan with an overall length of 50.5m. Refer to extract from RH drawing.
Figure 4-1 - Extract from RH drawing PB9475-RHD-ZZ-XX-DR-S-1001 P01
Dead and imposed (including seismic) loads from the linkspans were not able to be finalised during the concept phase and therefore the associated civils works have been assumed based on engineering judgement and information available at the time. These assumptions will be revised at the next project stage.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 19
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
4.15.2 Secondary linkspan The backup berth is currently proposed to be located on the eastern side of the jetty and shall be a single deck linkspan which is intended to primarily accommodate road traffic. Royal Haskoning DHV have been engaged to develop a performance specification for the secondary linkspan structure. To date the following documents have been received. • Basis of design PB9474-RHD-ZZ-XX-RP-Z-0002 25/09/2019 • Concept Stage Performance Specification PB9474-RHD-ZZ-XX-SP-Z-0001 22/11/2019 • Drawing: PB9475-RHD-ZZ-XX-DR-S-1005 P01 – Secondary linkspan GA
Figure 4-2 - Extract from RH drawing PB9475-RHD-ZZ-XX-DR-S-1005 P01
An alternative to this proposal is to provide a simplistic arrangement in the form of a floating linkspan. The idea behind the floating linkspan concept is that it will provide a relocatable option for use in the event that there is either a problem with the primary linkspan or berth at the new No.1 wharf or there is a need for two ferries to be berthed in Picton concurrently. It is anticipated that the pontoon and linkspan will be designed for loads associated with the ferry operating in Ro-Pax configuration only i.e. no rail freight. This alternative has not been fully developed at this stage.
The concept design of the arrangement allows for the fendering to be located on the landward side of the pontoon to maximise the available berth space when the pontoon is not present. This will require the pontoon to be designed to transfer accidental impact loads through the pontoon to the fender units. A positive connection between the fenders and the pontoon will not be provided. Instead, and to prevent the pontoon moving out of position, lateral ties back to the jetty will provide ‘off the berth’ restraint whilst being hinged in both the horizontal and vertical axis to allow the pontoon to move longitudinally without attracting significant damage to the jetty structure. Longitudinal restraint will be provided through the use of a combination of the fender piles and cables.
Refer to WSP drawing number C-440 for a schematic general arrangement drawing of this option. A extract from this drawing has been included below.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 20
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Figure 4-3 - Extract from WSP drawing C-4440
Note: Updated requirements for the backup berth have been received (18/5/20). These requirements have not been considered as part of the concept design stage and will instead be reviewed and agreed with KR and PMNZ at the start of the next stage of the project.
5 RAIL
5.1 Design Train The new rail yard has been designed to cater for a Design Freight Train comprising forty wagons and four locomotives. This gives a nominal design train length of: • 40 x 19.286m type IBB wagons with allowance for 100mm slack over draw gear plus 4 x 18.5m long SI locomotives (future rolling stock) = 850m overall train length
Note that IBB wagons and SI locomotives have been assumed to determine the maximum train length and various combinations of wagon/locomotive types will be used in practice based on existing and future rolling stock.
5.2 Rail Yard Layout The yard layout has been designed with provision for:
• Rail arrival road to accommodate the design train for departing and arriving scenarios and a run around road to facilitate transfer of the locomotives from the front of an arrival train as a single group of three locos • Two preassembly roads long enough to accommodate a total of forty 60ft wagons to enable a full length train to be stored while a second full length train is occupying the arrival road
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 21
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
• Eight ladder roads configured in two groups of four roads and with storage for a minimum of 7 wagons per road • A Container Terminal road for use in road bridging operations • The existing Coastal Pacific arrival road with a platform extension to the north of approximately 70m. A runaround road to facilitate relocation of locos from the front to rear of the train is also provided • The existing turn table adjacent to the Lagoon Road site entrance has been relocated to the northwest corner of the site. This will require a new turntable to be constructed, or the existing turntable to be relocated on new foundations.
The yard has been designed to enable rail operations, including assembly and break-up of the design train, to be undertaken without encroaching the Wairau Road level crossing. Due to the constrained site, it is necessary to close the Broadway approach to the level crossing on the western side of the railway to achieve the required backshunt and sandtrap/stop block.
At the northern end of the site, a realignment of Lagoon Road (non-public port road) is required to enable a new headshunt to be constructed. The headshunt allows for decoupling of locomotives from the front of the arriving train and access to the runaround line or Lagoon Road workshop without impacting PMNZ or Bluebridge operations.
The yard has also been configured to enable the Coastal Pacific arrival and runaround roads to operate independently of the freight/ferry operations. The platform for the Coastal Pacific will be replaced with a new 3m wide platform that is a total of approximately 170 m long (about 70 m longer than the existing platform, extended to the north).
5.2.1 Geometric Design Geometric design of the rail yard has been led by KiwiRail and has adopted the following key parameters:
• Max grade of 1 in 100 for the arrival road and run around road and 1 in 400 for the ladder roads and preassembly roads
• Minimum radius of 150m where decoupling wagons is required and 120m elsewhere
• Minimum vertical curve radius of 1,650m
• 1:7.5 Turnouts and double slips
• Rail centres of between 4.0m and 5.2m
• Tie-in to the existing rail south of Wairau Road at existing grades
5.3 Signals Design Signals design for the rail yard will need to be developed during the Preliminary Design.
5.4 Maintenance Facilities The existing maintenance workshop adjacent Lagoon Road is to be retained including the rail tracks serving the workshop. New connections between the workshop storage lines and the arrival runaround road are proposed.
The current rail fuelling area, used for fuelling of shunt locos, is located on the eastern side of the workshop building and is currently served by fuel tanks located further east within the vehicle marshalling yard. The design provides for retention of the fuelling area but with removal of the existing fuel storage tanks which are to be replaced with new above ground tanks positioned to the south of the maintenance workshop.
The existing rail line to the turn table which runs past the fuelling area is to be removed.
5.5 Subgrade, Formation and Ballast The majority of the yard will be formed on ballasted track in accordance with KiwiRail standard details.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 22
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
New ballast will be used for all new track with existing ballast either retained insitu or as cut to fill and used as bulk fill for areas where filling is required to meet proposed site levels. It is noted that contamination of existing ballast may influence potential for reuse as bulk fill.
Track slab has been adopted at the northern end of the site where vehicle crossing of the rail is required.
Stormwater concepts for the rail yard propose subsoil drainage of ballasted track, installed parallel to the rail and collected at intervals by carrier drains. 6 CIVIL DESIGN
6.1 Modifications to Roads The design retains the current entrance from Lagoon Road for access to the vehicle marshalling yard for all vehicles travelling on the ferry, however further investigation at preliminary design stage is needed to confirm that this provides sufficient storage capacity for entering vehicles without blocking back onto Lagoon Road. Access to the terminal building for all walk-on passengers will continue from Auckland Street with a new car park constructed adjacent to the proposed terminal building.
An overpass is required at Dublin Street to retain access across the railway into Picton. Road closures, with turning heads installed, are proposed at the following locations:
• Broadway (on the western side of the rail corridor) to accommodate the required track length for rail operations and the proposed safety back-shunt. A tee-configuration turning head in accordance with NZS 4404 Land Development and Subdivision Infrastructure is proposed for the new cul-de-sac with a new footpath linkage from the turning head to Wairau Road. It is noted that the existing Broadway Bridge crossing the Waitohi Awa has weight restrictions and may require strengthening if heavy vehicles (such as rubbish trucks) need to traverse this bridge. Alternatively, bins could be wheeled across the bridge for collection on the western side of the river and options will need to be reviewed with Marlborough District Council / Marlborough Roads during preliminary design.
• Market Street – two different size turning heads are shown for the Market Street cul-de-sac - 19m diameter and 30m diameter as per the NZS 4404 recommendations for residential and industrial turning heads respectively. It is noted that Market Street is within an industrial area and the larger 30m diameter industrial turning head is expected to be required.
Other modifications to roads include:
• Modifications to the Auckland Street / Dublin Street intersection – the existing priority control and intersection layout is retained but levels and crossfalls will be modified to tie-in with the new Dublin Street overpass grades. It is noted the shared path on the northern side of the bridge will terminate at this intersection and cyclists will need to move onto the carriageway (pedestrians can continue on the footpath around the corner onto Auckland Street) • Modifications at the Dublin Street / Devon Street intersection - the existing priority control and intersection layout is retained but levels and crossfalls will be modified to tie-in with the new Dublin Street overpass grades • A realignment of Lagoon Road (private PMNZ road) at the northern end of the project and with a reconfigured access to the Waitohi Wharf and Bluebridge Lady Bridget pontoon is proposed to accommodate the design train within the constrained site. A retaining wall will need to be constructed between Lagoon Road and the new rail headshunt to accommodate the road/rail levels.
A separate business case is being undertaken by Waka Kotahi NZ Transport agency to investigate the need for wider roading upgrades and the outcomes of this business case may inform the precinct design. It is noted that vehicle loading/discharge operations are influenced by the capacity of the Queen Charlotte Drive / Dublin Street / Kent Street roundabout and if upgrades to this roundabout are proposed by Waka Kotahi, this may influence yard layouts and linkspan overpass configurations, for example, the need for a three-lane bridge to the upper level linkspan
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 23
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
6.2 Public Road Signage Modifications and new signs will be required to provide appropriate direction and route guidance to the ferry precinct for both arriving and departing traffic. This has not been investigated as part of the concept design and is to be considered at preliminary design stage.
6.3 Site levels Site levels for the terminal precinct are driven by rail grading constraints (maximum permissible rail grades, accommodating the design train length within the site, and ensuring the rail alignment ties-in to existing rail levels south of Dublin Street). This results in the new rail yard/rail corridor being around 300mm higher than existing ground level and sections of the rail corridor between Dublin and Wairau being around 1.4m higher than existing.
To the west of the rail yard, the proposed site levels across the proposed vehicle marshalling yard are graded down from the rail yard level to existing ground level. This results in up to 0.5m cut to fill along the western portion of the vehicle marshalling yard to provide for the proposed pavement depth. The cut material (likely a mixture of rail ballast, existing pavement metals and asphalt/chipseal surfacing) can be reused as bulk fill below the new rail yard/vehicle marshalling yard subject to contaminated land considerations.
At the northern end of the site and around the new terminal building, site levels are influenced by seawall levels, terminal building floor level and existing levels of Auckland Street. The new terminal parking areas will be elevated by around 1.5m with the exception of the existing lower car park adjacent to the Edwin Fox, which is expected to stay at current levels.
6.4 Terminal Building Car Parking Car parking and hard landscaping concepts for the terminal building have been developed and provide approximately 280 parking spaces. The car parking/landscaping uses all available space not utilised for rail/railway platform extension or the building footprint and provides for:
• Pedestrian and cycle access and linkages to the town centre and railway station
• Pick-up/drop-off, short term and long term parking
• Rental car parking/storage
• Bus and shuttle parking
• Staff car parking
• Amenity landscaping and access to the waterfront with potential water taxis/recreation berths to be confirmed
6.5 Vehicle Marshalling Yard and Container Transfer Terminal
6.5.1 Vehicle Check-in Facilities The vehicle marshalling yard is accessed from the existing Lagoon Road entrance to the site. The Concept Design provides for three Private Vehicle entry lanes and two commercial vehicle entry lanes leading arriving traffic to check- in kiosks which control entry to the marshalling yard. The Commercial Vehicle entry is configured with a vehicle weighbridge and automated vehicle length measurement equipment. All existing check-in facilities and weighbridges will need to be removed from the site, i.e. – they will not be reused.
A staff welfare building is provided at the entrance area along with a covered canopy over the check-in lanes/barrier arms.
6.5.2 Vehicle Marshalling Yard Vehicle load cases that need to be accommodated are detailed below. For simplicity, it is assumed that these load cases apply to both arrival and departure sailings:
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 24
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
The Concept Design for the vehicle marshalling yard includes for:
• Two lane loading/discharge route linking and widening to three lanes on to the upper level linkspan overpass and traversing around the western perimeter of the site
• Two lane loading/discharge route linking to the lower level linkspan overpass and running adjacent to the container transfer terminal
• Single lane exit onto Lagoon Road
• Approximately 1,800m of private vehicle marshalling on the western side of the yard and split into 14 no. 2.7m wide lanes and 2 no. 3.2m wide lanes (two eastern most lanes). The lanes are configured to provide access to the upper level linkspan. It is expected that the two eastern most lanes (3.2m wide) could be used for marshalling campervans, vehicles with trailers, or commercial vehicle marshalling during peak demand periods.
• Approximately 1,000m of commercial vehicle marshalling on the eastern side of the yard and split into 20 no. 3.2m wide lanes. 25 vehicle drop slots are marked within these lanes to enable flexibility for use with drop trailers (note these drop slots are narrower than the preferred width of 3.7m)
• 20 drop slots measuring 23m long x 3.7 m wide
• An additional 27 drop slots measuring 23m long x 3.7m wide have been marked in the container transfer terminal for use when road-bridging is not occurring (i.e. the majority of the time) and this area provides convenient access to the lower level linkspan bridge for drop trailer operations
Further refinement of the vehicle marshalling yard layout is required to ensure KiwiRail operational requirements, including ship turn-around time and drop trailer operations, are achieved. Traffic simulations of the peak sailings have confirmed that a 60-minute ship turnaround time can be achieved with queuing of discharging vehicles within the marshalling yard (via the eastern discharge route through the yard) and/or concurrent loading/unloading of the upper deck via the three-lane overpass to the upper linkspan. Signage, potentially including overhead gantries and/or electronic signage, will be required within the marshalling yard to direct traffic on and off the ferry and particular attention will be required where multi-directional lanes are utilised on linkspan overbridge structures with concurrent loading/unloading.
6.5.3 Driver Facilities Building(s) Indicative locations for driver welfare facilities are shown on the concept design drawings with separate commercial driver and passenger vehicle facilities.
6.5.4 Container Transfer Terminal The concept design includes for a container transfer terminal to accommodate road-bridging operations which will be required during construction and intermittently if there is an issue effecting rail loading onto the ferries. When not in use for road-bridging, the container terminal will be used for vehicle marshalling.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 25
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
A demountable fence is shown in the concept design to separate the rail yard from the vehicle marshalling areas to prevent unauthorised access when road-bridging is not occurring.
