R61 Section 8 – Special Development Road Safety Project: Lessons Learnt Overview of Presentation • Background • Safety Considerations • Project Status • Lessons learnt • Way Forward Background • The R61 (Section 1 to Section 8) was declared a national route in 2003. • R61 Section 1 starts at the WC Border continues to N9 intersection at Aberdeen, then N9 north of Graaff Reinet, continues through N10 at Cradock, then Queenstown, through Mthatha and section 8 ending at Port St Johns. Included with the declaration of the N2 WCTR was a short 20 km section between Ntafufu River & Lusikisiki. • Through the former Transkei, statutory control regulations were not enforced and thus communities and towns were allowed to developed linearly along the R61 (Typical challenges associated with Ribbon development in Rural settlement areas). • This severely impacted the safety of the road users Background Background • SANRAL appointed ITS Engineers in 2009 to conduct study into Practical Design Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities on Rural Higher Order Roads • R61 Section 8 from Mthatha (km -2.1) to Port St Johns (km 70) and Ntafufu River to Lusikisiki was chosen as Case Study • The study was conducted by means of a Desktop study, community meeting and interviews, visual inspections and traffic counts • ITS Engineers recommended the upgrading of certain sections of the road to improve road safety conditions for pedestrians, non-motorised transport, local and through traffic. Background cont….. • In 2010, based on the report, the SANRAL approved a Road Safety Project which aimed to reduce accidents by closing unsafe accesses, construction channelized intersections, grade separated intersections (interchanges), pedestrian and livestock underpasses and walkways. • After a competitive tendering process, Goba (Pty) Ltd, now Hatch Africa, was appointed as the Consulting Engineers for the Special Development Projects on R61 from Mthatha to Lusikisiki. Safety Considerations Community Characteristics High unemployment High poverty rate 50 – 60 % of the population relies on Government Grants Low skills base Female headed households Under performing Local Municipalities Location and access to schools (junior) Lack of facilities – Public Transport, access roads, etc Safety Considerations – Typical Safety Issues Safety Considerations – Typical Safety Issues Safety Considerations – Typical Safety Issues Safety Considerations – Typical Safety Issues Safety Considerations – Safety interventions/ solutions Overpass (vehicular, agricultural and pedestrian) Underpass (vehicular and agricultural) Interchange Dual carriageway Taxi ranks Closing of unsafe informal accesses Formalising and upgrading of formal accesses Community access roads – linking to formal accesses Pedestrian walkways Safety Considerations During Design Development, the improvement scope was defined and the project was divided into 11 Packages 1. Dualling Mthatha (km -2.6) to Ngqeleni Interchange (km 5) 2. Ngqeleni Int (km 5.7) to Libode East (km 27) 3. Libode East to Mngazi River (km 75) 3A. Upgrade Majola Tea (km 51) to Tombo (km 66) 4. Tombo Dual carriageway & Modal Interchange (km 66 to 68) 5. Mafini to Mngazi – Community Development 6. Ntafufu to Lusikisiki – Reseal 7. Ntafufu to Lusikisiki - Conventional & Access Roads 8. St Barnabas Dual Carriageway & Modal Interchange 9. Corana River to Mafini – Community Development 10. Misty Mount to Mafini – Community Development Safety Considerations - Locality Plan Project Status - Brief R61: Mthatha (Sprigg Street) to Ngqeleni Turnoff (6 km) Commencement date : 16 September 2013 Completion Date : 30 June 2017 Value : R400 million Scope – New eastbound carriageway; upgrade westbound carriage – New bridges over the Mthatha River, Corana River and Sidwadweni River – Interchange at Ngqeleni Turnoff – Two agricultural underpasses; one pedestrian bridge – Relocate households and build new dwellings – Apply Cape Seal and asphalt at intersections 16 R61: SIDWADWENI RIVER BRIDGE AND DUALING OF R61 17 Ngqeleni Agricultural Overpass Bridge: B0235 R61: Ngqeleni Turnoff to Libode (15 km) Commencement Date : 28 March 2014 Completion Date : 19 September 2016 Value : R370million Scope – Widening of sections of road – New cross section (passing lanes where required) – Interchange at Libode – Walkways and community service roads – Construct one vehicular overpass; one vehicular underpass and one pedestrian bridge 19 – Construct taxi bays Mt Nicolas Pedestrian Bridge: N0239 21 22 Side View Top View 23 R61: Libode East (Mount Nicholas) to Mngazi (28 km) Commencement Date : September 2016 Completion date : February 2019 Value : R375 million Scope – Construction of bridges: Mngazi River Bridge Qiti Overpass Bridge Qhaka Overpass