Sunday 22 February 2015

Volume I - Summary

TABLE OF CONTENTS (SUMMARY)


I. THE PROBLEM....................................... (i)
II. THE OPTIONS.................................... (iii)
III. THE EVALUATION................................ (vii)
1. The Free Market Case.......................... (vii)
2. The State Rail Authority Option.............. (xiii)
3. The Western Suburbs Option..................... (xv)
IV. THE SOLUTION.................................... (xx)

I  THE PROBLEM 

A container on the back of a semi-trailer stands
out from the traffic stream. It does so because
of its very size and because it is a distinctive
form of transportation. The container box is 8
feet wide. The distance from the top of the
container to the ground will be approximately
13-14 feet. The length of the vehicle may be as
much as 57 feet. The vehicle unladen is likely I
to weigh approximately 13 tonnes. Loaded with a
container its weight may exceed 30 tonnes. On
any view a container truck is a large vehicle.

Certain facts relating to the transportation and
distribution of containers have been placed before
the Inquiry and are said to call for action.
Reducing the argument to its bare bones three
matters are important:
  • First, the opening of Port Botany will
    alter the balance between containers
    carried by road and containers carried
    by rail. Each of the Port Botany
    terminals is primarily directed towards
    a road delivery system. Fewer containers
    will be carried by rail than was the case
    when trade was confined to Port Jackson.
    There will, in consequence, be many more
    containers on the road.
  • Secondly, the move to Port Botany will
    change the direction of travel of the
    vehicles carrying containers. Container
    vehicles will be making their way
    towards Port Botany rather than Port
    Jackson and thus using a different road
    network. Suburbs not previously exposed
    to containers will suddenly be confronted
    by them in increasing numbers.



--------------(ii)---------------


  •  Thirdly, the Kyeemagh/Chullora road
    proposals do not provide an immediate
    solution to an immediate problem.
    Even if the decision were taken
    tomorrow to construct the Kyeemagh/
    Chullora Road it is likely that it
    would not be completed for a signifi-
    cant period, probably ten years.

In these circumstances a number of submissions have
been made to the Inquiry outlining various options.
They provide, so it is said, an immediate solution
to the 'container problem'. It is the task of this
Inquiry to examine these suggestions and to assess
their feasibility and their worth.

This Report makes no statement one way or the other
concerning the Kyeemagh/Chullora road proposals.
Those proposals (as well as the suggested rail link)
will be the subject of a separate report.






---------------(iii)--------------


II THE OPTIONS

1. THE OPTIONS DESCRIBED

In broad terms three options were considered by
the Inquiry. They were:

  1. The so-called 'free market case' in
    which it was said that there should
    be no regulation of the port, and
    no attempt to divert containers from
    road transportation to rail transport-
    ation.
  2. The scheme advocated by the State Rail
    Authority. The scheme envisages the
    establishment of four decentralised
    depots at the following locations:
  • Cooks River goods yard
  • Rozelle goods yard
  • Chullora (the existing depot)
  • Villawood (a1so an existing depot)
     
Import containers would be carried by
rail to the depot nearest their final
destination. Export containers would
be taken to the depot closest to their
origin.

3. The Western Suburbs Scheme strenuously
advocated by the planning and Environment
Commission amongst others. This scheme
envisages the creation of an Eastern
zone and a Western zone. Import
containers destined for the Western
zone would be carried by rail to the
decentralised depots at Villawood or
Chullora. Export containers coming from
the Western suburbs would be delivered
to the decentralised depots rather than
to Port Botany or Port Jackson as the
case may be.


