RENEWALSA PORT STANVAC MARINE FACILITIES ASSESSMENT ISSUES PAPER - YOURSAY

Page created by Yvonne Chapman
 
CONTINUE READING
RENEWALSA PORT STANVAC MARINE FACILITIES ASSESSMENT ISSUES PAPER - YOURSAY
RenewalSA
                                                  Port Stanvac Marine Facilities
                                                  Assessment
                                                  Issues Paper
                                                  Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment-

                                                  Final | 4 April 2013

This report takes into account the particular
instructions and requirements of our client.
It is not intended for and should not be relied
upon by any third party and no responsibility
is undertaken to any third party.

Job number         228217-00

Arup
Level 7, 182 Victoria Square
Adelaide SA 5000
Australia
www.arup.com
RENEWALSA PORT STANVAC MARINE FACILITIES ASSESSMENT ISSUES PAPER - YOURSAY
Document Verification

Job title                                      Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment                                    Job number
                                                                                                                            228217-00
Document title                                 Issues Paper                                                                 File reference

Document ref                                   Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment-
Revision                  Date                 Filename                    2013-01-29 Port Stanvac Issues Paper.docx
Draft 1                   29 Jan               Description                 First draft
                          2013

                                                                           Prepared by                    Checked by            Approved by
                                               Name                        Borvin Kracman                 Simon Schutz          Borvin Kracman
                                               Signature

Draft 2                   13 Feb               Filename                    2013-02-13 Port Stanvac Issues Paper.docx
                          2013                 Description                 Final Draft

                                                                           Prepared by                    Checked by            Approved by
                                               Name                        Borvin Kracman                 Simon Schutz          Borvin Kracman
                                               Signature

Draft 3                   22 Mar               Filename                    2013-03-22 Port Stanvac Issues Paper.docx
                          2013                 Description                 Final Draft 2

                                                                           Prepared by                    Checked by            Approved by
                                               Name                        Borvin Kracman                 Simon Schutz          Borvin Kracman
                                               Signature

Final                     4 Apr                Filename                    2013-04-04 Port Stanvac Issues Paper Final.docx
                          2013                 Description                 Issued as Final

                                                                           Prepared by                    Checked by            Approved by
                                               Name                         Borvin Kracman                Simon Schutz          Borvin Kracman

                                               Signature

                                                                                           Issue Document Verification with Document          

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RENEWALSA PORT STANVAC MARINE FACILITIES ASSESSMENT ISSUES PAPER - YOURSAY
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

Contents

                                                                                                                                            Page

1                 Executive Summary                                                                                                              1

1                 Background to the Assignment                                                                                                   7

2                 Statement of Assignment Requirements                                                                                           8

3                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Description                                                                                     9
                  3.1                  Structures                                                                                               9
                  3.2                  The Groyne                                                                                              10
                  3.3                  Corrosion Protection                                                                                    11
                  3.4                  Refinery History                                                                                        11
                  3.5                  Marine Habitat                                                                                          12
                  3.6                  Bird Habitat                                                                                            12
                  3.7                  Monitoring Site                                                                                         13
                  3.8                  Estimated Costs                                                                                         13
                  3.9                  Timing                                                                                                  13

4                 Potential Alternative Uses of the Facilities                                                                                 14
                  4.1                  Demolition by Exxon Mobil                                    14
                  4.2                  Industrial or Commercial Port, Hydrocarbon Uses, Single
                                       Operator                                                     14
                  4.3                  Industrial or Commercial Port, Limited Uses, Single Operator15
                  4.4                  Industrial or Commercial Port, Common Users, Single
                                       Operator                                                     16
                  4.5                  No Access Marine Reserve                                     16
                  4.6                  Restricted Access, Recreational Uses, Commercial Eco-
                                       tourism                                                      17
                  4.7                  Restricted Access, Public Recreational Uses                  18
                  4.8                  Unrestricted Public Access, Recreational Uses including Jetty
                                       Deck Access and Fishing                                      18

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities AssessmentPort Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RENEWALSA PORT STANVAC MARINE FACILITIES ASSESSMENT ISSUES PAPER - YOURSAY
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

1                       Executive Summary
The South Australian Government’s relationship with Exxon Mobil in relation to
the former Port Stanvac Refinery site, including the existing marine elements is
managed by the Department of the Premier and Cabinet which has established a
cross-Agency Task Force in relation to the site. The marine elements include an
oil products transfer jetty and a rock groyne. With respect to these elements, the
present position is that Exxon Mobil will demolish and remove its structures and
installations unless a third party is prepared to accept responsibility for retaining
them.
The government has undertaken to review whether it should accept responsibility
for any of the marine elements. To inform this review, Renewal SA, on behalf of
the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, appointed Arup as a party
independent of all the stakeholders to conduct a high level investigation and
determine whether there are any reasonable and sustainable future uses for the
jetty (primarily for potential future industrial use, but also for commercial or
recreational purposes) which would justify the State negotiating a transfer of those
assets from ExxonMobil in lieu of their demolition and removal.
The refinery was established in the early 1960s. Oil refining is a global business,
the dynamics of which have changed considerably over the last fifty years. It is
understood that despite Exxon Mobil’s efforts for its Port Stanvac operations to
remain competitive, cost pressures on the refining business drove the decisions by
Exxon Mobil in 2003 to mothball the plant and then in 2009 to shut it down and
demolish it.
Arup considered the potential alternative uses of the facilities at a high level as
well as the key issues and opportunities relevant to those uses. These were
assessed against the ‘Base Case” of Exxon Mobil demolishing all marine
elements. A summary of the assessment is presented in the Executive Summary
Table provide on the following pages. This table presents the main points only
and they are elaborated on and provided with context in the main body of the
report.
This paper considers only the potential uses of the marine facilities, not the future
use of the former refinery land, except in general terms with respect to its
potential to generate economic opportunities to use the marine facilities.
It is also acknowledged that the marine facilities belong to Exxon Mobil and
ultimately Exxon Mobil will determine the future of the facilities.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities AssessmentPort Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- Port Stanvac Marine Facilities                       Page 1
Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                    Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                           Issues Paper