6.6 Pavement Design
6.6.1 Container Transfer Area
6.6.1.1 Description The container transfer area is used for road bridging operations (transferring containers from rail to road trailers for loading onto the ferries and vice versa) during the construction phase and infrequently when rail wagons can’t be transported on the ferries for any reason. This area includes the unloading/loading pad (light yellow hatch in figure below) as well as the section of pavement between the loading pad and the overpass to the lower level linkspan which will be trafficked by road bridging vehicles (Yellow line in the figure below). The proposed container transfer area is positioned over both existing rail yard (ballasted) and existing vehicle marshalling (asphalt surfacing) and is intersected by the Waitohi Culvert structure.
Figure 6-1: Container Transfer Area
6.6.1.2 Heavy equipment Details of the machinery used for road-bridging operations are summarised below.
6.6.1.2.1 HYSTER Model H48.00XM-16CH
Figure 6-2: Front fork lift
Table 6-6-1: HYSTER Model H48.00XM-16CH technical data
Load capacity first Q (kg) 40,000 Load centre first container row, from face of front tyres c1 (mm) 1,400
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 26
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Load distance to centre of front tyres x (mm) 870 Wheelbase y (mm) 5,900 Unladen weight Kg 64,590 Axle loading at load centre with rated load, front Kg 96,990 Axle loading at load centre with rated load, rear Kg 7,600 Axle loading at load centre, unloaded, front Kg 41,629 Axle loading at load centre, unloaded, rear Kg 22,961 Tyres: L=pneumatic, V=solid, SE=pneumatic-shaped solid L Tyre size, front 18.00 - 25 40 PR Tyre size, rear 18.00 - 25 40 PR Number of wheels front (X = driven) 4 Number of wheels rear 2 Contact stress between wheel and pavement under Full load 1.12 MPa
6.6.1.2.2 MAFI T 225 Tug
Figure 6-3: MAFI T 225 Tug
Table 6-6-1: MAFI T 255 Tug technical data
Unladen weight Kg 7,000 Axle loading Full load, front Kg 11,000 Axle loading Full load, Rear Kg 32,000 Axle loading, unloaded, front Kg 6,000 Axle loading, unloaded, Rear Kg 1,000 Tyres: L=pneumatic, V=solid, SE=pneumatic-shaped solid L Tyre size, front 11.00 R 20 Tyre size, rear 11.00 R 20 Number of wheels front (X = driven) 2 Number of wheels rear 4 Contact stress between wheel and pavement under Full load (Front/ (0.81/ 1.18) Rear) Mpa
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 27
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
6.6.1.2.3 Cassette trailer Table 6-6-2: Cassette trailer technical data
Unladen weight Kg 5,000 Rear Axles Group Quad Number of Axel/ Tyres 4/ 16 Tyres: L=pneumatic, V=solid, SE=pneumatic-shaped solid L Tyre size 275/ 70 R 22.5 Maximum allowed Gross Weight when in-move (kg) 40,000 Contact stress between wheel and pavement under Full load Mpa 0.71
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 28
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
6.6.1.2.4 Roll trailer Table 6-3-4: Roll trailer technical data
Unladen weight Kg 4,000 Number of Axel/ Tyres 2/ 8 Tyres: L=pneumatic, V=solid, SE=pneumatic c-shaped solid C Tyre size 22” x 16” X 16” Maximum allowed Gross Weight when in-move (kg) 40,000 Contact stress between wheel and pavement under Full load Mpa 1.05
6.6.1.2.5 Patchell Trailer Table 6-6-4: Patchell trailer technical data
Unladen weight Kg 6,000 Number of Axel/ Tyres Quad – 4/16 Tyres: L=pneumatic, V=solid, SE=pneumatic c-shaped solid L Tyre size 275/70 R 22.5 Maximum allowed Gross Weight when in-move (kg) 50,000 Contact stress between wheel and pavement under Full load Mpa 0.83
6.6.1.3 Geotechnical data & geometric requirements Pavement test pits have been completed and are reported in the Geotechnical Factual Report. The pavement test pit logs have classified the granular pavement material with a thickness ranging between 550 and 650.
Container transfer area
PP02 PP06 PP07 0
100
200
300
400
500 Depth mm Depth 600
700
800
900
1000
Base course Subbase Subgrade
Figure 6-4: Existing pavement classifications based on test pit logs in the vicinity of the proposed container transfer area
Laboratory testing of subgrade and existing pavement materials is currently underway and will inform the future Preliminary Design.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 29
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
6.6.1.4 Expected movements Pavement in this area will be exposed to the stress from lifting or loading the containers from or to the rail wagons and transferring the containers to or from the Ferry on road bridging trailers. The assessed movements for a 25 year design life are detailed below. Total movements in the 25 years design life are 157,200 Laden movements and 78,600 Unladen movements.
Table 6-6-6: Transfer Area Load Repetitions
Allowed Unladen Total Laden Year Expected movements Movement (50%)/ Movement/ year year
Average 100 Containers on and off 1 &2 (during construction) 73,000 36,500 per day and working 365 days / year Average 100 Containers on and off 10 & 20 (assumed 4-week per day and working for only four 5,600 2,800 breakdown event) weeks/ year. 7 days per week (total 28 days)
6.6.1.5 Loads Distributions The assumed distributions of the containers being road-bridged are 80% 20’ containers with maximum allowed load of 20 Tonne/ container, and 20% 40’ containers with maximum allowed load of 40 Tonne/ container. The assumed load distributions for each container size are detailed below: Table 6-6-7: Distribution of load capacity for road-bridging operations
% of the full 40 ‘Container 20 ‘Container capacity/ container % of containers Load (Tonne) % of containers Load (Tonne)
50% 25% 20 10% 10 75% 50% 30 50% 15 100% 25% 40 40% 20
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 30
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
6.6.1.6 Design Loads and Repetitions The design loading and repetitions are summarised below:
Table 6-6-8: Design loads and repetitions used in HIPAVE model
Load (Tonne) Repetitions % of total movements
Unladen 7.86 x 104 33%
10 1.26 x 104 5%
15 6.29 x 104 27%
20 5.82 x 104 25%
30 1.57 x 104 7%
40 7.86 x 103 3%
Table 6-6-9: vehicle movements
Vehicle Combination % of total Vehicle Movements over 25 Year movements Design Life Hyster container handler 100 5,000,000 MAFI Tug + Cassette Trailer 30 1,500,000 MAFI Tug + Roll Trailer 10 500,000 MAFI Tug + Patchell Trailer 60 3,000,000
6.6.1.7 Container Transfer Area Concept Pavement Design HIPAVE software was used to design the pavement for the Container Transfer area. Two pavement options have been considered. The first option is that the finished pavement surface level matches the existing surface pavement level; and the second option is the finished pavement surface level is 500mm (maximum) above the existing surface pavement level.
For the option where the finished level matches existing, the HIPAVE model predicts that the cumulative damage factor (CDF) of the cemented bound subbase, in the container transfer area, is greater than 1. It is expected that this layer will be exposed to fatigue cracking after 12 to 15 years, without damaging the subgrade, and will require maintenance/repairs.
If the new pavement is built over the existing pavement (second option below), the HIPAVE model shows that all pavement layers in the container transfer area have CDF<1, with low risk of early failure or requirement for heavy maintenance.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 31
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
100 mm AC20 PMB
200 mm Cemented modified AP40 (Cement 2%- 3%) (Post cracking)
100 mm AC20 PMB 350 mm cemented bound 200 mm Cemented subbase AP65 (Cement 5%+) modified AP40 (Cement 2%- 3%) (Post cracking)
350 mm cemented bound Existing pavement subbase AP65 (Cement material >= 500 mm 5%+)
CBR>= 5 CBR>= 5 Finished pavement surface matches existing Finished pavement 500mm above existing
Figure 6-5: Pavement layers (Container transfer area)
6.6.2 Vehicle Marshalling Yard
6.6.2.1 Description The vehicle marshalling yard is used for parking vehicles prior to loading on to ferries and is accessed from the existing site entrance off Lagoon Road. Vehicles in this zone include Private Vehicles (cars, campervans, cars with trailers boats etc) and Commercial Vehicles. The Commercial Vehicles are comprised of drive on’s (where the truck is driven onto the ferry) and drop trailers (where the trailer is dropped in the yard and taken onto the ferry using tugs). The proposed vehicle marshalling area is positioned over both existing rail yard (ballasted) and existing vehicle marshalling (asphalt surfacing) areas.
6.6.2.2 Geotechnical data & geometric requirements The design levels across the vehicle marshalling area vary between 0m and 0.5m above existing ground level. Pavement test pits have been completed and are reported in the Geotechnical Factual Report. The pavement test pit logs have classified the granular pavement material with a thickness ranging between 550 mm and 650 mm.
Drop- Off Service & Parking Zone
PP04 PP05 PP09 0
100
200
300
400
500 Depth mm Depth 600
700
800
900
1000
Base course Subbase Subgrade
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 32
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Figure 6-6: Existing pavement classifications based on test pit logs within the proposed vehicle marshalling yard
Laboratory testing of subgrade and existing pavement materials is currently underway and will inform the future Preliminary Design. Material testing was also collected as a part of Contract 345 Pavement Marlborough (NZ) Ltd in September 2018 and has been used to inform the pavement concept. The testing was on the subgrade in the Bullring hardstand, Interislander long term carpark and Waitohi hardstand. The 10th percentile SCALA CBR = 5, has been used for the initial designs.
6.6.2.3 Vehicle Marshalling Yard Concept Pavement Design HIPAVE software was used to design pavement for the Vehicle Marshalling Yard. Two pavement options have been considered. The first option is the finished pavement surface level matches the existing surface pavement level; and the second option is the finished pavement surface level is 500mm (maximum) above the existing surface pavement level.
70 mm AC20 PMB
180 mm Cemented modified AP40 (Cement 2%- 3%) (Post cracking) 70 mm AC20 PMB
200 mm Cemented modified 200 mm cemented bound AP40 (Cement 2%- 3%) (Post subbase AP65 (Cement cracking) 5%+)
250 mm cemented bound subbase AP65 (Cement 5%+) Existing pavement material >= 500 mm
CBR>= 5 CBR>= 5
Finished pavement surface matches existing Finished pavement 500mm above existing
Figure 6-7: Pavement layers (Drop- off Service& parking zone)
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 33
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
6.7 Security and Fencing The concept design has incorporated the following security features: • Perimeter security fence assumed to be 2.0m high galvanized wire mesh fencing as per the existing fencing along Lagoon Road shown below (existing fencing to be retained where unaffected by the works) and entrance gates:
Figure 6-8: Example Perimeter Security Fence
• Demountable fencing positioned between the vehicle marshalling yard and rail CT road to prevent unauthorized access to the rail corridor. This is assumed to be galvanized steel fence panels inserted into permanent concrete ground sockets (similar to Fahey Fence panel shown below but with permanent ground socket for posts):
Figure 6-9: Example Fahey Fence
• CCTV security network (refer Section 9.10)
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 34
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
7 TERMINAL BUILDING GEOTECHNICAL INPUTS
7.1 Design assumptions Key design input parameters for the geotechnical design include
• Design Life: 50 years • Importance Level (IL): IL3 with Low Damage Design (LDD) principals
7.2 Concept Foundations
7.2.1 Concept Foundation A piled foundation concept has been developed in association with Athfield Architects and Dunning Thornton. The current and previous geotechnical site investigations show the proposed site is underlain by 5 m to 6 m of reclamation fill that overlies about 10 m of soft marine silts and liquefiable sands.
The piles are driven concrete filled steel tube piles, similar to those used for the marine structures and will be founded in the dense non-liquefiable alluvial gravels about 14 m to 18 m below the surface of the reclamation and below all layers expected to liquefy in a 1000 year return period earthquake. The piles are designed to support the building gravity dead and live loads. We have assumed that the piles will be installed after settlement of the fill is complete so that there is no downdrag on the piles from fill settlement.
The piles are tied together with foundation beams to distribute loads from the superstructure to the piles and limit uplift beneath the bracing elements of the structure in the design earthquakes and minimise stretch across the floor plate from lateral movement of the seawall. A suspended floor spans between the beams to prevent substantial differential subsidence of the ground floor in earthquakes that cause liquefaction of the soil between the piles. When liquefaction of the site soils is triggered, there could be up to 300 mm subsidence of the ground around the piles and the building. Subsidence of the piles from downdrag as the surrounding soil consolidates after liquefaction is estimated to be less than 50 mm. Service ducts will be designed to tolerate the differential movement between the structure and the surrounding ground. The seawall adjacent to the terminal building is relied upon to limit lateral ground movement to less than 400 mm at the terminal building in a 1000 year return period (ULS) earthquake.