                 -------------
(iv)----------------

2. THE RAIL SHARE

The State Transport Study Group has conducted a
painstaking analysis of the rail share 1ike1y to
arise under the various schemes. Their analysis
must be considered against the background of
these facts:

  • Before the opening of Botany the
    State Rail Authority carried 39%
    of the container throughput to
    the Port of Sydney.
  • The container trade transferring to
    Botany has a higher rail component
    than the rest of port Jackson because,
    in large measure, it is trade from
    White Bay. White Bay has forced rail
    to Chullora at the present time.
    Accordingly 53% of the trade which
    is likely to transfer to port Botany
    presently goes by rail.
  • Based on 1985 predictions the share
    between the various facilities at
    Port Jackson and those at port
    Botany will be approximately:
  •    65% Port Botany
  •    5% Port Jackson

According to the State Transport Study Group the
schemes will produce the following rail shares:

  • The Free Market Case will result in
    a 26% rail share for port Botany.
  • The State Rail Authority scheme would
    result in 7O% of containers being
    carried at some stage by rail.
  • The Western Suburbs Scheme would
    result in approximately 47% of
    containers being carried by rail.


-------------(v)----------------


3. VARIOUS SUB-OPTIONS CONSIDERED

A number of variations were discussed in submissions
and in the public hearings.

  (i) A suggestion that the industry should
      be left to its own devices for the
      time being. It would demonstrate (so
      it was said) that it can effectively
      organise its own affairs so as to
      increase the rail share, and therefore
      reduce the environmental damage
      occasioned by the carriage of containers
      by road.

 (ii) It was suggested that if regulation
      were introduced, it should be confined
      to imports or alternatively to exports,
      but should not be extended to both.

(iii) If a scheme were to be introduced it
      should apply equally to port Jackson
      and Port Botany. The Maritime Services
      Board, it was said, has pursued a ‘twin
      port' policy for some time in which it
      was even-handed in its treatment of the
      two ports. The extension of any scheme
      to include port Jackson would be
      consistent with that policy and would
      serve the environment at the same time.

 (iv) It is suggested that the real environ-
      mental problem was not trucks, as such,
      but rather the very large container
      trucks described in the introduction
      to this Report. Port Botany offers an
      opportunity to establish a depot for
      the unstuffing of LCL containers. For
      sound environmental reasons, so the
      argument runs, that option ought to be
      taken up and endorsed by this Inquiry.


-------------(vi)----------------

4. THE KYEEMAGH/CHULLORA ROAD PROPOSALS DO NOT
PROVIDE AN IMMEDIATE SOLUTION

Whatever view one takes about the Kyeemagh/Chullora
Road proposals, it is plain that they do not offer
a solution available to the community in less than
ten years. Indeed it may take considerably more
than that span of time before they furnish any
relief from the passage of containers.



---------------(vii)--------------




III THE EVALUATION

1. THE FREE MARKET CASE

1.1 Advocates of the Free Market Case

The line-up of parties opposing regulation is
formidable indeed. It includes:

  • The Maritime Services Board
    The Operators of Botany Bay
    (ANL and CTAL)
  • Glebe Is1and Terminals Pty. Limited
  • Liner Services Pty, Limited (a
    depot operator)
  • The Australian Chamber of Shipping
  • The New South Wa1es Road Transport
    Association

1.2 Environmental Impact of Containers

It is not difficult to appreciate why the community
has singled out containers from other forms of
transportation. The answer appears in the following
passage taken from the Environmental Impact
statement submitted by the Australian National Line:

"..The movement of container trucks has
given considerable cause for concern to
people who are affected by them. Some
of the environmental impacts of container
vehicles, or indeed of any similar large
vehicles, can be discussed in objective
or even quantitive terms fumes, safety,
traffic congestion, pedestrian delays,
noise and vibration.

Others are less tangible and possibly
emotive. It would seem that these factors
are linked with the sheer size of the
container on its truck.

A standard I.S.O. container measures 20
feet x 8 feet x 8 feet and weighs up to
20 tonne. Where a 40 foot container or two
20 foot containers are carried on a single
vehicle or trailer unit the length is up
to 17.4m (57 feet)." (emphasis added)

---------------(viii)--------------

The Inquiry accepts that there is an environmental
impact which attends the passage of containers
through the Metropolitan network, and that the
impact is significant.


1.3 The Experience at Mort Bay, Balmain

History has its own fascination but it may also
offer an insight into the mistakes made in the
past. There can be little doubt that the
Australian National Line Terminal at Balmain was,
environmenta11y, a mistake. The Maritime services
Board in evidence before the Inquiry described it
in this way:

"One’s only got to drive down the street
to Mort Bay to see that it is a situation
that is clearly unacceptable. Possibly a
thing that should never have happened."