                       Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment

                                              Executive Summary Table
Potential Uses                                  Issues                                                    Opportunities
DEMOLITION BY                                   Potential “lost opportunity” to use                       The full cost of demolition and
EXXON MOBIL                                     the marine elements for the benefit                       removal will be covered by
(“Base Case”)                                   of the local area.                                        Exxon Mobil

ExxonMobil to demolish                          Basis for existing exclusion zones                        Potential return of that segment
the marine elements.                            no longer relevant but could be                           of the coastline and inshore
                                                retained.                                                 waters to similar conditions that
                                                                                                          existed prior to establishment of
                                                                                                          the refinery.
                                                Perception that the facilities do
                                                provide a viable opportunity for
                                                development with attendant                                Potential linear public access
                                                economic development and                                  including beach and water
                                                employment opportunities.                                 linking with geological,
                                                                                                          archaeological and heritage
                                                                                                          sites, extending from Christies
                                                Concern that fishing interests have
                                                                                                          Beach to Hallett Cove
                                                not been accommodated.
                                                                                                          Conservation Park.

                                                Concern that diving interests have
                                                                                                          Access to a potential dive site
                                                not been accommodated.
                                                                                                          (deep water close to the coast)
                                                                                                          within the Adelaide
                                                Destruction of significant habitat                        metropolitan area where access
                                                and associated ecosystem.                                 has previously been limited.

                                                                                                          Potential once-off source of
                                                                                                          sand for beach replenishment.
INDUSTRIAL OR                                   Jetty location and structure purpose                      All reasonable indicators
COMMERCIAL PORT                                 built for oil refinery liquids transfer.                  suggest there is no plausible
– Hydrocarbon Uses,                                                                                       opportunity for such a use.
Single Operator.
                                                Vessel size limited to 40,000 dead
                                                weight tonnes (dwt).
A new entrant into the
market to provide bulk
                                                Exxon Mobil is demolishing all
fuel storage and/or
                                                crude oil and refined products
refining to the South
                                                related infrastructure on both the
Australian market.
                                                sea and land side.

                                                Safe access to the site is likely to be
                                                constrained for some time (possibly
                                                2020 or beyond) due to landside
                                                demolition and rehabilitation works
                                                at the former refinery site.

                                                Perception that the facilities do
                                                provide a viable opportunity for
                                                hydrocarbon storage or refining
                                                with attendant economic
                                                development and employment
                                                opportunities.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                                    Page 2
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                    Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                           Issues Paper

Potential Uses                                  Issues                                                    Opportunities
INDUSTRIAL OR                                   Jetty location and structure purpose                      All reasonable indicators
COMMERCIAL PORT                                 built for oil refinery liquids transfer.                  suggest there is no plausible
– Limited Uses or                                                                                         opportunity for such uses.
Common Users, Single
                                                Not a good commercial port
Operator.
                                                location due to weather and tide
                                                conditions.
Shipping operated to
support Southern Region
                                                Jetty not suitable for containerised
or adjacent industries
                                                freight or cruise ships and not
including tourism in the
                                                considered economically viable to
form of cruise ships.
                                                upgrade. Also, lack of supporting
                                                land side infrastructure without
                                                very large investment.

                                                The Port of Adelaide is South
                                                Australia’s key general maritime
                                                logistics facility and passenger
                                                terminal. It has capacity and a
                                                capital investment program
                                                integrated with road and rail
                                                transport infrastructure.

                                                Safe access to the site is likely to be
                                                constrained for some time (possibly
                                                2020 or beyond) due to landside
                                                demolition and rehabilitation works
                                                at the former refinery site.

                                                Perception that the facilities do
                                                provide a viable commercial
                                                shipping opportunity.
NO ACCESS MARINE                                Existing marine biodiversity has not                      Possible use would be
RESERVE                                         been subjected to significant human                       consistent with shipwrecks and
                                                interference over 50 years.                               deliberately scuttled vessels
                                                                                                          which provide habitat.
Retain part or all of the
facilities including                            The site was not included in the
exclusion zones to                              Encounter Marine Park. Amending                           Potential linear public access
preserve habitat and                            boundaries on existing Marine                             including beach and water
allow progressive                               Parks may have broader                                    linking with geological,
deterioration of marine                         implications.                                             archaeological and heritage
elements.                                                                                                 sites, extending from Christies
                                                                                                          Beach to Hallett Cove
                                                Asset will deteriorate over an
                                                                                                          Conservation Park but safe
                                                extended period. Impact of asset
                                                                                                          landside access to the site is
                                                deterioration, consequential
                                                                                                          likely to be constrained for
                                                changes in habitat and visual
                                                                                                          some time (possibly 2020 or
                                                amenity.
                                                                                                          beyond) due to landside
                                                                                                          demolition and rehabilitation
                                                Policing of access arrangements                           works at the former refinery
                                                including ensuring that potential                         site.
                                                public safety issues are addressed.
                                                                                                          Opportunity to reinstate Bureau
                                                Asset ownership (including                                of Meteorology (BOM)
                                                maintenance and management)                               instrumentation for short to
                                                risks residing with future owner.                         medium term data collection.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                                    Page 3
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                     Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                            Issues Paper

