FINAL Counteracting Congestion at Jumbo PDF

University of Mauritius
Faculty of Engineering
BEng (Hons) Civil Engineering
Counteracting congestion at Jumbo

Jumbo-
Phoenix Junction
CIVE 2014Y (3): Highway and Traffic Engineering
To: Mrs Reshma Rughooputh
Submitted by:
Videsha Beeslall 1415346

Zakiyyah Jugon 1413110
Abhishek Nawosah 1415318
Mohamed Ackmez Mohit 1416008
Kosalesh Chetan Oree 1413360
i
Date of submission:
submission 08 December 2015
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to take this opportunity to thank Mrs. Reshma Rughooputh who has been of an
exceptional help throughout our whole assignment. She was always present at the different stages of
the assignment and was willing to help us with our queries or to clear our doubts. She also provided us
with great guidance and showed endless signs of patience whenever we were unable to understand
something.
We also wish to express our sincere gratitude to Mr. Zaheer Doomah, Manager at the Road
Development Authority, who despite having a busy schedule was able to spare some of his precious
time to advise us and guide us in the right direction. The meetings we had with him completely changed
our vision of this assignment and allowed us to improve our work into a more professional one.
Finally, this acknowledgement would be incomplete without a special mention to Mr. Hansraj Raddhoa,
Msc Civil Engineering, who provided us with some invaluable help and advice when it came to the cost
estimation of our solutions. We also appreciate the fact that he was really eager to share his knowledge
with us, students, so as to help us progress in our assignment.
ii
Table of Contents
1.0 Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 2
2.1 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Aims and objectives ............................................................................................................................ 2
3.0 Literature Review .................................................................................................................................... 3
3.1 Functional effectiveness of a highway ................................................................................................ 3
3.2 Cyclic Flow interactions....................................................................................................................... 4
3.3 Level of service and Capacity .............................................................................................................. 4
3.4 Roundabout ........................................................................................................................................ 6
3.5 Traffic surveys ..................................................................................................................................... 7
3.5.1 Volume studies ............................................................................................................................. 7
3.5.2 Delay studies ................................................................................................................................ 9
3.6 Road classification in Mauritius .......................................................................................................... 9
3.7 Current traffic situation in Mauritius ................................................................................................ 11
3.8 Project Cost Estimation ..................................................................................................................... 12
3.9 Project Cost-Benefit Analysis ............................................................................................................ 13
4.0 Site Location and Description ............................................................................................................... 14
4.1 Study Area ......................................................................................................................................... 15
4.2 Description of Nalletamby Road (Link 1) .......................................................................................... 16
4.2.1 Road Description ........................................................................................................................ 16
4.2.2 Road Infrastructure & Surroundings .......................................................................................... 16
4.2.3 Road Defects .............................................................................................................................. 17
4.2.4 Road Geometry .......................................................................................................................... 17
4.2.5 Operation System ...................................................................................................................... 17
4.3 Description of M2 Corridor between Supercash Roundabout and Pont Fer Roundabout (Link 2) .. 18
4.3.1 Road Description ........................................................................................................................ 18
4.3.2 Road Infrastructure & Surroundings .......................................................................................... 18
4.3.3 Road Defects .............................................................................................................................. 19
4.3.4 Road Geometry .......................................................................................................................... 19
4.3.5 Operation System ...................................................................................................................... 19
5.0 Methodology......................................................................................................................................... 20
iii
5.1 Definition of our problem ................................................................................................................. 20
5.2 Sampling in times .............................................................................................................................. 20
5.3 Types of survey ................................................................................................................................. 20
5.4 Road Inventory Survey- LINK COUNT ................................................................................................ 21
5.4.1 Aim and Objective: ..................................................................................................................... 21
5.4.2 Criteria for choice of stations (for manual traffic count): .......................................................... 22
5.4.3 Descriptions of stations ............................................................................................................. 22
5.4.4 Equipment .................................................................................................................................. 22
5.4.5 Field Procedures......................................................................................................................... 23
5.4.6 Difficulties encountered:............................................................................................................ 23
5.5 Classified Turning Movement Count................................................................................................. 24
5.5.1 Preparations ............................................................................................................................... 24
5.5.2 Required Equipment .................................................................................................................. 24
5.5.3 Description of Roundabout ........................................................................................................ 25
5.5.4 Difficulties Encountered............................................................................................................. 29
5.6 Journey Time Delay Survey Floating Car Method .......................................................................... 30
5.6.1 Preparations ............................................................................................................................... 30
5.6.2 Execution........................................................................................................................................ 31
5.6.3 Problems encountered .............................................................................................................. 32
6.0 Results of Study..................................................................................................................................... 33
6.1 Link Count ......................................................................................................................................... 33
6.1.2 Link 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 33
6.1.3 Link 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 34
6.2 Turning Movement Count ................................................................................................................. 35
6.2.1 From Port Louis .......................................................................................................................... 35
6.2.2 From Jumbo ............................................................................................................................... 36
6.2.3 From South................................................................................................................................. 37
6.2.4 From Petit Camp ........................................................................................................................ 38
6.3 Delay Survey...................................................................................................................................... 39
7.0 Analysis of Results ................................................................................................................................. 41
7.1 Link Count ......................................................................................................................................... 41
7.1.1 Link 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 41
iv
7.1.2 Link 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 44
7.2 Turning Movement Count ................................................................................................................. 49
7.3 Delay Survey...................................................................................................................................... 52
8.0 Discussion.............................................................................................................................................. 55
9.0 Traffic Projection................................................................................................................................... 55
10.0 Alternative 1: Grade separation.......................................................................................................... 57
10.1 The Project ...................................................................................................................................... 57
10.1.1 Project Location ....................................................................................................................... 57
10.1.2 Project Objectives .................................................................................................................... 57
10.1.3 Project Description................................................................................................................... 59
10.1.4 Project Cost Estimation ............................................................................................................ 66
10.2 Project Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 67
10.2.1 Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................................ 67
10.2.2 Social Impacts .......................................................................................................................... 69
10.3 Project Cost- Benefit Analysis ......................................................................................................... 70
10. 4 Project Evaluation .......................................................................................................................... 70
11.0 Alternative 2: Diversion between Sodnac link and M2 North link...................................................... 71
11. 1 The Project ..................................................................................................................................... 71
11.1.1 Project Concept........................................................................................................................ 71
11.1.3 Project objectives..................................................................................................................... 73
11.1.4 Project description ................................................................................................................... 73
11.1.5 Project cost estimation ............................................................................................................ 74
11. 2 Project Impacts .............................................................................................................................. 75
11.2.1 Environmental impacts ............................................................................................................ 75
11.2.2 Social impacts........................................................................................................................... 76
11. 3 Project Cost-Benefit Analysis ......................................................................................................... 76
11. 4 Project Evaluation .......................................................................................................................... 77
12.0 Alternative 3: Park and Ride Project ................................................................................................... 78
12. 1 The Project ..................................................................................................................................... 78
12.1.1 Project Concept........................................................................................................................ 78
12.1.2 Project Objectives .................................................................................................................... 78
v
12.1.4 Project Description................................................................................................................... 80
12.1.5 Project Cost Estimation ............................................................................................................ 81
12.2 Project Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 82
12.2.1 Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................................ 82
12.2.2 Social Impacts .......................................................................................................................... 83
12.3 Project Cost- Benefit Analysis ......................................................................................................... 84
12.4 Project Evaluation ........................................................................................................................... 85
13.0 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 85
14.0 References .......................................................................................................................................... 86
vi
List of figures
Figure 1 Cyclic Flow interactions................................................................................................................... 4
Figure 2 Level of service A-F ......................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3 Main features of a roundabout....................................................................................................... 6
Figure 4 Turning movement count ............................................................................................................... 8
Figure 5 Motorways in Mauritius .................................................................................................................. 9
Figure 6 Main roads .................................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 7 Access roads .................................................................................................................................. 10
Figure 8 Site Location .................................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 9 Study area ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 10 Road description- Link 1.............................................................................................................. 16
Figure 11 (a) bustop; (b) traffic signals; (c) cultural centre; (d) factory shop ............................................. 16
Figure 12 Cracks on road............................................................................................................................. 17
Figure 13 (a) Traffic light for pedestrian crossing; (b) speed limit of 60 km/h ........................................... 17
Figure 14 Road description- Link 2.............................................................................................................. 18
Figure 15 (a) Residential areas and asphaltic roads; (b) River; (c) MITD building; (d) bus top and
sidewalks; (e) Underpass ............................................................................................................................ 18
Figure 16 Road Geometry ........................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 17 (a) Speed limit 80 km/h; (b) 'REDUCE SPEED NOW' sign ............................................................ 19
Figure 18 Stations for link count ................................................................................................................. 21
Figure 19 The Pont Fer Roundabout ........................................................................................................... 25
Figure 20 Entry from the South .................................................................................................................. 26
Figure 21 Entry from Vacoas ....................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 22 Entry from Port Louis .................................................................................................................. 28
Figure 23 Entry from Petit Camp ................................................................................................................ 29
Figure 24 Map showing position of A, B and C by a cross .......................................................................... 31
Figure 25 Comparison of saturation flow rate between link 1 and 2 ......................................................... 47
Figure 26 Service volume (veh/h) in each direction of movement ............................................................ 50
Figure 27 Total number of vehicles entering the roundabout in 1 hr ........................................................ 50
Figure 28 Percentage of vehicles entering the roundabout from each arm .............................................. 51
Figure 29 Delay time ................................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 30 Project Location .......................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 31 Existing Traffic condition ............................................................................................................. 58
Figure 32 Free Flow of traffic on flyover and underpass after construction .............................................. 58
Figure 33 Turning Count Movement Analysis ............................................................................................. 59
Figure 33 Proposed flyover and underpass ................................................................................................ 60
Figure 34 Bridge deck.................................................................................................................................. 61
Figure 35 Longitudinal Girders .................................................................................................................... 61
Figure 36 Cross Girders ............................................................................................................................... 62
Figure 37 Pier .............................................................................................................................................. 62
Figure 38 Approach Embankment .............................................................................................................. 63
vii
Figure 39 Example of an underpass from another project ......................................................................... 64
Figure 40 Possible look of underpass.......................................................................................................... 65
Figure 41 Location of diversion link ............................................................................................................ 72
Figure 42 Location of park and ride lots; .................................................................................................... 79
(a) at Forest Side before La Vigie junction; ................................................................................................. 79
(b) Near Phoenix and Beaux Songes Link near Jumbo Phoenix commercial centre ................................... 79
Figure 43 Park- and- Ride Prototype Concept ............................................................................................ 80
Figure 44 Economic Comparison of feeder service construction of park-and-ride lots ............................. 84
viii
List of Tables
Table 1 Levels of service and their description ............................................................................................. 5
Table 2 Vehicle registered from 2004 to 2014 ........................................................................................... 11
Table 3 From curepipe and roundabout ..................................................................................................... 33
Table 4 From roundabout to curepipe........................................................................................................ 33
Table 5 From jumbo to roundabout ........................................................................................................... 34
Table 6 From roundabout to jumbo ........................................................................................................... 34
Table 7 Movement of vehicles .................................................................................................................... 35
Table 8 From Port Louis .............................................................................................................................. 35
Table 9 From Jumbo.................................................................................................................................... 36
Table 10 From South ................................................................................................................................... 37
Table 11 From Petit Camp........................................................................................................................... 38
Table 12 Trip 1 ............................................................................................................................................ 39
Table 13 Trip 2 ............................................................................................................................................ 39
Table 14 Trip 3 ............................................................................................................................................ 39
Table 15 Trip 4 ............................................................................................................................................ 40
Table 16 Trip 5 ............................................................................................................................................ 40
Table 17 Trip 6 ............................................................................................................................................ 40
Table 18 Calculation of maximum flow rate for link 1 (one direction) ....................................................... 43
Table 19 Calculation of maximum flow rate for link 1 (one direction) ....................................................... 43
Table 20 Calculation of the maximum flow rate for link 2 (one way lanes) ............................................... 45
Table 21 Calculation of maximun flow rate on link 2 (one way lane)......................................................... 46
Table 22 LOS criteria for Multilane highway (Extracted from HCM 2000) ................................................. 47
Table 23 Comparison of volume of the links .............................................................................................. 48
Table 24 Percentage of vehicle entering the roundabout from each arm in 1 hour.................................. 51
Table 25 Journey and Running time ........................................................................................................... 52
Table 26 Journey and running speeds ........................................................................................................ 54
Table 27 Traffic projection for the next 15 years ....................................................................................... 55
Table 28 Cost Estimation of diversion between Sodnac link and M2 North link........................................ 74
Table 29 Cost estimate of one Park-and-Ride Facility (The costs are given in US dollars). ........................ 81
Graphs
Graph 1 Variation of traffic flow with time on link 1(one way only) .......................................................... 41
Graph 2 Variation of traffic flow with time on link 1(one way) .................................................................. 42
Graph 3 Total traffic flow variation with time in both directions ............................................................... 42
Graph 4 Variation of traffic flow with time on link 2(one way only) .......................................................... 44
Graph 5 Variation of traffic flow with time for link 2 (one way lanes) ....................................................... 44
Graph 6 Total traffic variation with time (2 way lanes) .............................................................................. 45
Graph 7 Amount of traffic from 2015-2030 in morning peak hour ............................................................ 56
ix
1.0 Abstract
There have been a lot of concerns regarding congestion at the Pont Fer roundabout, especially during
the peak hours, for quite some time now. The fact that a huge number of vehicles make use of that
junction as a mean to access important population centres, make the problem even more serious and
with the ever increasing traffic, this situation is set to aggravate.
Hence, this report deals with the alleviation of congestion at the roundabout. Before proceeding to the
possible solutions, there was a need to actually prove the congestion problems at that particular area
and also to determine the most critical routes. Hence, for this purpose, several surveys were carried out.
Those include:
A traffic count
A turning movement count
A journey time delay survey
The data obtained from the survey were analysed and it was found that the LOS and amount of delay at
the region surrounding the roundabout were simply unacceptable.
In an attempt to remedy the situation, several proposals were made and each one of them was duly
evaluated along with their constraints and their feasibility. The proposed solutions were as follows:
A 3 grade separated junction at the roundabout itself connecting the most critical routes, such
that the vehicles may circumvent the roundabout
A new Link Road connecting the Sodnac Link Road and the M2 motorway thereby acting like a
bypass for the vehicles
A park and ride project whereby citizens are encouraged to leave their cars behind at a common
parking area and travel together in the same bus, hence reducing the number of vehicles on the
road
After much consideration and evaluation, the 3 grade separated junction was found to be the most
appropriate solution to the congestion problems. Its advantages outweigh its drawbacks by a large
extent and it is therefore believed to be a worthwhile investment.
1
2.0 Introduction
2.1 Background
Mobility is a basic human need. Good road infrastructure is a key ingredient for national
development; it supports efficient industrial and agricultural activity as well as national and
international trade. For communities and individuals, a road network opens up opportunities for
accessing employment, markets, education and health facilities, as well as contributing to social
inclusion and security.
In Mauritius, the inland transport system is made up of only road network for people to travel from an
origin to destination safely. A transportation system should be safe, rapid, comfortable, convenient,
economical and eco-friendly. Meeting these expectations becomes a challenge especially when the
traffic has to be kept uninterrupted when the number of vehicles occupying the road keeps on
increasing. Problems arise in accommodating this growing number of vehicles as very often, congestion
results. Unfortunately, in Mauritius, congestion and delays have become a major problem on road
networks and this call for immediate remedial actions.
This report documents a traffic analysis, delay survey at the Jumbo-Phoenix junction and a thorough
feasibility study for three proposed solutions to decrease congestion in this region, particularly in peak
hours. During the peak hours, traffic congestion is acute at the Jumbo-Phoenix junction because of the
large numbers of work trips to the Ebene and Port Louis during the morning and during the afternoon,
congestion is mainly due to work releases. Private cars and goods vehicles are the major causes of
congestion and to quantify the amount of vehicles occupying the road during the peak hours, a traffic
manual count and a classified turning movement count were carried out on the links and at the Pont Fer
roundabout respectively. To further justify the current congestion problem, a delay survey was
conducted and data obtained from the surveys were analysed. A congestion problem was identified and
three solutions were proposed to counteract traffic accumulation at the Jumbo-Phoenix junction.
Finally, the most economic and feasible solution was chosen after a brief feasibility study on each
proposed solutions.
2.2 Aims and objectives

