s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com · 2018-06-07 · Port of Melbourne Operations Pty Ltd– Evidence...

Port of Melbourne Operations Pty Ltd– Evidence Base to Support Infrastructure Victoria Second Container Port Advice – Submission

Page 1 of 23

Port of Melbourne Operations Pty Ltd – Evidence Base to Support Infrastructure

Victoria Second Container Port Advice – Submission

Port of Melbourne Operations Pty Ltd (PoM) ), on behalf of the Lonsdale Consortium1, is very

pleased to provide this submission to Infrastructure Victoria in regards to the ‘Second Container Port

Advice – Evidence Base Discussion Paper’. This submission is focused around the following key

matters (each of which is discussed further below):

Key Matter 1 – Future capacity of the Port of Melbourne

Key Matter 2 – Future Victorian landside transport investment

Key Matter 3 – Forecast Victorian container vessel fleet

Key Matter 4 – Future Victorian economic outcomes

Key Matter 1 – Future capacity of the Port of Melbourne

In regards to the future capacity of the Port of Melbourne, PoM and Lonsdale Consortium has the

following comments:

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium support the high level capacity assessments undertaken by

Infrastructure Victoria and their consultants, in regards to the potential to grow and develop

the Port of Melbourne. PoM and Lonsdale Consortium also agree with a broad longer term

capacity of the Port of Melbourne in the range of 12 to 15 million TEU per annum

the Lonsdale Consortium provided a carefully designed long term plan to Government for the

sustainable growth and development of the Port of Melbourne as part of the Port of Melbourne

Lease Transaction (PLT). As a result we agree with the conceptual plans for upgraded and new

container terminals included in the Infrastructure Victoria work

this plan includes significant investment in Port of Melbourne to expand container capacity in

line with freight demand growth; enhancements to on port / near port road and rail links to

Swanson, Appleton and Webb Docks, including the potential development of a rail / high

productivity freight link to Webb Dock, and ongoing efficiency and productivity maximisation

of both existing and new port facilities and terminals to meet forecast trade of all types through

the full 50 years of PoM’s lease

central to this plan is inclusion of a commitment to continue to drive port efficiency,

productivity and cost effectiveness through adoption of new technologies (where optimal),

such as technologies installed at the new highly automated container terminal at Webb Dock.

Such technology developments and the associated productivity improvements merely reflect a

continuation of the clear historical trends seen in the global port industry over the last 50 years

a successful Port of Melbourne capacity outcome requires significant ongoing coordination and

collaboration between Government and industry to ensure a seamless and efficient supply

chain servicing the delivering of freight to and from the port and end users. This requires

1 PoM is owned by the Lonsdale Consortium, which consists of Australian and global infrastructure investors including QIC, the Future Fund,

Global Infrastructure Partners and OMERS.


Page 2 of 23

ongoing commitment to implementing productivity improvement initiatives and investment in

improved infrastructure, equipment and operations across the entire freight logistics supply

chain including shipping lines, stevedores, and freight transport and logistics companies. We

provide further commentary on landside infrastructure investment and other capacity

enhancement initiatives in the next section

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium are hence committed to working collaboratively with industry

to achieve these outcomes in order to respond to future trade demand growth and maximising

the long term benefits for the Victorian economy.

Key Matter 2 – Future Victorian landside transport investment

In regards to future Victorian landside transport investments PoM and Lonsdale Consortium has

the following comments:

Government transport infrastructure investment

a potential gap within the Infrastructure Victoria road and rail network work appears to be the

lack of inclusion of assumptions around future Victorian Government road and rail network

investments decisions (post the Western Distributor project), given the 30 plus year timeframe

associated with the strategic advice. It would be extremely unlikely that significant new

transport infrastructure would not be delivered during this period to support continued

metropolitan Melbourne population growth and development (whether or not the Port of

Melbourne exists)

from a PoM perspective the key road network project which would be expected to be delivered

during this period (as outlined within your 30 Year Victorian Infrastructure Strategy and also the

Western Distributor Business Case) is the ‘CityLink to Western Ring Road Connection – EWW’.

Whilst this project supports Port of Melbourne landside transport activities its primary driver

will be the continued growth and development of metropolitan Melbourne

the other road projects from within the 30 Year Victorian Infrastructure Strategy which are

important to the efficiency of Port of Melbourne related supply chain activities are the delivery

of the Victorian arterial road network upgrades to support the operation of ‘High Productivity

Freight Vehicles (HPFVs) – HPF’. Inclusion of HPFV upgrades to the Bolte Bridge and West

Gate Bridge within the future HPFV network upgrade framework is of particular interest to

PoM

the Infrastructure Victoria rail capacity analysis does not appear to consider the clear

Government policy supporting increased rail modal share for container freight movements.

PoM is currently preparing an inaugural Rail Access Strategy with input from Government

and industry, to assess solutions that will materially enhance rail access to the port, increase

rail network capacity as well as addressing some of the bottleneck issues where passenger /

freight rail networks interface

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium believe that in the long term, a modern and efficient Port of

Melbourne must include rail access and through the Rail Access Strategy will be looking to

deliver rail and rail-related solutions together with industry. Increasing rail modal share at the

Port of Melbourne will also alleviate the burden on the road network


Page 3 of 23

in terms of rail access to the Port of Melbourne the key future projects which should be

included within the Infrastructure Victorian work are the ‘Webb Dock Rail Link – WDF’ along

with a range of wider metropolitan freight rail network improvements, some of which may

emerge out of the Rail Access Strategy work currently being undertaken by PoM.