A schedule of the proposed piles is included in Appendix A. 8 LANDSIDE STRUCTURES
8.1 Upper and Lower Linkspan Overpasses
8.1.1 Principals Requirements The draft Principals Requirements for the Linkspan Bridges are as follows: (a) Bridges shall be designed with a minimum of two lanes to the upper deck and two lanes to the lower deck (if a bridge is needed for lower deck access) (b) Lanes shall be minimum 3.2m width and be designed to accommodate heavy vehicle tracking without encroachment into the adjacent lane. NZTA RTS18 Semi-trailer shall be adopted as the design vehicle (c) Vehicle containment in the form of guardrail or rigid concrete barrier shall be installed to both sides of overpass structures minimum TL4 (NCHRP 350) (d) There is no requirement to accommodate pedestrians or cyclists on linkspan overpass structures and therefore building code compliant fall protection for pedestrians or cyclists is not required (e) Maximum gradient for overpass ramps shall be as per the current linkspan bridge (understood to be 1 in 12) (f) Bridges shall be designed in accordance with the NZTA Bridge Manual to Importance Level 4
Subsequent to the issue of the draft requirements PMNZ advised that 3 no. lanes were required for the Upper Linkspan Overpass.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 35
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
8.2 Lower Linkspan Overpass
8.2.1 Description of proposed structure The proposed structure comprises the following: • 136m long, two-lane bridge • Curved vertical and horizontal alignment • Maximum gradient of 1 in 12 (8.3%) • Minimum horizontal radius 80m • 6 no spans of 20m length (2 no. end spans) and 24m length (4 no. central spans) • 10.35m wide deck comprising 9 no. 650mm deep prestressed single hollow core (SHC) beams • SHC beams fully integral with piers • 7.64m clear width between guardrail faces comprising 2 no. 3.32m wide lanes and 0.5m shoulders • TL-4 thrie beam semi-rigid barriers • 5 no. reinforced concrete hammerhead piers on 1.5m diameter columns with 2.4m diameter bored pile foundations • 2 no. reinforced concrete abutments on 3 no. 1.0m diameter bored pile foundations, with MSE embankments • Normal camber built into superstructure for drainage • Approach embankments up to 3.5m high with MSE retaining walls
Refer to the separate Preliminary Structure Design Statement (Concept Design) for further information
8.2.1 Unresolved issues, design interfaces and assumptions Unresolved design issues and interfaces and assumptions are presented below. Table 8-1: Unresolved Design Issues for the Lower Linkspan Bridge
Issue/interface Assumption(s) Limited information on ground 2.4m diameter cylinder piles assumed for pier foundations. Poorer than conditions expected ground conditions may lead to groups of four smaller bored or end driven shell piles with a pile cap being required. Embankments may require ground improvements. Currently assumed not to be required as abutments are piled.
Barrier type Assumed that TL-4 thrie beam with modified blockout is acceptable. Barrier deflection The barrier dynamic deflection requirements of the Bridge Manual have not been met as there is insufficient deck width and it is not possible to widen the deck due to the rail layout. Assumed departure is acceptable. Barrier transitions and terminals Appropriate barrier transitions and terminals are required. Providing a compliant solution may not be possible due to site constraints. Not currently allowed for in the design. Lighting and utilities Assumed that no lighting and utilities need to be accommodated on the structure. Rail impact Departure has been sought to modify rail impact and redundancy provisions. Urban design Assumed there are no urban design requirements. Signage No signage has been allowed for over the structure. Vertical clearance 4.9m clearance for rail envelope provided. Future electrification has not been allowed for. Sea level rise How sea level rise effects on the rail yard and linkspans are addressed may impact on the bridge alignment and design.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 36
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Linkspan design Should the overall length of the linkspan increase, the location of the passenger boarding door in relation to the jetty will change. This will affect the length of the elevated walkway. Early coordination with the linkspan design is required.
8.3 Upper Linkspan Overpass
8.3.1 Description of proposed structure The proposed structure comprises the following: • 211m long, three-lane bridge • Curved vertical and horizontal alignment. • Maximum gradient of 1 in 12 (8.3%) • Minimum horizontal radius 80m • 6 no spans of 28 to 39m length (measured on centreline) as follows:
• 2 no. 33m long span with 13.5m wide deck comprising 7 no. 1525mm deep prestressed super-T beams with in situ concrete deck at landward end • 3 no. 39m long spans with 13.5m wide deck comprising 7 no. 1525mm deep prestressed super-T beams with in situ concrete deck at seaward end • 1 no. 28m long span 16.0m wide deck comprising 2 no. 1950mm deep steel girders with 900mm deep steel transoms and composite concrete deck adjacent linkspan
• Super-T spans fully integral with piers • 10.96m clear width between guardrail faces comprising 3 no. 3.32m wide lanes and 0.5m shoulders • TL-4 thriebeam semi-rigid barriers • 4 no. reinforced concrete hammerhead piers on 2.0m diameter columns with 2.8m diameter bored pile foundations • 1 no. reinforced concrete two-column bent with 2.1m diameter columns and 2.1m diameter bored pile foundations (straddles rail tracks adjacent to lower linkspan). 2.8m diameter annulus around piles • 1 no. reinforced concrete abutment on 4 no. 1.2m diameter bored pile foundations, with MSE embankment • Normal camber built into superstructure for drainage • Approach embankment up to 4.2m high with MSE retaining walls
Refer to the separate Preliminary Structure Design Statement (Concept Design) for further information
8.4 Dublin Street Overbridge
8.4.1 Principals Requirements Where grade separation of Dublin Street is required, the draft Principals Requirements for the overbridge are as follows: (a) Dublin Street not be blocked to traffic during rail operations which could take several hours. (b) The Dublin Street / rail crossing must:
(i) maintain two lanes on Dublin Street; (ii) maintain the intersection with Auckland Street to the east; (iii) have a 3.0m wide footpath on one side of the road and maintain walking routes to all adjacent streets (the requirement for a 3.0m wide footpath is from consultation with Marlborough Roads who are investigating future shared path linkages along Dublin Street) (iv) have a clear span and height that meets KiwiRail geometric standards with a minimum headroom to rail of 4.9m
(c) The overpass shall be designed in accordance with the NZTA Bridge Manual
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 37
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
8.4.2 Description of proposed structure The proposed structure comprises the following: • 120m long, two-lane bridge with raised footpath • Bridge on vertical curve with minimum K value of 4 • Maximum gradient of 1 in 12 (8.3%) • Straight horizontal alignment • 5 no spans with 13.8m wide deck comprising 12 no. 800mm deep SHC beams with in situ concrete deck. Span lengths as follows:
• 1 no. 22m long span over raised rail corridor • 4 no. 24.5m long spans elsewhere
• 13.0m clear width between barrier faces comprising 3.0m wide shared path, 2 no. 3.5m wide lanes and 1.5m shoulders • TL-5 concrete HT rigid barriers • 4 no. reinforced concrete wall piers with 0.9m diameter bored pile foundations:
• 800mm thick walls with 5 no. piles at piers adjacent to rail lines • 600mm thick walls with 3 no. piles at other piers
• SHC beams fully integral withy piers • Reinforced concrete abutments on 3 no. 0.9m diameter bored pile foundations • Normal camber built into superstructure for drainage • Approach embankment up to 5m high with MSE retaining walls Refer to the separate Preliminary Structure Design Statement (Concept Design) for further information.
8.4.3 Unresolved issues, design interfaces and assumptions Unresolved design issues and interfaces and assumptions are presented below. Table 8-2: Unresolved Design Issues for Dublin St Overbridge
Issue Assumed Resolution Potential liquefaction/lateral Ground improvements potentially required. Currently assumed not to be spreading issues and embankment required. loads Provisions for accessible routes Handrails, landings, barriers to prevent cyclists/wheelchairs overrunning onto given 8% longitudinal grade Auckland Street required but not currently allowed for.
Property impacts. Bridge and road changes impact on several properties. Consultation, negotiation and acquisition likely to be required. Flood capacity/effects on the It is assumed that since the concept removes obstruction from the waterway stream and provides much larger opening, that the concept is no worse and likely a significant improvement. Existing services will likely require Determine existing and future services requirements to allow these to be location, protection and relocation accommodated in the design. Services and utilities not currently allowed for. during construction. Piling, pier wall construction and Determine available track closures/train timetable. Assumed this can be installation of precast beams for managed without impacting on bridge design. the spans over the rail line need to be completed between trains or under blockade Lighting requirements over Assumed lighting over structure required but hasn’t yet been allowed for in structure design. Confirm lighting requirements.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 38
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Issue Assumed Resolution Urban design requirements It is assumed that urban design will be required for this structure due to its location and visibility to the public. This has not been allowed for in the design at this stage. Barrier type TL-5 HT-type barriers proposed to allow for shared path use and to provide additional vehicle confinement over rail corridor. Barrier transitions and terminals Appropriate barrier transitions and terminals are required. Providing a compliant solution may not be possible due to site constraints. Not currently allowed for in the design. Signage over structure. Signage has not been allowed for in the design at this stage. Confirm signage requirements. Council facility access Assume access under new bridge. 4.3m vertical clearance provided Alternative span arrangement The final rail alignment is lower than previous, and a longer-span steel girder bridge is possible. This opportunity will continue to be investigated in the next design phase
8.5 Waitohi Culvert modifications
8.5.1 Principals Requirements While there are no requirements for the culvert specifically listed in the draft Principals Requirements document, it is understood the following requirements apply: (d) Design in accordance with W201 and the Bridge Manual (e) Waterway flow area to be maximised (f) Designed to W201 loading in rail yard (g) Designed to HN-HO-72 loading in road traffic areas (h) Designed for MAFI T 225 Tug plus Class 1 trailer unit
8.5.2 Description of proposed structure The existing culvert comprises the following: • 300m long, triple-cell box culvert • Three separate precast U-shaped base units • Prestressed double-T roof units spanning between culvert walls
The proposed culvert modifications (if undertaken as part of this project) generally comprise: • Replace existing roof units with 12.7m long prestressed 650 single hollow core (SHC) beams • Beams fully integral with pile caps immediately behind existing culvert walls • Pile caps supported on driven H-piles • New structure over spans existing U-shaped culvert units • Minimum 600mm fill between top of roof and rail vertical alignment • The existing U-shaped units will be retained, though they do not serve a significant structural purpose and largely act as a channel lining
Refer to the separate Preliminary Structure Design Statement (Concept Design) for further information.
8.5.3 Unresolved issues, design interfaces and assumptions Unresolved design issues and interfaces and assumptions are presented below.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 39
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
Table 8-3: Unresolved Design Issues for Waitohi Culvert
Issue/interface Assumption(s) Hydraulic modelling and design Hydraulic improvement will be maximised; however, capacity will not meet new design standard Preferred option Preferred option not finalised. Condition and construction of Condition and as-built construction details of existing wall to be confirmed existing culvert walls through further site inspection/investigation. Limited remaining life of existing U- Remaining life of existing unit is less than that of new structure. Plan shaped units required to address u-shaped units when they reach end of life. Inlet and outlet tie-ins Design of tie-in needs to be coordinated with other disciplines. Approach settlement Approaches may be subject to settlement. Settlement slabs may be required if this is an issue, though it is noted that KiwiRail’s standard box culvert have similar minimum cover and do not require settlement slabs. Construction sequence Modification will be undertaken in sections to minimise disruption. Needs to be coordinated with overall redevelopment programme. Outlet proximity to Edwin Fox Works at the outlet will need to consider effects on the Edwin Fox Museum. Museum
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 40
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
9 UTILITIES
9.1 Stormwater
9.1.1 Hydraulic and hydrology The primary stormwater piped system will be designed to have capacity to discharge the 10% Annual Exceedance Probability event (AEP) (1 in 10-year event). It is noted that NZS 4404 and MDC amendments require primary stormwater systems be sized for the 20% AEP event. However, Kiwi Rail require their stormwater infrastructure to be designed for the 10% AEP event and this has been adopted for the project site for consistency.
The secondary flood route will be required to take the 1% AEP (1 in 100 year) event. The secondary flood route will continue to run to Lagoon road which acts as the secondary flood route for the entire catchment.
Design rainfall depths have been determined using HIRDS Version 4. A Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) of 6.0 for the period 2081 - 2100 has been adopted. The rainfall intensities for the various return periods and durations are presented in Table 9-1. The Rational Method has been used to determine design flows as per NZS 4404 Section 4.3.5. The catchments are less than 50 ha and therefore this approach is appropriate.
Table 9-1: Rainfall Intensities for RCP 6.0 to year 2081 - 2100
ARI AEP Rainfall Intensities (mm/hr) (years) (%) 10 min 20 min 30 min 60 min 360 min 10 10 74.6 54.4 45.8 34.5 15.7 100 1 121 87.5 73.4 55.0 24.8
Stormwater mains and sump leads will have a minimum diameter of 300 mm. The pipes have been sized assuming a minimum gradient of 0.5%. The stormwater system will be finalised during detailed design when all design site levels and layout are confirmed. Stormwater drains from buildings will be sized in accordance with the building code clause E1/VM1.
9.1.2 General design concept Stormwater runoff will generally be collected via sumps or discharge directly into rain gardens. This allows the stormwater to be treated by a combination of rain gardens and proprietary treatment devices.
Stormwater networks have been designed to avoid crossing railway lines/marshalling yards wherever possible. The Waitohi culvert also provides a boundary for separate stormwater systems. There are five main sub-catchment areas.
• The south end of the CV/PV marshalling yard: Most of the runoff flows overland and into rain gardens. Stormwater lines on the two roads that bound the marshalling yard collect runoff from the remaining area and discharge to proprietary treatment devices. Treated stormwater then discharges into the Kent Street Drain via two outfalls. • The north end CV/PV marshalling area including the two overpass roads: Stormwater from this system is treated by a rain garden and proprietary devices then discharges to the existing DN1220 outfall pipe. The existing outfall will need to be reconstructed to go through the new seawall. • North-west of the new terminal building: The system collects runoff/subsurface drainage from the rail marshalling area north of Waitohi Culvert plus the sealed area immediately west of the new terminal building. Stormwater from this system is treated by a proprietary treatment device and discharges to sea via a new DN450 outfall pipe. • Rail yard south of Waitohi Culvert: Stormwater from the rail yard will be collected via subsurface drainage and trackside channels. These will discharge into cross drains and then into stormwater collection mains on either side of the rail yard. These systems are each treated by proprietary treatment devices and discharge to the Waitohi Culvert via separate outfalls.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 41
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
• New terminal building and surrounding carpark area: This area is treated by rain gardens where-ever possible. The systems discharge via new outfalls into the Waitohi Culvert outlet, through a new sea outfall and via the existing outfall south of the Edwin Fox museum. Two small carpark areas can’t be treated by a rain garden or treatment swale and require proprietary treatment devices
9.1.3 Waitohi Culvert The Waitohi Culvert capacity investigation is being carried out separately for Marlborough District Council. This investigation is outside the scope of this report.
9.1.4 Stormwater treatment The Stormwater runoff will be treated prior to discharge to water bodies. Stormwater treatment devices and systems will be in accordance with TP10 design Guideline Manual, Stormwater treatment devices.
The silt traps of sumps will be at least 300 mm deep to collect sediments and debris prior to entering the collection mains.
