Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100

Lake
Victoria

Mwanza

Kigoma Tanga

Lake Tanzania Dar es
Tanganyika Salaam

Lake
Nyasa Mtwara

Tanzania Ports Master Plan
Final Report

Tanzania Ports Authority

February 2009

9R8821

in association with






George Hintzenweg 85
P.O. Box 8520
Rotterdam 3009 AM
The Netherlands
+31 (0)10 443 36 66 Telephone
Fax
info@rotterdam.royalhaskoning.com E-mail
www.royalhaskoning.com Internet
Arnhem 09122561 CoC

Document title Tanzania Ports Master Plan
Final Report
Document short title
Status
Date February 2009
Project name East Africa Trade and Facilitation Project
Project ID No P079734
Port Master Plan Study
United Republic of Tanzania
Project number 9R8821
Client Tanzania Ports Authority
Reference 9R8821/R/903617/Rott

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

I – Introduction

The Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA) assigned Royal Haskoning – in association with
Ardhi University (formerly known as UCLAS) and Interconsult Ltd. – to prepare a Port
Master Plan covering all coastal and manned Lake ports of Tanzania. Key events during
the course of the study were as follows:
• Contract signature March 3, 2008
• Kick-off meeting March 26/28, 2008
• Inception report April 25, 2008
• Interim Report August 8, 2008
• Interim workshop September 19, 2008
• TPA workshop October 16-18, 2008
• Draft Final Report November 7, 2008
• TPA workshop January 9, 2009

This Report presents the final conclusions of the study. The following main issues came
to light during the course of the study:
• The need to increase the capacity of the existing facilities at Dar es Salaam until
new facilities can be built elsewhere.
• The location of new facilities for Dar es Salaam overspill traffic once traffic growth
can no longer be accommodated within the existing port footprint.
• The need for new port facilities at Mtwara to support and stimulate development of
the Mtwara Corridor.
• The role of the smaller coastal ports in supporting local trade, including new
terminals for resource-based exports.
• The potential of the Lakes ports as gateways to the rapidly growing transit
countries, particularly Uganda and DR Congo.

Before going on to consider these issues, the main factors influencing the future pattern
of port development in Tanzania are briefly discussed.

Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/Rott
Final Report -i- February 2009

II – Perspective on national port development

National context

National transport infrastructure
Logistics chains in Tanzania are still very inefficient. Port performance is being severely
impeded by inability to clear cargo from the ports quickly, and the country’s role as a
channel for trade from the land-locked countries1 is impeded by incomplete road and rail
networks, and the poor quality and high cost of land transport. It is essential that over
the next 20 years there is much closer integration of planning across all modes of
transport, as many of the recommendations in this report are conditional on parallel
actions being taken in respect of other forms of transport infrastructure.

Tanzania has two main railway systems with different gauges, i.e. the Tanzania-Zambia
Railway Authority (TAZARA) with connections to Zambia Railway system, and the
Tanzania Railway Limited with links to Uganda, DRC Congo, and Kenya. Only limited
areas of the country are rail-connected, and the railway sector has performed badly
during the last ten years. The infrastructure has deteriorated and services are below
standard due to the age and obsolescence of the infrastructure and shortage of
locomotives and wagons. Improvements to rail infrastructure and availability of rolling
stock (locomotives and wagons) are urgently required.

Between 2001 and 2007, TRL’s share of dry cargo imports through Dar es Salaam fell
from 22% to 3%, whilst TAZARA’s crept up slightly from 2.5% to 4.5%. Rail should be
the predominant mode for cargo movements in excess of 400-600km, so even allowing
for the limited extent of the rail network, there is scope for increasing rail’s share of port
traffic (excluding oil) from around 7.5% today to a target of 30-35% in 10-15 years time.
This would lead to a significant reduction in inland transport costs, environmental
improvements, and more efficient port operations.

The national trunk road network is undergoing substantial improvements, but still
includes large sections which are unpaved. Development of a paved and well
maintained road network connecting the major ports to the transit countries is critical to
the overall success of the ports master plan.

Development corridors
To ensure balanced regional growth, the Tanzanian Government has charged the
National Development Corporation with exploiting the economic potential of three
corridors running inland from the coast as follows:

• Tanga Corridor
• Central Corridor
• Mtwara Corridor

The Tanga Corridor study has identified several large agricultural and mining projects,
but these are less well-defined than in the other two corridor studies. There is a desire to
boost manufacturing activity in Tanga and Arusha, and a project – which has been

1
Zambia, DR Congo, Malawi, Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda

9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master Plan
February 2009 - ii - Final Report

around for many years – to build a new rail link from Tanga to Musoma via Arusha,
providing Uganda with a more direct route to the sea than via Dar es Salaam.