Increasing off peak truck movement

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium support the need to increase off peak transport network access

for freight vehicles, to maximise the capacity of the wider road transport network. We note that

the Infrastructure Victoria work suggests increasing night truck movement to around 30- to 0%

in the medium term

this is a widely supported initiative to optimise existing road network capacity without major

capital outlay. Increasing off-peak port access has been included as a specific requirement in

recent port capacity expansion projects procured by PoM, including the development of the

new container terminal at Webb Dock

the above outcome of existing road network optimisation furthermore supports the 24 hours a

day, 7 days a week 365 days a year nature of Port of Melbourne operations. PoM believes this

is a win-win outcome for all port users and the community in the long run. That said,

successful implementation of this initiative will require Government and industry coordination

from both a policy perspective and in order to drive the behavioural shifts across the supply

chain.

Inner west truck issues

in terms of trucks in the inner west PoM has historically undertaken active engagement with

the community and other stakeholder with the port recognising the ongoing inner west

community concerns around amenity. PoM is committed to working collaboratively with all

stakeholders to maximise the public amenity of areas which surround the Port of Melbourne

the issue however needs to be considered within the wider metropolitan Melbourne strategic

land use planning and transport network context. This requires consideration of the following

three issues:

1. inner west truck origins and destinations and lack existing routes to support

movement between these origins and destinations

2. proportion of trucks which are actually undertaking port related movements

3. existing curfew periods and allowed local truck movements.

in regards to Issues 1 and 2 trucks currently make up between 10 and 30% of all traffic on the

key roads within the inner west area (i.e., Francis Street, Somerville Road, Buckley Street,

Moore Street and Williamstown Road) with port trucks representing between 30 and 50% of

the total truck traffic. The remaining trucks are not port related and are simply moving

through the area on their way between the west and central Melbourne. As a result removing

port trucks from the inner west area will simply not address the underlying truck traffic issues

there are also a number of freight related facilities within the inner west and under VicRoad’s

current curfew arrangements trucks associated with these facilities are able to enter the area

during curfew periods (Issue 3). Curfew periods are between 8pm and 6am Monday to

Saturday and 1pm Saturday to 6am Monday. Surveys have been undertaken of port related

truck movements through the inner west (the most recent of which was completed in 2012)


Page 4 of 23

with these surveys identifying that during curfew hours only 1% of all vehicle movements and

8% of all truck movements were port related trucks

in order to address the issue of all truck movements through the inner west there is a need for

appropriate alternative route(s) to be provided for these vehicles between the truck origins and

destinations (such as between the Melbourne CBD and the Brooklyn / Tottenham industrial

area) along with the establishment of sufficient transport network connectivity to alternative

freight activity centres

this issue is discussed within the Western Distributor Business Case and also within your 30 Year

Infrastructure Strategy through the identification of a ‘CityLink to Western Ring Road

Connection – EWW’. The Western Distributor Business Case specifically states that the Western

Distributor will not address the inner west truck issue as the trucks will take the most direct

transport route possible between their origin and destination (which may or may not include

the Port of Melbourne) and that the CityLink to Western Ring Road Connection, or something

similar, will ultimately be needed

the recent Government announcement that all trucks will be banned from using roads within

the inner west following the completion of the Western Distributor, which is now to be called

the West Gate Tunnel, does not change the above position. In fact it makes the delivery of the

above additional arterial road infrastructure between the CityLink and Western Ring Road

even more important in the short to medium term, rather than the medium to longer term

further information on inner west truck related considerations is provided in Appendix 1.

Webb Dock freight rail and inter port terminal access

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium have been aware of, though not involved in, the consideration

of the proposed Fishermans Bend Freight Link, put forward within the Discussion Paper. It

should be noted that this project has been a Government initiative in order to inform strategic

planning considerations around the regeneration of Fishermans Bend

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium however continue to support reasonable and practical land

transport solutions which provide supply chain capacity, efficiency and productivity

improvements and which are commercially deliverable. This includes other options for

improving the high productivity transport connections to Webb Dock. These include

upgrading the Bolte Bridge to handle HPFVs (it currently has a 68t mass limit compared to the

109t mass limit on port roads) and the development of the Webb Dock Rail Link (WDRL)

the WDRL has been explored a number of times over the last 15 years to support the longer

term development of container capacity at Webb Dock. The WDRL proposal is based on using

a low level rail / high productivity vehicle bridge across the Yarra River to the west of the Bolte

Bridge (with an opening span) which connects to the existing rail alignment running along

Lorimer Street (which could either be at grade or elevated) and then south through the

Fishermans Bend Industrial Precinct to Webb Dock. The WDRL would connect Webb Dock

both back to the upriver section of the port (for inter-terminal type operations) and through to

the wider Victorian freight rail network (for freight rail operations)

the WDRL is designed to have annual container capacity of around 1.9 million TEU and be

delivered at a significantly lower cost than the proposed Fishermans Bend Freight Link. If it is

assumed that a Webb Dock road network capacity to be 4.9 million TEU (as per the GHD


Page 5 of 23

analysis) then this equates to the potential Webb Dock capacity of 6.4 million TEU (which is

broadly the same as Webb Dock without the development of Webb Dock South)

the Lonsdale Consortium has identified the need for the medium term delivery of a rail / high

productivity freight link to Webb Dock (i.e. during the next 10 to 15 years) within the long term

plan for the Port of Melbourne under the PLT. PoM is reviewing the options for this link which

will be an important element of the inaugural Rail Access Strategy for the port

for further information on the WDRL concept please see Appendix 2.

