Land Access to Ports

Most ports are surrounded by large urban centers, as a result of historical reasons and necessity, as some industries require easy access to ports. However, the symbiotic relationship between the two is increasingly creating problems of access to ports. There are often difficulties in allowing new road capacity in heavily built up areas. Several port cities (including Chittagong, Hanoi, and Manila) have resorted to daytime bans on truck movements to ports as a first measure to combat congestion (AAPA 2008). Although they reduce congestion, the bans add to the cost and time of shipping goods through the port.

MODULE 11

Land Access to Ports

Most ports are surrounded by large urban centers, as a result of historical

reasons and necessity, as some industries require easy access to ports

However, the symbiotic relationship between the two is increasingly

creat-ing problems of access to ports There are often difficulties in allowcreat-ing new

road capacity in heavily built up areas Several port cities (including

Chittagong, Hanoi, and Manila) have resorted to daytime bans on truck

movements to ports as a first measure to combat congestion (AAPA 2008)

Although they reduce congestion, the bans add to the cost and time of

ship-ping goods through the port

There are no benchmark standards of land access to a port, partly because

all port–urban interfaces differ Port city authorities in several countries have

recognized the urban development and growth benefits of merging land use

policy with port development strategies They take maximum advantage of

the value of the port as part the global economy while at the same time

maxi-mizing its contribution to the livability of the city (ECMT 2000) However,

outside a few developed countries, there has been little integration of port

planning with urban planning, at least while the port is still in operation

(UNCTAD 2004) It is only after ports are no longer operational that there is

consensus on their heritage value and redevelopment as residential, tourist,

and cultural and commercial centers Wharves, docks, and equipment that

would once have been demolished can become symbols of local heritage and instruments of urban renewal However, for purposes of corridor develop-ment, the focus has to be on the impact of cities on ports and vice versa In the United States, AAPA (2008) estimated that more than 13 million jobs are dependent on port activity It examined four categories of port-related employment: direct, indirect, induced, and port related Direct employment includes jobs at the port as well as the many supporting services that are the basis for the financial structure of a port city These services include trade finance and insurance, maritime services (including ship brokering), freight forwarding, and land transport services All these services and their employ-ment are at risk if a port loses competitiveness

Module 1 made the argument that the land access part of a corridor accounts for a very large share of the corridor costs If the arguments for including the maritime sector in the definition of the corridor are accepted, the land transport cost and time for a corridor to a landlocked country account for an average of about 35 percent of the corridor cost and about

27  percent of the corridor time If the maritime sector is excluded, these shares increase to 78 percent and 69 percent, respectively

The share of these costs and times that is taken up in crossing the urban area varies by corridor and by how far the origin or destination of the freight is from the port For freight that originates or is destined for locations in the urban area, the share is close to 100 percent, whereas for locations several hundred kilometers away from the port, the shares are about 1–5 percent

But it is not always the actual urban transit costs and times that affect cor-ridor costs, but the uncertainty they introduce, particularly in the time to cross the urban area, as argued above If the distance to the port through the urban area is about 40 kilometers (typical for a port city of about 2 million people and a port in the downtown area), the time to cross the area can range from about one hour when the streets are uncongested to five hours or more when there is severe congestion

Ports are pivotal nodes and platforms in integrated multimodal supply chains Much attention has been given to the efficiency of the ports them-selves Much less attention has been given to how easy it is for traded goods

to get to or from the port to their origin or destination within the port city or via a transport corridor to a more inland origin or destination Improving urban access to ports that are in cities that suffer congestion can be signifi-cant in reducing the total cost, time, and uncertainty of land access in the corridors leading to the port

This module addresses the issues and approaches to landside access to ports through the surrounding urban areas Access to ports through the

national road and rail networks is addressed in the road freight and railways

modules (Modules 7 and 8) One reason this module is necessary is that there

is little practical available information on how best to address the

interac-tions between ports and their cities

The module is structured as follows The first section identifies the main

issues concerning the functioning and impact of land access to ports on

corridor performance The second section presents the data and

informa-tion that are required to understand these issues The third secinforma-tion identifies

possible solutions to the most common issues The last section summarizes

these interventions

Impact of Urban Access on the Functioning of

the Port

There is little data about the share of trade corridor time spent accessing a

port through its surrounding urban area What little information is available

suggests that it can take up to a day for a truck from an inland destination to

cross an urban area to reach the city’s port For trucks coming from or going

to the interior of a country or from or to a landlocked neighboring country,

this time does not increase the transit time and cost greatly, but the uncertainty