Potential Uses                                  Issues                                                    Opportunities
RESTRICTED ACCESS                               Existing marine biodiversity has not                      Private sector run eco-tourism
RECREATIONAL                                    been subjected to significant human                       business subject to safety and
USES – Commercial                               interference over 50 years.                               habitat preservation controls
Eco-tourism (low-                                                                                         and run on a commercial basis
impact)                                                                                                   including payment of fees to
                                                Policing access arrangements.
                                                                                                          asset owner.
Commercially operated
                                                Security issues due to the isolation
diving tours and                                                                                          A potential dive site within the
                                                of the site.
associated marine                                                                                         Adelaide metropolitan area
recreation, interpretative,                                                                               where access has previously
education, training and                         The provision of public facilities                        been limited.
research activities                             (access, toilets, car parking, etc.) to
operated on a pay for use                       support use.
                                                                                                          Potential for development of a
basis.
                                                                                                          marine interpretive, education
                                                Without maintenance, the structures                       and dive training and supplies
                                                will progressively deteriorate and                        facility.
                                                use of the area would need to adjust
                                                to suit the conditions.
                                                                                                          Potential for a dive and eco-
                                                                                                          tourism destination linking with
                                                Impact of asset deterioration,                            geological, archaeological and
                                                consequential changes in habitat                          heritage sites extending from
                                                and visual amenity.                                       Christies Beach to Hallett Cove
                                                                                                          Conservation Park.
                                                Demand and the business case for
                                                such a venture are not presently                          Access arrangements for the
                                                known.                                                    jetty could provide a
                                                                                                          mechanism to manage potential
                                                                                                          public safety issues.
                                                Safe access to the site is likely to be
                                                constrained for some time (possibly
                                                2020 or beyond) due to landside                           Use could be achieved with
                                                demolition and rehabilitation works                       partial rather than total
                                                at the former refinery site.                              retention of marine elements.

                                                Future ownership to be identified.                        Opportunity to reinstate BOM
                                                                                                          instrumentation for short to
                                                                                                          medium term data collection.
                                                Asset ownership (including
                                                maintenance and management)
                                                risks residing with future owner.

                                                Public safety related to asset
                                                condition and in general.

                                                Limited use still results in potential
                                                degradation of habitat.

                                                Public concern regarding pay for
                                                use access.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                                     Page 4
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                     Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                            Issues Paper

Potential Uses                                  Issues                                                    Opportunities
RESTRICTED ACCESS                               Security issues due to the isolation                      Provision of a new recreational
PUBLIC                                          of the site.                                              diving and marine visitation site
RECREATIONAL                                                                                              within the metropolitan area to
USES                                                                                                      support existing facilities at
                                                The provision of public facilities
                                                                                                          Port Noarlunga and Rapid Bay.
                                                (access, toilets, car parking, etc.) to
Access to beach, groyne                         support use.
and marine environment                                                                                    Potential for a dive and eco-
EXCLUDING jetty deck                                                                                      tourism destination linking with
                                                Without maintenance, the structure
for the purposes of                                                                                       geological, archaeological and
                                                will progressively deteriorate and
diving, passive activities                                                                                heritage sites extending from
                                                create safety issues.
and recreational fishing.                                                                                 Christies Beach to Hallett Cove
                                                                                                          Conservation Park.
                                                Potential degradation of habitat,
                                                depending on the nature of
                                                                                                          Access arrangements for the
                                                uses/behaviour of users.
                                                                                                          jetty could provide a
                                                                                                          mechanism to manage potential
                                                Safe access to the site is likely to be                   public safety issues.
                                                constrained for some time (possibly
                                                2020 or beyond) due to landside
                                                                                                          Potential for part of the uses to
                                                demolition and rehabilitation works
                                                                                                          be accommodated without
                                                at the former refinery site.
                                                                                                          retention of all marine
                                                                                                          elements.
                                                Future ownership to be identified.
                                                                                                          Opportunity to reinstate BOM
                                                Asset ownership risks residing with                       instrumentation for short to
                                                future owner.                                             medium term data collection.

                                                Asset deterioration.

                                                Public safety related to asset
                                                condition and in general.

                                                Asset ownership (including
                                                maintenance and management)
                                                risks residing with future owner.

                                                Limited use still results in potential
                                                degradation of habitat.

                                                Impact of asset deterioration,
                                                consequential changes in habitat
                                                and visual amenity.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                                     Page 5
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                     Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                            Issues Paper

        Potential Uses                                                    Issues                                     Opportunities
UNRESTRICTED                                    Security issues due to the isolation                      Provision of a new recreational
PUBLIC ACCESS                                   of the site.                                              diving, marine visitation and
RECREATIONAL                                                                                              recreational fishing site within
USES                                                                                                      the metropolitan area to
                                                The provision of public facilities
                                                                                                          supplement existing facilities at
                                                (access, toilets, car parking, etc.) to
                                                                                                          Port Noarlunga and Rapid Bay.
Access to beach, groyne                         support use.
and marine environment
including jetty deck for                                                                                  Potential for an eco-tourism and
                                                The jetty would require upgrading
the purposes of diving,                                                                                   recreational fishing destination
                                                to provide safe public access.
passive activities and                                                                                    linking with geological,
recreational fishing.                                                                                     archaeological and heritage
                                                Ongoing maintenance would be                              sites extending from Christies
                                                required to maintain the facility.                        Beach to Hallett Cove
                                                                                                          Conservation Park.
                                                It is likely that the habitat would be
                                                degraded through use.                                     Access arrangements for the
                                                                                                          jetty could provide a
                                                                                                          mechanism to manage potential
                                                Safe access to the site is likely to be                   public safety issues.
                                                constrained for some time (possibly
                                                2020 or beyond) due to landside
                                                demolition and rehabilitation works                       Opportunity to reinstate BOM
                                                at the former refinery site.                              instrumentation for long term
                                                                                                          data collection.
                                                A long-term owner of the asset to
                                                be identified.