The principal investment projects in the Central Corridor are in mining and agriculture,
supported by large public investments in energy and transport. The additional traffic
which they generate will go mainly to Dar es Salaam.

Work on the Mtwara Corridor is the most advanced, and seems likely to generate
substantial volumes of port traffic, mainly for Mtwara but also for ports on Lake Nyasa.

Economic development zones
Economic Development Zones (EDZ) provide an important stimulus to trade and attract
inward investment. Thirteen locations have been identified for EDZs, with the highest
priority being given to the one in Bagamoyo, followed by Mtwara and Arusha.

If the EDZ program were to increase foreign direct investment in manufacturing by 50%,
equivalent to US$ 35 to 40 million of additional investment each year, this would
generate approximately 8,000 to10,000 tons per annum of project cargo. The permanent
increase in trade would depend very much on the type of industry attracted to the zone,
but experience elsewhere suggests an “order of magnitude” rate of build-up of around
2,000 to 5,000 tons per annum in each successive year.

Urban development
Most of Tanzania’s ports are located close to their city centres, where they contribute to
traffic congestion and other adverse environmental effects. Difficulties in acquiring land
have led to cramped and inefficient port layouts, and imposed serious constraints on
port expansion plans.

At the same time, the ports are important sources of local employment, and have
spawned a wide range of support activities nearby. It will therefore be difficult and costly
to move them. In order to achieve a proper balance of development, it is important that
port master plans are not viewed in isolation, but are related to much broader national
and local planning objectives.

Environmental considerations
Generic environmental impacts connected with port development have been identified,
and mitigation measures proposed. However these issues can only be properly
addressed in the detailed planning and design of projects. At this stage no irrevocable
environmental constraints have been encountered which prevent the recommended
projects from proceeding to the next stage of investigation.

Competitive position of Tanzanian ports
Although Tanzanian ports face competition from ports as far away as Durban, the
SWOT analysis demonstrates their potential to attract additional transit cargoes for the
landlocked countries PROVIDING they are operated more efficiently and developed in
closer harmony with hinterland road and rail connections.

Final Report - iii - February 2009

Vision on port development

Shipping developments.
Vessel sizes in global container shipping have grown strongly over the last years. The
largest vessels sail on East-West routes between the Far East and Europe, while East
Africa is mostly served by feeders from Middle East ports. It is expected that the present
pattern of shipping corridors will continue during the coming years. However, with
increasing volumes, some direct calls from Asian ports to the North Indian Ocean
including Tanzania may be introduced. Therefore, the expected maximum vessel size
for these routes is assessed by us at 5,000 TEU.

Port management models
At present TPA ports function as a mix between a public service port and landlord port.
Most terminals are operated by TPA (service port) and some terminals are operated by
private parties (e.g. TICTS). Investments in port infrastructure by private parties are
however very low. Under the Port Act of 2004, Tanzania Ports Authority was formed as
a landlord port authority, implying that port operations are handed over to private
terminal operators.

In order to further establish this shift, TPA should speedily step back in its role of
supervising authority and encourage private participation in port development and
terminal operations through Public-Private Partnerships (PPP).

Physically, terminals should have dedicated facilities and each be fenced and have its
own access gates. All security is to be in place under ISPS regulations, under the
responsibility of the private operator. Ownership of equipment and facilities and
employment of operational staff for terminals are to be transferred from TPA to private
terminal operators under the concession agreement. Such a shift may be undertaken in
the confidence that market forces of free competition and – last but not least – return on
investments will drive efficiency improvements and cargo growth in the port.

TPA is therefore strongly encouraged to further focus on this shift to increase efficiency,
attract private capital and gain market share. The first step would be to give all newly
developed terminals (such as berth 13/14 in Dar es Salaam) in concession to private
operators. The next step could be to segregate operations in the existing port areas and
give terminal operation concessions to one or more private entities.

Port development
Dar es Salaam port is by far the largest port in Tanzania, serving all major economic
centres in the country as well as the transit countries. All major existing infrastructure
corridors in Tanzania lead to Dar es Salaam, and it is the only place where both railway
systems (TAZARA and TRL) join. The port has shown a strong growth over the past
years, especially in the container sector. This has lead to congestion in the port and a
search for additional land area in or near the port.

In a city which is growing strongly and where road capacity is inadequate to cope with
the growing number of vehicles, port development, urban development and transport
plans must be closely inter-linked.

February 2009 - iv - Final Report

Land availability for the Tanzanian city ports is limited. Development of a green-field port
at a limited distance of the existing ports (but well outside the urban area) would allow
unrestricted port development, while connections to existing economic and physical
infrastructure can easily be made. A green-field port can be started as a modern port
facility to match latest developments in shipping and logistics, without having the
heritage of outdated infrastructure, equipment and organization.