The aim of this exercise is to study the feasibility of grades separated junction at the Jumbo-Phoenix,
assess the problems encountered by drivers on the road and provide appropriate and feasible solutions.
The key objectives to be fulfilled are:
Conducting a manual traffic count on the links meeting the Pont Fer roundabout
Conducting a classified turning movement count at the roundabout
Conducting a delay survey to be able to quantify delay time and congestion problems
Assessing the capacity and level of service of the road from traffic surveys data
Defining the current traffic situation and problem
Providing suitable solutions to the problem
Conducting a brief feasibility study of the solutions
Selecting the most economic solution
2
3.0 Literature Review
3.1 Functional effectiveness of a highway
When talking about an efficient transportation system, two terms are usually considered; mobility and
accessibility.
Mobility refers to the ability to travel to many destinations with ease, speed, safety and
convenience. Mobility is achieved through the elimination of congestion, provision of capacity,
maintaining reasonable and uniform speeds, and limiting stops.
Accessibility, on the other hand, refers to the ability to gain entry to a particular area. Access to
property from roads is accommodated through on-street parking, driveways, unsignalized
intersections with low volume access facilities, and at times signalized intersections.
A road system must function to provide both mobility and access to property. The functional
effectiveness of a highway is measured in terms of its ability to assist and accommodate the flow of
vehicles with both safety and efficiency. In order to measure the level of operational efficiency of a
highway, certain parameters must be measured and analysed. These are:
Traffic Volume. The traffic volume can be determined through manual and automatic traffic
counts. It affects both level of service and safety.
Vehicle mix within the stream. The highway not only carries passenger cars and trucks but also
buses, goods vehicles, vans and motorcycles. Each has an effect on the flow of vehicles.
Distribution of flow over time. Flow will have hourly, daily, weekly, annual and seasonal
changes.
Average speed of the traffic stream.
Density of flow.
All these factors need to be taken into account to ensure mobility on the road and mobility
means less congestion and hence less delays.
3
3.2 Cyclic Flow interactions
Transport demand is directly related to land use patterns and the available transportation systems and
facilities. This relationship can be established in a cyclic pattern
pat as shown below.
Greater traffic
needs
Added
Increased trip
transportation
genaration
facilities
Changed land Increased

use Accessibility
Increased Land
value
Figure 1 Cyclic Flow interactions
Increase in trip generation results in an increase in traffic volume on the road. Congestion results and
this call for added transportation facilities. With added facilities, ability to gain access to a particular
area increases. Land value of the particular area increases which results in a change in the activities of
the area and further increase in trip generation. This process continues, forming a cyclic flow
interaction.
3.3 Level of service and Capacity

Capacity and level of service are two important terms applied to traffic operations. When capacity gives
a quantitative measure of traffic, level of service gives a qualitative measure. Capacity represents the
ability of the system to handle traffic and level of service tries to answer how good the present traffic
situation on a given facility is. The level of service looks at the system from the drivers perspective and
is a measure of effectiveness of the highway while capacity
capacity gives the maximum hourly flow rate. The
maximum flow rate is taken for the worst 15 minutes of the peak hours while finding out the capacity.
This is a probabilistic measure and depends on certain conditions like;
1. Traffic conditions (traffic mix, peaking

peaking characteristics and proportions of turning movements at
intersections)
2. Roadway characteristic (geometric characteristics of the road which include lane width,
shoulder width, lane configuration, horizontal alignment and vertical alignment)
3. Control conditions
onditions (signs and signals at intersections)
4
Level of service ranges from A to F, representing free flow conditions at A and F representing the worst
traffic conditions and complete breakdown of the system. Factors affecting level of service are:
Speed and travel time
Traffic interruptions/restrictions
Freedom to travel with desired speed
Drivers comfort and convenience
Operating cost
Table 1 Levels of service and their description

Level of service Description
Zone of free flow
Traffic volume is less
Comfort and convenience level high
A
Vehicle has complete freedom to maneuver
Drivers have the ability to choose their desired speed
Lane changes, merging and diverging movements are relatively easy
Zone of reasonably free flow
Free flow speed can still be maintained
B Comfort and convenience level relatively high
There is slight reduction in freedom to maneuver
Drivers freedom to choose their desired speed is slightly reduced
Delivers stable flow conditions
Small increase in flow causes considerable reduction in highway performance
Average speed remains near free flow speeds
Significance increase in drivers vigilance is required at this level
C There is marked restrictions in freedom to maneuver
Care is required when changing lane
Other vehicle begins to restrict traffic flow
Average spacing between vehicles decreases
Minor accidents can be accommodated. Major ones leads to queue formation
Highway operates at high density level
Average speed decreases with increase in flow
D Poor level of service and convenience
Spacing between vehicle is considerably reduced
Minor incidents lead to queue formation
Represents level at which the capacity of the highway has been reached
Unstable traffic flow conditions
E Rapid queuing
No usable gaps between the vehicles
Levels of comfort and convenience are very poor
Represents region of forced flow
Operating conditions are highly unstable
F Constant queuing
Traffic moving on a stop-go basis
Complete breakdown of the system
5
The level of service can be represented in a speed against volume/capacity ratio graph with the max
volume /capacity ratio of 1 being at a level of service F.
Figure 2 Level of service A-F
3.4 Roundabout
A roundabout is a form of channelized intersection in which vehicles are guided onto a one one-way
circulatory road about a central island. Entry to the intersection is controlled by Give way markings and
priority is given to vehicles circulating (clockwise in Mauritius) in the roundabout.
Figure 3 Main features of a roundabout
6
The main objective of roundabout design is to secure the safe interchange of traffic between
crossing traffic streams with the minimum delay. The operating efficiency of a roundabout
depends upon entering drivers accepting headway gaps in the circulating traffic stream. Since
traffic streams merge and diverge at small angles and low relative speeds, accidents between
vehicles in roundabouts rarely have fatal consequences. On circulatory carriageways, super elevation
is unnecessary. However, a cross fall (typically 2%) is required to drain surface water.
3.5 Traffic surveys

Traffic surveys are required for local traffic planning and for both strategic and national issues. In the
engineering field, traffic data are very important to a wide range of decision making processes in the
planning, construction, operation and maintenance of a transport system. Data are collected to better
manage the physical system, to investigate trends over time, to understand the nature of travel
demand, to assess the need for improvements and to evaluate the systems performance. Various types
of traffic studies can be conducted. These are:
1. Volume studies
2. Speed studies
3. Travel-time studies
4. Delay studies
5. Density studies
6. Accident studies
7. Parking studies
8. Pedestrian studies
9. Good movement and transit studies
10. Observance studies
The aim of this report is to assess the effectiveness of the Jumbo-Phoenix junction. To do so, it is
necessary to determine the total traffic on the road. The first step is to determine the current volume
and type of traffic travelling on the road. A manual traffic count and a classified turning movement
count were carried out during the morning peak hours to obtain the current traffic volume on the links
and the turning movements on the Pont Fer roundabout. A delay survey was also conducted to assess
congestion on the links. Therefore, only volume and delay studies were considered in this report.
3.5.1 Volume studies

The purpose of these surveys is to collect data on the number and types of vehicles passing a specified
point on a link (link counts), or making specified movements at a junction (turning counts). Volume of
traffic is expressed as a rate of flow, usually either as vehicles per hour (veh/h), or vehicles per day
(veh/day), often converted into the value "AADT" (Annual Average Daily Traffic).
7
The AADT is the average 24 hour traffic volume at a given location over a full 365 days. Traffic volume
surveys are carried out by either manual or automatic traffic counts.
Automatic counts make use of automatic counters like the pneumatic tube system, buried loop system
and piezo system. Data can be recorded over a long period of time and with relatively low cost but
counters record only the total number of axles passing over the sensor. Classification of vehicle into
vehicle types is not possible
In a manual count, the surveyor stands by the roadside counting and classifying the vehicles as they
pass, dividing the survey into fixed time periods. The advantage of the manual count is that classification
of the vehicles can also be carried out. The vehicles were classified in 5 categories:
Car
Van
Bus
Good Vehicle
Motorcycle
Link counts should be located on straight sections of road for good visibility. Duration can be from a few
minutes to several days, depending on purpose. Most counts are carried out for one day, starting before
the morning peak hour, and extending for 12, 14 or 16 hours. Count periods are usually 15 minutes, with
results summarised hourly.
Turning movement counts are carried out in the same manner as link counts, except that the turning
movement of each vehicle is recorded, and the vehicle classification system is simplified.
Figure 4 Turning movement count
8
3.5.2 Delay studies
Delay is a term used to describe excess or unexpected time spent in travel. Methods of conducting delay
surveys are:
Floating car method

Stopped vehicle count method
Elevated observer method
Short-base method
During our study, the floating car method was used. The advantages of the floating car technique are its
direct and accurate measurement of travel times and delays, and personal experience of the causes of
delays. The main disadvantages are the large resources required for a comprehensive survey of a
network, and problems of the survey vehicle exceeding the speed limit. The survey car contains three
persons: two Surveyors and the driver. The driver tries to float in the traffic stream. One surveyor acts
as observer while another records the duration of delays and the actual elapsed time of passing control
points along the route from start to finish of the run.
3.6 Road classification in Mauritius

In Mauritius, roads are classified as follows:
1. Motorways
Denoted as M1 and M2, motorways are the highest road hierarchy. They provide high level of comfort
and free flow. Traffic is uninterrupted on motorways and speed limit on most motorways in Mauritius is
110 km/h. They are dual carriageways with 4 or 6 lanes and direction of traffic flow separated by central
reservation.
Figure 5 Motorways in Mauritius
9
2. Main roads
Divided into A and B categories, they are single carriageways with flow in different direction separated
by road markings.
Figure 6 Main roads
3. Access roads
These are local roads connecting areas of lesser importance. They are lower in road hierarchy and are
generally shorter than main roads.
Figure 7 Access roads
10
3.7 Current traffic situation in Mauritius
According to the Road Transport and Road Traffic accident Analysis, at the end of June 2014 there were
454,426 vehicles registered at the National Transport Authority (NTA). This represents a net increase of
10,931 vehicles (2.5%) as compared to end of year 2013 when the number of registered vehicles was
443,495.
A breakdown of the fleet by type of vehicle is given in Table 2. At the end of June 2014, the fleet
consisted of 48.1% (218,398) cars, double cab pickup and dual purpose vehicles and 40.6% (184,647)
auto/motor cycles. The remaining 11.3% comprised vans (26,755), lorries and trucks (14,148), buses
(2,983) and other vehicles (7,495).
Table 2 Vehicle registered from 2004 to 2014
As shown in table 2, there in an increase in traffic flow from 2004 to 2014. As the number of vehicles
in a given distance of road increase, the probability of vehicles to move closely increase and thus
drivers comfort is affected: they have to drive slowly and take more precautions. In addition, both
short and long trips become uneconomical. At this particular point when the road network does not
meet the drivers comfort and economic objectives-wastage of time and fuel, sometime
productivity is severely affected- the road network is considered to perform poorly. This results in
congestion problems and an increase in accidents on the road. Congestion is becoming a major problem
in Mauritius. With sustained economic growth, increased accessibility, enhanced mobility and a drastic
fall in poverty, the standard of living of Mauritians have improved largely. As a result, road traffic is
increasing continually at a rate of 5% to 8% p.a. At end of June 2015, some 476,207 vehicles were
registered at the National Transport Authority compared to 465,052 at the end of December 2014, i.e.
an increase of 11,155 or 2.4%.
11
3.8 Project Cost Estimation
The unit rate and simplified unit rate method is used to estimate the cost of the project as described by
the Overseas road note 5 (ORN5). Typically, the following methodology is followed:
1. Choose source projects that are of a similar type to the proposed project.
2. Obtain priced bills of quantities and information regarding the actual out-turn cost of the
projects after allowance for all claims and other cost increases.
3. Choose a particular topic for which a unit rate is required, for example, drainage.
4. Add up all the bill items relating to that topic. For example, in the case of drainage, add up the
total bill cost of all items relating to drainage. This total should be adjusted to take account of
any increases in the cost of the project resulting from claims or other factors.
5. Decide what single item would be appropriate to represent the relative cost of drainage on the
proposed project compared to the source projects. This item will be used to represent the total
of all drainage costs. The item chosen must be something that can be measured from the
drawings that are currently available. For example, it would not be appropriate to use the total
length of drainage pipes if the pipes have not yet been designed or drawn. It may be possible to
represent the cost of drainage in terms of the total road surface area of the project.
6. From the source projects, determine a unit rate for drainage in terms of the unit chosen. For
example, as a cost of drainage per square metre of the road pavement.
7. Use the same rate to calculate the total cost of all drainage works for the proposed project by
multiplying this unit rate by the total area of road pavement on the proposed project.
8. It may be possible to improve the estimate by taking account of any known differences between
the source project and the proposed project that might lead to a higher or lower rate.
12
3.9 Project Cost-Benefit Analysis
The method usually adopted for the economic evaluation of highway schemes, termed cost-benefit
analysis, utilises the net present value technique where the costs and benefits of the scheme are
discounted over time so that they represent present day values. Using this method, any proposal having
a positive net present value is economically sustainable in absolute terms. Where competing project
options are being compared, assuming they are being used in identical capacities over the same period,
the one with the numerically larger NPV is selected (i.e. the one that is less negative or more positive).
The main steps in the technique involve:
Listing the main project options.