of how long such urban transit may take can be a significant issue For trucks

traveling just in the urban area, the lengthy transit time can result in only one

return trip being made in a day Better urban access could result in two trips a

day and a reduction of up to 50 percent in the cost per trip

Need for Extra Storage to Cover Uncertainties Introduced by

Urban Transit Time

Exporters need their products to arrive at the port in time to meet the sailing

schedule of their contracted ship Products need to leave the exporter’s

premises with sufficient time to cover the variability in transit time Because

the manufacturing schedule puts constraints on when goods can be available

for loading onto the truck for transport to the port, a larger allowance for

urban transit time can impose either changes in production schedules or

higher stockholding costs, to provide buffers between manufacturing and

transport or in the port as a buffer between land and maritime transport In

extreme cases of urban traffic congestion (as in Jakarta) or daytime truck

bans (as in Cairo), trucks need to leave their urban location for the port at

least one day sooner and leave the container in the port overnight The port

therefore needs to provide storage space

Participation in Global Production Networks

To remain or become competitive, ports need to do more than just act as a convenient location for the transfer of freight between maritime and land transport Modern logistics requirements are increasingly a decisive factor in determining whether a port becomes the center for value-adding activities, including processing

It is not enough for a port to be closest to an inland destination for it to be competitive with other ports The port procedures for processing transit freight, the time it takes for the transit freight to reach its final destination, and the variability of that time are even more important than distance

A large part of the time uncertainty can come from crossing the urban area

in which the port is located

For value-adding processing of temporary imports, traders’ choice of port

is not just a function of geographic accessibility, the time and distance from places of production and consumption, or even how quickly, reliably, and inexpensively goods move these distances It also depends on how well the port complex can facilitate the transformation of products in response to made-to-order, just-in-time, best-priced, and door-to-door requests

Such activities once related only to repackaging and labeling; they now include partial assembly of electronic goods and final assembly of garments These activities often use locally produced inputs that need reliable, timely, and low-cost access to the port just as much as exports and imports do

In some cities, there is a perception that port traffic is a major cause of congestion Many cities have attempted to deal with this problem by ban-ning port traffic from city streets during the daytime In cities where conges-tion is a particularly serious problem (such as Cairo and Hanoi), not only port traffic but all trucks are banned from operating during the daytime.1

Such bans may diminish the attractiveness of the port as a center for sub- or final assembly in global production networks

Congestion resulting from port traffic is a more serious problem than

simple figures might indicate A typical container berth handling 300,000 containers per year will generate about 2,000 truck movements per day, assuming that trucks have to make two trips for each container, one in and one out But to this must be added the other traffic generated by the terminal—the journey to and from work for the terminal operating staff, customs agents, other public agency staff, and other logistics and service providers This additional traffic can more than double the traffic associ-ated with moving freight in and out of the port City traffic can also cause delays to trucks trying to reach the port, reducing port operational efficiency

Although truck bans can alleviate congestion, they reduce port

accessibil-ity and can result in long queues of trucks waiting at the caccessibil-ity boundary for

the ban to end They also make operation of ports in downtown areas less

efficient, as freight can be taken out of or brought into the port only at

night-time Trucks can typically make only one port trip during this night-time In

addi-tion, the port needs larger storage areas, particularly for containers but also

for bulk products and general freight, as they must have space for all the

freight unloaded during the day in addition to space for cargo left in the

ter-minal on previous days This problem is particularly important in container

terminals, where the average dwell in the port terminal can be more than

10 days

Data and Information Sources

The main indicators of performance of the port-land transport access system

include the following:

• proportion of cargo carried by road, rail, and inland waterway

• maximum length of train that can enter the port

• number of gates at port

• number of trucks in and out of port

• turnaround time for trucks from gate in to gate out

• travel time for trucks from city outskirts to port gate

Data on the port–land access interface system are collected from port

opera-tors, city authorities, and trucking and railways services operators The main

topics for discussion are outlined in annex 11A

Options for Improving Land Access to Ports

There are three sets of possible solutions to the land access problems of city

ports Two strategies attempt to improve land access to existing downtown

ports The third option involves moving the port outside the urban area

Improving Land Access to Existing Facilities

Access can be improved through infrastructure enhancements as well as

noninfrastructure measures The main infrastructure measures are of four

types:

• Improving road infrastructure, including through additional traffic lanes

and improved intersections

• Improving rail infrastructure, including through new rail links or grade separation of existing links in and out of the port (as in the Alameda Corridor in Los Angeles2) The design and planning of rail links is more difficult than it is for roads, because the space and turning area require-ments are difficult to accommodate in the restricted areas available in downtown ports