The water quality volume (WQV) will be based on approximately 30 mm rainfall depth. This is equivalent to the two year, 24-hour rainfall depth divided by three. The principle of the WQV is to ensure the “first flush” is treated and is in line with best practice. Rain gardens have been currently sized to approximately 3% of the contributing catchment area. The dimensions will be confirmed during detailed design. The raingardens will have an impermeable lining to ensure groundwater from potential contaminated soil cannot enter the treatment system. Stormwater will infiltrate through the rain garden profile and be collected by underdrains. Scruffy domes will act as a weir bypass for runoff volumes greater than the water quality volume.
Proprietary treatment devices will be sized for the treatment design event and in accordance with manufacturer’s requirements. The proprietary devices will include a bypass for flows above the treatment design event.
Stormwater treatment for the sub catchment area around the new terminal building and associated carparks will be achieved with raingardens, or similar low impact design infrastructure. The south end of the CV/PV marshalling area includes a landscape area. Raingardens are proposed in this area. Proprietary treatment devices will be required in addition to the raingardens.
Remaining areas such as roads and rail yard areas have minimal or no landscape areas. As a result, treatment of these areas will be achieved by proprietary stormwater treatment devices
9.2 Potable Water Supply
9.2.1 General Potable water supply mains pressure shall be between 500 kPa and 900 kPa. MDC estimate the pressure at peak demand to be 600 kPa to 900 kPa in the location of the terminal building. Hydrant flow testing will be completed during the detailed design phase to confirm pressure of the MDC water supply system.
Backflow prevention devices shall be designed and constructed in accordance with AS/NZS 2845.
Pipe material shall generally be PVC-U or PE100. Water laterals/ridermains shall use PE80B. Ductile iron, stainless steel with appropriate corrosion protection system such as Denso system may be used in specific cases, for above ground pipework. Corrosion protection shall meet requirements for protection within a marine environment.
Pipe fittings shall comply with relevant AS/NZS standards.
9.2.2 Proposed water supply network Water supply has been designed to supply water to two distinct areas:
(i) The new terminal building (including the new berth), and (j) The two passenger welfare/amenities blocks (including coffee cart and kiosks)
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 42
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
9.2.3 New terminal building The peak water demand for the new terminal building is estimated at 5 L/s. This value is indicative for the purposes of sizing infrastructure and will be refined during the detailed design phase. The 5 L/s flow includes the current demand plus an allowance for future increase in supply demand. The predicted increase in peak day volumes is estimated at 50 to 55 m³ per day by the year 2043. MDC have confirmed the existing water network will be able to meet the estimated increase in peak flow rates and peak day volumes.
Water shall be supplied via a DN200 water main with a tee connection to the existing MDC DN250 main. The new water line will supply the new terminal building and new jetty via underground storage tanks as described in section 9.2.4. The underground storage tanks can be used to provide a buffer for peak demand flows as well as supplying ships with water. The storage tanks can fill up during times of low demand flows. The booster pumps referred to in section 9.2.4 will provide adequate pressure to supply the new terminal building and new jetty.
A water line to bypass the storage tanks may be required to provide water supply to the terminal building and jetty for scenarios where the storage tanks and/or booster pumps are not operational. The requirement or a bypass line with associated valving and pipe fittings will be confirmed during the detailed design phase.
9.2.4 New ship berth water storage tanks Two x 25 m³ underground storage tanks have been provided in the concept design. The purpose is to allow supplying ships with 50 m³ of potable water. The existing Picton water supply network is close to capacity and will not have the capacity to supply 50 m³ of water within a 60-minute turnaround timeframe. However, provision of the storage tanks allows a single ship to be supplied with water if required. The storage tanks can refill over a period. The tanks refill time and therefore minimum possible turnaround time will depend on the capacity of the Picton water supply. The sizing of storage will be finalised during detailed design and may increase if required to provide buffer storage for peak demand flows to the new terminal building. A third tank with a volume of 10 m³ is included in the concept design to provide a buffer for peak demand flows. The requirement of a buffer tank and details will be confirmed during the detailed design.
Booster pumps will be required to provide pressure to supply the ship. The location of the tanks and booster pump system is located upstream of the new terminal building location. This is to allow water to the new terminal building to be routed through the storage tanks, allowing circulation of potable water through the tanks. This will prevent stagnant water sitting in the tanks when they are not used.
Water lines are provided to the #1 wharf and nesting structure for maintenance purposes. In addition, a water service line will be provided to the commercial jetty area.
9.2.5 Passenger welfare and amenity blocks The passenger welfare and amenity blocks including staff kiosks will have a low water demand. The water service laterals supplying these two blocks will be adequately supplied by DN50 pipe network.
This water service / lateral will be connected to the existing DN150 water main along Lagoon Road.
9.3 Fire Water Supply The proposed fire water supply will use the existing DN250 main with potable water draw-off with hydrants at nominal 90 m spacings to provide firefighting flows. Pressure sustaining valves on all potable water draw-off exceeding 50mm diameter will be provided to ensure residual pressure for fire flows with hydrants installed inline. Rider mains off the main are not required. NZS4404 will be used as the referenced standard for the infrastructure configuration to determine flow rates and pressure in conjunction with SNZ PAS 4509.
9.3.1 New terminal building The new Terminal building will have a sprinkler system. A dedicated DN150 fire main will be provided for the building sprinkler system. This fire main will be connected to the existing DN250 water main. The Fire Engineer has estimated the sprinkler system will require a pressure of 350 kPa at the valve set. A booster pump is presumed to be required for the sprinkler system. This will be confirmed during the detailed design phase.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 43
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
9.3.1.1 Ship Berths Firefighting options for the ship berths considered include
(a) water canon from tug boat, (b) firefighting off piers via in-line booster pumps from the main system, or (c) intake from sea with water cannons/monitors on the jetty if water main supply is not adequate.
Intake from the is sea more likely based on the expected flow rates, and this has been adopted for the concept design. The intake configuration adopted is a variation to Appendix B of SNZ PAS 4509.
New Zealand has no national standards governing fire protection in port areas. Therefore, Australian standards AS 3846 (The handling & transport of dangerous cargoes in port areas) and AS 2941 (Fixed fire protection installations – pump set systems) is proposed for the detailed design of these systems.
The water cannon monitors are to be positioned to maximise coverage for firefighting. Figure 9-1 shows an example of a water cannon monitor.
Figure 9-1 - Water cannon monitor example: 940 Stang 4" manual station monitor
9.3.2 Rail Yard The rail yard can be serviced from existing council water mains with adequately spaced hydrants. This system will be confirmed during the detailed design phase. If the existing network is not adequate a dedicated fire main will be provided.
9.3.3 Required Fire Fighting Flows The requirement for firewater flows for ships will be two firefighting monitors (water cannons) operating at 700kPa with a minimum flow rate of 2250L/min each. Draw off for the pier/terminal mounted monitors will likely be from the ocean via a dual booster pump set.
Hydrants fed off the water mains will cater for the various port buildings, shunting yards and other yard areas in addition to any sprinkler system demand. Indicative flow rate demand to be catered for will be 3,900L/min if there are any high hazard areas, otherwise 2,700L/min is required. Pier/terminal firefighting monitors are fed off the sea, thus there is no impact on the town’s main infrastructure.
Use of the proposed water storage tanks for firefighting will be considered during detailed design. However, the proposed water storage tanks cannot be guaranteed to provide additional firefighting capacity as they may have been recently used to provide water to a berthed ship.
9.4 Wastewater The wastewater supply has been designed to convey wastewater from two distinct areas:
(a) The new terminal building (including the new berth), and (b) The two passenger welfare/amenities blocks (including coffee cart and kiosks)
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 44
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
9.4.1 The new terminal building The peak wastewater discharge for the new terminal building is estimated at 20 L/s. The proposed wastewater system will be DN150 PVC-U gravity pipe laid at a minimum gradient of 1 in 100. This system will pick up the terminal building sanitary wastewater drainage and connect into the head of the existing (redundant) terminal building wastewater drainage system. This will be a simple gravity system with manholes located at horizontal 90-degree bends. From here, the existing gravity wastewater system drains to the existing wastewater pump station on Lagoon Road. This pump station pumps wastewater into a DN100 pressure main that runs south along Lagoon Road.
9.4.2 Passenger welfare and amenity blocks The expected discharge flow rates from the welfare and amenity blocks will be low. Due to the relatively flat gradient of the proposed ground level, minimum wastewater lateral gradients of 1 in 80 would result in excessively deep wastewater lines. The proposed wastewater system includes small pump stations to pump the wastewater into the Marlborough District Council DN100 wastewater pressure line along Lagoon Road. The hydraulic design of this proposed system will be completed during the detailed design phase. The proposed wastewater alignment runs south to avoid crossing railway lines.
The proposed pressure lines have been sized initially as DN80 PE80B wastewater lines. Non-return/check valves will be installed on these lines.
If the existing DN100 pressure main along Lagoon Road does not have the capacity to receive additional flow, then the proposed system could be designed to discharge into the existing gravity main on the other side of Lagoon Road. Refer to Figure 9-2 indicating the proposed line and alternative existing gravity main.
Figure 9-2: Wastewater connections for Vehicle Marshalling Yard
The pipework within the small pump stations will be stainless steel or another appropriate material and coating system within the marine/coastal environment. The pumps shall operate via float switches and have alarm systems that report to a control system via telemetry. The receiver and location of the warning alarm system will be confirmed
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 45
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
during the design phase. Requirements of emergency storage and/or back-up power generators will also be confirmed at design stage
9.5 Maintenance Considerations
9.5.1 Stormwater Stormwater sumps shall be inspected and cleaned out at regular intervals. This includes removing sediments and silts from the silt trap and removal of debris and rubbish from the grates.
Where grass treatment swales are used, the swale profile shall be designed to allow the design grass length and condition for treatment and conveyance to be maintained with standard mowing equipment used for network maintenance.
Swales shall be of a suitable grade and level and/or have underdrains installed to allow mowing all year round and to prevent grass die off or other nuisance due to standing water.
Stormwater treatment devices require regular maintenance. A frequency of inspections every 6 months is recommended to maintain and allow replacement of cartridges/filters as necessary to ensure the device is treating the Stormwater runoff to meet required quality standards. There are seven devices envisaged in the concept design.
9.5.2 Wastewater The small pump stations require regular maintenance and inspections. This should be carried out every six months. Inspections should include inspecting the impeller, checking the alarm system works and testing the pump float and manual operation.
Backup generator/power supply should be operated every six months to ensure the generator can run the pumps.
9.5.3 Water Backflow prevention devices should be tested in accordance with AS/NZS 2845. Hydrants should be tested at the regular intervals. This should occur with the same frequency as the Council water supply hydrant testing.
The booster pump system for the berth storage tank system should be run at 6 month intervals to ensure pump operation.
9.5.4 Fire water The ship berth firewater protection system completed with water cannons should be tested in accordance with the requirements of AS 2941.
9.6 Electrical
9.6.1 Power supply - Waterfront
9.6.1.1 Existing service The existing power supply to the waterfront area of the precinct is via a single incoming spur feed from the Marlborough Lines Ltd (MLL) network. The demarcation with the PMNZ network occurs at a single substation located on the waterfront, immediately west of the primary berth. The substation incorporates 1MVA of transformer capacity and primary metering and distribution facilities for PMNZ, KiwiRail and other minor consumers. This location of this substation is directly in conflict with the proposed rail line extension on to the Replacement Short Arm. Therefore, regardless of the functional requirements for the proposed development, a replacement relocated primary substation and high voltage service connection will be required.
9.6.1.2 New service In order to accommodate a prospective load of up to 10MVA for shore power connection to hybrid vessels, a substantial upgrade of the existing MLL service connection is required. The favoured option is to provide a new dedicated 33kV underground feeder from the Picton zone substation to the waterfront substation.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 46
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
This option offers a higher level of integrity than the alternatives involving the 11kV aerial network. It would also be possible to operate the feeder at 11kV, for a capacity of up to 7.5MVA, with the inherent capability of upgrade to 33kV in the long term. That would minimise the necessary works at the zone substation, although a subsequent upgrade to 33kV distribution, would have transition and equipment replacement implications.
9.6.1.3 Substation The new substation location will need to be closely coordinated with both existing and replacement structures, facilities, and operations. Similarly, the transition staging of the substation replacement will be critical, and it is anticipated that for a period of time, the existing and replacement facilities will need to be concurrently operational. The voltage of the necessary shore power distribution has yet to be determined, and therefore the provisional capacity of the new substation is 11.50 MVA, comprising of 2 x 5MVA 33kV/11kV transformers for shore power to hybrid vessels, and 2 x 750kVA 33kV/11kV transformers for general distribution within the waterfront area, comparable to that existing. The substation will incorporate the following features;
• Building structure with high degree of security and structural integrity, to enclose all associated facilities. • Dedicated MLL spaces for HV switchgear and transformers • Main switchboard room for LV (400V) distribution to PMNZ, KiwiRail, and other consumers
9.6.1.4 Standby Generation A diesel powered standby generator shall be provided for back-up LV (400V) distribution. Automated load management shall be employed to optimise and prioritise capacity utilisation. The generator shall incorporate the following features; • Enclosed within a dedicated building structure for security and for management of the marine environment. • Self-contained generator set with acoustic control • Adjacent dedicated bulk fuel storage facility
9.6.2 Power supply – Inland The existing power supply substation and main distribution, which serves the KiwiRail workshop and surrounding area, will be displaced by the proposed CV/PV management area. The proposed replacement and relocated facility will incorporate the following features;
• Package MLL unit substation with integrated transformer. Provisional capacity = 500kVA • Main switchboard room with distribution facilities to serve the area indicated on the proposed power distribution site plan. • Self-contained diesel powered standby generator set within a weatherproof and acoustically controlled enclosure. Provisional capacity = 500kVA to provide full load back-up. • Bulk fuel supply from new fuel distribution compound
9.6.3 Earthing & Bonding Earthing & Bonding shall be provided in accordance with AS / NZS 3000:2018 requirements.
9.7 Exterior Lighting Exterior lighting shall be provided throughout the precinct, including the differing requirements of the following areas. The associated zones of common functionality are defined on the area lighting site plan.;
• railway operations, • passenger vehicle and commercial vehicle access and management, • walk-on ferry passengers, • building exteriors • wharves and marine waterfront operational areas (i.e. including linkspans);
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 47
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
• car parking and general pedestrian access. • external roadway interfaces
The applicable design standards are as follows;
• KR standard E-ST-EL-0131 – Rail Yard Lighting, and the associated European CENELEC standard EN 12464-2 – Outdoor work places • Port Designers Handbook guidelines • AS/NZS 1680.5 – Outdoor workplace lighting • AS/NZS 1158.3.1 – Lighting for roads and public spaces – pedestrian area lighting • AS/NZS 4282 – Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting • Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) requirements
The exterior lighting shall;
a. have pole locations coordinated with the site layout to avoid impact from vehicles or plant, or effect operations. In locations where this requirement cannot be satisfied the pole installations must minimise the risk of impact, or operational effect, and have highly visible physical protection from damage and from causing damage to vehicles and plant;
b. utilise LED luminaires, with a maximum colour temperature of 4000oK colour temperature. Consideration shall also be given to the prospective environmental benefit from the use of 3000o K, in terms of reduced sky glow contribution and reduced ecological impact;
c. be designed in accordance with AS/NZS 4282 for the minimization of obtrusive effects and light pollution;
d. have congruous integration with surrounding area lighting;
e. not interfere with maritime navigation lights;
f. incorporate intelligent controls for lighting level variation to suit conditions and functional requirements;
g. include an integrated remote operation and monitoring system.
h. be networked to enable the lighting levels to be monitored and controlled remotely;
i. include capability for the addition of lighting poles, luminaires, and/or future technology upgrading where possible
j. be provided with back-up/ emergency power supply for all areas where such provision is available.