Identifying all relevant costs and benefits. These costs can be grouped into
Reduction in vehicle operating costs. Costs included are both fuel and non-fuel based.
For a highway scheme, the new upgraded project leads to lower levels of congestion
and higher speeds than on the existing roadway, usually resulting in lower fuel
consumption and lower maintenance costs due to the reduced wear and tear on the
vehicles.
Savings in time
Reduction in the frequency of accidents
Discounting the present values of all relevant costs and benefits required.
Using economic indicators like Net Present Value, Internal Rate of Return and Benefit/cost ratio
to enable a decision to be reached.
All the above economic indicators point to the economic strength of the project under examination.
Normally, the project with more positive NPV is selected.
13
4.0 Site Location and Description
The general location of the Jumbo-Phoenix junction and its vicinity road network are shown on map in
Figure 8.
Figure 8 Site Location
14
4.1 Study Area
The study area was concentrated on the key links and intersection at Pont Fer Roundabout as shown in
Figure 9.
These links included:
I. Nalletamby Road between Jumbo Roundabout and Pont Fer Roundabout

II. M2 Corridor Between Supercash Roundabout and Pont Fer Roundabout
Pont Fer
Roundabout
Link 1
Link 2
Jumbo
Supercash
Roundabout
Roundabout
Figure 9 Study area
15
4.2 Description of Nalletamby Road (Link 1)
4.2.1 Road Description
It is a straight line road of length 275 m between Jumbo Roundabout and Pont Fer Roundabout with
dual carriageways divided by a central reservation. It has 4 lanes- 2lanes in each direction.
Figure 10 Road description- Link 1
4.2.2 Road Infrastructure & Surroundings

It consists of two bus stops, two traffic signals, two pedestrian crossings, and two junctions. The road is
asphalted but does not have concrete sidewalk all along its length. There is a cultural centre and a
factory shop alongside the road.
(a) (b) (c)
(d)
Figure 11 (a) bustop; (b) traffic signals; (c) cultural centre; (d) factory shop
16
4.2.3 Road Defects
Fatigue cracks could be seen at some places of the road.
Figure 12 Cracks on road
4.2.4 Road Geometry

The average width of both carriageways is 9.2m .No shoulder is provided. The terrain is levelled.
Footways are provided on the sides of the link.
4.2.5 Operation System

Traffic light for pedestrian crossing.
Speed limit of 60 km/h.
Stop sign.
(a) (b)
Figure 13 (a) Traffic light for pedestrian crossing; (b) speed limit of 60 km/h
17
4.3 Description of M2 Corridor between Supercash Roundabout and Pont Fer
Roundabout (Link 2)
4.3.1 Road Description

It is a double carriageway road of length 440 m. It has 4 lanes- 2lanes in each direction separated by a
median barrier.
Figure 14 Road description- Link 2
4.3.2 Road Infrastructure & Surroundings

It consists of two bus stops, a pedestrian underpass and two junctions. It is asphalted and has concrete
sidewalks on both sides.
There are commercial buildings as well as an institutional (MITD) building in the surroundings. A small
river runs along one side of the link.
(a) (b) (c)
(d) (e)
Figure 15 (a) Residential areas and asphaltic roads; (b) River; (c) MITD building; (d) bus top and sidewalks; (e) Underpass
18
4.3.3 Road Defects
No defects were detected.
4.3.4 Road Geometry

The width of both carriageways is 10m .A shoulder of 2.5m is provided. The width of the shoulder is not
uniform along the link. The terrain is levelled.
Figure 16 Road Geometry
4.3.5 Operation System

Speed limit of 80 km/h.
Pedestrian Underpass
Reduce speed sign
(a) (b)
Figure 17 (a) Speed limit 80 km/h; (b) 'REDUCE SPEED NOW' sign
19
5.0 Methodology
5.1 Definition of our problem
The site to carry out investigation was Pont Fer roundabout. Found on the center of the small island, it is
one of the most frequently used roundabouts. A study of the site road network, through a small
reconnaissance, specified that it is bound by three main links and one link directing towards the
industrial area, Petit Camp. Data collection, to access the roundabout performance, was tedious and
was done by all 5 members.
5.2 Sampling in times

Our surveys were done only during the peak hour to access the main problem. Our surveys started at
7.00 a.m. to finish at 9.30 a.m. on Thursday and Fridays due to our studies. The choice to start our
survey at 7.00 a.m. was based on the information given by the traffic policeman on the site, when we
did our reconnaissance. We were informed that peak hour usually is between 6.45 a.m. to about 10.00
a.m. So we opt for a peak hour of 7.00 a.m. to 9.30 a.m. to be reasonable and also liable to our
convenient. Also a one hour delay survey was carried out during the peak hour.
Thursday was ideal for the surveys as there is higher probability that commuters will be travelling on this
particular day. One important fact to consider is surveys should not be conducted when traffic flow is
affected by abnormal conditions such as accidents, roadworks, Public holiday, public processions and
severe weather conditions (particularly heavy rain).
5.3 Types of survey

The following surveys were carried out:
1. Classified Manual Link Count

2. Turning Movement Count
3. Delay surveys
All the survey forms were designed in a way to simplify the recording of data at the site. The survey
forms were based on those shown in the Overseas Road Note 11 and are found in Appendix B.
It was important to establish a plan of work with each member allocated a responsibility each time a
particular survey was carried out. It was hence essential for each member to have an understanding of
the methodologies and procedures adopted for the surveys.
20
5.4 Road Inventory Survey- LINK COUNT
5.4.1 Aim and Objective:
Aim: To assess the traffic volume at defined station, shown below

Objective: For a specific station, number of vehicles and type of vehicles passing the stations was
recorded in an unambiguous time period.
Four stations were defined as shown in figure below:
Figure 18 Stations for link count
21
5.4.2 Criteria for choice of stations (for manual traffic count):
The station was chosen based on their strategic locations (Bus-stop, under a tree) taking into
consideration of the aim of our study, that is assessing the grade separation junction.
Four stations were enabled at a given time, as we were only 5 students. Hence we could collect data
for two links only, in both directions.
We positioned ourselves just adjacent to the stations to avoid parallax error.
We positioned ourselves on the roadside, a region where we were safe, with minimum hindrance to
the traffic.
We needed to find shelter to the extremes of weather also.(During sunny day)
The position we chose also was based on the fact that we needed to have full control over the
traffic.
5.4.3 Descriptions of stations

Station 1: It is found at the left side on the multi-lane dual carriageway where vehicles are heading
towards the south. It is found between the Pont Fer roundabout and the Pont Fer bus stop (as shown in
Figure). It is typically under a tree ( to protect oneself from the sun)All vehicles leading toward the south
were noted.
Station 2: It is found at the left side on the multi-lane dual carriageway where vehicles are coming from
the south. It is found between the Pont Fer roundabout and the Pont Fer bus stop (as shown Figure). It
is typically under a tree (to protect oneself from the sun) All vehicles coming from the south using this
traffic to roundabout were noted.
Station 3: It is found on the left side on the multi-lane dual carriageway where vehicles are heading
towards the Jumbo/Vacoas. This station is beside bus stop where observer was safe from the traffic
unlike in station 1 and 2. All vehicles coming from the roundabout toward Jumbo/Vacoas were noted.
Station 4: It is found at the left side on the multi-lane dual carriageway where vehicles are coming from
Jumbo/Vacoas and moving towards the roundabout. This station is also beside a bus stop where
observer was safe from the traffic. Vehicles heading toward the roundabout were noted.
5.4.4 Equipment:
Electronic counting board(Mobile phones application: Multi Counter)

Stopwatch
22
5.4.5 Field Procedures
1. Vehicles are classified into 5 catergories namely:
Car
Van
Bus
Good Vehicle
Motorcycle
2. Each one of us positioned ourselves at each of the 4 stations during the peak hour(7.00 am
9.00 am)
3. Each one of us was equipped with a stop-watch.
4. The number and type of vehicles were recorded passing the station for each period of 15
minutes.
5. Then the flow rate for the 15-min period was evaluated. ( in analysis section)
5.4.6 Difficulties encountered:

At peak flow several vehicles would pass the stations simultaneously meaning that it became
tedious to record the vehicles.
In case a bus passes by, we have the tendency to miss the vehicles passing beside the bus.
At time, we had to take a break to drink some water which had led to error.
Failure to classify some vehicles into their true position due to lack of time.
23
5.5 Classified Turning Movement Count
It is generally considered that the most ideal method of carrying out a turning count survey is the record
straight ahead, left and right turning manoeuvres count coming from each and every leg simultaneously.
Furthermore, to identify the reliability of surveyors, a check count what we normally referred to, is
executed which basically consist of recording all the vehicles coming from the entry and compared to
the summation of the straight ahead, left turning and right turning movements counts which are
expected to be equal. Usually it is equally advised to carry out the traffic counting on a single day due to
the fact that counting on different days often lead to insignificant result like negative volume.
However due to limited man power and time constraint, the ideal method could not be implemented in
this assignment. But, nonetheless, we amended the methodology as per our resources and tried not to
deviate much from the original one.
5.5.1 Preparations
Firstly, confining to our modus operandi, we allocated 2 days for the turning count survey, the first part
was carried out on 23 October 2015 while the second on 30 October. One important note here is that
the decisions behind the selection of these days are intentional as both of them are Fridays and well
before the start of school holidays. Consequently, the relevancy of our data would be intact.
Since the roundabout consist principally of four entries and keeping in line with the limiting factors, we
decided to record the turning counts movement for straight ahead, left and right turning manoeuvres
coming from each of the four entries for one hour during the early morning peak hours. So, in
agreement to our previous decision on the allocation of days and the duration of the peak hours, turning
count for traffic coming from two entries was executed on the first day while the remaining two on the
second day.
Fortunately, we were equally allowed to incorporate the check count mentioned earlier so as to access
the precision of the counting and it would be unwise to not mention that we are talking of a Classified
Turning Count Survey here.
Next, we located the possible stations based on good visibility and full traffic control criteria. Here we
should admit that in a roundabout, it is quite difficult to look for stations ensuring for a good visibility as
well providing the required shelter. So in this case, we had to compromise.
5.5.2 Required Equipment

Electronics Counters
Standard sheets to record the data
Protective equipment such as sunglasses and umbrellas.
Once the tasks were allocated for each member and the required equipment were arranged, we
proceeded to the site.
24
5.5.3 Description of Roundabout
The Pont Fer Roundabout
To Port Louis
Phoenix
Beverages
To Petit Camp
PHOENIX
LES
HALLES
To the South
MITD
To Vacoas
Figure 19 The Pont Fer Roundabout
Following the pilot survey, it was this roundabout which proved to be the most critical and as described
earlier, it consisted principally of four leg entries; from the South, from Port Louis, from Vacoas and from
Petit Camp. Some of the technical descriptions are: that there is double lane on the roundabout,
presence of superelevation and road markings.
25
The following sketches describe how data was collected for each entry.
Entry from the South
Entry from the South
Figure 20 Entry from the South
Position of Surveyors
The approach from the South was considered on the first day, 23 October 2015, between 7.00 am to
8.15 am. The counting was carried out for four 15 minutes intervals with a break of 5 minutes in
between. Being a team of 5 members the task were allocated as follows:
Member 1- counting of the Total Traffic from the South

Member 2- counting of traffic turning left ( Towards Vacoas)
Member 3- counting of traffic going straight forward ( Towards Port Louis)
Member 4- counting of traffic turning right ( Towards Petit Camp)
Member 5- Recording of the data during the break.
26
Entry from Vacoas
Entry from Vacoas
Position of
Member 5
Position of
Member 1
Figure 21 Entry from Vacoas
Position of Member
2,3& 4
Likewise, the approach from vacoas was equally considered on 23 October 2015 but between 8.20 am to
9.35 am. The procedures are similar as above, however due to the presence of a pass by towards Port
Louis, the task of the member were modified and are as follows:
Member 1- counting of the Total Traffic from the Vacoas