1.4 Is there an Analogy Between Mort Bay and Botany Bay?

Mayne Nickless Limited in its submission to the
Inquiry stated:

"Without adequate road systems to and from
Port Botany, a similar unacceptable
situation such as we have at Balmain,
will present itself."

In the corporate mind of one significant transport
operator there is an analogy to be drawn between
Mort Bay and Botany Bay. Can the analogy be
supported? It is the Inquiry's firm view that it
can.

There are four suggested differences between Mort
Bay and the route which container trucks are
likely to take when they are delivering containers
to the West (Bay Street, Harrow Road, Bexley Road
etc.). The differences are:

--------------(ix)---------------
  (i) Mort Street and the other streets in
      Balmain are narrower and the houses
      are built immediately adjacent to the
      footpath unlike the homes in Rockdale,
      Bexley and Campsie. It is suggested
      that the two situations are not
      comparable.

 (ii) It is suggested that Balmain is hillier
      than the Bay Street/ Bexley Road route.

(iii) It is suggested that there were more
      vehicles at Mort Bay than can be
      expected at Rockdale, Bexley and Campsie.

(iv)  Mort Street and the other streets in
      Balmain are residential streets. Bay
      Street/Harrow Road/Bexley Road is a
      secondary road carrying a significant
      volume of traffic.

The narrowness of the streets is relevant because
it affects noise, vibration and intimidation. Yet
Bexley Road is approximately 12.8 metres wide with
a 3.7 metre footway whereas the carriageway in the
relevant Balmain Streets varied between 10 metres
and 16 metres. Certainly the houses in Balmain
are not set back as they are in Rockdale, Bexley
and Campsie. Yet the differences are not great and,
in any event, noise and vibration do not significantly
attenuate over these distances.

The hilliness of the Balmain peninsula exacerbated
the noise and fumes created by trucks. Bexley Road
is quite as hil1y as it descends into the Bardwell
Creek Valley and into the Wo11i Creek Valley.

On the worst road (Mort Street, Balmain) the peak
flow was about 60 vehicles per hour. The average
flow was described in the following terms:

"..The number of trucks moving down the
street at an average frequency of one
truck every 3-4 minutes on the main routes,
represents an unacceptable frequency of
truck movement in an area where the
residential buildings are developed close
to the street alignment."



---------------(x)--------------

The daily average, in other words, was of the
order of 15-20 vehicles per hour down the main
routes. How does that compare with Botany? The
Planning and Environment Commission has submitted
the following figures to the Inquiry:

  • 512 trucks per day (some of which
    would be empty)
  • The maximum hourly movement through
    Rockdale would be 89 container
    trucks.

STSG also made certain calculations. It did
not feel able to make any estimate of the empty
container trucks making their way to the port.
Excluding this element, their figures were:
  • approximately 250 per day minimum
  • approximately 400 per day maximum

The figures submitted by ANL and CTAL to Commissioner
Simblist in the Port and Environment fnquiry in 1976
did not differ materially from these estimates. They
estimated 64 containers per hour although they based
their estimate upon a Botany throughput of 300,000
TEU (compared to the present M.S.B. estimate of 273,000).

It will be seen, therefore, that there will be
substantially more containers passing through
Rockdale than engendered the wrath of the public at
Mort Bay, Balmain.

The Terminal Operators maintain that these containers
will be lost in the traffic stream because unlike
Balmain there are so many other vehicles. The
Inquiry accepts that there is this difference but
maintains that the analogy with Mort Bay still holds.
First, a container vehicle, even in a sea of cars,
stands out as an elephant would stand out amidst a
flock of pigeons.

