Water Transport
Revitalisation Study
FINAL REPORT
Derwent Estuary Water Transport Revitalisation Steering Committee
Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited ACN 078 004 798 and
Parsons Brinckerhoff International (Australia) Pty Limited ACN 006 475 056 trading as Parsons Brinckerhoff ABN 84 797 323 433
Level 7, 457 St. Kilda Road,
Melbourne VIC 3004
Telephone (03) 9861 1111
Facsimile (03) 9861 1144
in association with
Patterson Britton & Partners
/ Derwent Estuary Water Transport Revitalisation StudyFINAL REPORT
Contents
Page Number
1.Introduction
1.1Background
1.2Study Scope
1.3Study Process
1.4Structure and Contents of this Report
2.The Current Situation - Commuter
2.1Ferry Services and Market Size
2.2Passenger Profile
2.3Market Conditions
2.4Infrastructure
2.5Overall Assessment of the Current Situation
3.Lessons from Elsewhere - Commuter
3.1Significance and Viability of Ferry Travel
3.2Market Profile
3.3Summary of Lessons for Hobart
4.Commuter Market Potential
4.1Source of Potential Travellers
4.2Initial Sieve of Potential Ferry Stops
5.Modelling of Potential New Commuter Services
5.1Service Scenarios
5.2Assumptions
5.3Base Case – The Existing Commuter Service
5.4Scenario 1: Extending Current Service to Lindisfarne
5.5Scenario 2: Services to Northern Suburbs
5.6Scenario 3: Service to Kingston
5.7Traffic Impact
5.8Summary
6.The Current Situation – Tourist
6.1Cruise Options and Market Size
6.2Market Size
6.3Passenger Profile
6.4Market Conditions
6.5Infrastructure
6.6Overall Assessment of the Current Situation
7.Lessons from Other Markets – Tourist
7.1Tourist Cruises in Other Markets
7.2Other Tasmanian Attractions
7.3Summary of Lessons for Hobart
8.Enhanced Tourist Cruise Market
8.1Potential Types of Cruises
8.2Market Opportunities
9.Market Potential for Longer Tourist Cruises
9.1Source of Potential Market
9.2Modelling of Market Potential
10.Interaction between Ferry Markets
10.1Operational Considerations
10.2Commercial Considerations
11.Implementation Issues
11.1Barriers to Entry
11.2Infrastructure Issues
11.3Derwent Estuary Program
11.4Bridgewater Bridge
12.Conclusions
12.1Main Findings
12.2Suggested Way Forward
Abbreviations
ABSAustralian Bureau of Statistics
BDABDA Marketing Planning
BTRBureau of Tourism Research
DEWTRSDerwent Estuary Water Transport Revitalisation Study
DDADisability Discrimination Act
DEPDerwent Estuary Program
DIERDepartment of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources
DPIWEDepartment of Primary Industry, Water and Environment
HPCHobart Ports Corporation
JTWJourney to Work
MASTMarine and Safety Tasmania
TDFSTrans-Derwent Ferry Study (1995)
TVSTasmanian Visitor Survey
74M017A : DEWTRS FINAL FOR GA REVIEWPage 1
/ Derwent Estuary Water Transport Revitalisation StudyFINAL REPORT
1.Introduction
1.1Background
Southern Tasmania has some of the most beautiful waterways in the world. But over recent years, there has been limited innovation in the use of the waterways for commercial transport of passengers. Commuter ferry services have contracted and tourist cruise operations are mostly limited to the Derwent estuary area. The southern Tasmanian waterways appear to offer a range of opportunities for tourist and commuter services that are not currently being taken up.
The purpose of this study is to act as a catalyst by drawing attention to these opportunities, creating a framework to move forward, and stimulating interest in private sector involvement. This will involve building a preliminary business case that demonstrates the likely feasibility of new water-based transport options for tourists and commuters.