Member 2- counting of traffic turning left passing through the roundabout ( Towards Port Louis)
Member 3- counting of traffic going straight forward ( Towards Petit Camp)
Member 4- counting of traffic turning right ( Towards the South)
Member 5- counting of traffic passing through the pass-by towards Port Louis
During the breaks, all the members recorded their individual data; however the data of Member 2 and 5
were summed up before the recording.
27
Entry from Port Louis
Position of Surveyors
Entry from Port Louis
Figure 22 Entry from Port Louis
After the successful survey carried out on 23 October 2015, now we were on Friday 30 October 2015
and we were considering traffic approaching from Port Louis the counting started from 7.00 am to 8.15
am including the breaks. The procedures are similar to that of the approach from the south, except of
the changes in the turning directions. Tasks of members are as follows:
Member 1- counting of the Total Traffic from Port Louis

Member 2- counting of traffic turning left ( Towards Petit Camp)
Member 3- counting of traffic going straight forward ( Towards the South)
Member 4- counting of traffic turning right ( Towards Vacoas)
Member 5- Recording of the data during the break
28
Entry From Petit Camp
Entry from petit Camp
Position
of
Surveyors
Figure 23 Entry from Petit Camp
The last approach, that is approach from Petit Camp, was studied on 30 October 2015 itself, between
8.20 am to 9.35 am. Procedures are similar as above and the tasks are as follows:
Member 1- counting of the Total Traffic from Petit Camp

Member 2- counting of traffic turning left ( Towards the South)
Member 3- counting of traffic going straight forward ( Towards the Vacoas)
Member 4- counting of traffic turning right ( Towards Port Louis)
Member 5- Recording of the data during the break
5.5.4 Difficulties Encountered

It is true that the Classified Turning Movement Count was successfully executed, but however we can
deny neither the fact of the presences of difficulties aroused during the processes. These difficulties
encountered are as follows:
Due to the presence of relatively high goods vehicles on the Roundabout, long observations
were affected.
Despite the fact that stations were chosen based on criteria mentioned earlier, it happened that
in some position, we were helpless and due to the lack of resources we could not arranged for
the shelter required.
29
5.6 Journey Time Delay Survey Floating Car Method
The aim of this survey is to determine the total time taken to complete a certain trip, including the time
during which the car was stationary. The reasons for which the car had to stop are identified and the
time elapsed during these situations is recorded.
In this way, we can determine the average travel time and compare the time during which the car is
moving with that of when it is stationary. Alongside this, by means of this survey, we can also determine
the average speed of the car as it moves from one point to another as well as for the whole trip itself.
As a matter of fact, the above mentioned parameters are important when trying to determine the
quality of flow on a certain road since they directly affect the drivers ability to move freely and their
comfort.
5.6.1 Preparations
1. Since the floating car method is used to survey only cars, a proper survey car was arranged for.
2. A suitable date and time period was selected.
3. 3 main points labeled A, B and C was identified on a map before the survey and these were
further subdivided into 6 different nodes.
4. We made sure all required equipment was available. Those included
i. A digital watch (that can read even seconds)
ii. A stopwatch
iii. A delay survey sheet for recording the data
5. The tasks were allocated as follows:
i. Member 1 Driving the car
ii. Member 2 Taking note of the actual time
iii. Member 3 Taking note of the time elapsed while the car was stationary
iv. Member 4 Identifying the reasons causing the delays
v. Member 5 Recording all data on the survey sheet
30
Figure 24 Map showing position of A, B and C by a cross
5.6.2 Execution
1. The survey was finally carried out on Friday, 23rd October 2015 during the afternoon peak hour.
2. Once all the preparations were complete, we proceeded to a pilot survey to familiarize
ourselves with the work to be done.
3. At 3.36 p.m., we started the survey at point A, labeled as node 1.
4. The strating time was recorded.
5. As we moved from A to C, the positions were labeled as follows:
A node 1, B node 2, C node 3
As we moved back from C to A, the positions were labeled as:
C node 4, B node 5, C node 6
6. Everytime we came across a constraint that would cause the car to stop, the nature of the
constraint was recorded as well as the time during which the car was stationary.
7. The times at which we passed each of the nodes (timing points) were recorded.
8. The trip from A to C and back was repeated 5 more times, which gave us a total number of 6
trips.
31
5.6.3 Problems encountered
The driver had to ensure that her driving style was not being influenced by the survey.
It was difficult at first to work in synchrony with each other and to get accustomed the assigned
tasks and hence the pilot survey took longer than expected.
The distance travelled during the delay survey and the pathway taken were kept shorter than
required for the sake of ease. Otherwise, the survey would be too time consuming.
32
6.0 Results of Study
6.1 Link Count
The results for manual traffic count are computed as shown below. It is to be noted that Form G, from
ORN 11 to collect data.
6.1.2 Link 1
Table 3 From curepipe and roundabout
FROM CUREPIPE TO ROUNDABOUT
TIME Cars Vans Buses Goods Motorcycle
Vehicles
7.00-7.15 346 72 36 37 49
7.15-7.30 494 57 38 35 46
7.30-7.45 513 81 37 41 51
7.45-8.00 492 61 21 33 31
8.00-8.15 480 31 10 27 21
8.15-8.30 432 54 25 43 30
8.30-8.45 433 33 24 21 26
8.45-9.00 419 22 21 30 15
9.00-9.15 402 27 20 8 19
9.15-9.30 423 72 35 38 19
Total 4341 510 267 313 307
Total Traffic in 2 hour 30 minute: 5821Vehicles
Table 4 From roundabout to curepipe

FROM ROUNDABOUT TO CUREPIPE
Vehicles
7.00-7.15 157 38 10 28 25
7.15-7.30 202 27 16 42 16
7.30-7.45 257 44 24 54 44
7.45-8.00 212 51 25 58 38
8.00-8.15 248 24 16 45 53
8.15-8.30 202 18 11 33 25
8.30-8.45 230 26 18 26 24
8.45-9.00 204 21 11 20 15
9.00-9.15 199 20 8 27 8
9.15-9.30 201 20 8 19 14
Total 2112 289 147 352 262
Total Traffic in 2 hour 30 minute: 3162 Vehicles
33
6.1.3 Link 2
Table 5 From jumbo to roundabout

FROM JUMBO TO ROUNDABOUT
Vehicles
7.00-7.15 364 45 11 22 43
7.15-7.30 496 37 14 18 62
7.30-7.45 481 55 21 25 58
7.45-8.00 473 47 26 31 44
8.00-8.15 462 51 19 24 42
8.15-8.30 492 31 16 23 37
8.30-8.45 421 33 18 18 21
8.45-9.00 409 47 15 22 19
9.00-9.15 395 47 19 16 24
9.15-9.30 410 39 20 22 27
TOTAl 4403 432 179 221 377
Total Traffic in 2 hour 30 minute: 5612Vehicles
Table 6 From roundabout to jumbo

FROM ROUNDABOUT TO JUMBO
TIME Cars Vans Buses Goods Vehicles Motorcycle
7.00-7.15 180 30 34 25 48
7.15-7.30 201 40 37 16 43
7.30-7.45 271 58 41 33 31
7.45-8.00 260 43 36 8 41
8.00-8.15 205 51 21 16 55
8.15-8.30 281 28 18 22 28
8.30-8.45 276 68 37 9 26
8.45-9.00 284 41 25 24 42
9.00-9.15 241 18 10 17 24
9.15-9.30 239 28 9 12 27
TOTAL 2438 405 268 182 365
Total Traffic in 2 hour 30 minute: 3658 Vehicles
Remarks:
Weather was fine
Policemen arrives at 06 45. Queues start to form.
Flow was recorded at peak hour
34
6.2 Turning Movement Count
All movements were recorded on the roundabout with respect to four arms.
Table 7 Movement of vehicles

Arm Names To
From Port- Louis South Petit Camp Jumbo Port Louis
From Jumbo Port Louis Petit Camp South Jumbo( no vehicles recorded)
From South Jumbo Port Louis Petit Camp South
From Petit Camp South Jumbo Port Louis Petit Camp (No vehicles recorded)
6.2.1 From Port Louis
Table 8 From Port Louis

Arm Name: From Port Louis
Time Vehicle Type Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3
South Petit South Jumbo Port
Champ Louis
7.00- Car 132 19 51 65 2
7.15 Bus 15 2 5 5 0
Van 10 2 6 8 0
Goods Vehicle 35 8 10 18 0
Motorcycle 4 1 0 2 1
7.20- Car 161 31 64 102 1
7.35 Bus 21 3 10 8 0
Van 25 3 19 5 1
7.40- Car 124 15 31 61 2
7.55 Bus 18 1 8 6 0
Van 16 6 8 6 1
8.00- Car 104 22 44 72 1
8.15 Bus 17 1 6 4 1
Van 13 0 2 3 0
Total Vehicles in 1h 801 140 299 399 12
35
6.2.2 From Jumbo
Table 9 From Jumbo

Arm Name: From Jumbo
Time Vehicle Type Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3
Port Louis Port Petit South
Louis Camp
8:20 - 8:35 Car 439 75 21 39
Bus 9 0 0 1
Van 19 1 3 3
Goods 10 0 3 6
Vehicle
Motorcycle 30 1 1 1
8:40 8:55 Car 452 81 19 32
Bus 15 0 0 3
Van 26 0 10 6
Goods 17 0 11 9
Vehicle
Motorcycle 46 0 3 4
9:00 -9:15 Car 448 79 30 47
Bus 12 0 0 1
Van 23 3 9 2
Goods 21 0 8 7
Vehicle
Motorcycle 41 2 4 0
9:20 - 9.35 Car 435 71 24 32
Bus 11 0 0 2
Van 15 1 5 3
Goods 15 0 6 5
Vehicle
Motorcycle 32 0 2 1
Total Vehicles in 1h 2116 314 159 204
36
6.2.3 From South
Table 10 From South

Arm Name: From South
Time Vehicle Lane 1 Lane 2
Type Jumbo Port Port Petit South
Louis Louis Camp
7.00- Car 53 135 282 6 4
7.15 Bus 5 22
Van 7 12 11 1
Goods 3 5 1 1
Vehicle
Motorcycle 2 3 16
7.20- Car 74 142 296 9
7.35 Bus 11 27 0
Van 11 17 9
Goods 9 7 2 1
Vehicle
Motorcycle 8 8 14 1
7.40- Car 69 150 293 5 1
7.55 Bus 13 29 0
Van 14 21 4
Goods 8 12 1 3
Vehicle
Motorcycle 6 16 11
8.00- Car 75 146 301 11 1
8.15 Bus 11 33 0
Van 17 19 14
Goods 11 15 3 3
Vehicle
Motorcycle 9 24 7
Total Vehicles in 1h 416 843 1265 40 7
37
6.2.4 From Petit Camp
Table 11 From Petit Camp

Arm Name: From Petit Champ
Time Vehicle Type Lane Lane 2
1
South Jumbo Port Louis
7.00-7.15 Car 6 8 7
Bus 0 0 0
Van 5 1 5
Goods 1 3 4
Vehicle
Motorcycle 0 2 1
7.20-7.35 Car 8 12 12
Bus 0 0 0
Van 10 5 7
Goods 4 6 9
Vehicle
Motorcycle 1 5 4
7.40-7.55 Car 9 8 10
Bus 0 0 0
Van 5 5 2
Goods 3 4 11
Vehicle
Motorcycle 2 3 4
8.00-8.15 Car 6 8 7
Bus 0 0 0
Van 4 3 5
Goods 1 3 3
Vehicle
Motorcycle 0 2 3
Total Vehicles in 1h 65 78 96
38
6.3 Delay Survey
The tables below show the data acquired from the delay surveys carried out for each trip. The raw data
has been annexed at the end of the report. Form M in the Overseas Road Note was used to record the
data for delay survey.
The locations and nodes are as identified in the delay survey methodology. A trip consisted of the car
moving from A, at the Supercash roundabout to C, the Jumbo roundabout and then from there, back to
the starting point, A.
Trip 1
Table 12 Trip 1
Location Node Time Passing No of Total Time Stopped Reasons
Name Number h min s Stops min s
Start, A 1 15 36 0
B 2 15 39 37 10 1 28 J
C 3 15 40 20 0 N
C 4 15 40 20
B 5 15 41 57 2 0 25 J, S
End, A 6 15 42 17 N
Trip 2
Table 13 Trip 2
Start, A 1 15 42 17
B 2 15 48 2 10 1 44 J
C 3 15 48 46 1 5 S
C 4 15 48 46
B 5 15 50 5 1 23 J, S
End, A 6 15 51 11 1 4 J
Trip 3
Table 14 Trip 3
Start, A 1 15 51 11
B 2 15 56 58 10 3 12 J
C 3 15 58 36 3 33 S
C 4 15 58 36
B 5 16 2 16 7 2 25 J, S
End, A 6 16 3 13 N
39
Trip 4
Table 15 Trip 4
Start, A 1 16 3 13
B 2 16 12 10 18 5 13 B, J
C 3 16 12 51 N
C 4 16 12 51
B 5 16 17 34 9 2 41 J, S
End, A 6 16 18 11 N
Trip 5
Table 16 Trip 5
Start, A 1 16 18 11
B 2 16 26 56 16 6 17 B, J
C 3 16 28 29 2 42 S, J
C 4 16 28 29
B 5 16 32 39 9 3 2 J, S
End, A 6 16 34 43 2 1 12 J
Trip 6
Table 17 Trip 6
Start, A 1 16 34 43
B 2 16 44 19 17 6 33 B, J
C 3 16 46 8 4 1 7 S, J
C 4 16 46 8
B 5 16 50 12 8 2 58 J, S
End, A 6 16 52 31 2 1 22 J
40
7.0 Analysis of Results
7.1 Link Count

