invest? Assessed at 3 defer tranches of million, 6 million and 9 capacity. million TEU per year capacity. Hasting scored lower because each stage Consider the ability to requires additional bring forward or defer dredging and significant stages to mirror environmental demand. approvals. Also the create of Regional Rail East to provide freight rail access to Hastings is a very large Is each capacity tranche investment that cannot both ‘stand alone’, be staged. efficient and able to be operated if no further stages were delivered? Long-term flexibility Whether the second Bay West preferred Bay West scored higher port has the ability to because there is more become the room to expand port State’s primary port in the footprint and good future and whether each transport connections option has the capacity which allow a much to expand to meet larger ultimate container term demand and capacity as well as accommodate room for other trades if alternative trades. required. We considered whether Hastings does have there was flexibility to: more land available close to the port for logistics use, but it Expand capacity would be difficult to beyond 9 million expand the terminal TEU (to 12 or 15 beyond 9 million TEU. million TEU) Allow changes to the port location and layout in design development phase (to mitigate impacts) Adapt to unforeseen change/new technology Readily accommodate a world class intermodal (rail) facility
invest? Assessed at 3 million, 6 million and 9 million TEU per year capacity. Consider the ability to bring forward or defer stages to mirror demand. Is each capacity tranche ‘stand alone’, both efficient and able to be operated if no further stages were delivered? defer tranches of capacity. Hasting scored lower because each stage requires additional dredging and significant environmental approvals. Also the create of Regional Rail East to provide freight rail access to Hastings is a very large investment that cannot be staged. Long-term flexibility Whether the second port has the ability to become the State’s primary port in the future and whether each option has the capacity to expand to meet demand and accommodate alternative trades. We considered whether there was flexibility to: Expand capacity beyond 9 million TEU (to 12 or 15 million TEU) Allow changes to the port location and layout in design development phase (to mitigate impacts) Adapt to unforeseen change/new technology Readily accommodate a world class intermodal (rail) facility Bay West preferred Bay West scored higher because there is more room to expand port footprint and good transport connections which allow a much larger ultimate container capacity as well as room for other trades if required. Hastings does have more land available close to the port for logistics use, but it would be difficult to expand the terminal beyond 9 million TEU. term
Advice%20on%20securing%20Victoria's%20ports%20-%20accessible%20version%20-%20FINAL.docx