9.7.1 Existing Lighting Poles It is anticipated that some existing lighting poles will be suitable for reuse, as indicated on the area lighting site plan. Those poles are either in peripheral locations or in locations which are provisionally compatible with the proposed development. In such cases the associated luminaires shall be replaced and functionally integrated with the new lighting design for the area.
9.7.2 Maintenance Access The proposed maintenance concept for all area lighting is via crane of bucket truck access. Tilting poles could be considered as an alternative for the high mast floodlighting installations where heavy vehicle access is particularly constrained. However, the low maintenance requirement for LED luminaires is such that necessary access would be rare, and unlikely to justify the cost and complexity of special pole provisions.
9.8 Shore Power Shore power shall be provided for the Rail Berth, with capacity to serve hybrid powered vessels.
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 48
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
The shore power facility shall incorporate the following features;
a. Capacity of up to 10MVA via 2 x 5MVA parallel connections
b. Provisional voltage = 11kV
c. Fixed location flexible cables with plug connections configured to suit the inlet provisions on the vessels. Control available from the vessel.
d. Cable support and management system on the jetty.
e. Integrated cable access provisions within the jetty structure.
Notes
The back-feed provision originally included in briefing requirements has been eliminated because of an absence of support from Marlborough Lines.
9.9 Telecommunications and SCADA
Telecommunications will be provisioned across the site with the concept design incorporating the following:
i. The existing chorus fibre network shall be extended to the new buildings and facilities including; the terminal building, tug, CV and PV facilities, weigh bridge and vehicle check in point, fuel depo, turn table, substation(s) and pump station(s). Alternatively, a new network fibre connection will be provided to the terminal building which will house a communication network server and a private fibre network loop will be run from there to pick up the various communications nodes as listed above.
ii. Wifi coverage will be provided to selected locations.
A SCADA (Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition) system will be provided with a central control / monitoring room within the Terminal Building. The SCADA system will monitor various systems and associated alarms, monitoring points and control points across the 4 main areas within the Picton Terminal; being; the Check In, Marshalling and Container Terminal Area, the Rail area, the marine area and the Terminal Building and Environs as follows;
i. Check In, Marshalling and Container Terminal Area;
a. Substation Power
b. Site access at the perimeter
c. Vehicle tracking and license plate recognition
ii. Rail Area;
a. Turntable
b. Mechanical Depot (Workshop) operations
c. Fuel Depo safety alarms and faults
d. Stabling activities
iii. Marine Area;
a. Link span hydraulic systems including backup system
b. Link span power and backup power
c. Mooring system
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 49
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
d. Passenger walkway power
e. Passenger walkway climate control
f. Shore power load and energy monitoring
g. Water supply system monitoring
h. Drainage system monitoring and control including any pumping facilities
i. Access control points of entry
j. Bunkering metrics
k. Weather and sea metrics
iv. Terminal Building;
a. Monitored building services as provided by others
9.10 CCTV
A CCTV network will be provided across the site. The CCTV network will: a. have CCTV poles positioned in locations where they cannot be hit by vehicles or plant or effect operations
b. meet all ISPS CCTV requirements
c. positively identify all people and vehicles entering the site
d. monitor all site entrances and exits
e. monitor vehicle check in and marshalling
f. monitor train arrival, shunting and departure
g. monitor Container Terminal operations
h. monitor ship berthing, mooring and departure
i. monitor ship loading and unloading
j. monitor restricted areas
k. monitor check in areas and counters in the Terminal Building
l. monitor all entrances and exists in the Terminal Building
m. monitor the passenger walkway and seabridge
n. function at night and in low light conditions
o. enable remote access to the system
p. have built in redundancy and be futureproofed to allow for the addition of CCTV poles and or cameras and/or upgrading to possible future technologies; and include back-up/ emergency power and CCTV coverage
q. meet Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) requirements
A CCTV control room is envisioned within the Terminal Building with multiple monitors for viewing and options for playback of recorded footage and or events.:
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 50
Report Number: 5MB97C-WSP-01-XX-RP-Z-0002 Picton Ferry Precinct Development Concept Design Report – Second DRAFT
10 Safety in Design
Safety in design (SiD) has been considered throughout the concept design process. This has included a SiD workshop, and the development of a SiD register.
The current safety by design records are shown in Appendix B.
11 Construction Methodology
A Construction Methodology Report has been prepared by WSP which outlines the expected construction processes for the project. The purpose of the report is to provide information to Quantity Surveyors for costing, and to Environmental Planners for input into the assessment of environmental effects from construction.
12 Conclusion
This report summarises the design assumptions and standards adopted for the Concept Design of the proposed Waitohi Picton Ferry Precinct Redevelopment. This report should be read in conjunction with the following supplementary information:
• Concept Design Drawings
• Geotechnical reports
• Construction Methodology Report
©WSP New Zealand Limited 2019 51
Appendix A Proposed Pile Schedule
.
PORT MARLBOROUGH NZ LTD 29th May 2020 Picton Ferry Precinct Development - Indicative Pile Schedule
Location Description No. Piles Diameter (mm UNO) Length Type Productivity Comments New #1 Longarm Wharf Wharf Piles 142 760 25-30m close ended steel pile rc filled 1 pile per day top driven. Alternative is 914mm diameter tubes driven open ended, cleaned out and concrete filled End Dolphin Piles 4 1050 32m open ended steel pile, rc filled 1 pile per 2 days top driven / bored Nesting Dolphin / Outer and Inner 16 3000 24m open ended steel pile rc filled 1 pile per 4 days bored. Linkspan Supports Alternative is 4No sheet piled cellular shaft to linkspans with 6.5m diameter RC column, plus western nesting dolphin foundation system.
Dolphin access bridge structure 4 760 25m close ended steel pile rc filled 1 pile per day support piles top driven Secondary Linkspan Pontoon Fender Piles 2 1.2m 24m rc pile with permanent steel casing 1 pile per 2 days bored
Pontoon restraint Piers 3 760 24m close ended steel pile rc filled 1 pile per day top driven. Alternative is 914mm diameter tubes driven open ended, cleaned out and concrete filled Commercial jetty (TBC by Piles 610 28 close ended steel pile rc filled 1 pile per day top driven Shearwater)
TBC by Shearwater Temporary tug jetty Piles 8 760 28 open ended. Not cleaned out. Not filled 2 piles per day top driven
Seawall King Piles 120 610 24m close ended steel pile rc filled 2 piles per day top driven Sheetpile Facing 228 TBC 12m 156m (plan length) 4 sheets per day vibro driven Tie-back Piles 114 450 shaft 900screw 12m bored screw pile 2 piles per day screw bored
Overpass to Upper Linkspan Single pile piers 4 2.8m dia 30m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 per week Steel casings top vibrated/driven, some piles steel casing, possible 6 m long rock sockets (34 m will definitely have rock sockets in the bottom long piles if rock encountered, rock socket from at the seaward. Further work is needed to 28 m) determine how far south the rock goes. May use downhole rock hammer to excavate
Twin pile piers 2 2.1m dia 30m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 2 per week Steel casings top vibrated/driven, likely to have steel casing rock sockets in the bottom. Allow for 2 diameter length of rock socket. May use downhole rock hammer to excavate Twin pile piers - oversize casing 2 2.8m dia 10m Permanent steel casing - no concrete fill in 1 per day Steel casings top vibrated/driven (provisional around piles annulus between oversize casing and pile only) Abutment piles 4 1.2m dia 20m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 per day Steel casings top vibrated/driven steel casing, possible driven plug (bottom driven)
Overpass to Lower Linkspan Single pile piers 5 2.4m dia 30m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 per week Steel casings top vibrated/driven, possible rock steel casing, possible 6 m long rock sockets (34 m socket below, some piles will definitely be in long piles if rock encountered, rock socket from rock at southern end. Further work is needed to 28 m) determine how far north the rock goes. May use downhole rock hammer to excavate rock
Abutment piles 6 1.0m dia 20m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 per day Steel casings top vibrated/driven steel casing, possible driven plug (bottom driven)
Dublin Street Overpass Wall pier piles (western side) 6 0.9m dia 9m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 to 2 per day Steel casings top vibrated/driven steel casing, possible driven plug (bottom driven)
Wall pier piles (eastern side) 10 0.9 m dia 18m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 per day Steel casings top vibrated/driven steel casing, possible driven plug (bottom driven)
Abutment piles (eastern end) 3 0.9 m dia 18m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 day Steel casings top vibrated/driven steel casing, possible driven plug (bottom driven)
Abutment piles (western side) 3 0.9m dia 9m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 to 2 per day Steel casings top vibrated/driven steel casing, possible driven plug (bottom driven)
Passenger walkway Tower foundation piles (2 no. 8 0.6m dia 20m Reinforced concrete bored pile with permanent 1 per day Steel casings top vibrated/driven landside towers only) steel casing, possible driven plug (bottom driven)
Waitohi Culvert Abutment piles 300 approx. 0.5m dia 20 m Top driven 310UC158 H-piles with 450x450 end 1 to 2 per day Top driven (0.45x0.45m end plate) plate
Terminal Building Type 1 Option 1 18 900 20 Reinforced concrete bored pile with temporary 2 days per pile Refer attached Sketch from Dunning Thornton steel casing Type 2 Option 1 24 750 20 Reinforced concrete bored pile with temporary 2 days per pile steel casing Terminal Building Type 1 Option 2 18 750 15 Steel Tube Base Driven Reinforced Concrete filled 2- 3 per day? after driving Type 2 Option 2 24 600 15 Steel Tube Base Driven Reinforced Concrete filled 3-4 per day? after driving
Notes: 1. Pile details indicated above are based on limited geotechnical information and concept design layouts only 2. Design loads and details for the linkspan supports are in development 3. On basis of no new short-arm and concept drawing for berth nesting/linkspan support dolphin 4. Ground model is currently under development following priority B investigations, pile founding conditions for overpasses will be at least partially rock socketed. Information on which piles and rock strengths currently unavailable.
Appendix B Safety by Design Records
.
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record
Risk Ranking Matrix - Lookup Table Consequence - Lookup Table Probability / Likelihood Consequence / Almost Likely Moderate Unlikely Rare Consequence Health & Safety Severity Certain
Death, multiple major 5 Critical Critical High High Medium 5 injuries, or significant irreversible disability
Major injury or worker 4 Critical High High Medium Low 4 injury resulting in three days away from work
Injuries resulting in one 3 High High Medium Low Low 3 day away from work, restricted work, or
Medical treatment 2 High Medium Low Low Low 2 beyond first aid
First aid, or an event 1 Medium Low Low Low Low 1 with negligible safety impact
Hierarchy of Controls Probability / Likelihood - Lookup Table
Almost Control Reference Description Likely Moderate Unlikely Rare Certain
Almost certain Likely to happen at Eliminate E Remove the hazard or risk entirely Possible, it might happen Not likely to happen Practically impossible to happen some point
Minimise by substituting (wholly or partially) the hazard causing the risk, Substitute S with something else that gives rise to a lesser risk. Minimise by isolating the hazard to Isolate I prevent any person coming into contact with it. Minimise by establishing engineering Engineering Controls EC controls. If risk remains it must be minimised, so far as is reasonably practicable, by Administration Controls AC also implementing administration controls. If a risk remains, further minimise the risk through the provision and use of PPE P suitable personal protective equipment IF THE CONTROL MEASURE ELIMINATES THE HAZARD OR RISK, THEN THE HAZARD OR RISK SHOULD NO LONGER BE PRESENT.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 1 of 1
PFPD- Health and Safety by Design Record Wharf
This document records the Health and Safety hazards that could give rise to reasonably foreseeable risks to the health & safety of those interacting with the design option, or any part of it, as a work place during its lifecycle. Limitation on Safety in Design Information provided: Only H&S hazards and risks which will or may result from the design have been identified and recorded. The hazards recorded are those that were identified at the date and associated with stage of the design. Project information Project Name Picton Ferry Precinct Development Project Number 5-MB97C.01 / 00102 Date 01/11/2019
Client PMNZ Project Stage Concept Phase Brief description of design option, Demolition of existing wharf and construction of new wharf Structures. Prepared by Wayne Stewart including its intended use
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each sheet # Maintenance less serious? How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design?
Demolition/construction Risk of falling from a height into water Provide temporary access or staging to enable access High Contractor
Risk from diving when inspection work must be undertaken under Ensure team members are qualified and trained, and Demolition/construction High Contractor water. equipment certified.
Risk from diving when construction work must be undertaken Ensure team members are qualified and trained, and Demolition/construction High Contractor under water. equipment certified.