                                                Asset deterioration.

                                                Public safety related to asset
                                                condition and in general.

                                                Future ownership to be identified.

                                                Asset ownership risks residing with
                                                future owner.

                                                Asset ownership (including
                                                maintenance and management)
                                                risks residing with future owner.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                                     Page 6
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

1                       Background to the Assignment
The South Australian Government’s relationship with Exxon Mobil in relation to the former
Port Stanvac Refinery site, including marine elements is managed by the Department of the
Premier and Cabinet which has established a cross-Agency Task Force in relation to the site.
The Port Stanvac marine structures were constructed pursuant to the Oil Refinery (Hundred
of Noarlunga) Indenture Act 1958 (SA), for a specific industrial purpose which Exxon
Mobil has deemed no longer required.

The marine elements include an oil products transfer jetty and a rock groyne, both of which
are the subject of this assignment. With respect to the marine elements, the present position
is that Exxon Mobil will demolish and remove its structures and installations unless a third
party wishes to retain them, in which case an agreement will need to be reached wherein
Exxon Mobil will transfer ownership of and responsibility for the retained assets together
with any residual risks and obligations to such party, should such a party be found.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                                 Page 7
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                    Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                           Issues Paper

       2                        Statement of Assignment Requirements
Renewal SA, on behalf of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, appointed Arup as a
party independent of all the stakeholders to conduct a high level review and determine
whether there are any reasonable and sustainable future uses for the jetty (primarily for
potential future industrial use, but also for commercial or recreational purposes) which
would justify the State negotiating a transfer of those assets from Exxon Mobil in lieu of the
demolition and removal of the assets.
As part of its review, Arup was asked to consider third party port and logistics type
opportunities as well as the recreational potential and environmental aspects of the marine
structures. This was to include the identification of any habitat issues associated with
retaining or demolishing the marine structures on the basis that if the State agreed to transfer
of the assets, it may be responsible for future demolition of the marine structures.

   Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                            Page 8
   J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

3                       Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Description
3.1                     Structures
The main structures are a rock groyne supporting a 250 metre long causeway from the
shore, heading seaward and joining up with a 400 metre long steel piled jetty with
concrete decking and terminating with a ‘T-Head’ comprising platforms, caissons and
dolphins reportedly designed to accommodate vessels of up to 40,000 dead weight
tonnes (dwt) such as small oil tankers and cargo ships.
At Figure 1 below is a photograph of the jetty taken during a site inspection on 17th
December 2012.

                             Figure 1 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities, ©Arup, approved Exxon Mobil

The original jetty was constructed in the early 1960s and following significant storm
damage it was re-built in 1996 or thereabouts with a higher deck level as well as a
modified end structure. As far as the causeway and jetty are concerned, Exxon Mobil’s
currently underway refinery demolition project includes for the removal of all topside
accessory structures, pumps, piping , pipe racks and the like, leaving the base structure
as the asset being considered by this assignment.
A visual condition assessment was undertaken for Exxon Mobil and provided in
February 2012. The visually assessed condition of the groyne, causeway and jetty
varies significantly. This is to be expected as some parts of the structure are fifty years
old whilst others are less than twenty years old. Much of the seaward end of the jetty
from where the structure turns half right looking seaward is what was built in about
1996 and was reported to be in reasonably good condition. In the photograph at Figure
2 below the exceptions are the two concrete caissons and the two mooring dolphins.
The southern caisson (foreground) and dolphin are shown. The caissons were
constructed in 1962, reportedly as a precast reinforced concrete base and cylinder sunk
into the seabed, filled with sand and capped with cast in-situ reinforced concrete. They
are substantial structures as their likely purpose was to take docking as well as
prevailing wave and wind induced shipping side loads. They are reportedly in poor to
fair condition.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                                 Page 9
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

         Figure 2 Southern Caisson (foreground) and Dolphin (behind), ©Arup, approved Exxon Mobil

The dolphins were also constructed in 1962, as cast in-situ reinforced concrete pile caps
over steel support frames and steel piles. Their likely purpose was to assist with
docking, take some side loads and provide mooring points. It is reported that overall,
the northern dolphin is in fair to good condition whilst the southern dolphin is in poor
condition. A closer view of the southern dolphin is shown at Figure 3 below. Spalled
concrete is obvious.

                                        Figure 3 Southern Dolphin, ©Arup, approved Exxon Mobil

3.2                     The Groyne
At the landward end, the causeway, rock groyne and associated structures have been
assessed as being in fair condition, with some damage noted to the south-west corner of
the rock groyne. The photograph at Figure 4 shows the groyne and tug berthing
structure but most if not all of the rusting steel work is understood to be the target of
early removal as part of the existing demolition contract.
The groyne is considered to be of little or no ecological value but the sheltered bay that
it creates might be considered to have recreational value to potential future beach users,
when and if public access becomes available. During the earlier part of the groynes

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 10
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

existence it was considered to be a significant barrier to the natural northern movement
of sand along the coast. However, the situation is considered to have stabilised over
time. If the groyne were to be removed, it is considered that a large amount of sand
would be released quickly and by natural processes transported in a northerly direction
with the potential to impact shallow near-shore reefs by covering them and the
organisms growing on them with sand, but this would be temporary. After this, the
natural incremental northerly movement of sand would continue.
The sand deposits within the Port Stanvac exclusion area are also of interest to DEWNR
as a potential once-off source of sand for the replenishment of Adelaide’s beaches.
Investigating this further is desired by DEWNR and the Coastal Protection Board.