7.1.1 Link 1
Graph analysis of link 1
Graph 1 Variation of traffic flow with time on link 1(one way only)
South to roundabout Traffic flow on Link 1 Thursday 22 October 2015
800
700
600
Cars
Number of vehicles
500
Vans
400
Buses
300 Good
vehicles
Motocycle
200
Total
100
0
7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00
Time(peak hour)/ hr
41
Graph 2 Variation of traffic flow with time on link 1(one way)
Roundabout to south Traffic flow on Link 1 Thursday 22

October 2015
450
400
350
Cars
Number of vehicles
300
Vans
250
Buses
200
Goods
150 Vehicle
Motorcy
100 cle
Total
50
0
7 8 9 10
Time (peak hour)/ hr
Graph 3 Total traffic flow variation with time in both directions
Total traffic flow on link 1 (both ways) on Thursday 22 October

2015
1200.00
Total number of vehicles
1000.00
800.00
600.00 Total in both directions
400.00
200.00
0.00
7 8 Time/hr 9 10
42
Finding the passenger car unit of each lane
The maximum traffic flow is between 7.30 a.m. and 7.45 a.m.
The capacity of a single lane is the maximum number of vehicles that can pass the stop line of a lane.
The basic saturation flow (for 2 way lane) is 1800 PCU/h, PCE stands for passenger car equivalent. Since
Lorries, busses and vans need more time to pass the stop line, they have a higher PCU.
The data for the 15 minute is as followed:
Table 18 Calculation of maximum flow rate for link 1 (one direction)

Type of Vehicle Count Multiplying Factor PCU
Motorcycles 41 0.4 16
Car 513 1 513
Vans 81 1 81
Buses 37 2.25 83
Good Vehicles 41 2.1 86
Total 743 779
Total vehicles in 15 min =743
Hence the capacity per lane =

= 1486 veh/h
Total PCU in 15 min = 819
The basic saturation flow of the link 1(one way only & 2 lanes) =3316 PCU/h
Hence for one lane only, total = 1558PCU/h
For the same time lapse, the traffic flow in the opposite direction was as follows
Table 19 Calculation of maximum flow rate for link 1 (one direction)

Car 257 1 257
Vans 44 1 44
Buses 24 2.25 54
Total 423 486
Hence the capacity of lane =

= 846 veh/h
The basic saturation flow of the link 1(one way only & 2 lanes) =1944PCU/h
43
Hence for one lane only, Total = 972PCU/h
7.1.2 Link 2
Graph analysis of link 2
Graph 4 Variation of traffic flow with time on link 2(one way only)
Jumbo to roundabout Traffic flow on link 2, Thursday 22

October 2015
700
600
Cars
500
Vans
400
Number of vehicles
Buses
300
Goods
200 Vehicles
100
0
7 8 9 10
Time/hour
Graph 5 Variation of traffic flow with time for link 2 (one way lanes)
Roundabout to Jumbo Traffic flow on link 2, Thursday 22

October 2015
500
450
400
Cars
350
Number of vehicles
300 Vans
250 Buses
200 Goods vehicles

150 Motorcycle
100
Total
50
0
7 8 9 10
Time/hr
44
Graph 6 Total traffic variation with time (2 way lanes)
Total traffic flow on link 2, Thursday 22 October 2015
1200
1000
Number of vehicles
800
600
400
Total in both
200 direction
0
7 8 9 10
Time(peak hour)/ hr
Finding the passenger car unit for each lane
The maximum traffic flow on that road is also in-between 7.30 and 7.45
Table 20 Calculation of the maximum flow rate for link 2 (one way lanes)
Car 481 1 481
Vans 55 1 55
Buses 21 2.25 47
Total 640 659

= 1280 veh/h
The basic saturation flow of the link 1(one way only & 2 lanes) = 2636 PCU/h
45
For the same time lapse, the traffic flow in the opposite direction was as follows
Table 21 Calculation of maximun flow rate on link 2 (one way lane)

Car 271 1 271
Vans 58 1 58
Buses 41 2.25 92
Total 434 502

= 860 veh/h
The basic saturation flow of the link 1(one way only & 2 lanes) =2008 PCU/h
Therefore,
The total traffic flow of link 1 in both directions is therefore (1558 + 972): 2530 PCU/h.
And the total traffic flow of link 2 in both directions is (1318 +1004): 2322 PCU/h
46
Discussion for both links
Comparison of saturation flow rate(PCU/hr)

to link 1 and link 2
4000
3500
3000
Basic saturation
2500 flow
2000 Link 1 saturation
flow
1500
Link 2 saturation
1000 flow
500
0
Category 1
Figure 19 Comparison of saturation flow rate between link 1 and 2
From the chart above, it can be seen that both link cannot accommodate the actual demand at peak
time as the maximum PCU per hour (1800 PCU per hour). It is hence important to propose new solution
to decrease congestion on both the links.
Another important question is how much traffic the the road can carry. Current studies present the
relationships between the capacity of the road link/node and the resulting level-of-service
level service offered to the
user of the road.. Assuming the free flow speed
spe of 70 km/h on the two links, the he LOS and its respective
service volume is as tabulated below:
Table 22 LOS criteria for Multilane highway (Extracted from HCM 2000)
LOS Flow conditions v/c ratio Service volume
(veh/h)
A Stable 0.26 490
B Stable 0.41 770
C Stable 0.59 1120
D High density 0.85 1530
E Near capacity 1.00 1900
Note: LOS F has been characterized by highly unstable and variable traffic low. Prediction of accurate
flow rate at level F is difficult
47
The maximum calculated volume per lane is tabulated below:
Table 23 Comparison of volume of the links

Road Service volume LOS
(veh/h)/per lane
Link 1( south to 1486 D
roundabout)
Link 1(roundabout 846 C
to south)
Link 2(Jumbo to 1280 D
roundabout)
Link 2(Roundabout 860 C
to Jumbo)
From the result above, it can be conclude that the maximum service volume is on the link, where traffic
is heading from south to the roundabout. Further evaluation of the vehicles turning movement from the
south is analysed in the next part, Turning Movement count. This link has a worst LOS than other link,
which is LOS D. The link heading toward the Pont fer roundabout from Jumbo roundabout is also of
concerned.
Henceforth, there is an urgent need to improve the road conditions for the different links. The road
infrastructures need to be reviewed and new solution needs to be proposed to have a more fluid traffic
on this motorway.
48
7.2 Turning Movement Count
Number of vehicles per hour in each direction of flow about the roundabout
PORT LOUIS PLAN OF ACTIONS:
NORTH From:
Port Louis 30 October 2015

12 7:00 am to 8:15 am
Petit Camp 23 October 2015

399 140
1100 8:20 am to 9:35 am
2116
314 96
PETIT CAMP
JUMBO
159 78
Inscribed diameter,
d= 78 m 65
204
PLAN OF ACTIONS:
From:
South 23 October 2015 416 2108 40

7:00 am to 8:15 am
Jumbo 23 October
20158:20 am to 9:35 am 7
SOUTH
49
Figure 26 Service volume (veh/h) in each direction of movement
Total number of vehicles entering the roundabout from each arm
Figure 26 shows the volume of traffic per hour in each direction of movement at the roundabout
roundabout. The
total
al number of traffic entering the roundabout from each arm is calculated
calculated and shown in figure 27
below.
Figure 27 Total number of vehicles entering the roundabout in 1 hr
Finding percentage of vehicle entering the roundabout from each arm
To show which arm holds the most traffic during the peak hour, the percentage of vehicle entering the
roundabout from each arm is calculated using the formula below:

% = 100

where,, the total number of vehicles entering the roundabout= 677+1651+239+2571=5138 veh/h
Note:
The amount of vehicles passing through the bypass from Jumbo to Port Louis (2116 veh/h) is rejected in
the calculation of the total number of vehicles entering the roundabout.
50
Table 24 Percentage of vehicle entering the roundabout from each arm in 1 hour
Percentage of vehicle entering the roundabout
Arm name
(%)
From Port Louis 32.1
From Petit Camp 4.65
From South 50.0
From Jumbo 13.2
Discussion
The data from table 24
4 is represented in a pie chart below.
Percentage of vehicles entering the

roundabout from each arm
13%
32%
From Port Louis
From Petit Camp
From South
From Jumbo
5%
50%
Figure 20 Percentage of vehicles entering the roundabout from each arm
It can be seen that maximum percentage of vehicles entering the roundabout during the peak hour is
from the south. Therefore, free flow of traffic is normally restricted
restricted in this direction. Very often, delays
and long term queues result, leading to uncomfortable and inconvenient
inconvenient driving. These conditions
reduce the level of service of the road and lead to congestion. The The roundabout performs poorly.
Actions to improve the level of service of this road are thus required.
51
7.3 Delay Survey
Assessing time taken to complete trips
For all trips starting at node 1, point A, the Supercash roundabout and ending back there at node 6, the
running time, i.e. the time taken for the vehicle to travel that distance without delay has been
determined as well as the journey time, which includes the time during which the vehicle was
stationary. This was done to have a better comparison between the two.
The journey time has been calculated by subtracting the time passing of the start of the trip from that of
the end. The running time was calculated by simply subtracting the delay time from the journey time.
The results are as shown below in the table below:
Table 25 Journey and Running time

Trip 1 2 3 4 5 6
No
Journey 6 min 17 s 8 min 54 s 12 min 2 s 14 min 58 s 16 min 32 s 17 min 48 s
Time
Running 4 min 24 s 6 min 38 s 5 min 52 s 7 min 4 s 5 min 19 s 5 min 48 s
Time
Our delay survey started about 25 minutes before the afternoon peak hour which starts at 4.00 p.m. and
as it can be seen, as we progressed from the off peak to peak hour, the journey time increased
considerably. While it would take about 4-7 minutes to complete the trip without stopping, due to the
traffic congestion occurring during the peak hour, the journey time might move from about 6 minutes to
even up to 20 minutes with a lot of delay and restricted movement.
The density of the traffic clearly increases as the spacing between vehicles decreases to such an extent
that we have to make a lot of stops during our journey thereby contributing to the time stopped. Care
should be taken when driving in such conditions as accidents might easily occur and any minor incident
would only aggravate the situation.
52
The Delay Time
As we move from off peak to peak hour, the total delay time (total time during which vehicle was
stationary) for the journey increases by a large extent as the road becomes more and more congested.
This can be shown in the figure below:
Figure 21 Delay time
As a matter of fact, having to wait for more than 10 minutes on a motorway connecting important
centres is simply inacceptable.
Calculating running and journey speeds
The distances between the nodes (obtained from Google Maps) are as follows:
Node 1 Node 2: 700 m
Total distance from Node 1 Node 6 = 2150 m = 2.15 km
53
The different speeds were then calculated by the following formula:
=
The distance was converted into kilometers and the time into hours for easier comparison with the
speeds prevailing at the junction.
Using trip 1 as an e.g.,
Distance travelled = 2.15 km

Journey Time = 6 min 17 s = 377 s
3600 = 1
1
377 = 377 = 0.10472
3600
\ = 2.15 0.10472 = 20.5 /
Table 26 Journey and running speeds

Trip 1 2 3 4 5 6
No
Journey
Speed/ 20.5 14.5 10.7 8.6 7.8 7.2
km/h
Running
Speed/ 29.3 19.4 22.0 18.3 24.3 22.2
km/h
From the above table, the decrease in the journey speed over time is blatant and clearly shows that
traffic congestion is a major problem that is gangrening the roads around the pont fer roundabout.
Discussion
From the delay analysis carried out, it has been proven that there is indeed a big concern about the
current situation at the Pont Fer roundabout. The huge influx of vehicles from all directions to a single
point, especially during the peak hours, causes a lot of traffic congestion thereby considerably reducing
comfort and the ease of movement at the roundabout which is actually the opposite of what a good
road system should provide for. As it is, the delay survey has shown how the congestion at Pont Fer
affects both the speed and travel time which are essential factors affecting the level of service of a road.
A motorway that acts as a link between important population centres cannot afford to provide a poor
LOS to the road users. However, the current conditions there need a lot of improvement.
As a matter of fact, there are a lot of interruptions, no freedom to travel with desired speed and the
movement is highly restricted all due to the congestion problems. And of course, this leads to driver
discomfort. It is not amusing at all to wait for more than 10 minutes in a queue and complete a journey
that would normally take around 5 minutes in 20 minutes. Finally, with so many stops and the proximity
of the vehicles, the road users are not safe from possible accidents that may occur. Hence, there is a
need to bring up potential solutions so as to improve the situation at Pont Fer.
54
8.0 Discussion
From the analysis of the three studies, the major problem identified at the Jumbo-Phoenix junction is
congestion. Level of comfort and convenience is very poor at peak hours. Speed of vehicles and spacing
between them decrease drastically and significant vigilance is required on the part of the driver as other
vehicles obstruct traffic flow. Lane changes, merging and diverging movement are affected and to
control the flow of traffic, help from policemen is required at the roundabout. To counteract this
problem, three alternatives have been proposed:
1. Grade separation (Flyover and underpass) at the roundabout

2. Diversion between Sodnac link road and M2 North link
3. Construction of a parking lot near the vicinity to park private cars and encourage mass
transportation via buses- Park and Ride project
9.0 Traffic Projection

To further justify the need of a project to decrease congestion at the Phoenix- Jumbo junction, a traffic
forecast for the next 15 years is carried out. The traffic growth rate used is 6%. This is obtained from a
report drafted by Mr Caderassen Dorsamy and Mr Chansraj Puchooa on Alleviating Traffic Congestion
along the M1 Corridor: an economic perspective. The estimated traffic is calculated in veh/h for the
next 15 years and is shown in the table below.
Table 277 Traffic projection for the next 15 years