Port logistics
A port is a node in supply chains, including physical flows (shipping, land transport,
(temporary) storage), value added operations (logistics, production) and processes
(custom clearance, inspections, payments). TPA is to facilitate the supply chain and
improve the competitiveness of Tanzanian ports by continually improving the quality of
port services on strategic, tactical land operational levels.

ICDs
An Inland Container Depot is generally defined as a common user facility offering
services for handling and temporary storage of containers carried under customs
control. ICDs are often located in the interiors (well outside the port towns) of the country
and well away from the servicing ports.

The present ICDs inside and near Dar es Salaam are used as temporary storage of
containers, and basically function as a remote terminal stack. Although necessary given
the limited space availability in the DSM sea port terminals (TICTS and TPA), the
additional handling and transport between the sea terminal and the ICDs add to the total
costs of the logistics chain without adding value. With sufficient terminal area available
at the sea port, the ICDs in Dar es Salaam would no longer be required for the present
purpose.

The future network of ICDs will develop further away from the sea port on major
transport axes near the major consumption and production areas. Transit countries may
have a dedicated ICD either near the border in Tanzania or in the transit country itself.
ICDs will develop near EDZs and on major transport corridors, such as near Isaka,
Mbeya and Kigoma.

Plan period
While the master plan gives guidance and direction on the long term development,
investment planning must be done on the basis of a five year updated forecast to ensure
that development of port capacity is demand driven. These five year forecasts must be
frequently updated by TPA to ensure that sufficient capacity is available ahead of
demand, without creating over-capacity.

Final Report -v- February 2009

Traffic forecasts

The Tanzanian ports system comprises:
• One large international port, Dar es Salaam, with a throughput of 7.1 million tons in
2007
• Two medium sized coastal ports, Tanga and Mtwara, with throughputs of 445,000
and 90,000 tons respectively in 2007
• A tail of smaller coastal ports with current throughputs of less than 50,000 tons per
annum: Pangani, Kilindoni (Mafia), Kilwa Masoko and Kilwa Kivinje, Rushungi, Lindi
and Mikindoni
• Lake Victoria ports: Mwanza North and South, Bukoba, Kemondo Bay, Nansio and
Musoma, plus 17 smaller unmanned ports
• Lake Tanganyika ports: Kigoma and Kasanga, plus 19 smaller unmanned ports
• Lake Nyasa ports: Itungi, Manda, Liuli and Mbamba Bay, plus 9 smaller unmanned
ports

The quality and level of detail of the statistics for the smaller coastal ports and all of the
Lakes ports is poor, and there is a significant amount of informal trade which has made
it difficult to identify the potential demand for new port facilities.

In addition, transit country trade through the Great Lakes ports is only just beginning to
take off, and has almost certainly been held down by the poor quality of existing port
infrastructure, a shortage of modern, commercial shipping services, and the poor quality
of road and rail connections from the ports. Much of the existing cargo is still carried on
passenger ferries.

Port Liquid Dry Break Container Total ,000 TEU
bulk bulk bulk
Dar es Salaam 2,189 1,161 515 3,259 7,124 334
Tanga 97 56 194 98 445 10
Mtwara 6 - 63 21 90 5
Lake Victoria 481
Lake Tanganyika Not available 108
Lake Nyasa 18
2007 cargo volumes (,000 tons)

February 2009 - vi - Final Report

In addition, some of the ports handle large numbers of passengers: Dar es Salaam
handled 732,000 passengers in 2007, whilst passenger traffic through the Lakes ports
was as follows:

Lake ‘000 passengers 2005-6
Lake Victoria Mwanza 206
Nansio 189
Bukoba 87
Kemondo Bay 9
Lake Tanganyika Kigoma 16
Lake Nyasa Itungi 7
Mbamba Bay 1

Since the beginning of the decade peace and macro-economic stability throughout most
of the region has resulted in high traffic growth rates. Between 2001 and 2007 the
average growth rate for the coastal ports was 9.2% per annum. Container traffic has
been growing even faster, at around 13.5% per annum, and there has also been strong
growth in dry bulk cargoes such as wheat, fertilizers and cement. Liquid bulk traffic
(mainly oil) has been growing at an average rate of 5.4% per annum, but break-bulk
traffic has been static.

Transit traffic to the land-locked countries makes up a growing proportion of Dar es
Salaam’s traffic. Since 2001 it has increased from 10% to 41% of liquid bulks, and from
25% to 39% of containers. Dry bulk and break bulk flows to/from the transit countries
have remained fairly small, and fluctuate from year to year.