1.2Study Scope
This study examined opportunities for expanding two different but related types of ferry services around the Derwent estuary and arrangements that may need to be put in place to facilitate developing these opportunities. The two categories of ferry services are:
COMMUTER FERRY services – regular scheduled ferry services designed to cater for the day-to-day travel needs of Hobart residents; and
TOURIST FERRY services – ferry services designed for sightseeing and related activities for VISITORS to Hobart. These services generally run to a regular schedule and are open to all-comers – charter services that only operate on demand for private groups are not specifically addressed by this report. In this report, the term CRUISE has been used as a generic term for regular scheduled tourism and recreational services offered by ferries. It is used to distinguish it from commuter ferry services (but should not be confused with international cruise liners).
The area covered by the study is the navigable section of the Derwent River and nearby southern waterways. The study area extends from around New Norfolk down river to the Iron Pot, and includes the D’Entrecasteaux Channel area and waterways eastwards to Tasman Island. The study area is shown in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1 Study Area
1.3Study Process
The Study involved the following steps:
background research to establish a baseline of information about the current situation – involving site visits, discussions with industry and Government stakeholders, review of past reports and related studies, review of statistical data, and so on;
background research into the success factors behind successful ferry services and other attractions in Tasmania and comparable markets elsewhere in Australia and overseas;
identification of opportunities for revitalising water transport in the southern waterways;
evaluation of the operational and financial feasibility of these opportunities to identify the ones with the greatest potential;
assessment of their implications in terms of infrastructure requirements; social, economic and environmental impacts; associated tourism and recreational development opportunities; and integration with land-based infrastructure and activities;
identification of any obstacles (infrastructure, regulatory, etc) to extending water transport activity on the southern waterways and suggest means to overcome these obstacles; and
development a strategy for facilitating the introduction of enhanced water-based transport.
Throughout this process, the Study was supervised by a Steering Committee which included representatives of:
Southern Tasmanian Councils Board
Hobart City Council
Glenorchy City Council
Clarence City Council
Derwent Valley Council
Kingborough Council
Huon Valley Council
Hobart Ports Corporation
Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources
Tasmania's South Regional Tourism Association
1.4Structure and Contents of this Report
This report summarises the key findings and recommendations of the Study. The report is structured into five parts
Chapter 1provides background on the study objectives and process
Chapters 2 to 5examine the current situation and potential for enhanced COMMUTER ferry services
Chapters 6 to 9look at the current market for TOURIST cruises and potential for enhanced tourist ferry services
Chapters 10 to 11 consider IMPLEMENTATION issues, including the interaction between commuter and tourist markets
Chapter 12summarises the MAIN FINDINGS and issues, and sets out a STRATEGY for moving forward to revitalise ferry services in the Hobart estuary area.
2.The Current Situation - Commuter
This Section provides a snapshot of the current commuter ferry market, associated infrastructure and external market conditions.
2.1Ferry Services and Market Size
The only commuter ferry service is a peak-period service that operates between Hobart and Bellerive
operates Monday to Friday excluding Public Holidays
two morning trips and two afternoon trips (departs Hobart 7.40 am, 8.15 am, 4.45 pm, 5.30 pm; departs Bellerive 8.00 am, 8.35 am, 5.05 pm and 5.45 pm)
at other times of the day, the ferry plies a tourism-oriented circuit linking major attractions around the estuary (Sullivans Cove, Casino, Bellerive, Botanic Gardens)
operated by Roche O’May Cruises using the vessel Wanderer
Observed patronage on the current commuter ferry service is low. Observations of patronage in late 2001 and early 2002 indicate
total of some 30 passenger boardings in the morning period
maximum load of some 20 passengers on a single crossing
estimated total annual patronage is around 15,000 boardings p.a.