                                Figure 4 The Groyne and Tug Berth, ©Arup, approved Exxon Mobil

3.3                     Corrosion Protection
Anticorrosive coating, plastic wrapping and impressed current cathodic protection have
been used to reduce corrosion of the steel piles immersed in sea water. In this
application, impressed current cathodic protection is the application of an electrical
charge to steel to reverse the small current generated when unprotected steel is exposed
to seawater. Reducing the electron flow reduces the speed of corrosion. As part of the
current demolition contract, it has been advised that electrical power to the site has been
isolated, meaning that cathodic protection, being one of the corrosion reduction
measures for the steelwork below sea level is no longer operative. In the long term this
will mean that corrosion and deterioration of the steel piles will proceed at a greater rate
than in the past.
If it were desired to retain some or all of the structures and protect the undersea
steelwork with cathodic protection, the options are to reinstate the power supply at a
cost estimated by Exxon Mobil of $500,000 plus annual running costs, or to apply
galvanic cathodic protection by the use of sacrificial anodes attached to the steelwork.
The overall cost of this option has not been estimated.

3.4                     Refinery History
The refinery was established in the early 1960s and at that time it presented
opportunities in the form of strategic asset in a stable, democratic country with a skilled
workforce, distant from external threats with substantial available land, significantly

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 11
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

buffered from urbanisation and with deep water close inshore. Whilst the refinery
operated successfully for about 40 years, discussions with Exxon Mobil personnel as
well as Arup maritime specialists indicate that ship berthing operations were prone to
impact by the wind, weather and tides to the extent that shipping often experienced
delayed schedules which manifested in demurrage (delay) charges which could be quite
significant. Port Stanvac is quite exposed to the prevailing weather, especially in the
cooler months with dominant strong winds and swells from the south-west. The advent
of larger shipping to lower freight costs increased the issues with berthing during bad
weather and the deeper draft of larger ships increased the constraints posed by the tides.
In an attempt to overcome these limitations, Exxon Mobil invested in an offshore single
point or single buoy mooring (SPM/SBM). Despite these efforts to remain competitive,
the global business environment as well as the local environment had changed
significantly over forty years and cost pressure on the refining business drove the
decision to mothball the plant in 2003.

3.5                     Marine Habitat
The habitat offered by the structures including the jetty, the dolphin piles and the
caissons is reported to support a marine ecosystem which has developed over fifty years
with little fishing pressure. This is due to the permanent exclusion zone within 400
metres of the jetty (Exxon Mobil employees were permitted to fish from the jetty after
hours when the jetty was not active). Information regarding the marine ecology has
been obtained from the Department for Environment, Water and Natural Resources
(DEWNR) and the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). It is reported that the
habitat supports protected species, namely the Leafy Sea Dragon and Weedy Sea
Dragon as well as species of conservation concern including the Blue Devilfish and
Long-snouted Boarfish. However, the marine habitat was not considered of such
significance to be included in the Encounter Marine Park.
The jetty and dolphin piles provide a substrate for reef invertebrates and plants which in
turn provide food and refuge for fish and other organisms. If the marine structures were
demolished and removed entirely, many of the less motile resident organisms would be
removed with the steel piles. More motile resident organisms such as fish would seek to
recolonise in a similar environment, possibly amongst one of the shallow reef systems
in the area. Transient species including various fishes, squid and cuttlefish are likely to
reduce their inhabitation of the area due to the lack of cover or elimination of food
sources. Retention of some of the underwater structures, such as piles and caissons
would retain elements of the existing habitat and this could be done in a way that did
not constitute a boating hazard.

3.6                     Bird Habitat
The decks and piping of all the jetty structures provide roosting habitat for a large
number of cormorants. These birds tend to depart the structure at mid-morning to hunt
for food at sea, returning to roost at dusk. They significantly foul the structures and this
may constitute a public health risk should access to the jetty deck be permitted. The
removal of pipe racks and other topside structures may reduce the birds roosting sites
but they will probably find substitute sites on handrails and pile cross beams or any
other retained elements that protrude above the waterline.
If the marine structures were demolished and removed, the cormorants would likely
relocate to other roosting sites within their range. Discussions with DEWNR personnel
indicated that this issue was not a concern from an ecological perspective as the birds

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 12
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

would find alternative roosting sites along the coast and breeding does not take place at
Port Stanvac.

3.7                     Monitoring Site
Up until recently, the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) used the jetty as a suitable site for
the deployment of instrumentation to monitor fluctuations in the tidal cycle and assess
changes in sea level. It is reported that about twenty years of data had been collected
which is statistically significant and valuable in monitoring the impacts of climate
change and sea level rise. The instrumentation requires electrical power and this has
been shut down recently as part of an overall site power isolation activity to eliminate
the risk of electrocution accidents during site demolition. Should some elements of the
jetty remain standing, BOM would value the re-installation of its monitoring
instruments. If power is not reinstated, local solar power may be viable and would need
to be investigated.