Demolition/construction Risk to recreational divers during construction. Create and maintain a construction exclusion zone. High PMNZ Ltd and Contractor
Separate construction areas from areas where the public Risk that objects fall from height injuring construction workers, have access. Demolition/construction operations personnel and the public, including when machinery Provide temporary staging to protect construction workers High Contractor (crane) is used to lift objects at height. along key desire lines. Consider staging Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Separate construction areas from rail operations areas and Demolition/construction and other vehicles including those driven by construction workers High Design Consultant and Contractor where the public have access. rail operators and the public.
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Separate construction areas from rail operations areas and Demolition/construction and active modes (pedestrians) including construction workers, rail High Design Consultant and Contractor where the public have access. operations personnel and the public. Undertake PSI and DSI before dredging and develop safety plan for those working with or coming into contact with Risk from contact with contaminated soil exposed during Demolition/construction contaminated soils Low PMNZ Ltd and Contractor excavations (dredging) within seabed or reclaimed land. Develop a safety plan for workers coming into contact with contaminated soil.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 1 of 5
PFPD- Health and Safety by Design Record Wharf
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Separate construction areas from areas where the public have access. Provide temporary staging to protect construction workers Risk of injury when transporting construction materials to site. Given along key desire lines. Consider staging. Demolition/construction need to maintain port operations, staging sites for material storage High Contractor Minimise number and distance to staging site(s). and pile fabrication is likely to be off site. Provide safe access to site, including right of way that prevents access by other vehicles and vulnerable users. Consider both marine and road access.
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vessels used for Demolition/construction construction (including dredging) and commercial vessels and Temporary lighting to work area to ensure safe navigation Medium PMNZ Ltd and Contractor private vessels.
Risk of injury resulting from collision between vessels and the new Demolition/construction Temporary lighting to work area to ensure safe navigation Medium PMNZ Ltd and Contractor wharf which will extend beyond existing jetty.
Develop construction methods that minimise time working Risk of injury and drowning of construction workers due to varying Demolition/construction near sea. High Design Consultant and Contractor sea states, including waves caused by storm events and tsunami Construction management plan Undertake careful pre-planning of demolition works and Risk of injury resulting from premature or unexpected collapse of undertake detailed investigations of existing structure. Demolition/construction High Contractor existing structure during demolition. Add monitoring equipment to confirm that the structure performs as anticipated during demolition process.
Careful planning of construction phases, barriers and Demolition/construction Risk of the public being injured during construction. High Design Consultant and Contractor provision of alternative safe routes for the public.
Consider alternatives to pile driving. Demolition/construction Risk of hearing loss as a result of construction noise during piling. Contractor to comply with resource consent, including hours Low Design Consultant and Contractor of work.
Consider programme, staging, restrict need to use night shift Demolition/construction Risk of injury as a result of fatigue Low PMNZ Ltd, Design Consultant and Contractor and extended hours of work
Risk of injury as a result of vessels striking construction works and Add temporary navigation lighting during construction. Demolition/construction underwater hazards related to construction, including newly driven High PMNZ Ltd and Contractor Temporary modification to harbour operations. piles
Risk of injury as a result a vessel striking construction works and Consider incorporating temporary works into permanent Demolition/construction underwater hazards due to frequent (temporary) changes to vessels solution to minimise the number of changes that operators High PMNZ Ltd and Contractor operations must accommodate.
Consider standardised modular design elements minimise Risk of injury due to construction workers being unfamiliar with Demolition/construction the number of construction methodologies that High Design Consultant and Contractor bespoke design elements and bespoke construction methods. construction workers must become familiar with.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 2 of 5
PFPD- Health and Safety by Design Record Wharf
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design?
Risk of injury as a result of demolition of post tension concrete Investigate existing construction methods and plan safe Demolition/construction High Contractor elements. sequence for demolition
Risk of injury as a result of demolishing construction elements Confirm existing construction materials before demolition Demolition/construction High Contractor containing hazardous materials including asbestos plan is finalised.
Risk of injury for operational personnel and the public using the Demolition/construction back-up birth while construction plant is being used to demolish Consider using marine based plant for demotion. High Contractor the ‘Number One’ jetty.
Risk to injury or falling into water by construction workers when Prepare safe demotion methodology considering needs for Demolition/construction High Contractor demolishing the jetty after the linkspan has been removed. safe access and site restrictions.
Consider a separate/standalone structure to minimise Risk to injury of construction workers needing to work in very close Demolition/construction impact on rail operations or the need for construction work High Design consultant, PMNZ Ltd and Contractor proximity to rail operations when constructing the new short arm. to be undertaken in close proximity to rail operations. Minimise changes of level, Falls due to slippery walking surfaces, particularly when negotiating Operations Include slip resistant surfaces Low Design consultant changes in level. Add handrails. Provide navigation aids, Risk of injury resulting from collision between vessels and the new Update port operations, Operations High PMNZ Ltd Wharf which will extend beyond existing jetty. Undertake sea trials before new vessel and wharf become operational..
Operations Risk of falling for operations personnel while birthing ship Use automatic mooring system High Design consultant & PMNZ Ltd
Risk of falling for operations personnel while serving ship while Use automatic arms to supply services (potable water, foul Operations High Design consultant & PMNZ Ltd birthed water) to vessel when birthed.
Wharf foundations undermined from effects of scour generated by Operations Consider when designing pile embedment length. High Design Consultant ship operations.
Operations Injury to operations personnel and public during seismic events. Design structure for earthquake loading and deformation. Medium Design Consultant
Provide alterative route for vulnerable users, Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles and active Operations Segregate vulnerable users from vehicles by physical barrier High Design Consultant modes (pedestrians/cyclists) on link span or by time during the loading and unloading operation.
Provide barriers for pedestrians. Consider high barrier if Operations Risk of falling when pedestrians and cyclists use link span High Design Consultant cyclists are allowed to cycle over link span.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 3 of 5
PFPD- Health and Safety by Design Record Wharf
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Separate public and passengers from working areas of the Operations Risk of passengers being injured by mooring lines ship and wharf. Medium Design Consultant, PMNZ Ltd and KiwiRail Use automatic mooring systems Provide navigation aids, update port operations, provide Risk of injury resulting from new vessel colliding with new wharf and training Operations Medium Design Consultant, PMNZ Ltd and KiwiRail operators being unfamiliar with both. Undertake sea trials before new vessel and wharf become operational..
Risk of pedestrians and workers being injured by trains using the Operations Provide barriers. and restrict access Medium PMNZ Ltd and KiwiRail new short arm.
Vessel berthing procedures are documented and Risk of injury resulting vessels causing collapse of the wharf or Operations understood by operational personnel to ensure design loads Medium PMNZ Ltd loosing moorings are not exceeded. Use automatic mooring systems that avoid the use of Injury to operations personnel from mooring lines if they were to mooring lines and operational personnel working near the Operations Medium Design Consultant, PMNZ Ltd break. lines. Restrict access, provide safe passage, safe havens or barriers Make provision for future safe access to key elements of the Risk of falling for maintenance personnel when inspecting wharf new structure, including under the jetty. Maintenance elements including structural elements under the wharf, capping High Design Consultant, Enable services to be inspected and maintained from the beams, quick release moorings and fenders. deck level. Make provision for future access into the new structure. Risk of falling for maintenance personnel when undertaking Maintenance Provide space for mobile mechanical access, including Medium Design Consultant, cleaning at a height. cheery picker.. Allow for access for maintenance to be made from the wharf from vehicle or allow access from a vessel. Maintenance Risk of injury from falling when maintaining fenders High Design Consultant, Allow vehicles to access short arm (may require agreement from KiwiRail).
Allow for vehicle access from which maintenance work can Risk of falling when working at heights to maintain pedestrian Maintenance be undertaken by mobile mechanical access, including High Design Consultant, walkway. cheery picker.
Maintenance Rick of injury from vessel striking wharf in poor visibility. Use coloured fender panels. High Design Consultant,
Risk that falling elements injure construction workers, operations Segregate vulnerable users from construction activities Disposal/Demolition personnel and the public, including when. machinery is being used High PMNZ Ltd during lifting operations. for lifting.
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Disposal/Demolition and other vehicles driven by construction workers, rail operations Segregate ongoing operations from construction activities. High PMNZ Ltd personnel and the public.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 4 of 5
PFPD- Health and Safety by Design Record Wharf
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Disposal/Demolition and other active modes (pedestrians) including construction Segregate vulnerable users from construction activities High PMNZ Ltd workers, rail operations personnel and the public.
Disposal/Demolition Working at a height, risk of construction workers falling Design building so that it can be easily disassembled. High PMNZ Ltd
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 5 of 5
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Terminal + Terminal Precinct
This document records the Health and Safety hazards that could give rise to reasonably foreseeable risks to the health & safety of those interacting with the design option, or any part of it, as a work place during its lifecycle. Limitation on Safety in Design Information provided: Only H&S hazards and risks which will or may result from the design have been identified and recorded. The hazards recorded are those that were identified at the date and associated with stage of the design. Project information Project Name Picton Ferry Precinct Development Project Number 5-MB97C.01 / 00102 Date 01/11/2019
Client PMNZ Project Stage Concept Phase Brief description of design option, Demolition of terminal building and construction of the new terminal and terminal precinct Prepared by Wayne Stewart including its intended use
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each sheet # Maintenance less serious? How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Risk that objects fall from height injuring construction workers, Efficient structural systems (less types of structures or Demolition/construction operations personnel and the public, including when machinery is High Design Consultant and Contractor avoiding the complexity of hybrid structures) used to lift objects at height. Grade separation – physical, signage, planning in advance of changes/shifts in phasing. Detailed TMP/staging plan. Restrict construction vehicles access to periods between Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles ferry sailings to avoid conflicts. Demolition/construction and other vehicles including those driven by construction workers High Design Consultant and Contractor Segregate construction vehicles access from vehicles used by rail operators and the public. the public and operations personnel, including barriers. Planning meetings between PMNZ, Kiwirail and contractor to coordinate vehicle movement around construction activities. Design the interface points – potential conflict points will exist. Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Combination of landscape, barriers, traffic claiming to direct Demolition/construction and active modes (pedestrians) including construction workers, rail High Design Consultant and Contractor vulnerable users. operations personnel and the public. Provide separate access route for vulnerable users from construction vehicles and activities, including barriers. Consider alternative roof materials Use of fall nets Provide space for mobile mechanical access, including Demolition/construction Working at a height, risk of construction workers falling High Design Consultant and Contractor elevated working platforms Prefabrication of primary elements – will depend on availability of plant. Minimising time workers are required to work within trenches Demolition/construction Working in trench, risk of being buried from collapse of trench walls High Contractor Use of temporary shoring to support deep or unstable trenches.
Early investigations into cable locations including use of GRP Demolition/construction Underground services, risk of electrocution during excavation High PMNZ Ltd and Contractor and Pot holing.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 1 of 4
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Terminal + Terminal Precinct
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Early investigations including PSI and DSI and development of remediation and mitigation plans (dust suppression, Risk from contact with contaminated soil (including asbestos) consider potential contamination during cartage and Demolition/construction exposed during excavations within reclaimed land or brown field Medium PMNZ Ltd and Contractor dumping., sites. Develop a safety plan for workers coming into contact with contaminated soil. Early investigations into underground servicers locations Damage to a potable water supply network resulting in Demolition/construction including use of GRP and Pot holing. Medium PMNZ Ltd and Contractor contamination risk to the public. Installing temporary backflow preventor during construction. Staging plan for fabrication and demolition. Provide adequate contractor layout site (location and size) that enables safe access for vehicles and loading and unloading of vehicles. Impact risk and fall risk when transporting building elements from Demolition/construction Consider using additional but more remote site for some Medium Design Consultant and Contractor fabrication yard to site vehicle movements. Design site layout that avoid need for reversing. Minimise distance that vehicles have to travel Consider right of way for construction vehicles. Relocate birthing facilities for duration of construction. Risk of injury from conflict between construction vehicles and sea Demolition/construction Limit/restrict use of wharf by member of the public. Medium PMNZ Ltd and Contractor going vessels using wharf. Create marine exclusion zone during construction. Consider alternatives to pile driving. Risk of hearing loss from excessive noise from construction work, Demolition/construction Contractor to comply with resource consent, including hours Low Contractor including piling. of work. Reduce dust using alternative construction methods Create exclusion zone Staging construction to reduce areas subjected to dust Risk of respiratory system diseases from dust and other generation Demolition/construction Low Contractor contaminates. Supress dust, including use of water (spay) Barriers/enclosures that protect public requiring access. Dusk masks Warning and signage for public.
Risk of injury as a result of demolishing construction elements Confirm existing construction materials before demolition Demolition/construction High Contractor containing hazardous materials including asbestos plan is finalised.
Self explaining streets, including clarity over entry and exit and the side of the road that drivers should use. Operations Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles Medium Design Consultant Safety audit of routes to be used by vehicles Adequate signage.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 2 of 4
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Terminal + Terminal Precinct
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Provide separate access route for vulnerable users from vehicles including barriers. Allow vulnerable users to use access routes also used by vehicles, but only during periods when vehicles are Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles and active prevented from using the route. Operations modes (pedestrians/cyclists) at the drop off area and operational Consider grade separating routes used by vulnerable users High Design Consultant areas. from routes used by vehicles. Where grade separation cannot be achieved, design safe at- grade crossing points for pedestrians and other vulnerable users, including setting appropriate posted speed and checking sight distances. Limit gradients Falls due to slippery walking surfaces, particularly when negotiating Specify slip resistant surface materials. Operations Medium Design Consultant changes in level. Design to NZS 4121 (& NZBC) Add handrails Undertake modelling to predict future passenger numbers, including using statistical methods to predict upper bound Risk of injury from overcrowding, in particular overcrowding of stairs, Operations estimates. High Design Consultant lifts, ramps and escalators. Provide adequate flat areas for crowds to gather safely. Consider effects of crowd loading on suspended floors. Locate building on land not over water Use balustrades, barriers and landscape elements at water Operations Risk of injury from falling from height into water edge. High Design Consultant Provide permanent access and barriers to elevated space requiring access during operations. Design baggage and freight areas to reduce need for lifting Risk of injury from lifting or moving heavy or oversized baggage and including use of conveyors automatic /mechanical lifting Operations Medium PMNZ Ltd & Design Consultant freight. systems. Separate areas with easy access for oversized items Provide adequate space for use of mobile mechanical access, including elevated working platforms to access exterior areas. Safe distance from water. Risk of falling for maintenance personnel when undertaking exterior Use balustrades and barrier elements at water edge. Maintenance High PMNZ Ltd & Design Consultant cleaning, including windows. Provide permanent external access and barriers to roof space and other areas that require access for maintenance, including fixed ladders and mechanical facade access systems. Provide parapets and roof anchor points and safety lines. LED light fittings Risk of falling for maintenance personnel when undertaking interior Maintenance Provide permanent internal access to ceiling spaces. High PMNZ Ltd & Design Consultant cleaning at a height. Provide internal access anchor points for use of abseiling
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 3 of 4
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Terminal + Terminal Precinct
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design?