-------------(xi)----------------

Secondly, the container will pass through certain
areas which are sensitive to truck traffic and
especially container truck traffic. The following
is an extract from the Rockdale Council submission:

"Within Rockdale, container trucks wil1
pass through Brighton-Le-Sands, Rockdale,
Bexley and Bexley North shopping centres
and pass schools, churches and hospitals.
The route adjoins residential areas for
the greater portion of its length both
within Rockdale and the neighbouring
municipality. "

Thirdly, the passage of containers through Rockdale,
Bexley and Campsie will take place some ten years
after it began at Mort Bay. In 1969 when Mort Bay
began its operations no one quite knew what the
impact of containerisation would be. No one
envisaged that it would overwhelm the shipping
industry within the space of ten years. No one
quite appreciated the impact which container
vehicles would make upon the environment and upon
the public mind. But those lessons have been
learned. The community is less likely to be
tolerant now, ten years on, than it was when Mort
Bay began.

Fourthly, it is obvious from the submissions made
to this Inquiry (to which reference will be made
shortly) that the community senses that the
environmental degradation is unnecessary because
of the rail alternative which offers an immediate
solution. Even those who advocate the Kyeemagh/
Chullora Road, or some other road proposal,
recognise the long lead time required for the
implementation of that solution. It is to trespass
unduly upon the good-wil1 and patience of a
community to expect it to wait a period of ten years
if it be the case that there is a solution, which is
available, and can be implemented immediately.

-------------(xii)----------------



Finally, there is a great deal of evidence that
the areas through which containers would pass (Bay
Street, Rockdale, Harrow Road, Bexley and Bexley
Road) already suffer significantly from the effects
of noise and the other forms of environmental
degradation that follow in the wake of a heavy
traffic stream. It is against that background
that the superimposition of an additional load
of container traffic must be judged.

l.5 The Effects on Decentralised Depots

Depots have been established in the Western suburbs
(at Chullora and Villawood) because there was not
the space at Port Jackson to stuff and unstuff
containers or to handle containers efficiently.

There is the space at Botany. What, then, will
happen to the depots? There is a body of evidence
which suggests that they are threatened and they
may c1ose. Were this to happen, a substantial
number of men and women would be displaced.

Obviously a scheme cannot be justified simply to
keep the Villawood or Chullora depots open. Insofar
as the pursuit of a legitimate government purpose
(such as the preservation of the environment) has
this incidental effect, that is a bonus which
cannot be ignored.

1.6 The Clamour for Rail

Almost 1,500 submissions have been made to the
Kyeemagh/Chullora Road Inquiry. The view they
present on the container issue has been almost
unanimous. There is a clamour for the movement
of containers by rail which is all but deafening.
That public response is not lightly put to one side.

Nor does the public stand alone. The same view was
put by the following Local Councils:




--------------(xiii)---------------
  • the Botany Municipal Council
  • the South Sydney Council
  • the Marrickville Council
  • the Rockdale Council
  • the Canterbury Council
  • the Kogarah Council
  • the Hurstville Municipal Council

The Inquiry supports that view. It is firmly of
the view that there is a problem which will become
increasingly evident as port Botany becomes fully
operational.

It is the Inquiry's view that the Free Market Case
is, therefore, unacceptable.

2. THE STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OPTION

2.1 The Option Described

The State Rail Authority proposed an option in
which four decentralised container parks would
be established at the following locations:

  • the Cooks River goods yard
  • the Rozelle goods yard
  • the existing depot at Chullora
  • the existing depot at Villawood

Importers would be obliged to rail a container to
a depot closest to his premises. The same procedure
would be followed for exports in reverse. In this
way the road transportation of containers would be
kept to a minimum.

2.2 The Environmental Advantaqes
The scheme assumes that in every case there are
environmental advantages in railing a container
to the closest depot or from the closest depot,
as the case may be. Ordinarily, that is a safe
assumption. It is demonstrably true in the case

--------------(xiv)---------------

of the Western suburbs depots. Upon analysis,
the environmental benefits of railing a container
to the Cooks River goods yard or the Rozelle goods
yard are dubious.


2.3 Problems Inherent in the Scheme

It is plain that the implementation of the State
Rail Authority Option would add considerably to
the cost of handling each container. There are,
in addition, a number of operational and practical
difficulties which make the option unacceptable.

