8.28
8.29
8.30
8.31
could hold 400 empty containers and 400 loaded containers for future shipments all stacked 2-high, and still leave room to handle 500 containers in and 500 out for one containership. There would be room for tractor-and-trailer units carrying containers out of the Terminal to park behind the container-storage area for loading.
With 64-ft.-gauge rubber-tyred transfer cranes stacking 2-high fed by tractor-and-trailer units, the capacity of the same marshalling area would be about 85% of the capacity with straddle carriers. Containers can be stored 3-high with such cranes, but there would be a loss of operational flexibility and more of a problem from typhoon winds. It is con- sidered therefore that planning should be based on storing containers 2-high. This means that if an operator wished to use transfer cranes and have a marshalling area of the capacity described in the previous paragraph, he would have to increase the width of the marshall- ing area by some 50 ft. and either reduce the space for some of the other facilities or reclaim an additional area behind the existing breakwater.
The tentative layout for Stages 1, 2 & 3 on Drawing 17 provides slightly more marshalling capacity per berth than proposed for Stage 1. However, as noted in paragraph 8.10 it is recommended that the requirements for this and the other facilities be re-assessed for the later Stages in the light of operating experience.
On existing land, where little or no settlement is to be expected, it is recommended that surfacing should comprise 6 in. of lean concrete + 4 in. of bitumen macadam † 14 of asphaltic concrete. On the thicker areas of reclamation, where some settlement is to be expected, the surfacing should initially comprise 8 in. of crusher run +4 in. of bitumen macadam on which straddle carriers could run satisfactorily. As and when levels had to be made up, this would be done with combinations of crusher run, lean concrete and bitumen macadam as appropriate to the thickness required. When settlement was virtually complete the surface would be finished with a nominal 14 in. of asphaltic concrete.
With containers stacked 2-high, experience in other ports has shown that it is quite feasible to secure the containers in typhoon winds by linking-together and anchoring-down the containers in the outer rows of each block. Also, empty containers should be stored beneath loaded ones under typhoon conditions.
Packing Stations
8.32
8.33
The packing sheds shown on Drawing 16 for Stage I are of the same width as recommended by the Container Committee in their 1966 report but as explained in paragraph 8.5 only about 60% of the total length of shed for two berths is provided. The corresponding amount of lorry bays and circulation space is provided, but the width for container bays and circulation of straddle carriers has been increased where necessary to allow for 40-ft. containers.
The tentative layout for Stages 1, 2 & 3 on Drawing 17 provides about the same area of packing sheds as recommended in 1966 for 4 berths. Corresponding space for containers, carriers and lorries is also provided, but because of the shape of the site and allowing for the future Mass Transport Railway, some of the lorry areas are not quite so conveniently sited for the sheds. As noted in paragraph 8.10, the actual allocation of space to pack- ing stations relative to other facilities in the later Stages should be reconsidered nearer the time for their construction.
8.34 The Container Committee in 1966 envisaged equipping the 1,560-ft. length of packing sheds for each berth with 70 fork-lift trucks for filling and emptying containers. Current opinion now is that only 35 could be used effectively in that area of shed, but hand trolleys instead may be quite satisfactory.
Lighter Berths
8.35
As packing and unpacking of containers would probably be done mainly at the Terminal, the goods to be packed would be carried to and from the site both by road and by sea. It is considered therefore that berths for lighters would be required right from the start of operations at the Terminal. For this reason the construction of a 900-ft. length of seawall is included in the proposals for the first phase of Stage 1. This seawall would have a minimum depth of water of 12 ft. 6 in. alongside and would be of a standard concrete- block design; a type that has proved successful in many parts of Hong Kong harbour.
33