BEFORE A BOARD OF INQUIRY EAST WEST LINK PROJECT UNDER the Resource Management Act 1991 (the RMA) AND IN THE MATTER OF Notices of requirement for designation and resource consent applications by the NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY for the East West Link Project STATEMENT OF PRIMARY EVIDENCE OF DARREN WU ON BEHALF OF THE NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY Construction Traffic Impacts Dated: 12 April 2017 Barristers and Solicitors Auckland Solicitor Acting: Pat Mulligan Email: [email protected] Tel 64 9 358 2555 Fax 64 9 358 2055 PO Box 1433 DX CP24024 Auckland 1140 CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 1 2. INTRODUCTION 3 3. CODE OF CONDUCT 4 4. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 4 5. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND MY ROLE 4 6. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 5 7. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 8 8. ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION 10 9. RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS 19 10. CONCLUSION 30 BF\56808835\9 1. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 1.1 I have assessed the Construction Traffic Impacts from the Project based on the proposed construction activities as described in Section 7 of the AEE for the Project. I undertook my assessment on the assumption that a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) and Site Specific Traffic Management Plans (SSTMPs) would be produced. Overall I consider that the effects can be effectively managed to ensure safety and minimise disruption through the implementation of the management plans. 1.2 All temporary traffic management is governed by the Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM) and any proposed work must have an approved SSTMP from the relevant Road Controlling Authority. In my experience, these processes will require the contractor(s) to assess any potentially significant impacts and set out mitigation and management measures. 1.3 The assessment that was carried out has considered the effects on capacity of existing carriageways due to construction works, construction site accesses, public transport, pedestrians and cyclists and property accesses and parking. 1.4 For the purpose of my assessment, a proposed construction period of 2018 to 2025 was used for the assessment of traffic impacts, with a baseline environment set for 2018 which considered a road network after the opening of the Waterview tunnel connection. 1.5 The 2025 end of construction year assumes a road network before the Project has been complete. The two ends of the construction programme spectrum were used to assess the State Highway network impacts. 1.6 The analysis of the proposed work on State Highway 1 and 20 assumed that they did not occur at the same time. The assessment suggested that the impacts would be of greater significance if the work on State Highway 20 took place in the later years of the proposed construction programme. In my opinion, prioritising the SH20 works earlier in the programme would be beneficial. In both cases, whilst some transfer of vehicle route choice is predicted from the disrupted State Highway to the un-disrupted one, the effects on travel time by this was minimal. 1.7 Access to work sites will need to be reviewed and developed on a site by site basis as part of SSTMPs taking into account the potential mitigation measures identified. 1.8 There is no significant impact anticipated for public transport. The Project will make use of scheduled block-of-lines for rail for the construction of over-rail bridges. Some bus BF\56808835\9 | Page 1 routes are affected at Panama Road and Princes Street Interchange but all routes will be maintained. 1.9 The most significant impact on pedestrians and cyclists is the potential full or partial closure of the Waikaraka Walkway. In other areas, pedestrian and cycle movements must be provided with a safe route through or around the work area as required in CoPTTM. 1.10 Access to private properties will generally be maintained and individual property owners consulted to discuss specific impacts. 1.11 A Construction Traffic Management Plan Framework (CTMPF) was developed as part of this assessment. This document guides the philosophy that the Project will follow in the delivery of all temporary traffic management. It summarises key processes and considerations for an engaged contractor(s) to develop into a CTMP. 1.12 In addition, a number of proposed conditions were developed to set the requirement for a CTMP and the required content. Conditions were also developed to note important considerations for a contractor(s) when developing an SSTMP for any proposed work activity. 1.13 I have reviewed the submissions received that have raised concerns or issues with regarding construction traffic effects. The majority of submissions were specific in the issues that were raised. As a result I have proposed a number of possible amendments to the draft Construction Traffic conditions to address these. 1.14 In my opinion, other issues raised by submitters, such as site specific access issues, can be managed via the original or amended proposed draft conditions or through the processes and procedures as detailed in the CTMPF. 1.15 Overall, I do not consider the potential effects of the Project’s construction works on traffic to be significant. The Transport Agency has notable experience in successfully managing traffic effects through major road projects and this will be carried through to this Project. In addition, I believe that the proposed conditions, CTMP and approval processes for SSTMPs will require more detailed consideration of traffic management meaures that a contractor(s) will adopt to mitigate, manage and minimise effects once the construction methodology is developed in detail. With the proposed conditions and management plan framework in place, I consider that the effects of construction activities on traffic can be appropriately managed. BF\56808835\9 | Page 2 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1 My full name is Darren Wu. I have a Bachelor of Engineering in Civil Engineering with Honours from the University of Canterbury (2006) and am a Member of the Transportation Group of IPENZ. 2.2 My role on the East West Link Project (the Project), is a technical specialist for the assessment of construction traffic impacts by the proposed construction staging. I am familiar with the transport environment in which this Project sits. 2.3 I currently hold the position of Associate at Beca Limited (Beca). I have 10 years’ experience in traffic engineering in Auckland, New Zealand with specific skills in the areas of understanding and mitigating operational impacts to a road network by construction staging. I hold a Level 2/3 STMS qualification from the NZ Transport Agency for temporary traffic management on New Zealand roads and have built my experience primarily through major capital projects in Auckland. 2.4 On the Victoria Park Tunnel Project, I was the principal traffic engineer in the temporary traffic management team and was responsible for all planning, temporary design and approvals of construction staging on the local road network as the cut and cover tunnel was built. For the Newmarket Viaduct replacement project, I led the development of two of the three full motorway closure traffic management strategies. In recent times, I have been largely serving as a traffic management advisor to support the assessment and planning of major construction events for the Western Ring Route (WRR) projects and also the Southern Corridor widening project on SH 1. 2.5 I have also had some exposure to this field of work in Australia where I have been managing a traffic staging design package for a seven kilometre section of rural Pacific Highway in northern New South Wales for the department of Roads and Maritime Services. 2.6 I have been engaged by the New Zealand Transport Agency (the Transport Agency) to undertake an assessment of the effects on traffic of the construction staging works for the Project (for which the Notices of Requirement (NORs) and resource consent applications have been lodged with the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). My evidence describes this assessment and its findings. BF\56808835\9 | Page 3 3. CODE OF CONDUCT 3.1 I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note and that I agree to comply with it. I confirm that I have considered all material facts that I am aware of that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express, and that this evidence is within my area of expertise, except where I state that I am relying on the evidence of another person. 4. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 4.1 This evidence highlights the key points from Technical Report 10: Construction Traffic Impact Assessment, and Technical Report 10 Supplementary Assessment, which formed part of the Assessment of Effects on the Environment (AEE). With the exception of any updates noted in this evidence I confirm the content and accuracy of those reports. Together with my colleague Martin Peake, I also assessed the Great South Road intersection grade separated design. Technical Report 10 – Supplementary Assessment contains the results of that assessment. With the exception of any updates noted in this evidence I confirm the content and accuracy of those reports. 4.2 My evidence addresses the following matters: (a) Project description and my role in the Project; (b) Assessment methodology; (c) A description of the existing environment relevant to my assessment; (d) Assessment of effects and proposed mitigation; (e) Response to submissions; and (f) Overall conclusions 4.3 I have relied on the evidence of Mr Noel Nancekivell and Mr Andrew Murray. 5. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND MY ROLE 5.1 The Project has been described in Sections 6 and 7 of the AEE and the evidence of Mr Noel Nancekivell. 5.2 An outline of the proposed construction activities for the Project (Section 7 of the AEE) was carried out for the proposed design solution.