The traffic forecasts assume a continuation of past GDP growth rates of 6 to 8% per
annum in Tanzania and neighbouring countries. Although the short-term forecasts to
2013 will be affected by the global recession, its impact is likely to be smaller and slower
than in developed countries. There is a good chance of a speedy recovery, making the
timing of port development the main issue rather than its form.

The traffic forecasts have been based on trend analysis, interviews with leading
business organizations, and studies of individual issues such as:
• Macro-economic growth and the restructuring of the economy
• Agriculture, forestry and fisheries resources
• Energy policy
• Mining projects
• Economic development zones
• Corridor development plans
• Road and rail infrastructure
• Transit traffic, including competition from ports in other countries.

Low and high forecasts have been made for individual ports, reflecting the envelope
within which cargo handling is expected to develop. It is emphasized that future
investment planning is to be based on annually updated five-year forecasts, with an
appropriate level of substantiation and stakeholder commitment.

The forecasts are summarized for each individual port separately.

Final Report - vii - February 2009

III – Dar es Salaam

High and low cargo forecasts have been used to demonstrate the high level of
uncertainty associated with future traffic volumes, particularly after 2018.

2007 2013 2018 2023 2028
High forecast
Liquid Bulk 2,189 3,724 4,820 6,099 7,652
Dry Bulk 1,161 2,449 3,693 4,779 6,056
Break Bulk 515 655 934 1,317 1,842
Total excl. containers (‘000 tons) 3,865 6,828 9,447 12,195 15,550
Containers (‘000 TEU) 334 775 1,554 2,728 4,719
Vehicles ('000 units) 41 81 143 230 370
Ferry Passengers ('000 ) 732 981 1,253 1,599 2,040
Cruise Passengers (‘000) - 3 18 28 50
Low forecast
Liquid Bulk 2,189 2,824 3,251 3,790 4,260
Dry Bulk 1,161 2,020 2,624 3,245 3,726
Break Bulk 515 424 551 741 992
Total excl. containers (‘000 tons) 3,865 5,268 6,426 7,776 8,978
Containers (‘000 TEU) 334 649 1,074 1,637 2,486
Vehicles ('000 units) 41 69 106 155 228
Ferry Passengers ('000) 732 849 961 1,087 1,230
Cruise Passengers (‘000) - 1 8 12 23
Dar es Salaam cargo forecasts (,000 tons)

The existing footprint of Dar es Salaam port – including the planned development of
berths 13-14 – is estimated to have the following capacity.

Commodity Capacity
Liquid bulk 10 million tons per annum
Dry bulk 6.1 million tons per annum
Break bulk 4.0 million tons per annum
Containers 1.2 million TEU per annum
Vehicles 120,000 units per annum
Capacity of Dar es Salaam Port’s Existing Footprint
(including berths 13-14 and the new SPM)

To reach this capacity, significant improvements must be made with regard to
operational efficiency, traffic flows in the port and dwell time reduction. Also changes are
required to port infrastructure and layout, as discussed below.

February 2009 - viii - Final Report

Liquid bulks

Construction of a new single point mooring (SPM), which will handle the majority of
black and white oil products as well as crude oil.

This SPM is being designed to handle ships of up to 150,000dwt, and is already at the
detailed design stage. Although it will not do away with the need for a small jetty for
specialist oil products such as LPG, and other liquid bulks such as vegetable oil and
molasses – such a jetty is desirable anyway for emergency back-up purposes – it will
substantially reduce traffic at the Kurasini Oil Jetty (KOJ).

Dry bulks

Creation of a specialist dry bulks terminal at berths 5-7
Expansion of grain silo to allow handling of larger vessels

Major bulk cargoes should no longer be bagged on the quay, but transferred to bulk
storage directly. If required, bagging can take place at the bulk storage facility,
independently from the vessel operation.

The plan envisages all grains being transported to the existing silo, which would be used
primarily for intermediate storage to increase the unloading capacity of the quay.
Traders would be required to remove the grain as quickly as practical. In order to handle
a full shipload, the storage capacity of the existing grain silo should be expanded from
30,000 tons to 60,000 tons. Further expansion will be required if the silo is to be used for
long-term storage of grain, an additional demand which could occur if silo operations
were privatized.

Dangote cement imports should be transported from berth 7 by conveyor belt to the
recently leased packaging area at the back of the port. The conveyor should have an
elevation of at least 6m to allow trucks and small equipment to pass underneath.

Fertilizers should be stored in a bulk warehouse / Shed 7, from where the product can
be bagged and loaded onto trucks or rail wagons.