• Linking ports to inland container depots, including additional storage capacity and the moving of land-based functions out of the port area (or if they are rail linked, moving road traffic off the existing road network

to  relieve congestion Road congestion can also be relieved by building new access roads)

• Building additional gates to reduce queues or relocating existing gates to fit better with the road network

Noninfrastructure measures to improve access can include traffic management and institutional arrangements that improve coordination between agencies involved in port operation and local authorities responsi-ble for management of local traffic One effective traffic management approach is to introduce an appointment system for trucks accessing the port (box 11.1)

Relocating the Port

Where ports suffer from space or access constraints as a result of the sur-rounding urban area, port relocation or the development of dry ports or con-tainer freight stations linked to the port may be considered General freight facilities are usually located close to the downtown area, with dry bulk and liquid bulk terminals often located in deeper water and in locations with more storage space and often rail access As containers replace most general freight, container facilities have to relocate, for deeper water, more land area, and better land access

Although there is no standard benchmark for how much land is needed for storage of off-loaded containers, one reliable source suggests 1 hectare for every 30,000 20-foot equivalent unit (TEU) in terminals with more than 1 million TEU per year and half that number of containers per hectare

in smaller ports (Drewry Maritime Research 2010) A typical downtown container terminal with about 500,000 TEU per year will need at least

33 hectares of storage space—more than many of them can accommodate Only Rio Grande has adequate storage area (table 10.2) Many other ports (such as Mombasa and Dar es Salaam) now supplement the port storage area with nearby inland container terminals Most ports in downtown

BOX 11.1

Improving Productivity at the Port of Aqaba by

Improving the Queuing System

In order to diversify the economy of the city of Aqaba, in Jordan, away

from total dependence on its port, city planners had to eliminate the long

queues of trucks in the downtown area that resulted from the queuing

system To do so, in 2008, they replaced the queuing system with a

tech-nologically simple advanced notification system Under the system, only

approved and licensed truck operators can operate out of the port’s

con-tainer terminal Trucks are not allowed to enter the town until they are

notified that the container they have come to collect has cleared all its

entry requirements and is ready for pickup Truckers are further

man-dated to use predetermined routes provided to the driver by the

notifica-tion system Since introducnotifica-tion of the new system, traders contract

directly with the transport companies for transporting their containers,

rather than having to use the next truck in the queue that is waiting at the

container terminal (for imports) or in the free trade zone (for exports)

The impact of this advanced notification system on the trucking

industry has been dramatic The productivity of trucks serving the port

increased by a factor of about three As a result, they now travel about

100,000 kilometers per year instead of the 30,000 kilometers per year

they averaged before the change The volume of container traffic handled

at the port rose by 30 percent following the change, with a much reduced

truck fleet Importers obtain reliable and timely transport of their

con-tainers, with no increase in the transport price These outcomes were

achieved by taking advantage of a broad community of interests,

includ-ing the city administration, the ministries of transport and environment,

the operator of the container terminal, and the trucking industry

Source: Arvis and others 2011.

areas are under great pressure to relocate, given the high opportunity cost

of the value of the land they occupy

Other activities competing for downtown land space are often able to pay

much higher prices than the port could if it had to rebid for the land it is

using or bid for more land Where the port operator has become a landlord

port rather than just an agency of the municipal government, it could well

determine that its best interests are served by selling the land and relocating

to another location outside the urban area

Two other factors may affect the decision to relocate a port The first is problems in navigational access The need for increased depths of access channels to accommodate larger vessels requires dredging that can be sub-ject to an increasingly complex process for managing the disposal of dredged material, which is often contaminated from discharges of pollutants from urban industrial activity The second is that a constituency of interests may oppose port operation, based on concerns arising from increasing port-city tensions, particularly social and environmental conflicts (quality of life issues)

Increasing navigational access Each new generation of container ships

needs deeper access channels and berths and additional landside space for the storage of unloaded containers Larger ships make fewer voyages for the same number of containers, so each voyage has more containers to load and unload They need more space Fourth-generation container ships (Post-Panamax) need about 11 meters of depth The latest generation needs even more depth (Maersk’s Triple E series of vessels need at least 14.5 meters)

Very few upstream ports have the natural depth for fourth-generation container ships, which are serving typical downtown ports on feeder services For example, Shanghai’s original container port had only about