3.8                     Estimated Costs
The Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) has inspected the
structures and advised that if the jetty were to be retained in reasonable condition an
initial capital budget of $2 million -$3million would be required in addition to resolving
the most cost effective approach to cathodic protection. DPTI expects that there would
be an annual maintenance requirement of $300,000 and that in excess of $5 million
would be required for major maintenance in about ten years. It is also expected that to
keep the jetty in reasonable condition, greater funding would be required at successive
major maintenance intervals as the structures deteriorated over time.
In addition to the above costs and if public access of the varying types canvassed in this
report were to materialise, there would be additional capital and recurrent costs
associated with construction and maintenance of landside infrastructure such as access,
car parking, public toilets, boardwalks and the like as well as provision of site security.
A cost estimate for demolition of the marine structures has not been obtained.

3.9                     Timing
As mentioned earlier, Exxon Mobil’s refinery demolition project currently underway
includes for the removal of all topside accessory structures from the jetty. The present
demolition contract which also includes removal of the land based refinery
infrastructure is scheduled for completion late in 2013. If the marine facilities are to be
demolished and removed, Exxon Mobil wishes to commence procurement and
associated actions before completion of the land based works.
It should also be noted that any consideration of public access to the beach or to any
elements of the marine facilities that might be agreed, such as the groyne or some of the
jetty structure, may not be available for several years. It is likely that Exxon Mobil will
wish to avoid any risk associated with public access to the entire site until all required
demolition, equipment removal and remediation activities have been completed.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 13
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

     4                        Potential Alternative Uses of the Facilities
     There is significant community interest in the future of the jetty. This is
     evidenced by various representations to local, state and federal politicians, by
     media articles, internet sites and through the social media. Public interest in the
     potential retention of the marine facilities includes possible future commercial
     uses for berthing cruise ships as well as access for recreational fishing and diving.
     Arup has considered reasonable potential uses for the facilities in the context of
     their constructed purpose, condition, environmental conditions, regional and state-
     wide economics and ongoing cost implications. Arup’s findings are reported on
     below against the base case of demolition and removal.

     4.1                      Demolition by Exxon Mobil
     In order to provide a basis against which to asses other options, Arup has
     considered the issues and opportunities associated with comprehensive demolition
     and removal of the marine facilities. The facilities were designed and built for the
     transfer of liquid hydrocarbons between ship and shore but Exxon Mobil decided
     to mothball the refinery in 2003 due to unfavourable economic conditions and in
     2009, confirmed its intention to shut down and demolish it. This decision is
     understood to have been based on the age and small relative scale of the refinery
     as well as international cost differentials which made this refinery uneconomic on
     a global basis.
     Complete demolition of the refinery infrastructure including the marine facilities
     could be perceived by some members of the public as a loss of opportunity to use
     those facilities for the benefit of the local area and the general community. This is
     likely to be most significant from recreational fishing and diving interests and
     those with concerns for the habitat created by the facilities and the ecosystem that
     they support. However, retention of the facilities would come at a significant
     ongoing cost and a key issue is whether the range of benefits for the future owner
     would meet or exceed the costs of retention, bearing in mind that if
     comprehensive demolition and removal proceeds, the full cost would be borne by
     Exxon Mobil.
     Demolition would potentially return that segment of the coastline and inshore
     waters occupied by the refinery to similar conditions that existed prior to
     establishment of the refinery. This could provide the opportunity for public
     access to the beach and water linking geological, archaeological and heritage sites,
     extending from Christies Beach to Hallett Cove Conservation Park. The site
     could also provide dive access to deep water close to the metropolitan coast. The
     site also contains a potential once-off source of sand for the replenishment of
     metropolitan beaches and removal of the groyne would reinstate the natural
     northerly drift of sand along the coast.

     4.2                      Industrial or Commercial Port, Hydrocarbon
                              Uses, Single Operator
     As mentioned above, the facilities were designed and built for the transfer of
     liquid hydrocarbons between ship and shore. Exxon Mobil’s decision to demolish

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 14
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

     the refinery and Arup’s understanding of the global energy oil refining industry
     supports the conclusion that a future use associated with an alternative refinery
     operator is not considered plausible.
     The jetty and its mooring facilities are limited to vessels up to 40,000 dead weight
     tonnes (dwt). In terms of modern shipping these are quite small vessels. Exxon
     Mobil is demolishing all crude oil and refined products related infrastructure on
     both the sea and land side. Safe access to the site is likely to be constrained for
     some time (possibly 2020 or beyond) due to landside demolition and rehabilitation
     works at the former refinery site.
     The marine facilities could be used to transfer refined fuel products from ship to
     shore and for fuel to be stored at part of the former refinery site. This would
     require a substantial new operator to enter the market and invest a large amount of
     capital to provide the necessary new ship to shore, storage and distribution
     infrastructure. This would complement but also compete with South Australia’s
     principal point of inbound fuel supply being the Adelaide Terminal at Birkenhead.
     The Birkenhead terminal is operated by Mobil on behalf of joint owners Mobil
     and Shell. Mobil's facility at Birkenhead is one of three key fuel distribution
     terminals operated by it in South-Eastern Australia. Mobil Birkenhead currently
     handles petrol, diesel and aviation fuels. A new diesel storage tank is presently
     under construction and will increase the overall storage capacity of the terminal
     by more than 10 per cent. Mobil Birkenhead has extensive road and rail loading
     facilities to support the distribution of product throughout Adelaide and surrounds,
     to farther regions of the State, and into areas of NSW and Central Australia. It is
     also noted that Terminals Pty Ltd is also concurrently constructing a fuel storage
     terminal at Outer Harbour off Pelican Point Road. This terminal is understood to
     be linked directly to the Outer Harbour wharf area.
     To this background, Arup concludes that a future use of the Port Stanvac marine
     facilities associated with the transfer, storage and distribution of fuels is not
     plausible.