If a contrast is made between a number of containers
presently handled, and the number of, containers
to be handled under the proposed scheme, the strain
upon the resources of the state Rail Authority is
obvious:

  • in the year ended the 30.6.80 the
    State Rail Authority carried a
    total of 136,115 TEU (Twenty foot
    equivalent units)
  • assuming a 70% share for both port
    Jackson and Port Botany the number
    of TEU carried in 1985 would be
    292,600 (i.e. more than twice as
    many as presently carried)

The Inquiry accepts that doubling the container
task in the space of less than 5 years must create
significant capacity problems for the railways.

2.4 The Scheme is Too Complex and Too Ambitious

It is the Inquiry's view that in the transformation
from a free market to some form of regulation one
must tread warily in the beginning. The proposals
should be modest. The state Rail Authority scheme
has much to commend it. It is, at this stage, too
ambitious and too complex.
-------------(xv)----------------

3. THE WESTERN SUBURBS OPTION

3.1 The Option Advocated by the Planning and
Environment Commission

The essential features of the option are:

  1. Sydney should be divided into an Eastern
    zone and a Western zone.
  2. The Western zone is depicted in the map
    figure A. The local government areas on
    the boundary of the Western zone included
    Campbelltown, Liverpool, Bankstown,
    Strathfie1d, Concord, Ryde and Hornsby.
  3. Under this scheme import FCL containers
    destined for the Western zone would be
    carried by rail to the decentralised depots
    at:

  • Villawood or
  • Chullora
4. Export FCL containers coming from the Western
suburbs are to be delivered to the same
decentralised depots rather than directly
by road to the port.
5. The scheme would not apply to LCL containers
which would continue to be handled in. the same
way as they are now handled (i.e. distributed
between the various depots according to
shipping line agreements or affiliations).
The scheme would embrace country and interstate
FCL containers. It would include empty
containers.

It is necessary to address two other issues:
  • what arrangement is suggested for the
    division of containers between Villawood
    and Chullora?
  • what arrangement is suggested for the
    road delivery of containers?

-------------- (xvi)---------------



---------------(xvii)--------------

The Inquiry investigated both these matters. It
will recommend the following:

  1. The service areas of the Chullora
    and Villawood depots should not be
    defined. Both depots should serve
    the entire Western region and should
    be permitted to compete with each
    other for whatever share of the
    market they can capture.
  2. There should be no regulation of the
    road transportation of containers to
    or from the decentralised depots.
    Specifically, there should be no
    exclusion of owner-drivers in favour
    of large transport companies from
    that portion of the trade.

3.2 The Inquiry's View on the Inclusion of Empty Containers
Empty containers should be excluded from the scheme.
Their inclusion achieves 1itt1e environmentally.
Yet the cost of the scheme as a whole is doubled.
Their exclusion will not jeopardise the scheme
itself.

3.3 The Exclusion of Interstate and Intrastate Containers
The Inquiry differed from the planning and
Environment commission concerning the inclusion of
intrastate and interstate containers.

Most intrastate and interstate containers are
already carried by rail as the following
statistics demonstrate :

  • 23% are carried by rail
  • 8% are carried by road
Rail is the cheaper mode over long distances. The
8% which choose road probably make that choice for
--------------(xviii)---------------
good reason. The cargo may be urgent or there may
be no handling facilities where the container is
being transported or the cargo may be unsuited to
rail.

For the time being, these containers should be
excluded from the scheme.

3.4 The Rail Share Under the Inquiry's proposal

Under the Inquiry's proposal the rail share is
approximately 41% as opposed to approximately
26% under the Free Market Case.

This share is not remarkably different from the
share contemplated by the Botany Terminals:

  • The ANL contemplated a 2O% rail
    share but has experienced 28%
    since the Port opened.
  • CTAL contemplates a 36% rail
    share.