Other dry bulks can be handled on either of berth 5, 6 or 7 and stored in one of the
sheds, depending on allocation and availability.

Containers

Construction of container berths 13-14 upstream of the Kurasini Oil Jetty (KOJ)
Relocation of the KOJ jetty for safety and operational efficiency
Development of a large scale ICD outside Dar es Salaam

In view of high traffic growth rates, congestion at the TICTS terminal, the limited amount
of storage space available for containers elsewhere in the port, and the inefficiency of
using ICDs, two additional container berths (berths 13-14) are required as soon as
possible.

Final Report - ix - February 2009

Berths 13-14 provide the only possibility to create additional container terminal capacity
on the short and medium term. This additional capacity is required in 2013 to handle
forecasted volumes until new terminals can be developed elsewhere (refer Section IV).
Delayed development of berths 13-14 could result in congestion, loss of market share of
Tanzanian ports and impeded economic development.

Once berths 13-14 are operational (2013) TPA should discontinue container operations
on berths 1-7 to allow for the growth of other commodities.

Nautical access to berths 13-14 will be impeded by KOJ. Navigational safety must be
improved to limit the risk of collision. Also a safety zone must be created with a 260m
radius from the KOJ, within which no cargo handling or shipping activity is allowed. The
following options for improving navigational safety have been considered:
• Widening the approach channel to berths 13-14, so that container ships can
manoeuvre at a safe distance from the moored tankers, and moving the quay line
for berths 13-14 outwards so that it lines up with the KOJ rather than berths 5-11.
• Shortening the KOJ trestle so that the jetty head is in line with the TICTS and
B13-14 terminal. Construction can start after the new SPM is operational.
• Relocating the oil jetty to the Kigamboni site of the creek, physically separating all
liquid bulk activities from the container operations

The last option – relocating the oil jetty to the opposite site of the creek – is preferred
because of the navigational safety, operational safety, optimal use of container terminal
area, and minimal disruption of operations during construction.

The need for additional off-dock ICDs to support the container terminals(s) will depend
on the ability and willingness of shippers to reduce container dwell times. The situation
should be closely monitored.

There is a proposal to construct a large new large ICD for transit traffic at Kisarawe
25 km west of the port, where TRL and TAZARA are about 7 km apart. Containers
would be shuttled between the port and ICD by rail only, using a private rail operator.
Development costs would be high (US$ 30-40 million) because the area is hilly and
significant road improvements are required, and the costs would have to be recovered
over a relatively short period (6-8 years) until new container terminal capacity can be
developed in the port(s). A site with lower investment costs would be preferable.

Break bulks

• Deepening of berths 1-4

In the short term much of the space at Berths 1-4 will be needed for container stacking,
but more space will become available for general cargo storage as new facilities are
developed for containers and dry bulks.

The design depth of berth 1-4 should be increased to 12 m –CD. This will require a new
quay wall to be built in front of the existing gravity structure.

February 2009 -x- Final Report

Ro-Ro / vehicles

• Construction of a new 260m quay in line with the Lighter Quay
• Reclamation of the area behind it to provide additional storage space.
• Construction of a two multi-storey car parks

Ro-Ro vessels and specialist vehicle carriers would use the new break-bulk quay
between berth 1 and the Lighter Quay, with berths 1-4 in reserve.

A multi-storey car park for 5,000 vehicles is already planned adjacent to the Malindi
marshalling yard, but a second multi-storey car park of comparable size will be required
to accommodate the forecast growth in demand until a new vehicle terminal can be
opened.

The feasibility of developing parking areas outside the port – Inland Car Depots much
like the principle of Inland Container Depots – should be investigated. Inland car depots
could reduce the requirements for multi-storey car parks inside the port.

In the longer term car terminals can be built at another location, most probably
Bagamoyo.

Logistics area

• Development of the Kurasini warehouse area for port logistics and distribution

There is potential to develop the Kurasini warehouse area on the other side of Bandari
Street to the port for logistics and distribution activities. This land should be transferred
to TPA for port-related activities at the earliest opportunity, as it provides a rare chance
to over-come existing space constraints in the port, and would open up new options for
improving port layout and traffic circulation.

Passengers

• Redevelopment of the waterfront adjacent to the city centre

The waterfront development for passengers, tourists and commercial activities will be
located near the city centre. The development area must lie outside the navigation
channel to the cargo port, and passenger terminals should be located outside of the
main port area to avoid security issues.

The lighter wharf will remain in use for dhows, coasters and service vessels.

Final Report - xi - February 2009

Ship repairs

• Acquisition of new floating dock
• Relocation of related workshops

A floating dock is the preferred solution for ship repairs. The dock and the related
workshops can best be placed on the outer edge of berth 13/14, where sufficient space
is available and noise and light nuisance is minimized. Alternatively the dock could be
placed in Mtwara.