Key Matter 3 – Forecast Victorian container vessel fleet

In regards to the forecast Victorian container vessel fleet PoM and Lonsdale Consortium has the

following comments (please note that more detailed vessel fleet information is provided in

Appendix 3):

Existing container vessel visits

Port of Melbourne currently handles around 1,100 container vessel visits each year with vessel

sizes spread from less than 1,000 TEU through to almost 8,000 TEU. During 2015-16 the most

significant Port of Melbourne vessel size group was the 3,400 to 4,500 TEU (Panamax) group

which accounted for 40% of all container vessel visits to the port

the size of vessel visiting the Port of Melbourne is driven by a range of factors including the

volume of cargo demand associated with the route, physical characteristics of all ports on the

route, and availability of vessels to service the route. As a result smaller vessels are

predominately focused on routes with smaller ports (such as the Pacific Islands and New

Zealand) and smaller trade volumes (such as the direct American services) in order to provide

a weekly or fortnightly service

likewise larger vessels are associated with the major trade volumes and large ports, such as

trade routes which include East Asia, South East Asia and Europe. These vessels which are

predominately in the 5,000 to 8,000 TEU (Post Panamax Plus) group and accounted for 19% of

the Port of Melbourne container vessel visits during 2015-16

Declared vs operating draught

in 2009 the Port of Melbourne Channel Deepening Project (CDP) was completed, which

provides port access for large commercial vessels of up to 14.0m draught under all tidal

conditions. Prior to CDP completion the maximum Port of Melbourne access draught was

11.6m under all tides and 12.1m with tidal assistance

analysis of the Port of Melbourne shipping data following the completion of the CDP has

shown that whilst shipping lines supported the CDP they are largely not using the additional

draught now available. In fact at during 2015-16 only around 5% of container vessel visits to

the Port of Melbourne used the additional draught delivered by the CDP. In comparison

during the last three years (2013-14 to 2015-16) around 80% of Port of Melbourne container

vessel visits had registered draughts of greater than 11.6m and could have used the additional

CPD draught

the above shows that the container vessels currently visiting the Port of Melbourne are not full

and hence are visiting with reduced operating draughts. It also shows that whilst a shipping

line may request a service level increase (such as the increased allowable draught under the


Page 6 of 23

CDP) they may not utilise it. Ultimately the operation of the industry is subject to the broader

market dynamics, which in this case is leading to the under-utilisation of the available draught

by vessels visiting the Port of Melbourne.

Existing Port of Melbourne vessel capacity

a rigorous simulation and assessment process is undertaken at the Port of Melbourne to inform

and approve the design vessel upon which the port channels and infrastructure are designed.

This process was most recently undertaken for the Channel Deepening Project and resulted in

a design vessel of 300m Length Overall (LOA), 40m beam and 14m operating draught (with a

nominal 7,500 to 8,000 TEU capacity) as per the Harbour Master Directions. As a result this

design vessel is the vessel that is able to enter the Port of Melbourne, including Swanson and

Webb Docks, under almost all operating conditions

in addition the Harbour Master provides an operational overlay to allow individual larger

vessels to visit the Port of Melbourne, subject to appropriate vessel visit assessments and

approvals. As a result of this operational overlay the Port of Melbourne is currently able to

accept container vessels of up to 320m LOA, 42.8m beam and 14m operating draught (with a

nominal 8,500 TEU capacity)

in addition vessels passing up the Yarra River have a height limitation of 50.1m air draught

due to the West Gate Bridge. It should be noted that a number of ports around the world have

air draught issues and hence the presence of tilting masts are reasonably common on the larger

container vessels today. This means that the West Gate Bridge air draught limit is not as

significant as it used to be.

Future Port of Melbourne vessel capacity

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium are committed to working collaboratively with shipping lines,

stevedores and wider freight logistics industry to ensure the port is able to handle the largest

range of container vessel sizes that is practical, safe and efficient. This includes actively

engaging over time with individual stevedores in ensure that they are able to maximise the

opportunities of their respective container terminals to the joint benefit of the State, port, and

wider supply chain

Given the size of the Australian market and the significant distance between Australia’s capital

cities, it is likely that international shipping lines will continue to service the three east coast

container ports on their Australia shipping routes. As such, any plans to expand and upgrade

Port of Melbourne’s capacity to handle larger ships should be in close coordination with the

other major container ports

to this end the PoM and Lonsdale Consortium anticipate, over time and following appropriate

analysis and Harbour Master approval, to be able to upgrade Swanson Dock to regularly

handle 8,500 TEU vessels (320m LOA, 42.8m beam and 14m operating draught). It may also be

possibly to upgrade Swanson Dock in future to handle vessels of between 9,000 and 10,000

TEU (340m LOA, 46m beam and 14m operating draught) however this is subject to further

simulations, analysis and Harbour Master approval

likewise over time upgrades to the maximum vessel size able to be handled at Webb Dock is

also expected to be undertaken. Subject to what upgrades are undertaken at other Australian

ports to handle larger container vessels, and appropriate simulations, analysis and Harbour

Master approval, PoM and Lonsdale Consortium expect to be able to increase the Webb Dock