8  meters natural depth, Montevideo about 9 meters, and Mombasa about

10 meters In addition to greater depth, the larger and longer vessels need wider access channels and larger turning circles in the port Except in the few ports that have enough natural depth and channel width, these features call for significant dredging

The large amounts of dredged material, contaminated and uncontami-nated, require disposal Historically, a synergy has been exploited, with dredged material used to create reclaimed land for port development Growing environmental awareness is making this less feasible, however, in many instances leading to a protracted dredging approval process, higher costs, and longer implementation time

Dealing with constituencies of interest In port cities, there are

constituencies of interest that both support and oppose downtown port development The major interests in favor of such expansion include labor interests, whose members do not want to move or commute long distances

to a potential new port location, and shipping agents and other service providers, which have well-established commercial relationships in the current port location Interests opposed to downtown port expansion include adjacent landowners and occupants whose property values and life

styles will be detrimentally affected by the expansion of an unwanted

neighbor These constituencies can make port expansion and access

improvements difficult to achieve, especially on a schedule that does not

threaten the port’s competitive position

Many urban ports have been relocated, but the location has not always

been chosen to improve land access In some countries, maritime access has

also been a reason The desire to redevelop the port area to create a new

downtown residential or commercial center has also been a motive

Though poor land access itself is rarely a sufficient justification for a port

to be relocated away from a downtown location, it is one of the more

impor-tant components of a complex of issues that can lead to this result Relocation

can improve access, because road and rail (and possibly inland waterway)

access to the port can be planned without the constraints of having to pass

through built-up areas Access can be designed for the specific needs of

the port rather than being adaptations of an already existing road and rail

network (box 11.2)

BOX 11.2

Relocating the Port of Bangkok

A typical example of relocation of port facilities is that of Bangkok The

original up-river port in the center of Bangkok was becoming inefficient,

for a variety of reasons: land access was becoming time consuming and

unreliable, port traffic was a major contributor to city traffic congestion,

landside space was inadequate for the increasing needs for container

storage and expansion would be prohibitively expensive and socially

unacceptable, and river navigation could not be improved to accommodate

the new generation of container ships The three main constraints on

growth were poor land access because of city traffic congestion, lack of

space for expansion, and the limited  depth of the access channels

(8 meters), which limited container ship size to about 1,500 TEU

A new port, Laem Chabang, was built about 120 kilometers southeast

of the city Opened for service in 1991, it now handles about 5  million TEU

per year The original port was not closed, but its container capacity was

restricted to 1 million TEU per year (in practice, it operates close to its

physical capacity of about 1.5 million TEU) In addition to road and rail

links between Bangkok and Laem Chabang, there is a barge shuttle

ser-vice for containers

Summary of Possible Interventions for Improving Land Access to Ports

Table 11.1 summarizes the most common land access to ports issues and questions found in corridor projects and proposes possible interventions to address them Actual interventions should be adapted to deal with specific constraints

TABLE 11.1 Possible Intervention Measures for Improving Land Access to Ports

Access to

cities, ports

• Are there time restrictions on when trucks

can be allowed into the city or port?

• Is there a port access management system?

• What is the turnaround time for trucks

entering a port?

• Address infrastructure constraints to alleviate congestion.

• Introduce management system to facilitate smoother traffic flows.

• Is there congestion in the port environs?

• Are there urban planning proposals that will

affect port access?

• Is there land for future expansion of the port?

• Engage with local urban authorities to ascertain development plans, especially industrial location and traffic network.

• Establish port development plans and land requirements.

• What are the shares of each type of port

traffic (container, general, bulk solid, bulk liquid) on the road, rail, and waterway access modes?

• Maximize the capacity of the most appropriate mode for each type of traffic.

• What is peak-period capacity for port-related

traffic on the main access corridors?

• Does port traffic cause or add to congestion

on the main access links?

• Are there allocated traffic lanes for port

traffic on the main access links?

• Add road or rail capacity

• Develop rail-linked inland container depots

• Is there adequate off-road parking for traffic

waiting to enter the port?

• Add more port gates and parking spaces.

Rail access • Is there a link from the national rail network

into the port?

• Is any part of the access to the port shared

with passenger trains?

• Build a rail link

• Develop rail-linked inland container depots

• Negotiate for daytime train paths.

• What is the maximum length of trains

accessing the port? Are there height or axle-load constraints on port trains that are stricter than on the rest of the rail network?

• Increase train length and the number of paths.

• Are the rail crossings on the local road and

port access roads at grade or grade separated?

• Introduce grade separation or preallocation of crossing times.