at this level of patronage, the long term financial viability of the service is questionable – this issue is discussed further in Chapter 5
Historical evidence shows a stable and possibly declining market. According to the 1995 Trans-Derwent Ferry Study
ferry patronage peaked following the collapse of the Tasman Bridge – some 25,000 persons per day crossed the Derwent by ferry in 1975
by 1991, the daily patronage had dropped to some 60 persons per day
estimated patronage in 1995 was some 30 persons per day, which is roughly the same as current usage
passenger numbers are lower in winter
Ferry is a very small part of the commuter travel market in Hobart - journey to work mode splits for Clarence are
82% car, 8% bus, 10% other
considerably less than 1% ferry
of the bus travellers around 10% park-and-ride or kiss-and-ride
2.2Passenger Profile
Information about ferry passengers is available from
direct observations of the characteristics of travellers
results of the market research undertaken for the 1995 Trans-Derwent Ferry Study (TDFS)
According to the TDFS, ferry passengers have the following characteristics
most passengers are going to work (65% going to work, 30% going home) and don’t use the ferry for any other purpose
most are regular travellers (50% five days a week, 30% 3-4 days a week)
most live in Bellerive (55%) or Howrah (20%) and work in the city (100% of workers)
passengers are mostly male (75%), office workers (85%), over 40 years of age (75%)
travellers predominantly walked to the jetty, some kiss-and-ride (75% walked to the ferry, 19% by car, 6% by bus)
for most travellers (60%), the ferry experience (aesthetic appeal, enjoyable, stress free mode) is the most important reason for using the ferry. Other important factors affecting the choice of ferry are convenience (location of trip start and end) and punctuality
factors that were stated as not important are parking, trip duration, weather, comfort and cost.
Observations of ferry passengers made in late 2001 and early 2002 corroborate the 1995 survey results
As part of the TDFS, a survey of 50 persons living within walking distance of the Bellerive ferry terminal was conducted. Results were
most persons (60%) had not used the ferry in the last year
the main reason for not using the ferry was the limited operating hours and frequency
possible changes to the ferry service that might stimulate greater use of the ferry were earlier and later departures (30%), faster ferry (15%), connecting bus (15%) and more frequent departures (10%)
The TDFS also included a telephone survey of Eastern shore residents and focus group discussions with Eastern shore residents
almost all had not used the ferry recently
main reasons cited in the telephone survey for not using the ferry were inadequate parking at Bellerive (35%), lack of awareness of ferry as an option (25%) and lack of ferry terminal close to their home
main reasons cited in focus groups for not using the ferry were lack of parking at Bellerive, limited range of operating hours and lack of a shuttle bus linking with the ferry.
2.3Market Conditions
Population of greater Hobart region is static at around 194,000
prospects for significant population and employment growth in Hobart are weak
Public transport is a minor part of the travel market in Hobart
overall share of journey to work in Greater Hobart is 7% (around 9% for Clarence, 8% Glenorchy, 5% Kingborough)
long-term decline in public transport usage since the 1960s
Metro patronage has shown a slight recent increase but is still more than 15% below figures of the mid-90s (around half of the 1960s peak)
high levels of car ownership (few households do not have at least 1 car) and established culture of using cars as the primary mode of transport (more than 80% car share for journey to work)
parking is available at reasonable price for all day parking and at low rates for short-term parking
lack of a strongly established park-and-ride or kiss-and-ride routine for public transport (Census figures suggest around 10% of public transport journey to work trips involve an initial car trip)
Other factors mitigating against development of ferry as a significant public transport mode in Hobart include
low population density in suburban waterfront areas
lack of severe congestion in Hobart. There is evidence that traffic levels are stable on some major roads (including Tasman Bridge)
potential ferry routes run largely in parallel with roads and do not offer a substantial time saving
weather and wave conditions can produce uncomfortable travelling conditions, especially south of the Tasman Bridge
2.4Infrastructure
There is a range of berthing facilities for ferries in the Hobart area. Some are fixed structures with multiple landing platforms, such as at Sullivans Cove, Bellerive and Wrest Point Casino. Some are floating structures with hinged access gangways such as near the Cadburys Factory and Botanic Gardens, and at the Moorilla Winery.
there is a proposal to build a new jetty at Kingston Beach
Major issues with jetties are
ownership is a mixture of public (MAST, Hobart Ports, local council, etc) and private (ferry operators, landholders, etc)
some have been privately constructed and have restricted access such as the floating berth near the Botanic Gardens (Roche O’May Cruises) and the floating berth at Moorilla Winery (Moorilla Winery).
condition is mixed – ranging from excellent facilities at Moorilla and Bellerive to lesser standard at Cadburys and Botanic Gardens
existing structures involve a variety of construction materials and are built to a range of design standards.