Page 7 of 23

maximum design vessel over time up to around 11,500 TEU (340m LOA, 48m beam and 14m

operating draught). The above upgrade is also subject to further consideration of the vessel

capacity of the Port Phillip Bay heads

upgrades to handle larger vessels at both Swanson and Webb Dock would require appropriate

capital investments by PoM / Lonsdale Consortium and the respective stevedores and is

subject to normal business investment considerations. It should be noted that the handling of

vessels within the 9,000 to 10,000 TEU range at Swanson Dock is not expected to require any

change to the existing West Gate Bridge air draught clearance level

The business case of larger vessels calling at Port of Melbourne

the economic benefits of investing in port upgrades to accommodate larger vessels should be

viewed holistically, considering the cost / benefit impact on the entire supply chain, and

ultimately, the end consumers and exporters

PoM and Lonsdale Consortium are of the view that the Australian market does not currently

support the ultra large container vessel deployments that have been suggested by shipping

lines, and is unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future

these ultra large container vessels are currently servicing fundamentally different major east-

west trade routes, for significantly larger trade markets. In Australia, given the very nature and

size of our import / export markets, the market response will continue to favour smaller

vessels. The key reasons being:

o desire to maintain market share and service frequency – there is just simply not

enough local cargo demand in the east coast Australia market to fill the larger ships

and maintain weekly or bi-weekly services

o increased unit cost – the core objective of deploying larger vessels is to leverage

economies of scale and reduce unit costs. This logic does not exist in the Australian

market if there is insufficient cargo demand to full utilise vessel capacity. Deploying

larger ships is likely to result in increased service costs due to increased shipping costs

driven by sub-optimal vessel capacity utilisation and/or higher infrastructure charges

driven by the infrastructure upgrades required to handle the very large vessels.

in short, whilst much larger container vessels may well suit the shipping lines in isolation, this

does not mean they will offer the most efficient, lowest cost option to the supply chain

servicing international sea freight moving into and out of Australia.

Key Matter 4 – Future Victorian economic outcomes

In regards to future Victorian economic outcomes PoM and Lonsdale Consortium has the

following comments:

Port of Melbourne economic contribution

Port of Melbourne makes a substantial contribution to the south eastern Australian economies

and in 2012-13 the port was responsible for $5.9 billion in Australian, $4.3 billion in Victorian

and $1.3 billion in Tasmanian economic benefits. In addition during 2012-13 the port was

responsible for $1.1 billion in Victorian household incomes and the provision of 15,900 full

time equivalent (FTE) Victorian jobs


Page 8 of 23

for more detailed information on the Port of Melbourne economic contribution please see

Appendix 4.

Existing Victorian container port infrastructure

based on the information provided within the Discussion Paper the Port of Melbourne will

continue to be the most cost effective location to provide Victoria’s future container terminal

capacity due to the ability to leverage the existing and significant Port of Melbourne container

trade related asset base and the ability to provide incremental capacity increases in response to

trade growth forecasts

a preliminary review of the costs provided by GHD to support your Discussion Paper

identified that the unit cost per TEU for additional container capacity at the Port of Melbourne

is less than half that of the Port of Hastings (prior to the inclusion of any landside transport

improvements) and just under two thirds of Bay West (again prior to the inclusion of landside

transport costs)

a similar comparison between the Port of Melbourne, Port of Hastings and Bay West can be

made in regards to the unit costs per TEU with landside transport improvements included

Based on the Infrastructure Victoria evidence base as well as Port of Melbourne analysis,

incremental developments at the Port of Melbourne is also likely to involve significantly less

environmental disruption and impact to local flora and fauna, as compared to a major new

greenfield port development at either the Port of Hastings or Bay West.

Landside transport costs minimisation

Port of Melbourne has undertaken a high level internal review of the relative road freight

transport costs between the three port options and key intermodal hub locations which have

been considered by the port during past freight logistics planning activities. This information is

presented in Table 1 below and shows the following:

o the lowest trucking costs across all land transport routes is between Port of Melbourne

and Laverton and the highest is between Bay West and Dandenong

o due to the Port of Melbourne’s central position to the three main hinterland areas, it

has the lowest trucking costs to Somerton and Laverton North compared to Bay West

and the Port of Hastings

o for the trucking costs to Dandenong the Port of Melbourne is about 5% higher

compared to the Port of Hastings

o combined with the 2009 Port of Melbourne Container Logistics Chain Study results which

show that about 38% of containers are destined for the west, 18% for the north and

15% for southeast this review indicates that in order to minimise the overall

Melbourne landside transport costs the Port of Melbourne is the optimal container port

location


Page 9 of 23

Table 1 – Relative land transport cost comparison

Port Intermodal Hub Location

Dandenong (South East) Somerton (North) Laverton North (West)

Port of Melbourne 1.97 1.61 1.00

Bay West 4.02 3.17 2.16

Port of Hastings 1.88 4.01 3.57

Note: These cases are based on 2012 freight logistics land transport cost modelling and hence have been normalised to show the quantum

of cost difference between the transport movements rather than the actual prices. The costs have been indexed to the lowest point to point

transfer cost, which is between the Port of Melbourne and Laverton North

In addition to the above significant matters, PoM and Lonsdale Consortium would likely to

highlight a couple of comments on other specific issues identified within the Discussion Paper:

Largest Port of Melbourne container vessels visit to date – Port of Melbourne continues to see

gradual growth in both the average and largest container vessels visiting the port. The largest

container vessel handled by the Port of Melbourne to date (as at 15 March 2017) was the MSC

Ningbo not the E.R. Long Beach as stated in your Discussion Paper. The MSC Ningbo has a cargo

capacity of 7,849 TEU and dimension of 300m Length Overall (LOA), 42.8m beam and 15m

registered draught and has visited the Port of Melbourne on multiple occasions during the

most recent year. During its visits to the Port of Melbourne the MSC Ningbo operated with

draughts ranging from 12.5 to 13.2m

Pure Car Carrier (PCC) access under the West Gate Bridge – Appleton Dock has been used as a

temporary automotive terminal during the delivery of the recent Port Capacity Project. The

largest PCC vessel accepted at Appleton Dock (and the Port of Melbourne) during this period

was the Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics (WWL) operated Tysla which was built in 2012 and

has a 265m LOA, 33.3m beam and 12.3m registered draught. The WWL Tysla is the largest PCC

vessel within the WWL fleet today and has had no issues to date passing under the West Gate

Bridge in order to access Appleton Dock

Non-containerised trades – Port of Melbourne has a significant proportion of berths and land

which is currently allocated to automotive, Tasmanian, liquid bulk, dry bulk and break bulk

trades. As with the container trade, the port is committed to working with all customers and

tenants in order to maximise the capacity and utilisation of existing and new port facilities and

land. As a result PoM and Lonsdale Consortium consider that the port will be able to

accommodate the forecasts for trade growth across all non-container trade types for the period

of the Port Lease.