Channel dredging

• Deepening of the port access channel from -10.5m to -12.0m CD

Deepening of the channel would reduce the number of ships having to wait for the tide,
and associated demurrage costs. Deepening to -12.0m CD would allow an estimated
85% of all ships in 2028 to enter at all states of the tide, allowing 1.0 m for under-keel
clearance.

Further deepening to -13.0m CD was considered, along with widening and straightening
of the channel to allow two way operation and longer ships. However, high costs and
constraints on longer-term development at Dar es Salaam suggest that relocating the
larger vessels to new port facilities outside of Dar es Salaam would be a more cost-
effective alternative.

Traffic circulation

• Improvement of traffic circulation
• Development of parking areas outside the port

A traffic circulation plan has been prepared based on dedicated in and out gates for
each of the four terminals (break bulk, dry bulk, TICTS and berths 13-14) and a one-way
road system.

Dedicated parking areas for trucks should be provided near each port entrance, and
trucks should only be allowed to enter the port once all documents are in order and the
cargo is ready for collection/delivery. Improvements in signing are needed, and a traffic
management unit should be created in the Port Manager’s office to enforce the
regulations and remove obstructions.

February 2009 - xii - Final Report

Proposed traffic circulation pattern

Better management of the rail-port interface is required, together with the purchase of
additional rolling stock and cargo handling equipment, and relocation of rail tracks to the
back of the port.

Summary of development plan of Dar es Salaam existing footprint
The master plan for development of the existing footprint is shown below.

Offshore SPM
Crude, oil products

Liquid
bulk
jetty
Waterfront
Passengers, cruise, ferries

Floating
dock

Berths 5-7 Berths 8-11 (TICTS) Berth 13/14
Dry bulk Containers Containers
-4
s1 k
Lighter wharf r th u l
Be ak B
Dhows, coasters e
Roro Br

Kurasini logistics
Value added logistics
Light manufacturing

Car park

Final Report - xiii - February 2009

Recommended actions are summarized below:

Key Actions for Short Medium Long Remarks
Dar es Salaam 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28
Liquid bulk
• Construction of a new single  At detailed design stage
point mooring (SPM)
Dry bulk
• Creation of a specialist dry  Cement, grain, fertilizer and other dry
bulks terminal at berths 5-7 bulks. No bagging on the quay.
• Expansion of grain silo  Allowing for larger vessel sizes
Containers
• Development of  Only location for short term development
berths 13-14 of container handling capacity, needs to
be fast-tracked
• Relocation of KOJ  Preferred relocation to Kigamboni side
• Develop a large ICD near  In Kisarawe or other location. In use until
DSM 2018.
Break bulk
• Deepening of berths 1-4  Deepening to -12m CD
Vehicles
• New Ro-Ro quay  Creating a dedicated Ro-Ro / vehicle
• Reclamation Kurasini creek  terminal
st
• 1 multi-storey car park  In progress, capacity 5,000 cars
nd
• 2 multi-storey car park  Determine feasibility of Inland Car Depots
as alternative solution
Logistics
• Development of Kurasini  Land to be transferred to TPA, gradual
warehouse area development for port related logistics and
light industries.
Passengers
• Redevelopment of  Avoid negative impact on shipping and
waterfront commercial port operations
Ship repairs
• Acquisition of floating dock 
• Redevelopment of 
workshops
Channel dredging
• Deepen channel to 12 m –  Reduce tidal restrictions and waiting times
CD for container vessels and tankers
Traffic circulation
• Traffic circulation plan  Traffic plan to include enforcement
• Parking areas outside 
port area

February 2009 - xiv - Final Report

IV – Development plan – Port expansion

The short-term plan for Dar es Salaam (existing footprint) provides sufficient capacity to
handle the expected traffic up to 2016 in the high forecast case, and 2020 in the low
forecast case. After that, a completely new area will have to be opened up for port
development.

After examining the whole of the Tanzanian coastline for potential sites, three were
identified as the most suitable locations for handling Dar es Salaam overspill traffic:
• Kigamboni (on the other side of the creek to the existing port)
• Bagamoyo
• Mwambani Bay (near Tanga)

Consideration was also given to a site at Manza, near the Kenyan border, proposed as
the site for a new port to handle Mombasa as well as Dar es Salaam overspill traffic.
However poor land transport infrastructure, high development costs and the political
challenges of jointly developing a port which would serve the Kenyan as well as the
Tanzanian market made this significantly less attractive than the above alternatives.