Year Amount of traffic entering the
roundabout during morning
peak hour(veh/h)
2015 5138
2016 5446
2017 5772
2018 6118
2019 6485
2020 6874
2021 7286
2022 7723
2023 8186
2024 8677
2025 9197
2026 9748
2027 10332
2028 10951
2029 11608
2030 12304
55
The date from table 27 is represented in a graph below.
Graph 7 Amount of traffic from 2015-2030 in morning peak hour
Amount of traffic from 2015-2030 in

morning peak hour
14000
Amount of vehicles per hour (veh/h)
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029 2030
2029
Year
As it can be seen from the graph, traffic on the road will keep on increasing with traffic being 12304
veh/h in the year 2030. This will only aggravate the congestion problem with consequent decrease in
the level of service of the junction. That is why there is a need to provide a remedy to the problem and
to ensure easy and smooth flow of traffic at the Phoenix-Jumbo junction.
Three solutions as numerated in section 8.0 above have been proposed. Further details of each solution
will now be given in the following sections.
56
10.0 Alternative 1: Grade separation
10.1 The Project
10.1.1 Project Location
Considering the turning movement count analysis in section 7.2, most vehicles travel from south to Port
Louis during the morning peak hour. Number of vehicles travelling from Port Louis to Jumbo is also
significant. To counteract this problem, a two-level grade separation has been proposed in Phoenix. The
grade separation will comprise of a flyover and an underpass. The flyover will expand from M2 South
link to M2 North Link while the underpass will connect the M2 North link with the Jumbo link, also
known as the Nalletamby road.
Underpass from
Port Louis to
Jumbo
To Jumbo
Figure 22 Project Location
10.1.2 Project Objectives

As traffic on the road keeps on increasing and congestion keeps on decreasing the level of service of the
road, there is little space left in both the dimensions. Then, the only option left will be to go to the third
dimension and that is done through grade separation construction. Grade separation can be at different
levels. Above ground level, flyovers are built and below natural ground, underpasses are constructed.
The main objective of the grade separated junction at Pont Fer junction is to avoid congestion on the
existing links, decreasing the amount of vehicles passing a point and increasing the level of comfort and
57
convenience. As a result, the level of service of the junction is enhanced significantly. Therefore, in
accommodating the number of traffic on the road, the highway will perform better and drivers will not
have to wait at the roundabout. Traffic will flow freely.
Figure 31 Existing Traffic condition
From South to
Port Louis
From Port Louis

to South From Port Louis
to Jumbo
Figure 32 Free Flow of traffic on flyover and underpass after construction
58
Other objectives of the grade separation include:
Time saving by decreasing congestion.
Reduction in vehicle operation cost as less fuel is used.
Reduction in vehicle maintenance cost due to less wear and tear of tyres.
Reduction in accidents and the costs associated with them.
10.1.3 Project Description

This solution was proposed according to the turning movement count obtained in section 7.2. The
results obtained were as follows;
Figure 33 Turning Count Movement Analysis
From figure 33, it can be perceived that;

Maximum number vehicles travel from M2 south link to M2 North link per hour during morning
peak hour.
The 339 vehicles per hour moving from M2 North link to jumbo link has to go through the entire
roundabout before entering the jumbo link. Very often, these vehicles are stopped at the star-
marked position ( ) on figure 33 by the policeman controlling traffic in the morning. These
vehicles sometimes wait for significant number of vehicles to leave the south link before
regaining their course, thereby, delaying their trajectory.
59
To prevent congestion in both directions, a flyover between south link and north link and an underpass
between north link and jumbo link have been proposed, as shown below in figure 33.
Phoenix underpass
Figure 33 Proposed flyover and underpass
Description of flyover
As the traffic on the road goes on increasing and we dont have any space left in both the dimensions,
then the only option left will be to go to the third dimension and that is done through flyover
construction.A grade separated junction is proposed at the Pont Fer roundabout, which is facing major
traffic problems due to increasing number of vehicles. Overpasses are proposed to connect the Port
Louis link and the South link and the slow traffic is made to pass underneath. The main objective of the
flyover is to make the roads easily accessible for day to day traffic.This dual carriageway consisting of
two lanes in each direction will offers a non-interrupted traffic flow from Port Louis to South and vice-
versa.
The proposed length of the flyover is 120 m with two approach ramps of length 100 m each. Hence the
total length of the proposed flyover is 330 m. It is to be noted that the middle flyover is supported by
approximately 6 columns. The new width of the flyover is anticipated as 16 m wide with a 2 m for
central reservation. It consists of a deck slab, longitudinal girders, cross girders, deck beam, pier and
foundation.
The flyover can be further described into two main components:

1. The superstructure
2. The substructure
60
Super-structure of a flyover
1. Bridge deck
Being one of the main superstructures of the flyover, it is the roadway, usually covered with asphalt
concrete. It is one of the integral parts of the flyover and may be supported by column and steel girder.
The deck is considered as slab deck which is known to be analysed as a plate.
Figure 34 Bridge deck

2. Girders
A girder is a support beam in construction. It is the main horizontal support of the deck slab and
supports smaller beams. It is typically refer to a steel beam. Different forms of girders are shown below
below.
Longitudinal girders
Figure 35 Longitudinal Girders
61
Cross girders
Figure 36 Cross Girders
3. Foundation
It consists of mainly abutment and piers.
In engineering, abutment refers to the substructure at the ends of a bridge span or dam whereon the
structure's superstructure rests or contacts. Abutments support the extreme ends of the bridge and
confine the approach embankment, allowing the embankment to be built up to grade with the planned
bridge deck.
Function of an abutment:
It resist self weight, lateral loads and wind loads
It acts a support to one end of approach slab
And most importantly, it transfer loads from superstructure to its foundation
elements.
A pier is a raised structure typically supported by well-spaced piles or pillars.
Figure 37 Pier
62
Sub-structure of a flyover
1. Bearing
A bridge bearing is a component of a bridge which connects the piers and deck.
2. Approach embankment
It provides a transition between the roadway pavement and the bridge. In our case retaining
wall will be used.
Figure 38 Approach Embankment
3. Handrails & parapets

Handrails or parapets are used as a low protective wall along the edge of bridge.
Proposed materials
Concrete and steel used will be according to maximum strength the roads can stand. This will be
analysed by the structural engineers
63
Description of underpass
An underpass is basically a road that allows for the transit of vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians
from one point to another and is found at another level, normally a lower one, as compared to the other
roads in the network.
Figure 39 Example of an underpass from another project

(Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/A3_at_the_Hook_underpass_-
_geograph.org.uk_-_39474.jpg )
Forming part of the grade separated junction proposal that has been put forward to reduce congestion
at the Phoenix Roundabout is a 170 m underpass from Port Louis to the Jumbo link road as shown
previously in Fig. 30.
It was seen from the turning movement count (refer to Fig 26) that the main vehicle movement during
the morning peak hour is from the South towards Port Louis but also from the Jumbo link road towards
Port Louis. Now, the latter actually has a small bypass that permits the vehicles to circumvent the
roundabout and hence the congested area by allowing them to directly access the motorway to the
capital.
However, it is during the afternoon peak hour that the problem arises when this large number of
vehicles has to go back to the Jumbo link road. Since they do not have a direct pathway to the
aforementioned road, they have to pass through the roundabout first and hence this contributes a lot to
the congestion in that area. Hence, considering this route as a critical one too, it has been decided that
an underpass that would directly link the road from Port Louis to that towards Jumbo would be
appropriate. As a matter of fact, this will also prove to be beneficial to the vehicles heading towards
Jumbo during the morning peak hour.
64
The main step in the construction of an underpass is the excavation. Since it will be at a different level as
compared to the other roads, there is a need to accurately determine the amount of soil that needs to
be removed for the construction to progress.
The underpass itself will be a two lane one way road and the major components to be taken into
consideration are:
Retaining Walls
Retaining walls are prominent elements of underpasses and in this case, it will be used mainly to
separate the underpass from the adjacent properties. The latter will be found throughout the whole
underpass.
Figure 40 Possible look of underpass
Ramps
A ramp is simply a short section of the road that allows a vehicle to gain access or leave a certain road.
In this case, the underpass will consists of 2 ramps, one for vehicles to enter at the Port Louis link road
and one for them to leave once they have reached the Jumbo link. It is to be noted that the ramps will
be gently sloped to permit the road users to safely and comfortably access the other roads which of
course are at different levels.
Road courses
Since the underpass is going to be subjected to large amounts of loads as the vehicles use it, it needs to
have sufficient layers so that the loads get distributed such that they have been highly dissipated as they
reach the sub grade. Of course, this will also depend on the strength of the latter. Hence, if the
conditions allow it, the same road courses as those used for the bypass from jumbo to Port Louis might
be adopted here.
65
Road signs
Appropriate road signs should be allocated to ensure the safety and comfort of the road users. These
will include proper road surface markings, speed limits and maximum allowable height/loads of vehicles
amongst others.
Drainage
Since the underpass is at a lower level as compared to the other roads, it is more prone to the influx of
water, especially during heavy rainfall. Hence, it is essential to provide for drainage systems that will be
able to cope up with any situation, thereby making the road safer to use.
Lighting
Lighting will also be a very important feature in this part of the project to ensure the safety of the road
users, especially at night. As it can be seen from the picture above, the underpass is not found
underground but is instead found in the open-air. Hence, during the day, there will be appropriate
natural light. At night, lights can be placed at the middle of the road or on the retaining walls. Alongside
this, the use of cats-eyes will be very helpful in guiding the drivers.
On a further note, the underpass has been designed in such a way that it will not conflict with the
aesthetics of the flyover. Instead it will easily blend with the surrounding environment. Neither should it
conflict with any cables or pipe work found underground.
10.1.4 Project Cost Estimation

It is not in the scope of our syllabus to estimate the cost of the project as to do so, we have to design the
flyover and underpass. This is not yet taught to us. However, the government of Mauritius is coming up
with a similar project in the year 2016. Their estimated cost of a grade separation at Phoenix-Jumbo
roundabout amounts to Rs 2.4 billion.
Using the unit rate method at a pre-feasibility stage of project construction described in section 3.8, the
cost of the proposed solution is compared to the cost estimated by the government of Mauritius.
Therefore,
The cost estimation of the grade separated junction at Phoenix equals to Rs 2.4 billion.
66
10.2 Project Impacts
10.2.1 Environmental Impacts
Positive impact:
The new construction is going to blend with the nature. Ecosystem contamination by chemicals
or pollutants will be kept to a minimum by means of proper drainage system.
Negative impacts:
The area actually has a surface water resource in the form of a river called, Riviere Seche. The
latter actually crosses the South carriageway and is sort of a hindrance for the grade separated
junction, especially when it comes to underpasses. As it is, during the construction phase, there
will be a lot of pollution and this might directly affect the river, thereby causing degradation of
the water. Even after the completion of the project, the high number of vehicles using those
roads tends to have adverse effects on the quality of the river.
With such a project, a very large amount of excavation will be needed, whether it is for the
foundations of the flyover or for the underpass itself. The grade separated junction will be
implemented in such a way that it blends with its surrounding environment and they are all in
harmony.
However, the main problems usually associated with these normally are
the loss of productive soil

soil erosion
soil contamination, especially during construction.
With a huge influx of vehicles to the junction, there is going to be a lot of air pollution mainly
due to the emission of greenhouse gases from the vehicles, as they burn fossil fuels to produce
energy. The harmful gases are emitted in the atmosphere and spread over a larger region while
undergoing several reactions. Air pollution occurs during both the construction and operation
phase and will affect people working or travelling nearby.
Noise pollution is also a problem, both during the construction and operation phase.
67
Mitigating measures:
Law enforcement in the junction must be taken very seriously.
The underpass will be built in harmony with the surrounding natural resources such that we will
not have to divert the river nor bypass it for construction purposes.
Part of the construction will be held far away from the river.
We need to make use of clean and harmless materials.
The construction of the junction will be at the Phoenix roundabout itself where there already
was a highway constructed meaning that from the start itself, the loss of productive soil had
already been taken into account. Hence, the implementation of this proposal will not affect the
productive soil in the region.
To ensure that there is no soil erosion occurring, the amount of cut and fill should be balanced.
The slopes should not exceed a suitable and safe limit and we should compensate for any trees
or shrubs that have been removed during the construction.
During construction phase, there should be proper management of waste products such that
they do not contaminate the soil. As it is, the junction will consist of a proper drainage system
that will carry wastewater to the sewers.
The vehicles should be equipped with properly functioning catalytic converters to reduce their
emissions of harmful gases.
People should be encouraged to travel together if ever they share the same destination. In this
way, we can reduce the number of vehicles on our roads and hence, the amount of gas
emissions.
The surrounding buildings must be equipped with noise barriers or double glazed windows in
order to allow the people to work in peace.
The alignments and materials used for the road should be such that they reduce noise due to
friction.
During the construction stage, all workers should wear ear mufflers.
68
10.2.2 Social Impacts
Positive Impacts
Temporary jobs are created, providing sources of income for many people.
Reduction in congestion about the roundabout
Reduction in risks of accidents. When there is less congestion, of course there is going to be a
decrease in the number of accidents too. As a matter of fact, in the queues formed during
congestion, especially during peak hours, there has been a lot of accidents previously and these
really are unwanted situations as they may have disastrous repercussions in terms of loss of
lives, grief, both physical and psychological injuries, loss of time as well as damage to the
properties of vehicle owners and even the government.
There is a reduction in vehicle operating cost as less fuel is consumed when vehicles move
freely.
Negative Impacts
Due to associated developments projects (land use changes) and operation of the road, there
will be infrastructure barriers to pedestrian movement.
During the construction phase and land use changes, there will be an unpleasant built
environment and personal safety and security will be low.
Habitants having accessed to that existing roads every day, will face difficulties to access
transport. It will be a financial barrier having general impact on local households and businesses.
Nevertheless, this does not mean that this new implementation will be completely safe. Of
course, there will always be unexpected and unfortunate situations that might occur. In fact, in
this case, there might even be less chance of survival if a very serious accident occurs, especially
on the flyover.
Mitigating Measures
Surface road crossing, subways and footbridges transport services should be executed.
Facilities such as lighting, cleaning, street furniture like bus stops should be maintained. Road
safety measures must be catered during construction phase.
There must be substitution for transport services and institutional support for local road
maintenance and employment opportunities for labour based works.
Providing for appropriate speed limits and other road signs to better control the traffic.
69
10.3 Project Cost- Benefit Analysis
A cost benefit analysis is usually carried out by finding the Net Present Value, Internal Rate of Return
and Cost/Benefit ratio as shown in section 3.9. Unfortunately, we could not carry out a detailed cost-
benefit analysis since our syllabus is limited only to traffic surveys.
10. 4 Project Evaluation