Avoid locating mechanical plant at height. Maintenance Risk of falling when maintain building services plant. High PMNZ Ltd & Design Consultant Provide parapets, barriers and anchor points.
Locate mechanical plant away from public access routes. Separate accessways for mechanical plant access routes used by the public. Maintenance Risk of public being injured during maintenance Medium PMNZ Ltd & Design Consultant Restrict access to plant to times when public access is restricted. Signage Avoid locating plant over access routes used by the public Risk of injury from mechanical plant falling due to excessive Maintenance Consider effects of corrosion of fixings. Medium Design Consultant loadings or corrosion. Provide access to enable regular inspections Locate mechanical plant so that it can be replaced without impacting on terminal operations. Maintenance Risk of injury due to the need to replace mechanical plant. Medium Design Consultant Consider need to close terminal operations during replacement operations. Enclose vertical shafts Maintenance Risk of falling/injury down vertical cores/shafts Barriers High PMNZ Ltd & Design Consultant Web grating Avoid creating confined spaces, including providing space with alternative egress Risk of lack of oxygen, injury from fire and flooding while working in Exclusion zones by providing security that only allows Maintenance Medium PMNZ Ltd & Design Consultant confined spaces, including sumps. authorised access. Maintenance plans, including working in teams Add sump pumps Risk that falling elements injure construction workers, operations Segregate vulnerable users from construction activities Disposal/Demolition personnel and the public, including when. machinery is being used High PMNZ Ltd during lifting operations. for lifting.
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Disposal/Demolition and other vehicles driven by construction workers, rail operations Segregate ongoing operations from construction activities. High PMNZ Ltd personnel and the public.
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Disposal/Demolition and other active modes (pedestrians) including construction Segregate vulnerable users from construction activities. High PMNZ Ltd workers, rail operations personnel and the public.
Disposal/Demolition Working at a height, risk of construction workers falling Design building so that it can be easily disassembled. High PMNZ Ltd
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 4 of 4
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Marshalling Yards
This document records the Health and Safety hazards that could give rise to reasonably foreseeable risks to the health & safety of those interacting with the design option, or any part of it, as a work place during its lifecycle. Limitation on Safety in Design Information provided: Only H&S hazards and risks which will or may result from the design have been identified and recorded. The hazards recorded are those that were identified at the date and associated with stage of the design. Project information Project Name Picton Ferry Precinct Development Project Number 5-MB97C.01 / 00102 Date 8/10/2019
Client PMNZ Project Stage Concept Phase Brief description of design option, Reconstructing the marshalling yards Prepared by Wayne Stewart including its intended use
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each sheet # Maintenance less serious? How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Undertake investigation during investigation and design phase, including GRP and pot holing as required . Demolition/construction Underground services, risk of electrocution during excavation High PMNZ Ltd Design to consider temporary re-location of electrical supply cables and substation during demolition and construction
Undertake contaminated land investigations early in project Risk from contact with contaminated soil exposed during Demolition/construction Develop a safety plan for workers coming into contact with Medium PMNZ Ltd excavations within reclaimed land or brown field sites. contaminated soil. Design to consider construction staging and potential Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles construction access routes/entry locations. Design Consultant and Contractor with PMNZ Demolition/construction and other vehicles including those driven by construction workers Medium May need to consider temporary re-location where vehicles Ltd rail operators and the public. using the port enter and access the facilities Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Permanent or temporary segregation of construction work Design Consultant and Contractor with PMNZ Demolition/construction and active modes (pedestrians) including construction workers, rail High area from pedestrian routes. Ltd operations personnel and the public. Early investigation of underground services, including using GPR and potholing to identify underground services in Damage to a potable water supply network resulting in critical locations. Demolition/construction Low PMNZ Ltd contamination risk to the public. Consider temporary re-location of utilities during demolition and construction Backflow prevention devices
Risk of falling from height into water when working adjacent to Demolition/construction Installation of safety barriers. Low Contractor to manage Waitohi Stream and Culvert
Consider how noise effects can be managed when Risk to health from excessive and prolonged levels of noise and considered temporary terminal building layout/location Demolition/construction vibration – particular effects on staff working at terminal through Low Contractor to manage Ensure a robust noise and vibration management plan is construction phase. specified
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 1 of 4
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Marshalling Yards
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Create a separate zone (extent needs to be flexible) for HCV from light vehicles, including fencing or barriers and well- designed signage and wayfinding. With the marshalling yards, risk of injury from conflict between light Provide separate welfare facilities for the public and drivers Operations vehicles, between HCV and light vehicles, and between vehicles and High Design Consultant of HCV so that pedestrians do not need to encroach into the active modes (pedestrians/cyclists) at the drop off area. HCV zone. Consider key desire lines for pedestrians and provide a safe passage that avoids interaction with HCV. When entering the marshalling yards, risk of injury from conflict Design access routes and consider safe merging zone for between light vehicles, between HCV and light vehicles, and different vehicles and vehicles/pedestrians during the Operations High Design Consultant between vehicles and active modes (pedestrians/cyclists) at the loading/unloading phase and during the phases where drop off area. vehicles arrive/depart the marshalling yards Rail operations to be segregated from other activities, including the use of grade separation and barriers. Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles and trains, Dublin Street overpass Operations High Design Consultant including during shunting operations. . Improved level crossing at Broadway/Wairau Road including provision of adequate sight distances and optimised pedestrian crossing routes. Rail operations to be segregated from pedestrians, including Operations Risk of injury resulting from conflict between pedestrians and trains. the use of grade separation and barriers (best practice for High Design Consultant level crossing pedestrian facilities).
Design to follow Kiwirail guidelines for track spacing and Operations Risk of injury resulting from conflict between trains and personnel High Design Consultant clearances to fixed objects
Clearance between tracks and structures. Operations Risk of injury resulting from conflict between trains and structures. Bridge design to consider collision loadings in accordance High Design Consultant with NZTA Bridge Manual and Kiwirail requirements.
Segregate areas for HCV drop trailers from other port users, Operations Risk of injury resulting from reversing HCV including light vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. High Design Consultant Design layout to avoid (minimise) need for reversing. Separate areas set aside for HCV from areas used by other Risk of injury resulting uncontrolled vehicles (runaway vehicles and vehicles, including barriers. Operations High Design Consultant trailers) Limit grades at areas used to drop HCV trailers. Consider humps in pavement for trailer legs.
Separate areas set aside for HCV carrying dangerous goods Operations Risk of injury from unsafe storage and handling of dangerous goods and for the storage of dangerous good, including the use of High Design Consultant barriers. Inadequate welfare facilities – arriving drivers will be fatigued and its Provide accessible facilitates including toilets, area for unreasonable to expect them to wait in vehicles promoting risk of Operations pets/children and separate CV driver facilities High Design Consultant, people seeking to wander across site in search of Provide safe access/passage along desire lines. toilets/refreshments/town centre
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 2 of 4
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Marshalling Yards
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design?
Inadequate facilities for drivers and passengers arriving by vehicle to Provide facilitates where passengers can seek refuge from Operations seek protection of the heat when waiting for long periods. Avoid High Design Consultant the sun. cars running air conditioning for long periods.
Signage and best practice for level crossing pedestrian Operations Risk of injury from people accessing rail corridor at Broadway Medium Design Consultant facilities
Consider height of rail formation in light of flood return Risk of derailment from debris following flooding events of rail Operations periods, including effects of global warming. High Design Consultant, marshalling yards. Consider risk of debris from Waitohi Stream. Provide alternative routes and routes with adequate capacity Risk of injury from not being able to escape in emergency, including to enable area to be cleared in an emergency. Operations High Design Consultant, Kiwirail and PMNZ Ltd flooding, fire and earthquake events. Identify emergency egress routes and mustering points for various events
Risk of injury as a result of vehicle conflicts used in deliveries and Provide alternative entrance and routes to Kiwirail Operations High Design Consultant maintenance activities and gaining access to maintenance depot. maintenance shed/refuelling area etc
Risk of injury to cyclists due to conflict with vehicles while Stage loading and unloading to protect cyclists Operations Med Design Consultant and Kiwirail loading/discharging from Ferry Direct cyclists through the terminal building
Provide dedicated cycleway separated from other vehicles Risk of injury to cyclists due to conflict with vehicles on route through marshalling yard, Operations Med Design Consultant through marshalling yard. Provide alternative cycling route requiring cyclists to walk cycles through the Ferry terminal building Provide for passengers to transfer oversized carry-on items Risk of injury to pedestrians having to carry oversize luggage, such as kayaks through the Ferry terminal building rather Operations Low Design Consultant and Kiwirail including kayaks, onto and off the ferry. than allowing pedestrians to carry items onto and off the Ferry via the route used by vehicles.
Ensure structures are designed to accommodate MAFI wheel Operations MAFI loading exceeds linkspan or overpass axle load capacity Low Design Consultant loads
Where maintenance is required regularly or in high risk areas, provide dedicated areas for use by maintenance vehicles Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles and between Maintenance that are separated from areas used by the public. Medium Design Consultant, PMNZ Ltd. vehicles and active modes (pedestrians/cyclists) at the drop off area In other areas, provide temporary barriers during maintenance activities.
Design to consider temporary re-location of electrical supply Disposal/Demolition Underground services, risk of electrocution during excavation High PMNZ Ltd cables and substation during demolition and construction
Risk from contact with contaminated soil exposed during Undertake contaminated land investigations early in project. Disposal/Demolition Medium PMNZ Ltd excavations within reclaimed land or brown field sites. Develop a management plan for dealing with contaminates.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 3 of 4
PFPD - Health and Safety by Design Record Marshalling Yards
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Design to consider construction staging and potential Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles construction access routes/entry locations. Disposal/Demolition and other vehicles including those driven by construction workers Medium PMNZ Ltd May need to consider temporary re-location where vehicles rail operators and the public. using the port enter and access the facilities
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Disposal/Demolition and active modes (pedestrians) including construction workers, rail Segregating construction work area from pedestrian routes. High PMNZ Ltd operations personnel and the public. Early investigation of underground services, including using GPR and potholing to identify underground services in Damage to a potable water supply network resulting in Disposal/Demolition critical locations. Low PMNZ Ltd contamination risk to the public. May need to consider temporary re-location of utilities during demolition and construction
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 4 of 4
Health and Safety by Design Record Bridge & Culvert Structures
This document records the Health and Safety hazards that could give rise to reasonably foreseeable risks to the health & safety of those interacting with the design option, or any part of it, as a work place during its lifecycle. Limitation on Safety in Design Information provided: Only H&S hazards and risks which will or may result from the design have been identified and recorded. The hazards recorded are those that were identified at the date and associated with stage of the design. Project information Project Name Picton Ferry Precinct Development Project Number 5-MB97C.01 / 00102 Date 01/11/2019
Client PMNZ Project Stage Concept Phase
Brief description of design option, Demolition of existing Bridge Structures and construction of new Bridge Structures, including the upgrade Prepared by Wayne Stewart including its intended use of Culvert.
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each sheet # Maintenance less serious? How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Risk that objects fall from height injuring construction workers, Consider using similar bridge elements including bridge Demolition/construction operations personnel and the public, including when machinery is beams so construction workers can follow (be familiar with) High Design Consultant and Contractor used to lift objects at height. the same construction methodology. Segregate routes used by construction vehicles from port Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles operational vehicles and routes used by public. Demolition/construction and other vehicles including those driven by construction workers High Design Consultant and Contractor Limit access for construction, operations and public to rail operators and the public. separate time periods. Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Segregate construction vehicles from pedestrians and Demolition/construction and active modes (pedestrians) including construction workers, rail cyclists. High Design Consultant and Contractor operations personnel and the public. Limit access for pedestrians and cyclists
Risk of injury to fingers and hands when placing dry pack between Demolition/construction Provide adequate width between hollow core units (if used) High Design Consultant and Contractor bridge beams.
Consider adding barriers to bridge beams before lifting into Demolition/construction Working at a height, risk of construction workers falling High Design Consultant and Contractor place.
Avoid need for trench work. Demolition/construction Working in trench, risk of being buried from collapse of trench walls Limit trench depths High Design Consultant and Contractor Provide temporary support Design to consider temporary re-location of electrical supply Underground services, risk of electrocution during excavation, cables and substation during demolition and construction Demolition/construction High PMNZ Ltd and Contractor including culvert structure Undertake investigation during investigation and design phase, including GRP and pot holing as required .
Risk of noxious fumes, reduced oxygen levels, risk of fire, drowning Provide alternative means of escape Demolition/construction High PMNZ Ltd, Design Consultant and Contractor or asphyxiation from working within culvert Management Plan
Undertake PSI and DSI before dredging and develop safety plan for those working with or coming into contact with Risk from contact with contaminated soil exposed during Demolition/construction contaminated soils Low PMNZ Ltd and Contractor excavations within reclaimed land or brown field sites. Develop a safety plan for workers coming into contact with contaminated soil.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 1 of 5
Health and Safety by Design Record Bridge & Culvert Structures
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design?