Development scenarios
Four port development scenarios were defined based on different combinations of the
three most suitable port sites, as shown in the table below. It was assumed that the new
port(s) would handle the Dar es Salaam overspill traffic as well as North Tanzania’s
traffic. Development scenarios were therefore based on the combined traffic forecasts of
Dar es Salaam and Tanga.

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4
Tanga
Mwambani Mwambani

Mwambani
DSM Bagamoyo
Bagamoyo
Kigamboni

Dar es Salaam – Existing footprint (incl. berth 13-14)

Economic analyses and comparison of non-monetary aspects show that Scenario 4
(Bagamoyo and Mwambani) is the preferred development alternative. This is explained
further below.

Distribution scenarios for the merged Dar es Salaam and Tanga traffic forecasts for the
four scenarios are as follows:

Final Report - xv - February 2009

High forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028 2013 2018 2023 2028
Scenario 1 : Development at Kigamboni and Mwambani Bay
Kigamboni Mwambani Bay
Dry bulks('000 tons) - - - - - 2,366 2,942 3,026
Break bulk ('000 tons) - - - - - 359 426 516
Containers ('000 TEU) - 394 1,566 3,520 - 122 211 361
Vehicles ('000 units) - 23 110 250 - - - -
Scenario 2 : Development at Bagamoyo only
Tanga
Bagamoyo
(lighterage, coasters, dhows)
Dry bulks('000 tons) - - 919 2,196 552 626 702 786
Break bulk ('000 tons) - - - - 63 98 120 145
Containers ('000 TEU) - 506 1,768 3,870 10 10 10 10
Vehicles ('000 units) - 23 110 250 - - - -
Scenario 3 : Development at Mwambani Bay only
Mwambani Bay
- 2,366 2,942 3,026
- 359 426 516
- 516 1,778 3,880
- 23 110 250
Scenario 4 : Development at Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay
Bagamoyo Mwambani Bay
Dry bulks('000 tons) - - - - - 2,366 2,942 3,026
Break bulk ('000 tons) - - - - - 359 426 516
Containers ('000 TEU) - 394 1,566 3,520 - 122 211 361
Vehicles ('000 units) - 23 110 250 - - - -
Traffic at the new ports (,000 tons) – High forecast

The low forecast for the preferred scenario 4 is shown in the table below.

Low forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028 2013 2018 2023 2028
Scenario 4 : Development at Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay
Bagamoyo Mwambani Bay
Dry bulks('000 tons) - - - - - 667 1,004 763
Break bulk ('000 tons) - - - - - 221 227 241
Containers ('000 TEU) - - 453 1,302 - 82 126 191
Vehicles ('000 units) - - 35 108 - - - -
Traffic at the new ports (,000 tons) – Low forecast (Scenario 4)

In practice the traffic mix is likely to be more varied than shown in the table – not least
because of the unknown effects of EDZ development at Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay.
However the total tonnages in the high forecast give a reasonable indication of the
maximum scale and speed of development required for port planning purposes, whilst
the tonnages in the low forecast have been used to test the financial robustness of the
alternative scenarios.

February 2009 - xvi - Final Report

Layouts and capital cost estimates were developed for each scenario. In the high
forecast the difference in capital costs between the most and least expensive schemes,
phased over 15 years, is just over US$ 150m.

Cost estimates
For the preferred scheme (Scenario 4) capital expenditure from 2013-28 is about
US$ 845m in the high forecast, and US$ 445m in the low forecast. This includes
superstructure and equipment, which could be privately funded, and road and rail
access which would be funded by public entities other than TPA.

High forecasts 2013-18 2018-23 2023-28 Total
Scenario 1
Kigamboni 90 190 375 655
Mwambani Bay 110 25 30 165
Total 200 215 405 820
Scenario 2
Bagamoyo 200 210 365 775
Scenario 3
Mwambani Bay 150 200 345 695
Scenario 4
Bagamoyo 170 190 320 680
Total 280 215 350 845
Low forecasts
Scenario 4
Bagamoyo 100 95 135 330
Total 190 100 155 445
Capital cost estimates (rounded, US$ m)

Operating and inland transport costs
Estimates were made of differences in operating costs between the four scenarios, but
these turned out to be relatively small, of the order of US$ 7-8m per annum by 2028,
with Scenario 3 the least expensive and Scenario 4 the most expensive. Differences in
operating costs were caused primarily by differences in maintenance costs (including
maintenance dredging) and the need to duplicate certain facilities at each separate port
site.

The main cost difference between the four scenarios was in inland transport costs.
These were modelled on the basis of the following:
• Origin-destination pattern of the cargo (21 regions in Tanzania plus six transit
countries)
• Assumed modal split, with an increase in rail’s market share once its current
problems have been resolved
• Distance-based cost formulae for road and rail transport costs for different types of
cargo. These were derived from a mixture of Tanzanian and international data, and

Final Report - xvii - February 2009

allowed for a reduction in unit costs for rail resulting from economies of scale and
general efficiency improvements.