To sum up, the two-level grade separated junction is most probably the best option that can be
implemented to reduce congestion at the Pont Fer roundabout. This is because it caters for all the
possible routes and trips that may be undertaken at that particular junction, making them easier to
access without the need to always go through the roundabout. The fact that it gives us the option to
circumvent the latter will make the flow more fluid thereby greatly decreasing congestion in the area
along with all the problems that generally entail with it.
Nevertheless, like all major projects, there are a few constraints that need to be overcome for the
proper implementation of the junction; the main ones here being the cost and the construction itself
which will be carried out in a restricted perimeter and especially one that is very busy. As far as
construction is concerned, with proper deviations and if it is carried out during the off peak hours, there
should be no real problem pertaining to it. And for the cost, it is to be noted that the investment will be
a worthwhile one. All other possible obstacles have been dealt with in the mitigating measures section
as mentioned before.
Hence, it can be said that this solution is by far the most suitable one in the long run as, with proper
maintenance, it will also be able to cope with the ever increasing traffic over the next years.
70
11.0 Alternative 2: Diversion between Sodnac link and M2 North link
11. 1 The Project
Our second proposal to shrink the outrageous congestion at the Pont Fer roundabout is the construction
of a link road, linking the Sodnac Link Road to M2.
11.1.1 Project Concept

A link road in an urban area, is basically a road creating a representative link within townships or
significant roads which has as objective to connect to road of arterial nature that provide mobility in the
township. Joining to and from the central business district; other commercial/ industrial areas or to
arterial roads are equally other aims of Link Road.
Usually, the link road, providing service in urban areas, will universally carry all types of vehicles and
generally should be to design to provide capacity of much more than 1000 vehicles per hour.
Some of the preferred standard of an urban link road are:
A design speed of at least 60 km/hr

The road to be wide of up to 12 m between the line of the kerbs so as a clear carriageway of
about 7m is left.
A nature strip of at least 4m and a 1.5m wide footpath on both sides of the road.
The ever-increasing congestion on our roads has become today a serious obstacle to our country, more
precisely to our economic sector where our economic growth is always under the threat. It is beyond
doubt that economic growth brings along an increase in demand. However, the economy itself can
become the victim of its own success due to the fact the rise in congestion cause the damping of our
growth.
Well, the need for a diversion link road lies well at the center of this issue. It will provide alternatives to
the public instead of compacting in a single congested area, getting stuck in traffic jams and falling
behind schedule.
The link road in this concept is to encourage people travelling from regions of Vacoas to Port Louis to
avoid using the Pont Fer Roundabout, instead taking the link road to access the M2. Consequently,
traffic from the south will be given more priority on the roundabout.
Usually, Nalletamby Road is occupied by vehicles going in three principal directions. However the
majority of the traffic has Port Louis as ultimate destination and it is often observed that these
passengers are often stuck in the link due to other vehicles going to the other directions. So to improve
these conditions, it is welcoming to introduce an alternative route to jump to M2 without passing
through the consistently congested Nalletamby Road.
71
The link road will be basically located on an existing agricultural landscape situated behind Phoenix Les
Halles. It will principally link the Sodnac Link to the M2 as illustrated in the picture below.
Position of
Flyover
Position of
traffic signal
Figure 41 Location of diversion link
72
11.1.3 Project objectives
Eventually, the main objectives of the link are summarised as follows:
To improve the level of service provided to the motorist by reducing travel time, cost and
skipping congestion.
To encourage users of the Nalletamby Road to opt for another route so as to allow other entries
in the Pont Fer Roundabout to benefit from a smoother flow.
Apart from providing significant relief to the busy Nalletamby Road, the new Link road will
equally open up areas for new housing and business development, promoting of new jobs and
boosting the economy.
11.1.4 Project description

The project consists basically of construction of a 2 lanes- 2 way Link Road, connecting the Sodnac Link
to M2. The length of the road will of 0.56 km composing of the following components.
An interchange flyover between M2 and the new Link road

A T-intersection between the new Link Road and the Sodnac Link Road
A traffic signal operating the T- intersection
Central reservation
Shoulder
Footpath
Efficient drainage system including camber and drains
Lightings
Traffic Signs and Road Markings
Two lanes- two way
The road is designed to consist of a carriageway pavement with width of asphaltic surface 7.2 m along
with a two paved shoulder of 1.5 m wide on both sides.
Furthermore other detaillings components such as side ditches and culverts are equally to be included.
Required signing, marking and guard rails are to be present along the road.
The interchanges at the ends of the link are extremely important. It has been decided to construct a
flyover interchange to M2 while at the Sodnac Link, due to the formation of a T-intersection, a robotics
traffic signal is to be implemented there.
73
11.1.5 Project cost estimation
For the calculation of the respective costs, assumption is made:
The road is considered to be uniform 7.2 wide along the length.
Bus stop lay by is not considered in this link
Cost estimation is calculated by unit rate method. Below is a rough estimation of the projects.
Outline of description of works:
Surveying Surfacing Earthwork Markings
Clearing Drainage Finish Grading Electricals and Lightings
Table 288 Cost Estimation of diversion between Sodnac link and M2 North link
DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST (Rs)
(appro
x.)
1.0 EXCAVATION
1.1 Top soil(150 mm) 856.8 m3 150 128 520
1.2 Excavation for road( 490 mm) 1975.6 m3 400 790 272
8
1.3 Excavation for pavement (350 mm) 588 m3 300 176 400
2.0 MATERIALS FOR ROAD

2.1 Spalls( agg.size 100-200mm) 1209.6 m3 150 181 440
2.2 Crusher run (150 mm) 302.1 tonnes 500 151 050
2.3 Compacting (490 mm) Lump sum 85 680
3.0 MATERIALS FOR FOOTPATH

3.1 Crusher run(150 mm) 126 tonnes 500 63 000
3.2 Concrete- Grade 25(100 mm) 168 m3 4200 705 600
4.3 Laying of kerbs 2240 m 250 560 000
Type K1
(Including 100 mm concrete grade 25)
4.0 ASPHALTING
4.1 Applied coat Lump sum 20 160
4.2 Asphalt: 0-14 403.2 tonnes 4000 1,612 800
5.0 ROAD MARKING 201.6 m2 450 90 720
6.0 TRAFFIC SIGN

6.1 Speed limits sign (2 each side) 2 - 20000 400000
7.0 DRAIN WITH FOOTPATH 560 m 8000 4, 480 000

8.0 LIGHTING POLE(1 each 50m = 11/560m) 11 - 44 000 484 000
Total costing 9,872 942
For the suggested improvements, the total cost for the 560m of the new link is about Rs 10M. However
certain costs had been omitted due to missing data.
74
11. 2 Project Impacts
11.2.1 Environmental impacts
Positive impacts
The proposal for a new link road between Sodnac Link and M2 implicate a new path for
transportation and undoubtedly will decrease the air quality on that area. However we should
equally expecting a decrease in the traffic flow in Nalletamby Road, thereby improving the air
quality there.
Meanwhile, the fact that the link will be constructed mainly in a remote area, the air pollution
developed there should not be affecting much and overall, since there will be reduction in the
congestion in the region of Pont Fer, we are expecting the air quality to improve.
During the construction of the link, no historical or religious features are being disturbed. The
urban character of the area is also not affected.
Negative impacts
Landscape encloses both the physical and cultural characteristics of the land. The fact that the
location of the proposed link road to be constructed is based on an agricultural land and
grassland, there is no doubt with changes in the natural relief and morphology of the landscape
leading to losses in vegetation.
Noise pollution along the new link will ultimately increase with increased traffic volumes. This is
unwanted sound, typically a nuisance to people. Noise pollution will arise during both the
construction and operation phase and can also lead to structural damage to nearby structures.
The project is found near Iskcon, which is a religious site for many people. Hence, there might be
complaints and some resistance against the implementation of the latter especially since there
will be a lot of movement and disturbance in the region mostly during the construction phase.
Mitigating measures
During the design of the sodnac-M2 link, the vertical and horizontal alignments are designed
such that the road follows the natural relief. In this way, little vegetation is lost. Also, roadside
planting of indigenous species can also improve the natural aura of the area.
To avoid negative impacts of noise pollution on nearby inhabitants, the link is construction far
from residential areas. Improvement in maintenance of vehicular fleet will also decrease noise
pollution and eliminate the negative impacts associated with it.
Vehicles should be properly maintained and fitted with a functional catalytic converter so as to
reduce the amount of harmful gases released in the atmosphere.
It will be ensured that the ongoing construction as well as the road itself will in no significant
way affect any cultural sites.
75
11.2.2 Social impacts
Positive impacts
Reduction in risks of accidents as vehicles moves more freely. Any costs or inconvenience
associated with accidents are reduced.
With plants on both sides of the road, journey quality is also improved. This is a measure of the
real and perceived physical and social environment experienced while traveling.
Congestion on the Nalletamby road is reduced significantly. Journey time also decreases and
efficiency of the Pont fer roundabout is enhanced.
Vehicle operating costs also reduces as with higher speeds and free flow, fuel consumption is
less. Less maintenance is required as there is little wear and tear of tyres.
Labour increase during the construction phase.

With the construction of link road in the region, the land value will undoubtedly increase, calling
for a change in land use which includes the transformation of the area into commercial and
industrial zones, creating more and more jobs.
Negative impacts
Part of the congestion problem at Pont Fer roundabout will be reduced. Exchange of vehicles
between M2 South link to M2 North link, which is significantly high, will remain the same. So,
the congestion problem is not entirely eradicated.
The construction of the Link Road will bring a displacement effect following Land Acquisition by
the Government, which will entail losses of agricultural land by the owners, losses of trees and
crops.
Mitigating measures
A new project must be set up to prevent congestion between M2 South link and M2 North link.
Owners losing their plots of land should be fairly compensated.
Proper laws and signs should be enforced on the new road to ensure the safety of the road
users as well as to make it easier to control the traffic.
11. 3 Project Cost-Benefit Analysis

Due to lack of information on some costs and our limited syllabus, we could not carry out a cost-benefit
analysis but an estimated cost of the overall project was done in section 11.1.5.
76
11. 4 Project Evaluation
The construction of a new Link Road connecting the Sodnac Link Road directly to the M2 may actually
prove to be a great way to reduce congestion at the Pont Fer roundabout. This is because it allows one
of the most critical routes to and from Port Louis to be diverted such that vehicles are able to avoid the
roundabout, which will thus be more easily accessible to vehicles coming from and going to the South.
The main advantage of this solution is that it is more achievable as compared to the Park & Ride
project, while cost wise, it has an edge over the grade separated junction.
However, it is far from being perfect since the fact that it caters for only one critical route might not
reduce congestion by a significant level. As it is, the possibility of a duplicate road, i.e. one which serves
almost the same purpose as that of the proposed Link Road is not to be ignored. Finally, the huge
amount of land that needs to be acquired and the traffic signals that are present on the proposed road
may prove to be major drawbacks to the construction and the traffic flow respectively.
As a final word, although the construction of this new Link Road seems to be both economical and
effective, it, however, is not the most suitable option to remedy the congestion issues that have been
plaguing the Pont Fer roundabout for so long.
77
12.0 Alternative 3: Park and Ride Project
12. 1 The Project
12.1.1 Project Concept
Park-and-Ride facilities provide a common location for individuals to transfer from a low occupancy
vehicle to a higher-occupancy vehicle. This can involve transferring to a carpool, vanpool, or to a transit
system. Regional Park-and-Ride lots allow commuters, particularly those who commute out of their
community and those who live in rural areas, to park their vehicles at convenient location in order to
finish their commute using alternative transportation, such as meeting their carpool partners or using
transit. As a result, most Park-and-Ride lots are oriented toward providing sufficient automobile parking
to facilitate ride-sharing and transit. Robert Spillar (1997) identifies Park-and-Ride lots as a connection to
transit systems and Park-and-Pool lots are principally for ridesharing (carpooling and vanpooling). In
general a Park-and-Ride study includes:
i. A detailed inventory of existing official and unofficial Park-and-Ride lots in the

region.
ii. Performance measures of each site to determine its effectiveness and usefulness.
iii. Recommendations and strategies to improve the connectivity and inventory of
Park and-Rides in the area.
12.1.2 Project Objectives

These goals provide regional transportation solutions by developing alternatives to single occupancy
vehicle use and encouraging the use of mass transit as a viable regional mobility alternative.
Reduce auto usage and increase vehicle occupancy by providing an alternative to auto use
through public transportation and carpooling.
Improve the motorists trip quality by reducing travel costs and congestion.
Improve environmental quality by reducing auto use, therefore reducing overall emissions.
Provide a system of park-and-ride lots to support regional bus service.
78
Three potential park-and-ride lots were identified. These sites are:
1. M2 corridor at Forest Side before La Vigie Roundabout.
(a)
2. M2 Corridor near Phoenix.