     4.3                      Industrial or Commercial Port, Limited Uses,
                              Single Operator
     The concept of using Port Stanvac for shipping that could support specific local
     industry or commerce has been considered. The jetty was purpose built for oil
     refinery liquids transfer. As previously mentioned, safe access to the site is likely
     to be constrained for some time (possibly 2020 or beyond) due to landside
     demolition and rehabilitation works at the former refinery site.
     To convert the jetty to accept containerised freight or cruise ships would require a
     significant modification and investment. Provision of the necessary land side
     supporting infrastructure would also be a significant cost. No entity has come
     forward with such a proposal and this is considered extremely unlikely. The site
     is not a good commercial port facility because of its exposure to the weather and
     the influence of tides. The Port of Adelaide including Outer Harbour has the
     capacity to meet the likely demand for specific maritime uses as evidenced by the
     passenger terminal, automotive export terminal, container terminal, grain berth,
     cement berth, soda ash berth, and liquid fuels berth along with other specialist
     uses. It is noted that in early 2000, prior to construction of the Outer Harbour
     grain terminal, Port Stanvac was canvassed as a possible site for that facility. This

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 15
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

     was not pursued further and provides a real-life example where projects of this
     nature are preferentially located at Port Adelaide, which offers all-weather
     protected berthing, well integrated road and rail infrastructure and is considered
     the key logistics hub for Adelaide and South Australia.
     Arup therefore concludes that investment by the State in facilities to support such
     uses at Port Stanvac could not be justified in the context of potential future users
     and this option is therefore not considered plausible.

     4.4                      Industrial or Commercial Port, Common Users,
                              Single Operator
     Similarly, the concept of using Port Stanvac for general purpose, multi-purpose or
     common user freight or cruise ships are not considered plausible for similar
     reasons. A multipurpose facility would require even more modification and
     expense compared to a limited use facility. The demand for a facility at Port
     Stanvac is not apparent given there is a comprehensive, well connected facility
     with capacity at Outer Harbour and Port Adelaide.

     4.5                      No Access Marine Reserve
     All or part of the facility could be retained to preserve the marine habitat that has
     established as a result of (or been retained despite construction of) the structures
     and has not been subjected to significant human interference for over 50 years.
     That said, the site was not included in the Encounter Marine Park when it was
     delineated and any amendment to park boundaries would likely have broader
     implications for all of South Australia’s marine parks. The current exclusion zone
     could be maintained or modified depending on whether the whole or only part of
     the structure was retained as a habitat, however as noted above, retention of the
     habitat appears not to have been sufficient to warrant its inclusion in the
     Encounter Marine Park (which would have been the most logical administrative
     mechanism for habitat protection). The retained structures could be allowed to
     progressively deteriorate much the same as with ship wrecks or deliberately
     scuttled vessels off the coast, e.g. The Ships Graveyard at North Arm, The Barges
     off Port Stanvac, ex-HMAS Hobart in Yankalilla Bay, and the Zanoni Wreck off
     Ardrossan.
     BOM instrumentation could be re-installed for at least several more years of data
     collection. The opportunity for public access to the beach is also a possibility,
     linking geological, archaeological and heritage sites extending from Christies
     Beach to Hallett Cove Conservation Park. However, beach access is likely to be
     constrained for some time (possibly 2020 or beyond).
     Under this scenario, there is likely to be no mechanism to generate revenue in
     order to offset future required expenditure, and therefore such a use is unlikely to
     be sustainable. The asset ownership risks and costs including ‘make safe’ works,
     maintenance and management as the structure inevitably deteriorates would reside
     with the future owner and the ongoing capacity of the future owner to fund those
     works would need to be considered. There would be habitat and visual amenity
     impacts in letting the facilities progressively deteriorate. Future demolition of
     hazardous structures may be required. Demolition costs have not been estimated
     but will very likely be millions of dollars, depending on scope. Marine

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 16
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

     construction or de-construction is generally several times more expensive that the
     same scope of work on land due to increased risks including safety and weather
     and also due to the need for specialised equipment and the aggressive
     environment.
     Control of access including ensuring that public safety issues are addressed would
     be an issue but could, at least in part be managed by legislation such as is
     currently the case including the Harbours and Navigation Act and the Fisheries
     Act. Breaches of these Acts can incur penalties including confiscation of boats
     and equipment, fines and imprisonment.

     4.6                      Restricted Access, Recreational Uses,
                              Commercial Eco-tourism
     The facility and the marine habitat that has colonised the structures over the last
     50 years could be used to support low impact commercially operated diving tours
     and associated marine recreation, interpretive education, training and research
     activities on a pay for use basis. This scenario could provide access to a deep
     water dive site within the Adelaide metropolitan area where access has previously
     been limited. The opportunity for public access to the beach is also a possibility,
     linking geological, archaeological and heritage sites, extending from Christies
     Beach to Hallett Cove Conservation Park but beach access is likely to be
     constrained for some time (possibly 2020 or beyond). The revenue generated
     from commercial operations is unlikely to approach that required to maintain the
     jetty in reasonable condition in the longer term and therefore the feasibility and
     viability of this option is unable to be assessed. The demand for, business case
     and public acceptance of ‘pay for use’ for such a venture are presently unknown,
     particularly in the context of existing diving (albeit in more shallow water)
     available at Port Noarlunga.
     The marine biodiversity associated with the jetty structure in a location within the
     metropolitan area could become a significant attractor to recreational diving, eco-
     tourism and supporting small business. Controlled eco-tourism based on a
     licenced operator paying a fee to government for the right to access the site would
     likely assist in regulating safety and habitat preservation controls. However, as
     mentioned earlier, such a fee would be very unlikely to generate anything like the
     revenue required to maintain the facility in reasonable condition.
     In order to reduce the probability of unauthorised access to the deck whilst
     retaining most of the habitat, a partial demolition could be agreed. For example,
     demolition of the causeway and associated concrete elements in poor condition as
     well as the first 100 metres of the jetty , but retaining the groyne, boat ramp and
     the balance of the jetty. BOM instrumentation could also be re-installed for
     further data collection in the short to medium term. Details with regard to the
     extent of maintenance that would be essential for this purpose and the cost thereof
     would need to be estimated to test the viability of this potential use. Security,
     given the relative isolation of the site would need to be considered, as would
     provision of public facilities such as access, parking and toilets to support this
     form of use.
     The asset ownership risks and costs including inevitable ‘make safe’ works,
     maintenance and management of the structure would reside with the future owner