Yet the difference is vital to the environment.
Figure A depicts a screen-line in the Rockdale
area. Calculations were made by the planning and
Environment commission and by STSG of the number
of vehicles crossing the screen-line under the
Free Market Case and under the western suburbs
Option. The result is as follows:

  •  The PEC estimate 5l2 trucks per
    day in Rockdale under the Free
    Market Case.
  • A maximum of 89 trucks per hour
    during peak periods.
  • If the scheme they propose were
    implemented (472 rail share) the
    number of trucks in Rockdale would
    reduce to 57 trucks per day (inclu-
    ding empty trucks)
-------------(xix)----------------

  •  STSG estimate between 250 and 400
    trucks per day in Rockdale (exclu-
    ding empty trucks for which they
    did not feel able to make an esti-
    mate) under the Free Market Case.
  • If the PEC scheme (47% rail share)
    were implemented the number of
    trucks carrying a container either
    empty or fu1I would reduce to 26
    per day.
  • If the rail share were 41 or 42% as
    suggested by the Inquiry the number
    of trucks in Rockdale would reduce
    to 67 per day.

The scheme, in short, would reduce the total daily
number of trucks crossing the Rockdale screen line
to a lesser number than would be experienced each
hour (in the peak) under the Free Market Case. In
the Inquiry's view that is a substantial achievement.

3.5 The Cost of the Scheme

The Inquiry accepts that there is a cost which
attaches to the implementation of the scheme. We
calculate that cost to be approximately $20 per
container. It is like1y, in the Inquiry’s judgement,
that the shipping lines will adopt a box rate for
all metropolitan containers without differentiating
between those destined for the western zone and
those going to the Eastern zone. They will, in
other words, generalise and spread the additional
cost entailed by the scheme.

The Inquiry has investigated a number of suggested
indirect costs:

  • the delay occasioned to containers
    caught by the scheme
  • the diversion of containers to
    Melbourne to avoid the scheme
  • the suggestion that a scheme would
    operate as a disincentive to industry
    in the Western suburbs.


--------------(xx)---------------


It is clear, beyond argument, that Melbourne
poses no threat to Sydney. The scheme will not
operate as a disincentive to industry in the
Western suburbs. Some delay, of a minor nature,
will come about as a result of the scheme. The
delay is like1y to be far less than experienced
by importers and exporters in the past when
Port Jackson was not assisted by Port Botany in
handling the Sydney throughput.

3.6 Operational and Practical Difficulties

A number of operational and practical difficulties
were suggested by the terminal operators. They
are not to be underestimated. The Inquiry does not
suggest that they are trifling. Upon examination,
neither alone nor in combination are they suffici-
ently weighty to cause one to jettison the scheme
and thereby lose the environmental advantages
which flow from the scheme.

The Inquiry has suggested a number of safeguards
which will protect the legitimate interest of
persons, concerned with the importation and export
of containers.

-----------------------------

               IV THE SOLUTION

1. THE FREE MARKET CASE

The Free Market Case advocates no regulation of
the Port and no attempt to divert containers
from road transportation to rail transportation.

RECOMMENDATION:  The Inquiry recommends against
                 the adoption of that view.


2. THE STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OPTION

The State Rail Authority recommended a scheme
which envisages the establishment of four
decentralised depots at the following locations:

  • Cooks River goods yard
  • Rozelle goods yard
  • Chullora (the existing depot)
  • Villawood (also an existing depot)

Under the scheme import containers would be carried
by rail to the depot nearest their final destination,
Export containers would be taken to the depot closest
to their origin.

RECOMMENDATION:  The Inquiry recommends against
                 the adoption of that option.


3. THE WESTERN SUBURBS OPTION

The Western Suburbs Option envisages the creation
of an Eastern zone and a Western zone for the
Sydney Metropolitan Area. Import containers
destined for the Western zone would be carried
by rail to the decentralised depots at:

  •   Villawood
  •    Chullora

Export containers coming from the Western suburbs
will be delivered to these decentralised depots
rather than to Port Botany or Port Jackson.
--------------(xxii)---------------



RECOMMENDATION:  The Inquiry recommends the
                 adoption of this option
                 with the following essential
                 features:


  1.   The service areas of the Chullora and
    Villawood depots should not be defined.
    Both depots should serve the entire
    Western region and should be permitted
    to compete with each other for whatever
    share of the market they can capture.
  2.  There should be no regulation of the road
    transportation of containers to or from
    the decentralised depots. Specifically
    there should be no exclusion of owner-
    drivers in favour of large transport
    companies from that portion of the trade.
  3.  For the time being, empty containers
    should be excluded from the scheme though
    the matter can be reviewed if the need arises.
  4.  The scheme should be confined to the Sydney
    Metropolitan Area FCL containers (both
    import and export) and should not, for
    the time being, extend to interstate or
    intrastate containers carried by road.

