Port of Newcastle says it has a "strong intention" not to clog up Newcastle roads with trucks carrying containers to and from its proposed Mayfield freight terminal.
A high-intensity freight terminal at the former BHP steelworks site at Mayfield moved a step closer to reality on Tuesday when the NSW lower house voted in favour of scrapping restrictions on Port of Newcastle developing a container facility if it compensates the government.
Port chief executive Craig Carmody said on Wednesday that 95 per cent of the port's existing exports and imports were moved by rail.
"One of the key advantages Port of Newcastle has over competitors is that we are rail-heavy," he said.
"With the development of any new industry, there will be a level of increase in all transport modes.
"The Port of Newcastle will continue to incentivise rail over other forms of transport, and it is our strong intention not to have the same road congestion issues that are experienced around Port Botany.
"We will continue to strongly engage with our community to ensure we have the ongoing support for this critical project."
The prospect of a container terminal in Mayfield has long attracted concerns over road congestion, most famously when Nathan Tinkler and former Labor minister Joe Tripodi launched the "Stop Jodi's Trucks" leaflet campaign against Newcastle MP Jodi McKay in 2011.
Community activist John Hayes, the convener of Correct Planning and Consultation for Mayfield Group, said his group supported the port's plans for a container terminal but remained sceptical about its assurances the bulk of freight would move on trains.
"In all the analysis we've done, we don't think it'll work, given the capacity of the rail and the fact a huge amount of that is used up by coal," he said.
"We think there are problems there."
An Australian Rail Track Corporation spokesperson said the rail network had "available capacity for passengers, intermodal freight and bulk grain and coal for the present and into the future".
"ARTC has worked closely with customers in the Hunter Valley on developing the capacity and capability of the Hunter rail network, including significant investment linked to export capabilities across the region for over a decade," the spokesperson said.
"This will continue to be a core focus as passenger and freight volumes evolve in forward years.
"ARTC has a robust and proven process for establishing additional or bespoke capacity on our network, and will continue working closely with customers and the Port of Newcastle to ensure rail is the mode of choice for this region."
Port of Newcastle's plans for a container terminal include six rail sidings which can each accommodate 1.8-kilometre freight trains.
A terminal handling high volumes of containers could be at least 10 years away.
Calculating the compensation owed to the government will take about six months.
The port would then have to lodge a development application and have it approved before starting an estimated five to six years of construction work.
The port says the Mayfield site has the capacity for a freight terminal moving 2 million containers a year.
Any trucks carrying containers would travel to and from a Mayfield terminal via Industrial Drive to connect with the Pacific Highway, Hunter Expressway and other main road corridors.
Ten years ago, the Department of Planning assessed Newcastle Port Corporation plans for a freight terminal at Mayfield handling a million containers a year by 2034.
Its assessment report said moving 30 per cent of containers by rail was "achievable in the long term".
"Traffic impacts ... are considered to be the key issue in relation to the Concept Plan," the report said.
Mr Hayes said his group was concerned Port of Newcastle's plans to handle 2 million containers would "choke" the road network.
"We're very sceptical that on current proposals for the rail network ... if the container terminal was built with that capacity and inadequate rail, then the surplus would overflow onto the roads and it would be an enormous problem, not just in Newcastle but on the feeder roads around Newcastle as well.
"The opportunities are there for things to be done, but there would have to be big capital expenditure."
The Mayfield group plans to lodge a submission to the government's Hunter Regional Transport Plan this week calling for the plan to take into account freight movements from the proposed container terminal.
A draft of the plan published in September does not mention the terminal, which at the time was handcuffed by financial penalties written into the lease deal between the government and Port of Newcastle.
Port of Newcastle says the terminal can be built without the government forking out for infrastructure upgrades.
A 2018 report prepared for Port of Newcastle by consultants AlphaBeta said a Newcastle terminal moving 1.2 million containers a year would "relieve pressure on Sydney's road and rail networks by diverting a portion of Port Botany-related freight traffic from Sydney to the Newcastle region".
But the report said the Mayfield terminal's reliance on rail meant "congestion and pollution effects would not be transferred to that area if activity shifted there".
"Port of Newcastle has supporting road and rail infrastructure with capacity for much larger freight volumes than it currently handles," AlphaBeta found.
A 2018 report by Deloitte Access Economics on the state government's port strategy found "minimal NSW government investment is required to establish a container terminal at the Port of Newcastle, as the Port has the land, channel, and existing road and rail connections to develop a container terminal now".
WHAT DO YOU THINK? We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on the Newcastle Herald website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. Sign up for a subscription here.