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 17
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

     and the long term viability and solvency risks with respect to a future owner
     would need to be mitigated. There would likely be habitat impacts even with
     restricted access.
     A further option that appears plausible is for partial demolition to remove the deck
     and piles to an agreed distance below the lowest low tide so as to minimise
     navigational hazards, but retain pile stubs, the caissons and possibly the dolphins
     for preservation of habitat and the ability to engage in passive observation of the
     associated marine species. Whether or not the groyne remains would need to be
     evaluated further in terms of risks and costs versus benefits.
     Under this scenario, further discussion would need to take place between the
     Department for Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) and DEWNR to
     determine what if any elements of the structure could be retained. Agreement
     would need to be reached with ExxonMobil as it will affect its scope of works.
     Within this option, open public access to the beach and a swimming zone and
     possibly access to the groyne (if retained) for land based angling could be
     considered.

     4.7                      Restricted Access, Public Recreational Uses
     The facility could be used as proposed above including the variants canvassed but
     with public access to the beach, groyne and certain remaining marine structures
     only (e.g. under water piles and caissons) but not to the jetty deck. This option
     may satisfy community demand for a recreational diving and marine visitation site
     within the metropolitan area as demonstrated by existing patronage of that type at
     Port Noarlunga and Rapid Bay.
     With public access there is a heightened risk of potential degradation of the
     ecosystem depending on the extent of patronage and public behaviour which may
     need to be monitored and reviewed, but local ‘ownership’ is often a powerful
     means of providing stewardship of the environment. The exclusion of
     recreational access to the jetty deck may raise objections from the community.
     Many of the issues relevant to the previous potential use apply here as well
     including the timing constraints on safe access to 2020 or beyond, security,
     provision of public facilities, asset and habitat deterioration and impacts, future
     ownership risks including management, maintenance, viability and solvency.
     Similarly, the opportunities presented include an eventual ecotourism linkage
     between Christies Beach and Hallett Cove Conservation Park and the potential
     reinstatement of BOM instrumentation, albeit with some possible security and
     protection challenges given enhances public access.

     4.8                      Unrestricted Public Access, Recreational Uses
                              including Jetty Deck Access and Fishing
     For this level of access, the facility would need to be stripped of all topside
     accessory structures, pumps, piping, pipe racks and the like (understood to be part
     of Exxon Mobil’s Stage 1 demolition contract) and upgraded to bring it to a safe
     public access standard (with an estimated initial expenditure of $2 million to $3
     million). The future owner would then be liable for ongoing maintenance and
     major works in about ten years’ time. To reduce longer term maintenance costs

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 18
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
RenewalSA                                                                                                 Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment
                                                                                                                                        Issues Paper

     and extend the life of the asset impressed current or sacrificial anode cathodic
     protection would need to be reinstated or applied at a potential up-front cost of
     $0.5 million together with ongoing costs.
     Under this scenario, Exxon Mobil would not have to fund subsequent stages of
     demolition or bear the risks that complete demolition entails. Another
     consideration is that public access to the jetty is likely to be prevented for several
     years due to the landside demolition and rehabilitation works at the former
     refinery site and Exxon Mobil’s understandable reluctance to allow such access
     due to safety concerns.
     Such use as described above may satisfy community demand for recreational
     diving, marine visitation, recreational fishing and associated tourism. Potential
     conflicts between fishers and divers would need to be managed noting that both
     uses coexist at Port Noarlunga, Rapid Bay and various jetties, breakwaters,
     wrecks and wharves around South Australia.
     With unrestricted public access including jetty deck access and recreational
     angling, the present ecosystem would almost certainly be altered as a result of
     what would be expected to be significant fishing pressure in the short term.
     In addition to the above costs and if public access of the varying types canvassed
     in this report were to materialise, there would be additional capital and recurrent
     costs associated with construction and maintenance of landside infrastructure such
     as access, car parking, public toilets, boardwalks and the like as well as provision
     of site security.
     The future ownership risks including management, maintenance, viability and
     solvency would apply as would potential opportunities including an eventual
     ecotourism linkage between Christies Beach and Hallett Cove Conservation Park
     and the potential reinstatement of BOM instrumentation, again with some possible
     security and protection challenges given potential increased public access.
     Under this scenario, there is likely to be no mechanism to generate revenue in
     order to offset future required expenditure, and therefore such a use is unlikely to
     be sustainable.

Port Stanvac Marine Facilities Assessment- | Final | 4 April 2013 | Arup                                                               Page 19
J:\228000\228217-00 PT STANVAC ASSESSMENT\WORK\INTERNAL\2013-04-04 PORT STANVAC ISSUES PAPER FINAL.DOCX
You can also read