The following safeguards (to protect the legitimate
interests of various parties) are an essential part
of the scheme:

  1.  There should be duplication of the Botany
    Goods Line.
  2.  The capacity of the State Rail Authority
    to handle the expected throughput under
    the Western Suburbs Scheme should be
    immediately reviewed and arrangements
    made to correct any deficiency in either
    locomotives or container wagons.


-------------(xxiii)----------------
3.  Certain categories of containers (such
as hazardous cargoes) should be excluded
from the scheme. Those concerned with
the importation and export of goods
should be invited by the government to
submit suggested exclusions within a
specified period. The exclusions should
include (for the time being) the coastal
trade of the Australian National Line.
4.  Steps should be taken to preserve the
residential amenity of the Villawood
area in the vicinity of the Freightbases
depot. The steps should include:
(a)     At State Government expense,
Christina Road, Leightonfield
should be upgraded.

(b)     In consultation with the Department
of Main Roads and the Traffic
Authority, the intersection of
Christina Road, Mil1er Road and
Waldron Road should be reviewed,
with a view to easing the passage
of container vehicles to and from
Freightbases via Christina Road
to Woodville Road.

(c)     Vehicles carrying full containers
should leave the Freightbases depot
via Christina Road.

(d)     Provision should be made for land-
scaping, noise barriers and even
double glazing (if it is warranted)
in Miller Road after monitoring the
effects of the scheme upon that road
and after consultation with the local-
community. Insofar as the vehicles
are substantially confined to Christina
Road, the amenity of Mi11er Road should
not be seriously affected


--------------(xxiv)---------------

5.  Consultation should take place between
the following bodies in order to work
out truck routes to be used by heavy
container vehicles:
  • Department of Main Roads
  • Traffic Authority
  • Planning and Environment Commission
  • the inner city Councils
  • Transport Workers’ Union of Australia
  • New South Wales Road Transport Association
  • Long Distance Road Transport Association
  • Chamber of Commerce
  • any other bodies involved in the
    importation or export of goods or
    the transportation of containers

4. DEPOT AT PORT BOTANY

RECOMMENDATION:   The Inquiry recommends that the
                  Government permit one 6,000 TEU
                  depot at Port Botany subject to
                  the following conditions:

  1. It is to be understood that there should
    be one only depot for the two terminals
    and not one depot for each terminal.
  2.  The lease agreement between the Maritime
    Services Board and the Terminal Operators
    at Port Botany (ANL or CTAL or both)
    should be amended to make it a condition
    of the lease that 6,000 TEU only are
    handled each year at the depot.
  3.  Any planning permission given with respect to
    the erection of a shed for the purposes of
    stuffing and unstuffing should ensure that
    proper environmental safeguards are observed,
    and should be conditional upon the annual
    throughput of the depot not exceeding 6,000 TEU.
  4. The size of the shed permitted for the
    purposes of such a depot should not be
    greater than is reasonably required for
    a depot with a throughput of 6,000 TEU
    per annum.

--------------(xxv)---------------


5. THE APPLICATION OF A SCHEME TO PORT BOTANY AND PORT JACKSON


RECOMMENDATION:  The Inquiry recommends that
                 the Western Suburbs Scheme
                 be applied to the following
                 terminals:
  • the Australian National Line Terminal
    at Port Botany
  • the CTAL Terminal at Port Botany
  • the White Bay Terminal at Port Jackson
  • the Glebe Island Terminal at Port Jackson
  • any other terminal or wharves connected
    to rail which may be constructed at
    either Port Jackson or Port Botany in
    the future.


- End of Summary to Volume I -