Bridge – Construction of underpasses: Gangata Agricultural underpass Kuleka Agricultural underpass 24 R61: Libode (Mount Nicholas) to Mngazi cont…. – Construction of underpasses: Tutor Ndamase Agricultural underpass 1 Tutor Ndamase Agricultural underpass 2 Tutor Ndamase Agricultural underpass 3 Tutor Ndamase Agricultural underpass 4 Mnxabakazi Agricultural underpass Umngazi Agricultural underpass 25 R61: Libode East (Mount Nicholas) to Mngazi cont…. – Widening of Intersections: 8x Intersections will be widened 6x Dangerous intersections will be closed – Community Development project: Local SMME will be used to construct community access roads which will be used to channel traffic towards the new formalised intersections. – Relocation of services – ESKOM, Telkom, houses, etc 26 R61: Upgrade from Majola Tea – Tombo (15.5 km) Commencement date: January 2015 Completion : April 2018 Value R535 million Scope – Improved alignment at sharp curves – Widening of road with passing lanes where required – MSE walls at high fills – Upgrade or relocate intersections and accesses – Construct 3x agricultural underpasses and taxi rank - Majola Tea Junction 27 – Relocate numerous dwellings MSE Retaining Walls 28 Lessons Learnt 1. Road Safety Project Programme • Identifies and reviews specific High risk locations • Solutions or remedies are localised • Solutions are isolated to a specific location and reduces risk at location – warranted under special maintenance • Improved LOS at location – Variable LOS or function along route • Determine overall LOS or Function based on Project Type/ Scope • Varying LOS across length - Driver Expectation reduced • TRH 26 Route function classification – R2 or R3 • Holistic Approach – Driver behaviour Lessons Learnt 2. Typical Intersection Design • No existing typical standard for Rural Settlement (Peri urban) • Numerous discussion and lengthy debate, typical intersection layout agreed. • Vehicular movement was prioritised – N2 WCTR planning (LOS) • Typical standard - not always effective and relevant in varying situations or conditions • NMT not prioritised sufficiently to mitigate risk • VRU profile not adequately– Primary Scholars, elderly, etc • Road classification – TRH 26 – R2 or R3 Lessons Learnt 2. Typical Intersection Design • Prioritises safety related issues for motorised transport, e.g. capacity, geometric, accidents etc. • NMT modes (pedestrians, bicycles, cart etc.) expected to fit in with the preferred solution for motorised transport - The pedestrian desire lines sometime ignored – sight distance • Such an approach does not adequately address the specific needs all road users especially the VRUs. Risk not adequately mitigated • Therefore, a more holistic approach is required – Driver & pedestrian behaviour Lessons Learnt Intersection Design Lessons Learnt 3. Special Projects (Scope definition - Improvements) • Economical – Desirable LOS/ Class based project type. • Varying LOS – Driver expectation, links between intersection at lower LOS resulting in bottle necks • Lack of safe overtaking – Encourage overtaking through intersection – more conflict and dangerous • Impractical LOS – Could limits future planning and improvements to existing alignment • Fencing only along the improved section only – entire length should be considered Lessons Learnt 4. Pedestrian Bridge/ Grade separated structures • Review warrants for grade separation in rural settlements areas • Only used if at-grade and ease of access – prefer to grade separate the vehicles instead of the pedestrians • Engineering & Planning design to facilitate pedestrian movement towards defined crossing area - Underpass • Bridge must have canopy – Pedestrian Psychology - safer • Must be wide enough to cater for Livestock & cyclist Lessons Learnt 5. Spatial Development & Town Planning • Inform, educate and actively participate with informal settlement development – traditional & local authorities • Involvement in spatial development • Coordinate & improve Access Management • Allowance for Public Transport Management & NMT • Work together with other spheres of government i.e. Education, Rural development and Local authorities • TRH 26 consideration – Rural settlement areas (Not urban or rural – Peri urban) Lessons Learnt 6. Statutory Control • Improved and continues enforcement of regulation • Limit future and closing of illegal and informal access, • RRM need to maintain limited crossing points, by replacing fencing as and when it is vandalized for entry to the road reserve, bush clearance & grass cutting, removal of litter • Support and work together with local & traditional authorities • Regulations to be reviewed - Rural settlements and locality • Action taken against offenders Lessons Learnt 7. Road safety education