3. Beaux Songes Link near Jumbo Phoenix Commercial Centre.
(b)
Figure 42 Location of park and ride lots;
(a) at Forest Side before La Vigie junction;
(b) Near Phoenix and Beaux Songes Link near Jumbo Phoenix commercial centre
79
12.1.4 Project Description
The project consists of the construction of three Park-and-Ride facilities at the previously mentioned
locations. Each Park-and-Ride facility will take up an area of 8 acres and can sustain up to 530 parking
spaces.
The eight components that make up a Parking Facility Element are:
Base Parking Spaces

Vehicle Access
Bus Layover spaces
Security
Bike Storage
Drainage
Landscape / Irrigation
Lighting
The following prototype designs would be provided with consistent signage, safety lighting, landscaping
and pedestrian and bicycle access. It is used as a guide in developing individual site plans, modified as
necessary to meet the size; zoning requirements and restrictions; and the unique constraints, limitations
and strengths of each individual site.
Figure 43 Park- and- Ride Prototype Concept
80
12.1.5 Project Cost Estimation
The unit rate and simplified unit rate method, described in section 3.8 of the Literature Review is used
to estimate the cost of the project.
However, since we are at the pre-feasibility stage and we simply need a rough estimation of the project,
we adopt the same cost estimate as a similar Park-and-Ride in Virginia in the United States.
Table 29 Cost estimate of one Park-and-Ride Facility (The costs are given in US dollars).
The project consists of the construction of 3 Park-and-Ride Facility of same prototype.
Therefore,
Total Estimate of Project is (1662, 985 x 36 x 3) = Rs 180 million.
81
12.2 Project Impacts
12.2.1 Environmental Impacts
Positive Impact
There could be a reduction of air and noise pollution in the congested areas.
Decreased congestion could help with easy evacuation of agricultural produce and
decrease in transportation cost for sugar cane to and from concerned areas.
Decreased CO2 emission.
Increase in public recognition and perceptions of the ongoing development of more
sustainable transport options, including the promotion of using more efficient vehicles
Negative Impacts
The major drawback of park-and-ride programs is their potential for transferring traffic and
pollution problems from one location to another.Traffic and air pollution problems may
increase in the areas where park-and-ride lots are located.
Soil and ground water pollution by oil and fuel can be caused by the regrouping of vehicles
in one area.
The building of large car parks will take up a lot of land.
Increased risk of flooding from replacing a vegetated surface with an impermeable one.
Mitigation Measures
Adoption of adequate design methodologies so as to ensure that the park and ride system
will contribute a decrease in traffic congestion and associated pollution.
The use of semi-permeable materials (bricks with holes in them) would allow some
drainage and aeration of the soil.
Daily environmental and safety management best practices can be implemented to
minimise and prevent spills of hazardous materials, soil pollution and improve waste
management system should be ensured.
Construction of underground car parks for land use minimization
82
12.2.2 Social Impacts
Positive Impacts
The reduction in the number of cars along the M2 motorway will enhance efficiency of the
transportation system at the Pont Fer roundabout.
Improved traffic flows will reduce journey times and enhance travelling efficiency,
particularly for commuters from the South and Curepipe.
The reduced traffic at Pont Fer Roundabout will make access easier and safer.
During construction some casual labourers and some skilled workforce will be absorbed
from the nearby project areas. Apart from the opportunities for self-employment the new
parking facility will promote income generating activities like selling food and other
merchandise to the construction workforce during the construction phase and the users of
the park and ride system after the construction phase.
Reduced demand for parking in Port-Louis.
Reduced fuel expenditures by reducing use of personal vehicles for the work trip.
Reduced vehicle depreciation by reducing vehicle miles of travel and exposure to potential
vehicle damage.
Reduced vehicle maintenance costs by reducing the annual cost of mileage-related
maintenance requirements.
Negative Impacts
Increased assembly time costs (e.g., carpooling adds extra time to the journey to work
because it is necessary for the members of the common transport to be assembled at the
beginning and disassembled at the end of the work day)
Road users might not be interested or be hesitant to try out this new concept
Decreased autonomy and restricted ability to deviate from the normal schedule.
A multitude of private vehicles left in the open might attract carjackers and thieves.
Mitigation Measures
The car parks should have on-site security and should be well lit.
The schedule for busses should be adapted to users travel schedules.
Travel information, such as leaflets and posters, may be provided. Extra services such as a
travel office, food shop, car wash, or cafeteria may be provided to encourage use of park
and ride.
83
12.3 Project Cost- Benefit Analysis
A contemporary analysis of park-and-ride in metropolitan Seattle utilized methodologies designed to
explore cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit on a somewhat broader scale. Its evaluation took into
account not only the user and public agencies responsible for transportation, but also the community at
large.
Figure 44 Economic Comparison of feeder service construction of park-and-ride lots
The study started with a survey of users of the 26 permanent lots existing circa 1985. A 39 percent
survey return rate was achieved. The north and southeast corridors were chosen as being together
representative of the overall system, and a detailed examination was conducted of before-and-after
travel by the park-and-ride lot users in those corridors. Taken into account were time costs in-and-out-
of-vehicle; public costs including roadway provision and maintenance, congestion impacts, related
services such as planning and police, and environmental costs; automobile ownership and operating
costs; provision of park-and-ride parking and fees for destination parking; and non-fare box transit
provision costs plus fare.
The results indicated that vehicle miles travelled (VMT), traffic volumes, accidents, vehicle emissions,
and energy consumption were all reduced by the Seattle area park-and-ride system. A negative impact
was found on user person-miles of travel and travel time. The average trip using the park-and-ride
system was estimated to be 11.6 percent less expensive than the average cost of the corresponding pre-
existing trip.
84
12.4 Project Evaluation
Despite park-and-ride is a smart environmentally friendly concept, it is not a suitable option to solve the
problem of congestion at Pont Fer roundabout. The project can only accommodate the parking of 1500
vehicles and as such does not reduce significantly the traffic flows. Consequently, the long term
durability and sustainability for the increasing projected traffic flow is not met. Hence, the alternative to
construct park-and-ride facilities is rejected.
13.0 Conclusion
This report analysed the traffic flow at the Pont Fer roundabout. Surveys such as manual traffic count,
turning movement count and most importantly, delay surveys were executed. Through traffic count the
actual capacity of the road was obtained which was not within the acceptable limits for a motorway. The
turning movement count enabled us to determine the performance of the roundabout. The turning
movement of each vehicle was recorded from each link and the classification system was hence
simplified. And lastly, delay surveys, where the travel time on special links was determined, assessed the
time wasted due to congestion while using the roundabout.
Consequently, from the data we obtained, it clearly showed that there was definitely a need for new
road infrastructures to reduce the travel time and to increase the level of service at the roundabout.
Hence, in the light of the above, three main solutions were proposed whereby proposal 1 seems to be
the most convenient one as compared to the other two. Proposal 1 includes a flyover heading from Port
Louis to the South and also in the opposite direction, an underpass from Jumbo to Port Louis and vice
versa and the Pont Fer roundabout which would then still be used for any other minor routes. This three
grade separated junction is the most efficient one as it will bring a considerable decrease in congestion
in all links and it will also be able to cater for any further needs of the traffic flow as the number of
vehicles keeps on increasing over the years. It is aesthetically more expedient as well, as compared to
the diversion or the park and ride project. The park and ride project could be a new construction phase
in Mauritius but due to inaccessibility of required land use, it has to be rejected. The diversion link we
considered would have helped people coming from Sodnac and Vacoas only, which would not diminish
congestion to a large extent unlike the three grade separated junction. Despite the fact that the latter is
going to cost more than the other two, it is to be noted that it will be nevertheless, a worthwhile
investment.
The best proposal is hereafter the three grade separated junction which is the same as the project
initiated by the Road Development Authority in an attempt to take care of the congestion issues
affecting the Pont fer roundabout for quite some time now.
85
14.0 References
Great Britain road numbering scheme. Available at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain_road_numbering_scheme (Accessed 28.11.2015)
Transport in Mauritius. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_in_Mauritius

(Accessed 28.11.2015)
Traffic problems. Available at: http://motors.mega.mu/news/2013/04/03/traffic-problems-

more-200-vehicles-entered-capital-minute/ (Accessed 28.11.2015)
Road Transport and Road Traffic Accident. Available at:

http://statsmauritius.govmu.org/English/StatsbySubj/Pages/Road-Transport-and-Road-Traffic-
Accident.aspx (Accessed 28.11.2015)
Road Transport and Road Traffic Accident Analysis. Available at:

http://statsmauritius.govmu.org/English/StatsbySubj/Documents/ei1130/road.pdf (Accessed
28.11.2015)
ALLEVIATING TRAFFIC CONGESTION ALONG THE M1 CORRIDOR: An economic perspective.

DORSAMY,Caderassen., PUCHOOA, Chansraj. Road Development Authority; The Journal of the
institution of of Engineers Mauritius.
THE OPPERATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS OF PART OF EBENE ROAD NETWOKS; MATTADEEN, Vivek.

BEng (Hons) Civil Engineering. Faculty of Engineering, University of Mauritius; April 2011.
ASSESSING THE PERFORMANCE OF A MAJOR LINK AND NODE AT EBENE; MOEDEEN Shah
Mohammed Wassim Mamode. BEng (Hons) Civil Engineering. Faculty of Engineering, University
of Mauritius; 31st March 2011.
ROGERS, Martin., Highway Engineering. Department of civil and structural engineering; Dublin
institute of technology, Ireland. 1st Ed, 2003; Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Analysis and design of flyover. Available at:

http://www.internationaljournalssrg.org/IJCE/2015/Special-Issue/NCRACCESS-2015/Part-1/IJCE-
NCRACCESS-P107.pdf (Accessed 04.12.2015)
Park-and-Ride, Wikipedia. Wikipedia. Available from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_and_ride [Accessed April 2015]
Improve Public Transport -. Available from:

https://improve-public-transport.wikispaces.com/intro_complimentary [Accessed April 2015]
86
Anon, Results. The Use Of Park And Ride Systems. Available from:
http://www.theissue.eu/en/a/the-use-of-park-and-ride-systems [Accessed April 2015]
Park-and-Ride, Available from:

https://www.pbworld.com/pdfs/publications/monographs/spillar.pdf [Accessed April 2015]
A Study of Park-and-Ride, Available from:

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_95c3.pdf [Accessed April 2015]
Anon, Available from: http://nrvrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/park-and-ride-study-

2009.pdf [Accessed April 2015]
Final Report, Available from: http://assets.jtafla.com/documents/general/park-and-ride-final-

draft-with-cover/1115/park-and-ride-final-draft-with-cover.pdf [Accessed April 2015]
A Study of Park-and-Ride, Available from:

https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisions/engineering/technical-services/trans-r-and-d-repository/c-07-
66_final report nycpr study.pdf [Accessed April 2015]
WARFIELD LINK ROAD BUSINESS CASE. Available from: http://www.bracknell-

forest.gov.uk/warfield-link-road-business-case.pdf (Accessed 05.12.2015)
OVERSEAS RODE NOTE 5- A guide to road project appraisal; Department of international

Development. R8132. Revised edition.2005; London.
OVERSEAS RODE NOTE 11- Urban Road Traffic Surveys; Transport Research Laboratory. 1st
edition.1993; London.
ANTONIOU, F., ARETOULIS, G.N., KONSTANTINIDIS, D., May 2015. Cost Analysis and Material
Consumption of Highway Bridge Underpasses. Conference Paper
LAND USE PLANNING & POLICY, November 2010. Downtown Underpass Urban Design
Guidelines. Article
http://www.dairynz.co.nz/media/195192/1D-Part-3-Underpasses.pdf [Accessed on the 29th

November 2015]
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/resources/urban-design/principles/underpass/docs/urban-
design-principles-underpasses.pdf [Accessed on 29th November 2015]
Environmental and Social Impacts, Available from:

http://www.transport-links.org/transport_links/filearea/publications/1_851_ORN_5_Final.pdf
[Accessed 07/12/ 2015]
87
Estimation Road Construction Unit Costs, Available from:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/t0579e/t0579e06.htm[Accessed 07/12/ 2015]
Urban Link Roads, Available from:

http://www.glenelg.vic.gov.au/Files/completeLocalRoadHierarchyVol1.pdf
[Accessed 07/12/ 2015]
88

FINAL Counteracting Congestion at Jumbo PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FINAL Counteracting Congestion at Jumbo PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Mauritius

BEng (Hons) Civil Engineering

Counteracting congestion at Jumbo

To: Mrs Reshma Rughooputh

Videsha Beeslall 1415346

2.2 Aims and objectives

Average speed of the traffic stream.

Changed land Increased

Figure 1 Cyclic Flow interactions

3.3 Level of service and Capacity

1. Traffic conditions (traffic mix, peaking

Table 1 Levels of service and their description

Figure 2 Level of service A-F

Figure 3 Main features of a roundabout

3.5 Traffic surveys

3.5.1 Volume studies

Figure 4 Turning movement count

Floating car method

3.6 Road classification in Mauritius

Figure 5 Motorways in Mauritius

Figure 6 Main roads

Figure 7 Access roads

The main steps in the technique involve:

Listing the main project options.

Figure 8 Site Location

These links included:

I. Nalletamby Road between Jumbo Roundabout and Pont Fer Roundabout

Figure 9 Study area

Figure 10 Road description- Link 1

4.2.2 Road Infrastructure & Surroundings

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 12 Cracks on road

4.2.4 Road Geometry

4.2.5 Operation System

4.3.1 Road Description

Figure 14 Road description- Link 2

4.3.2 Road Infrastructure & Surroundings

(a) (b) (c)

4.3.4 Road Geometry

Figure 16 Road Geometry

4.3.5 Operation System

5.2 Sampling in times

5.3 Types of survey

1. Classified Manual Link Count

Aim: To assess the traffic volume at defined station, shown below

Four stations were defined as shown in figure below:

Figure 18 Stations for link count

We positioned ourselves just adjacent to the stations to avoid parallax error.

We needed to find shelter to the extremes of weather also.(During sunny day)

5.4.3 Descriptions of stations

Electronic counting board(Mobile phones application: Multi Counter)

5.4.6 Difficulties encountered:

5.5.2 Required Equipment

Figure 19 The Pont Fer Roundabout

Entry from the South

Entry from the South

Figure 20 Entry from the South

Member 1- counting of the Total Traffic from the South

Entry from Vacoas

Figure 21 Entry from Vacoas

Member 1- counting of the Total Traffic from the Vacoas

Entry from Port Louis