Page 10 of 23

Appendix 1 – Inner West truck related environmental and social considerations

Port freight logistics

The Port of Melbourne has a close relationship with the inner west suburbs. The inner west hosts a

significant number of port related logistics businesses whose location is dictated by land values

and minimising logistics costs in a highly cost-competitive environment.

The cost of moving containers to and from the port, and its competitive position compared to other

ports, is directly related to the efficiency of the container logistics chain. Significant factors

impacting this logistics chain include:

Origin and destination of full containers

Location of port logistics industries, including empty container parks and transport operators

Efficiency of connecting transport networks

Hours of operation of each business.

In 2009 the Port of Melbourne Container Logistics Chain Study (CLCS) found that 26% of international

containers imported through the Port of Melbourne went to importers located less than 15km to

the west of the port. A similar percentage of export containers also came from the west. The CLCS

also found that 77% of import containers and 52% of export containers are staged through

transport depots, almost all of which are located adjacent to the port or in the inner west suburbs.

Inner west roads

Trucks travel to and from the Port of Melbourne via the major freeways / tollways (West Gate

Freeway and CityLink) along with a variety of other arterial and local roads. It is truck operations

on the arterial and local roads within the inner west suburbs that are the major focus of community

concerns and attitudes. The roads shown in blue are arterial roads (VicRoads responsibility) whilst

Somerville Road, shown in black, is a local road under the responsibility of the Maribyrnong City

Council (Figure 1). These roads are used by both port and non-port trucks travelling to, from and

through the region with the land between Whitehall Street and Geelong Road being predominantly

residential in nature.

Following representations concerning truck numbers, noise and safety from local residents and the

Maribyrnong City Council, on 1 May 2001 VicRoads introduced curfews on Somerville Road

between Geelong Road and Hyde Street in Yarraville (shown dashed black in Figure 1). The

curfews were extended on 4 April 2002 to include Francis Street between Cemetery Road and

Whitehall Street (shown dashed blue in Figure 1).


Page 11 of 23

Figure 1 – Inner west region (Maribyrnong City Council)

The curfews apply to all trucks with a gross vehicle mass (GVM) of more than 4.5 tonnes with the

exception of those trucks that have legitimate local access requirements. Examples of ‘local’ trucks

that are exempt from the curfew include:

trucks travelling to or from a destination along Francis Street within the curfew area

trucks travelling to or from a road which can only be accessed from Francis Street

trucks using Francis Street as their most direct route to West Gate Freeway, for example:

o between the Mobil Yarraville Terminal and the Williamstown Road / West Gate

Freeway ramps

o between Hyde Street / Douglas Parade in Spotswood and the Williamstown Road /

West Gate Freeway ramps

o between Whitehall Street (south of Footscray Road) and the Williamstown Road / West

Gate Freeway ramps if heading west

The curfews apply to the hours between 8pm and 6am, Monday to Saturday, and 1pm Saturday to

6am Monday.

The Port of Melbourne 2012 traffic survey found that Port trucks comprise only 1% of all vehicles

and 8% of all trucks travelling on Francis Street and Somerville Road during curfew hours.


Page 12 of 23

Contribution of trucks to inner west traffic

Frequent surveys of traffic on inner west roads have been undertaken separately in recent years by

the Port of Melbourne, VicRoads and the Maribyrnong City Council. Table 1 provides the results

of weekday surveys done in 2012. The VicRoads and Council survey results are for an average

weekday whilst the GHD / Austraffic survey was started on Tuesday and continued for 24 hours.

The technology used was also different. The Port of Melbourne survey was undertaken by GHD /

Austraffic and used specialist video cameras whilst VicRoads and Maribyrnong City Council

surveys used automated counting and classification equipment.

Table 1 – 2012 Traffic survey results (Vehicles)

Road VicRoads / Council Port of Melbourne (GHD / Austraffic)

All vehicles All trucks All vehicles All trucks Port trucks

Francis Street 20,019 5,800 15,911 4,850 2,404

Somerville road 12,589 1,822 9,650 1,713 769

Buckley Street 22,878 2,483 22,836 2,178 1,005

Moore Street 23,468 2,647 22,652 1,833 837

Williamstown Road (south

of Francis Street) 42,868 5,165 42,544 4,629 1,276

Notwithstanding the differences between the survey results shown in Table 1, a broad conclusion

is that trucks (port and non-port) represent between 10% and 30% of traffic on the various roads,

with numbers varying from around 2,000 to 5,000 per day. On these roads port trucks represent

between 3% and 8% of all traffic and 28% to 50% of all trucks.