jetties available for commuter ferry services do not exist at many key locations, such as Lindisfarne Bay
most jetties would not comply with DDA requirements
Hobart Ports Corporation (HPC) has a long term plan to develop new cruise liner facilities and a new liner berth in Sullivans Cove parallel to Princes Wharf
may involve some reorganisation of ferry berths and construction of a new multi-user ferry terminal on or near the current site
ferry operations are expected to continue at the current location for the foreseeable future
provision can be made for new operators in the existing or planned configuration of berths
Overall, infrastructure for commuter ferry services in the Derwent Estuary area is generally inadequate and private ownership of jetties in key locations has the potential to constrain development of new services
especially if DDA compliance requirements are taken into account
2.5Overall Assessment of the Current Situation
In summary, the current situation has the following features
limited service – one route and week-day peak service only
patronage is stable (some evidence of long-term slow decline)
current service is good – reliable, punctual, affordable, adequate infrastructure, acceptable travel time and comfort
no Government subsidy
BUT
market is static – little recent change in routes, vessels or patronage
long-term financial viability of the service at current patronage levels is questionable – this issue is discussed further in Chapter 5
service would not comply with DDA requirements
3.Lessons from Elsewhere - Commuter
Although no two travel markets are identical, valuable lessons can be learned from what has happened in other travel markets. This section reports on lessons to emerge from a review of commuter ferry services in Australia and NZ
3.1Significance and Viability of Ferry Travel
Ferry transport is a very minor component of the urban transport system even in cities with an extensive and long-established ferry network.
ferry caters for less than 1% of work trips in Sydney and Brisbane
An international review of ferry operations conducted by PPK for the Auckland Ferry Strategy identified that in most cities the largest growth in ferry patronage over recent years has been from tourist and recreational based travel
commuter is not a major growth market
Commuter ferry services are generally not self-funding
in Sydney, there is significant Government financial input (approx. 60% cost recovery through the farebox)
cost recovery in Brisbane is estimated to be well below 50%
high level of financial subsidy in Perth
ferry services in Auckland are contracted to private sector under subsidy arrangement
The cost structure of commuter ferry services is generally much higher than bus services
the cost of running a bus is about $50 per hour (Source: typical hire rates)
the cost of running a ferry is around $100 per hour for an “historic ferry” and around $150 per hour for a modern Rivercat or 15m Cat (Source: PPK estimates based on actual unit costs)
ferry generally costs around 2-3 times as much as a bus
The reasons for subsidising ferry services vary
in Brisbane, recent enhancements to ferry services have a strong link to the “River City” image of Brisbane, as well as offering a transport alternative to the CBD
in Sydney, ferries are seen as part of the fabric of the “harbour city” and a key element of the public transport system. Sydney has a strong policy for encouraging public transport for commuter travel to the CBD and ferry is a competitive travel option for many harbour-side locations because of the deeply indented nature of Sydney harbour. There is a high proportion of recreational (including tourist) travel on Sydney ferries.
In general, public transport is subsided
for social amenity reasons – to provide transport for persons without other mobility options
to provide an alternative to cars and reduce pressure on congestion, especially in inner city areas
as a more environmentally sustainable transport mode
for historic reasons – having taken responsibility for public transport at some point in the past, it is not politically or practically feasible for Governments to withdraw services, despite declining patronage and increasing subsidies in many instances
There are “commuter” ferry services with a higher level of cost recovery but they are generally associated with tourist destinations or activities
Manly ferry in Sydney
weekend CityCat services to Southbank in Brisbane
cross-harbour services to Devonport in Auckland
3.2Market Profile
Information is available from Sydney and Brisbane about the characteristics of ferry travel in a mature and extensive commuter ferry system
The market for ferry travel is clustered tightly around ferry terminals
mostly within 400-500m if no shuttle bus available
catchment extends to about 1500m with shuttle bus
journey to work (JTW) trips by ferry varies by origin: Manly (8%) Mosman (6%) Hunters Hill (5%) North Sydney (4%) Leichardt (2%) Source: 1996 Census
JTW trips by ferry vary by workplace: CBD (2%) Manly (1%) Hunters Hill (0.5%) Source: 1996 Census