Risk to workers being crushed during placement of rock protection Reduce use of rock protection Demolition/construction Medium Contractor works. Management plan
Damage to a potable water supply network resulting in Site investigations including use of GRP and potholing. Demolition/construction Low PMNZ Ltd and Contractor contamination risk to the public. Backflow prevention devices
Undertake investigation during investigation and design Demolition/construction Health risk to workers if sewer is encountered during excavation. Medium PMNZ Ltd phase, including GRP and pot holing as required .
Consider king tides and effects of gates at outlet Demolition/construction Safety risk to workers located in areas subjected to flooding. . High Contractor Management plan
Consider site fabrication Impact risk and fall risk when transporting bridge elements from Limit size of units Demolition/construction Low Contractor fabrication yard to site Minimise distance between construction site and fabrication site. Consider adequate laydown area and work space in staging Risk of injury from reversing HCV when transporting bridge Demolition/construction planning phase. Medium Design Consultant and Contractor elements within site Use additional safety team members as look outs. Lifting lid removes risk of workers within confined spaces. Risk of injury to construction workers due to culvert floating if lid of Demolition/construction Undertake further investigation of culvert design and High PMNZ Ltd culvert has been removed. condition.
Risk of injury to construction worker when demolishing post tension Engineering/construction team to develop safe demolition Demolition/construction Critical PMNZ Ltd and Contractor concrete bridge methodology.
Develop construction methodology including temporary Risk of injury to rail operations team members and construction closure of rail line and or temporary relocation of rail line. Design Consultant and Contractor with PMNZ Demolition/construction workers lifting precast bridge beams and constructing Dublin Street Select materials for bridge beams to enable beams to be High Ltd Bridge deck over a live rail line. installed over live rail with minimal disruption Provide adequate crane access. Consider alternatives to pile driving. Demolition/construction Risk to health of the public from construction noise during piling. Contractor to comply with resource consent, including hours Low Design Consultant and Contractor of work. Provide adequate clearance between rail line and Risk of injury resulting from conflict between rail operations and construction activities. Demolition/construction temporary structure/falsework needed during construction of the Consider effects of curvature of bridge and span of bridge Medium Design Consultant and Contractor Dublin Street bridge. beams. Consider varying span lengths.
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 2 of 5
Health and Safety by Design Record Bridge & Culvert Structures
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design?
Consider alternatives to post-tensioning. Demolition/construction Risk of injury if failure of post-tensioning cables. Medium Design Consultant and Contractor Develop management plan.
Risk of injury as a result of the contractor having inadequate space Consider laydown area and work space in staging planning Demolition/construction Medium Design Consultant and Contractor for yard, laydown area and work space.. phase
Risk of injury to MDC team members needing to inspect and Consider maintaining safe access during staging planning Demolition/construction Medium Design Consultant and Contractor maintain Council’s infrastructure (e.g. pump station) phase
Undertake careful pre-planning of demolition works and Risk of injury resulting from premature or unexpected collapse of undertake detailed investigations of existing structure. Demolition/construction High Contractor existing structure during demolition. Add monitoring equipment to confirm that the structure performs as anticipated during demolition process.
Consider programme, staging, restrict need to use night shift Demolition/construction Risk of injury as a result of fatigue Low PMNZ Ltd, Design Consultant and Contractor and extended hours of work
Provide adequate sight distance and stopping distances on Operations Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles streets and intersections connected with Dublin Street Medium Design Consultant bridge making allowance for steep grades. Provide adequate clearance between rail line and Risk of injury resulting from conflict between rail operations and completed structure. Operations Medium Design Consultant Dublin Street bridge. Consider effects of curvature of bridge and span of bridge beams. Consider use of one-way routes, enhanced visible signage Risk of injury resulting from international drivers having uncertainty (clarifying direction) median separation barriers at the start of Operations over which side of a two-way road to drive on or priority at Medium Design Consultant journeys that assist drivers to enter the correct lane on two- intersections. way routes. Movable barriers, signage, road markings and signals. Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles where Use median separation barriers at the start of journeys that Operations contraflow operations is used to increase loading and unloading assist drivers to enter the correct lane on two-way routes. High Design Consultant time. Use barriers that prevent pedestrian movements crossing contra-flow routes
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles and active Make provision for separate space for pedestrians and Operations High Design Consultant modes (pedestrians/cyclists) cyclists if they are to be allowed on overbridges
Limit gradients Falls due to slippery walking surfaces, particularly when negotiating Operations Specify slip resistant surface materials. Medium Design Consultant changes in level. Design to NZS 4121 (& NZBC)
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 3 of 5
Health and Safety by Design Record Bridge & Culvert Structures
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design? Consider reducing posted speed limit to 10km/hr. Add Safety rail operations team members standing in carriageway additional width and/or refuge for operations team Operations High Design Consultant directing traffic. members where they can retreat in the event of potential collision.
Safety from falling for pedestrians and cyclists using overbridge to Operations Consider height of barriers for cyclists and pedestrians. High Design Consultant ferry
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between vehicles and Provide separate or segregated access for maintenance Maintenance maintenance personnel when undertaking inspections or personnel High PMNZ Ltd maintenance on bridge structures. Maintenance to be undertaken outside of ferry operations Alternative means of escape Risk of noxious fumes, reduced oxygen levels, risk of fire, drowning Management plan Maintenance or asphyxiation from inspecting and maintaining culvert, including Reduce needs for maintenance access within culvert by High Design Consultant & PMNZ Ltd clearing debris. adding grates at the inlet to prevent build-up of debris within culvert.
Risk of falling when inspecting bridge bearings and bridge Maintenance Provide space on ground level for mobile mechanical access Medium Design Consultant & PMNZ Ltd structural condition.
Use materials that do not require painting, such as concrete Maintenance Risk of falling when painting (coating) bridge structural elements or galvanised steel Medium Design Consultant & PMNZ Ltd Provide space on ground level for mobile mechanical access
Provide space on ground level for mobile mechanical access Maintenance Risk of falling when replacing bridge bearings Medium Design Consultant & PMNZ Ltd and cranes
Risk that falling elements injure construction workers, operations Disposal/Demolition personnel and the public, including when. machinery is being used Management plan Medium PMNZ Ltd for lifting.
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Disposal/Demolition and other vehicles driven by construction workers, rail operations Management plan Medium PMNZ Ltd personnel and the public.
Risk of injury resulting from conflict between construction vehicles Disposal/Demolition and other active modes (pedestrians) including construction Management plan Medium PMNZ Ltd workers, rail operations personnel and the public.
Disposal/Demolition Working at a height, risk of construction workers falling Management plan Medium PMNZ Ltd
Disposal/Demolition Working in trench, risk of being buried from collapse of trench walls Management plan Medium PMNZ Ltd
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 4 of 5
Health and Safety by Design Record Bridge & Culvert Structures
How is hazard managed in design? Residual Risk and Additional requirements Project Stage and Element Identified Hazards Eliminated / Minimised The level of risk & Risk Owner after the hazard has been managed Residual Identify Health and Safety hazards that may arise from the design Demolition Risk during the lifecycle of the ‘structure’ and that users need to be Construction Can I eliminate the risk of injury through my design? Critical, High, Medium or Low – for rating see over page recorded aware of to ensure there are no resulting risks to their Health and Operations If not, how can I reduce or control the risk so harm is unlikely or For any hazards that have a residual risk other than ‘Low’, record what additional on drawing Safety. conditions (if any) the users of the structure must be aware of to ensure that each Maintenance less serious? sheet # How could someone be injured during the life of this component? hazard is reduced to ‘Low’, including who is responsible for completing that. Disposal/Demolition Can I influence this hazard through my design?
Disposal/Demolition Underground services, risk of electrocution during excavation Management plan Medium PMNZ Ltd
PF-PR-119(NZ) 07/19 Page 5 of 5
Appendix C Derivation of Design Water Level and Deck Height
.
Memorandum
To Matt Taylor
Copy Paul Westaway
From Alec McWhinnie
Office Christchurch Office
Date 15 October 2019
File 5-MB97C.01 Subject Derivation of Design Water Level & Deck Height
Introduction The purpose of this memo is to outline the rationale behind the recommendation for the design water level (DWL) and subsequent deck height to be used for the new ferry wharf structure for Port Marlborough based on a 100-year design life.
The DWL is built up of seven constituent parts:
Fluctuations due to regular lunar cycles (tides) Wind set-up Barometric surge Sea-level rise Other long-term oscillations such as El Nino etc. Locally generated waves Wave run-up
To these is added the following allowances to arrive at a design deck height:
Clearance to the deck soffit Estimated deck thickness
Design Water level (DWL)
Tidal Component The table below gives the key tidal levels for Picton1:
Highest Astronomical Tidal (HAT) 1.76m2
Mean High Water Spring (MHWS) 1.62m
Mean Sea Level (MSL) 0.87m
Mean Low Water Spring (MLWS) 0.13m
1 LINZ (2019) https://www.linz.govt.nz/sea/tides/tide-predictions/standard-port-tidal-levels 2 Heights relative to Chart Datum Page 1
Typically, when considering the design tidal maximum, the HAT value is used. However, in this case, given the design “horizon” being considered and the uncertainty associated with other significant components, in particular the allowance for future sea-level rise, and the low (annual) frequency of this tidal event, it was decided that the use of MHWS was appropriate to ensure day- to-day functionality. This accepts that the forecastable HAT extrema will occur but will not in itself be destructive. Recommended Design Value 1.62m
Wind Set-up This describes the general elevation of the local water level due to the effect of the wind blowing across the water surface and the shear stresses generated. Typically, this is only significant in shallow water deltaic/estuarine type environments. Because of the bathymetry and the relatively short fetch lengths aligned with the sound, this component is not considered to be significant. Recommended Design Value 0.0m
Barometric Surge This component accounts for the water level elevation rise due to the passage of low pressure weather systems. In its guidance document3 the MfE notes that the most recent modelling included in the ICCP (AR5) document suggests that while the magnitude of large storm events will likely not change, their frequency is likely to increase. This is further reinforced when looking at the outputs from a newly developed online storm surge prediction tool4. As shown in the figures below, based on the RCP 8.5 scenario, the predicted maximum storm surge is of a similar magnitude to that hindcast from actual records.
Figure 1: Hindcast storm surge plot for Picton Figure 2: Forecast storm surge levels (RCP 8.5)
The absolute maximum forecast surge height is 0.44m. Based on the model results applying a design surge value of 0.3m provides a >99% confidence of this height not being exceeded in the forecast horizon. To give this some real-world context, the lowest pressure recorded in NZ was 968hPa in 1868 which represents a barometric surge of 0.45m. Cyclone Bola produce a measured surge of 0.3m.
Recommended Design Value 0.3m
Sea-level Rise (SLR) This component represents both the single largest contributor, other than tidal fluctuations while at the same time having the greatest uncertainty. The recommendation around the design value relies heavily on the MfE guidance document released in 2018. The document identifies that there is “no one particular or ‘most likely’ climate future” and thus a number of scenarios need to
3 Ministry for the Environment (2018) Coastal hazards and climate change: Guidance for local government 4 https://uoa-eresearch.github.io/storm_surge/#ACCESS10 - rcp8.5@2010-01-01 Page 2 be considered. Four scenarios have been developed for New Zealand to cover a range of possible sea-level futures and are summarised below: 1 A low to eventual net-zero scenario (RCP 2.6)
2 An intermediate-low scenario based on the RCP4.5 median projections
3 A scenario with continuing high emissions, based on the RCP 8.5 median projections
4 A higher H+ scenario, taking into account possible instabilities in polar ice sheets, based on RCP 8.5 (83rd percentile) projections
In the same document, minimum transitional SLR allowances are suggested for where a single value is required based on the categorization of a development. There are arguments in this case for the wharf to be considered both Cat A (‘major new infrastructure’) and also Cat D (‘non- habitable … assets with a functional need to be at the coast,...’) with the associated recommended allowances being at either end of the spectrum. Given the ‘downstream’ effect of the selected deck height on road and rail infrastructure it has been decided to use the RCP 8.5 median projection line representing continuing high emissions.
When allowing for the interceding 19 years from the from the 2000 base point a SLR allowance of 1.0m is arrived at. This happens to coincide with the minimum SLR allowance for a Cat C development. Recommended Design Value 1.0m
Other known long-term oscillations This allowance is to account for periodic events such as El Nino. The magnitude of these is generally well quantified and considered collectively under the heading of the Monthly Mean Sea Level Anomaly (MSLA)5. Recommended Design Value 0.25m
5 Ministry for the Environment (2018) Coastal Hazards and Climate Change – Appendices; Appendix J, Section 8 Page 3
Wave Height The bay that forms Picton Harbour is orientated in an approx. NE direction with a limited fetch over which any wind generated waves can form. Numerical wind and wave modelling was carried out as part of the Waikawa Marina development (which features a similar fetch exposure and orientation) and determined the 1yr ARP to be 0.9m with a 50yr ARP wave of 0.99m. Calculation based on an established empirical equation predicted a 1.2m wave. Given the improved accuracy inherent in the numerical models the recommended design value is based on this.
Recommended Design Value 0.9m
Wave Run-up This component represents the vertical height that the design wave is estimated to travel up the revetment beneath the wharf. Because of the fact that the wharf is a finger structure with only the root of the wharf supported/protected by a revetment and given the time horizon, this was discounted and minor wetting of the deck soffit in the future accepted.
Recommended Design Value 0.0m
Sum of Constituents 3.62m
Recommended 100yr Design Water Level (wrt Chart Datum) 3.60m
Design Deck Level
Clearance to Deck Soffit above WL There is no hard-and-fast rule but general guidance suggests an allowance of 0.5m to allow air flow and drying of deck soffit concrete. This is a significant factor when considering durability and the life of the structure.
Recommended Design Value 0.5m
Estimated Deck Thickness While dependent on final applied deck loadings i.e. pedestrian vs rail carriages, based on previous projects it is thought that the deck will likely be in the order of 0.8m thick.
Recommended Design Value 0.8m
Sum of Constituents 1.3m
Recommended 100yr Design Deck Level (wrt Chart Datum) 4.9m
As a comparison, the deck level of the existing jetty structures are in the order of +4.5m CD and therefore the proposed deck level is approximately 400mm higher than the existing.
Page 4
wsp.com/nz