Based on traffic counts undertaken by VicRoads and Maribyrnong City Council on roads in the

inner west since 2002 as shown in Table 2, it can be seen that growth in the total number of all

vehicles is reasonably consistent across all roads. However, growth in the number of trucks using

each of the roads varies greatly. In 2012 fewer trucks (-26%) used Williamstown Road than in 2002

but significantly more (160%) used Moore Street. Whilst the growth in truck traffic on Moore Street

seems concerning, it should be viewed from the perspective of trucks, as a percentage of all

vehicles, increasing from around 5% to slightly more than 11%.

Table 2 – Traffic change 2002 – 2012 (Vehicles)

Road Truck Numbers 2002 Truck Numbers 2012 % Change 2002-12

All vehicles All trucks All vehicles All trucks All vehicles All trucks

Francis Street 18,495 5,757 20,019 5,800 8% 1%

Somerville road 11,319 1,551 12,589 1,822 11% 17%

Buckley Street 20,577 2,112 22,878 2,483 11% 18%

Moore Street 20,809 1,020 23,468 2,647 13% 160%

Williamstown Road

(south of Francis Street) 38,121 6,977 42,868 5,165 12% -26%


Page 13 of 23

Road congestion

The perception that port related trucks is a major contributor to road congestion on the near port

road network does not convey a realistic picture of the extent or impact of port related operations

with the number of trucks quoted are often aggregated (per day or per year) or double counted.

The 2012 Port of Melbourne traffic survey found that:

trucks travelling directly to the Swanson Dock precinct represented 9% of all vehicles on

Francis Street in the morning peak period from 7am to 9am

for Somerville Road, Buckley Street and Moore Street trucks travelling direct to the Swanson

Dock precinct during the morning peak represented 3.4% , 3.4% and 2.3% of all vehicles

respectively

for the afternoon peak period – 3pm to 6pm on Francis Street, Somerville Road, Buckley Street

and Moore Street, trucks travelling direct from the Swanson Dock precinct represent 10%,

3.2%, 1.8% and 0.7% of all vehicles respectively.

There hence needs to be clarity on the outcomes sought, and whether any changes to port truck

operations will achieve the objective of reducing truck traffic. Importantly, truck curfew hours

should be carefully considered / re-examined on this basis as it has significant impact on

supporting the 24 hours operation model of the Port of Melbourne.

Road safety

The issue of road safety has been raised by the local community and parents of schoolchildren,

primarily in the context of pedestrian crossings on Somerville Road adjacent to St Augustines

Primary School, Yarraville West Primary School, Kingsville Primary School and Merriwa

Kindergarten. On school days the road speed in the vicinity of the crossings is restricted to 40kph

during the hours 8 to 9:30am and 2:30 to 4pm. Due to their size and performance, trucks are

perceived to pose a greater risk to children using these pedestrian crossings than other vehicles.

A high level analysis of VicRoads CrashStats1 data for the Maribyrnong Local Government Area

over the five years from 2008 to 2012 was undertaken covering the main roads used by trucks,

namely Ballarat Road, Barkly Street, Buckley Street, Docklands Highway (Whitehall Street), Francis

Street, Geelong Road, Hyde Street, Moore Street, Napier Street, Somerville Road, Sunshine Road

and Williamstown Road. The findings of the analysis of the VicRoads crash data was as follows:

two pedestrians were killed and 28 seriously injured on the above roads over the five years

cars and light vehicles were responsible for 24 of these incidents, with four by unknown

vehicle types and one involved a rigid truck (not a semi-trailer as usually used for port related

movements)

Based on the above information it is not apparent that trucks in general, or port trucks in

particular, are the cause of road safety issues within the area.


Page 14 of 23

Appendix 2 – Webb Dock landside logistics considerations

At a number of points in time the delivery of a dedicated connection between Webb Dock and the

wider Victorian freight rail network and upriver portion of the port has been considered, with the

project broadly known as the ‘Webb Dock Rail Link’ (WDRL). These considerations have focused

on the combination of technical and commercial considerations associated with the development of

the WDRL.

Significant work was undertaken by Maunsell (now AECOM) and a range of other consultants

between 2002 and 2006 on the WDRL, with this work underwent a high level review and minor

updates by CH2M during 2015. The key WDRL information from this work is as follows:

Link alignment

the WDRL alignment consists of the following elements (as illustrated in Figure 1):

o connection to the existing freight rail network using the Dynon Port Rail Link (which is

grade separated and sits under the elevated section of Footscray Road)

o a low level elevated rail structure and bridge running between Victoria Dock and the

Bolte Bridge over the Yarra River with an opening (bascule) span to allow for the

transit of taller vessel between the Port of Melbourne and Parks Victoria controlled

sections of the river (west and east of the Bolte Bridge respectively)

o an at grade rail line, or elevated rail structure, along the existing rail easement between

the South Wharf precinct and Lorimer Street which turns south down the western side

of Todd Road before turning south west along the southern side of Wharf Road

o the rail line would then pass across a section of Westgate Park (again using the existing

rail easement) and into Webb Dock

Figure 1 – Indicative Webb Dock Rail Link alignment


Page 15 of 23

the current rail easement is able to provide a vertical and horizontal easement suitable for the

operation of freight trains at up to 40km/h and there is sufficient land available across the

whole route to accommodate a single track (on a nominal 6.5 to 7.0m wide easement). There is

also sufficient land available north of the Yarra River and west of Todd Road to accommodate

sections of double track (on a nominal 11m wide easement), if required. All track is assumed to

be dual gauge to support the full spectrum of metropolitan, regional and interstate trains

the low level bridge across the Yarra River is designed to give 8m clearance for river craft at all

times when closed. When open the available air draught under the Bolte Bridge will be the

limiting factor.

Rail operations

subject to the development of an appropriate rail terminal at Webb Dock and infrastructure

connections back into the wider freight rail network the capacity of the WDRL (based on the

predominately single track alignment) would be around 68 train movements per day,

excluding loco transfers, which equates to an annual maximum container capacity of around

1.9 million TEU per annum (which if you assume that the road network capacity to be 4.9

million TEU, as per the GHD analysis, then this equates to the potential Webb Dock capacity of

6.4 million TEU)

the above forecast includes a range of rail traffic including metropolitan trains (600m long),

regional trains (900m long) and interstate trains (1,500m long) with the expectation that this

also includes a number of repositioning trains in response due to the imbalance between

imports and exports

to allow full operation of 68 train movements per day a range of wider rail network

improvements will be required including additional train stagging yards in Dynon and/or

Tottenham

usage towards the WDRL capacity would be supported through the development the elevated

option for the WDRL structure along Lorimer Street and Todd Road, thus removing the two

existing public road level crossings at the Todd Road / Lorimer Street intersection and on

Wharf Road and providing easier access to the South Wharf precinct.

Delivery timing and costs

based on the analysis undertaken it is expected that the delivery of the WDRL will need to be

delivered during the next 10 to 15 years to support the continued growth in Webb Dock

container capacity

this analysis also identified a substantially lower delivery costs for the WDRL thank the

proposed Fishermans Bend Freight Link. The WDRL costs were however prepared some time

ago and need to be reviewed and updated for recent construction price inflation.

Webb Way Inter-Terminal Vehicle Concept

in addition to the freight rail component of the link the Maunsell 2002 work also considered

the potential of using the link for the operation of Inter-Terminal Vehicles (ITVs) which are

special off-road tractor-trailer units and not allowed to operate on public roads (due to the high

vehicle axle loads and lengths).


Page 16 of 23

In conclusion the Lonsdale Consortium has identified the need for the medium term delivery of a

rail / high productivity freight link to Webb Dock within the longer term plans for the Port of

Melbourne under the PLT. This aligns with the Lonsdale Consortium’s view that increasing rail

modal share is a critical supporting element to increasing the Port of Melbourne’s overall capacity

and ensuring an efficient supply chain. PoM is in the process of reviewing the options for the

delivery of the Webb Dock Rail Link which will be an important element of the inaugural Rail

Access Strategy for the port.


Page 17 of 23

Appendix 3 – Port of Melbourne vessel size considerations

Port of Melbourne approach to vessel size growth

Key points:

Larger vessels are a whole of supply chain issue – it is not just the port which needs to invest to

support the operation of the larger vessels it is the whole supply chain which needs to invest to

ensure that the larger vessels are able to be effectively serviced when in port

Maximisation of existing latent capacity – prior to undertaking significant new infrastructure

investments to support container vessel growth it is important that the capacity and utilisation

of existing assets is undertaken, including through the consideration of operational controls

which are able to minimise existing physical limitations

Collaborative decision making and investments – PoM is committed to working

collaboratively with its customers and tenants to maximise the opportunities around existing

infrastructure and to deliver mutually beneficial development and improvements which

support higher supply chain productivity and capacity

PoM has developed a high level and indicative framework (presented in Figure 1) to support the

analysis, planning, decision making and delivery associated with handling larger container vessels

at the port. This framework shows that:

robust port supply chain engagement, particularly with shipping lines and stevedores, is

needed to deliver any investments and operational improvements which are required to

handle larger vessels at the port

investment decisions by the port operator will require parallel investment decisions by the port

supply chain, particularly shipping lines and stevedores, in order to deliver the overall benefits

to the supply chain and Victorian economy.

Figure 1 – Indicative decision making framework for Port of Melbourne larger vessel

infrastructure investments


Page 18 of 23

There are a number of investment drivers and broader supply chain considerations that also need

to be furthered developed to support the above larger vessel infrastructure investment framework

for investment. The key investment drivers and considerations are outlined in Table 1.

Table 1 – Likely investment drivers and supply chain considerations for Port of Melbourne

large vessel infrastructure investments

Demand considerations Supply considerations Operational parameters Related supply chain

Investments

• Shipping line fleet

deployment

characteristics and

aspirations

• Shipping line

business model

and commercial

decision making

considerations

• Differences

between key

shipping lines

drivers and

decision making

• Shipping line

preferred,

alternative and

minimum

operating

parameters

• Existing Port of

Melbourne

infrastructure and

shipping channel

physical limits

• Existing and likely

other Australian

port infrastructure

and shipping

channel physical

limits

• Ability to use

operational

controls to

minimise physical

limitations

• Risk profiles of

different

operational

controls

• Larger vessel

discussion is likely

to be focused on

LOA, beam and

displacement

tonnage rather

than draught

• Vessel actual vs

design draught

considerations

• May prefer all

tides operations to

maximise

flexibility

• Consistent

parameters across

the port or

different for

different precincts

• Stevedore and

supply chain

equipment

investment and

operational

improvement

requirements

• Ability of

stevedores and

supply chain to

respond to

increased demand

variability while

increasing

productivity

• Financial and

commercial drivers

for required

stevedore and

supply chain

investments and

changes

In order to better understand the above investment drivers and broad supply chain considerations

significant stakeholder engagement and consultation will need to be undertaken, along with

appropriate investigations, assessments and evaluations. These will include, but not necessarily be

limited to, the following:

significant level of stakeholder engagement across all shipping lines in order to provide a

broader and more detailed understanding of the preferred and alternative ship fleet operating

parameters, which in turn will generate a more accurate appreciation of port development and

improvement options and any potential asset and operational implications

further vessel simulation work is likely to be required to both maximise existing operational

outcomes while more closely analysing proposed vessel deployment options

a staged vessel handling capacity growth delivery approach may be appropriate which is able

to spread the expected / potential port and supply chain investments over a significant period

of time in order to ensure commercial viability of any improvements.


Page 19 of 23

Current Port of Melbourne container vessel fleet distribution

Key points:

Vessel size growth – based on past Port of Melbourne vessel growth experience and Australian

market dynamics it is expected that vessel growth will continue going forward however it will

be tempered by market size, required service levels and wider supply chain economics and

hence will be gradual vessel size growth

Vessel size range – Port of Melbourne container trade is serviced by a range of vessel sizes to

cater for different markets / shipping routes, and as a result a range of vessel sizes is expected

to continue to visit the port going forward (with a significant difference between the maximum

and average vessel sizes)

Vessel draught utilisation – the CDP vessel operational draught outcomes show that ships

calling at Port of Melbourne are often not fully laden (reflecting the size of the market and the

characteristics of the Australian shipping route) and the delivery of infrastructure

improvements to cater for larger ships are often not fully utilised for an extended period of

time. Therefore, the cost implications should be carefully considered and weighed up against

the economical / commercial benefits of delivering the infrastructure upgrades

Port of Melbourne Operations Pty Ltd (PoM) routinely collects information on historical container

vessel visits to the port to support ongoing port operations and management with this information

providing a useful platform to inform short, medium and long term port planning and

development considerations and decisions.

Analysis of historical Port of Melbourne container vessel trends has been undertaken over the

period from 2002-03 through to 2015-16 and is presented in Figures 1 and 2 which show:

that during the last 14 years the average and maximum size of container vessels visiting the

port increased by 4.5% and 4.7% per annum (on a compound annual growth rate basis) to 3,892

TEU and 7,455 respectively (note that 2016-17 data is not included within this analysis dataset)

during 2015-16 the port handled 1,089 container vessels which varied significantly in size from

less than 1,000 TEU to around 7,500 TEU

small container vessels continue to be a reasonable portion of vessel visits with around 26% of

2015-16 visits (285 vessels) being by vessels of 3,400 TEU and under

there has also been a step increase in the proportion of Port of Melbourne containers carried

by 5,000 TEU and over vessels around three years ago followed by reasonable stable portion of

larger vessel visits during the last three years, with 203 such vessels visiting during 2015-16.


Page 20 of 23

Figure 1 – Average and maximum of Port of Melbourne container vessel capacity (TEU, 2002-03

to 2015-16)

Figure 2 – Distribution of Port of Melbourne container vessel visits (%, 2002-03 to 2015-16)

In 2009 the Port of Melbourne Channel Deepening Project (CDP) was completed, which provides

port access for commercial vessels up to 14.0m draught under all tidal conditions. Prior to CDP

completion the maximum port access draught was 11.6m under all tides and 12.1m with tidal

assistance.

PoM collects data and monitors both registered and operational draughts of vessels visiting the

port. This information is provided in Figures 3 and 4 (on the following page) and shows:

over the last 14 years there has been a reasonably steady increase in the maximum and average

registered and operating draughts of vessels visiting the Port of Melbourne

there has however been a stronger growth trend in registered draught compared to operating

draught with average registered draught growing around 75% faster than average operating

draught


Page 21 of 23

Figure 3 – Average and maximum Port of Melbourne container vessel registered draught (2013-

14 to 2015-16)

this shows that whilst shipping lines were supportive of the CDP they are largely not using the

additional draught available. More detailed analysis of the 2015-16 information has shown that

typically only around 5% of container vessel visits to the Port of Melbourne use the additional

CDP draught

in comparison, during the last three years around 80% of Port of Melbourne container vessel

visits have registered draughts of greater than 11.6m and hence could use the additional CDP

draught.

Figure 4 – Average and maximum Port of Melbourne container vessel operational draught (2013-

14 to 2015-16)


Page 22 of 23

Appendix 4 – Port of Melbourne economic benefits

The Port of Melbourne as a key international and domestic trade gateway and contributes

significantly to the Australian and Victorian economies. The most recent assessment of Port of

Melbourne economic benefits was undertaken in 2012-13 and is presented below2.

Australian overall

The total economic benefit of the Port of Melbourne to the Australian economy in 2012-13 was $5.9

billion. This comprised of $4.3 billion to Victoria, $1.3 billion to Tasmania and $0.3 billion to the

remaining states and territories.

Victorian overall

During 2012-13 the Port of Melbourne was estimated to provide Victorian economic benefits

consisting of $4.3 billion in economic output (identified above), $2.1 billion in value added benefits,

$1.1 billion in house hold incomes and 15,900 full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs.

2 It should be noted that this data covers the whole of Port of Melbourne including Station Pier Tasmanian activities. It however excludes

Station Pier cruise activities.


Page 23 of 23

Victorian by port function

Land transport and storage, cargo services and ship loading / unloading were the top three Port of

Melbourne functions during 2012-13. Combined, they resulted in a total Victorian economic benefit

of $3.3 billion, $1.6 billion of value added benefits, $0.9 billion of household income and

employment of 12,900 FTE jobs.

Victorian by port trade

Containers were the largest trade within the Port of Melbourne in 2012-13 and accounted for $3.5

billion of total Victorian economic benefits, $1.7 billion of value added benefits, $0.9 billion of

household income and employment of 12,800 FTE jobs.

s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com · 2018-06-07 · Port of Melbourne Operations Pty Ltd– Evidence...

Documents

Transcript of s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com · 2018-06-07 · Port of Melbourne Operations Pty Ltd– Evidence...