Discounted cash flow
Discounted cash flow analysis of the capital, operating and land transport costs
associated with the four alternative scenarios showed Scenario 4 (Bagamoyo /
Mwambani Bay) to be the lowest cost option in all of the situations tested.

Although the cost differences between Scenario 4 (Bagamoyo/Mwambani) and the next
most expensive Scenario 1 (Kigamboni/Mwambani) are large in absolute terms, they are
relatively small in terms of the total costs considered. On the other hand the cost
advantage of Scenario 4 over Scenario 3 (Mwambani Bay only) is overwhelming
because of the Mwambani Bay’s peripheral location in relation to national and transit
country markets.

Evaluation period to 2028 Evaluation period to 2038
NVP @ 5% NPV@10% NVP @ 5% NPV@10%
High forecast
Scenario 1 +1.2% +1.0% +1.4% +1.2%
Scenario 2 +3.1% +2.9% +3.2% +3.1%
Scenario 3 +8.5% +7.7% +10.7% +9.6%
Scenario 4 - - - -
Low forecast
Scenario 1 +0.8% +0.5% +1.2% +0.9%
Scenario 2 +2.9% +2.6% +3.2% +2.9%
Scenario 3 +12.6% +11.9% +10.7% +10.7%
Scenario 4 - - - -
Increase in total discounted costs (compared with Scenario 4)

Other considerations
Other (non monetary) economic considerations were taken into account to select the
preferred development option, including:
• Security of supply
• Level of commercial risk
• Increased competition
• Longer-term potential for port development
• Contribution to regional development
• Stimulus to Economic Development Zones
• Impact on urban planning
• Traffic congestion relief.

Some of these criteria favoured different port locations, but on balance they reinforced
the view that Scenario 4 – large scale development of container and vehicle facilities at
Bagamoyo, combined with smaller scale dry bulk and multi-purpose terminals at
Mwambani Bay – offers the best way forward.

February 2009 - xviii - Final Report

Preferred Scenario
The economic analysis and the analysis of other considerations both confirm Scenario 4
(Bagamoyo / Mwambani) as the preferred layout. The conceptual layouts for this
scenario at Bagamoyo and Mwambani are shown below:

Land N
Very shallow areas
Shallow water (<14m)
Deep water (> 14m) Access
Channel & turning circle(s) Channel
Container terminal area
Vehicle/RoRo terminal

Vehicles

2018
2023
2028

0 1 km Containers

Layout Scenario 4 – Bagamoyo (high forecast)

Final Report - xix - February 2009

Land

Shallow water
N
Channel & turning circle(s)
Container terminal area

Break bulk

Dry bulk

Dry bulk
Break Bulk

Access
2018 Channel
2028

Containers

0 1 km

Layout Scenario 4 – Mwambani (high forecast)

Financial Analyses
A preliminary financial evaluation of Scenario 4 showed that the basic infrastructure to
be developed by TPA, and the individual terminals which could be funded by either
private investors or TPA, all generated relatively high rates of return, with the possible
exception of the multi-purpose terminal at Mwambani Bay (7% in the low forecast).

A more detailed feasibility study for the development of Bagamoyo is in the process of
being commissioned. A similar study is needed for Mwambani Bay, as the traffic
forecasts for Tanga have a much higher margin of error because of their dependence on
large dry bulk projects which may or may not go ahead. The Mwambani Bay feasibility
study should also update and evaluate proposals for a new rail link between Arusha and
Musoma.

Although the construction of a new port at Bagamoyo is unlikely to start before 2013, the
development of a green-field site requires considerable amount of preparatory work.
Particular attention should be paid to land acquisition and the agreement of a publicly
acceptable resettlement programme, covering not just residential properties but also
public buildings such as schools.

February 2009 - xx - Final Report

V – Tanga

The wide spread in the cargo forecasts between the high and the low forecast for Tanga
is illustrated below:

2013 2018 2023 2028
High forecast
Existing cargoes 1,075 1,415 1,770 2,242
New projects 756 1,781 2,311 2,341
Total 1,831 3,196 4,081 4,583
Low forecast
Existing cargoes 791 662 1,075 934
New projects 513 515 523 530
Total 1,304 1,177 1,598 1,464
Tanga Cargo Forecast (‘000 tons)

The high forecast growth of dry bulk cargoes will only materialize if direct vessel calls at
alongside berths are possible (i.e. the Mwambani Bay scheme goes ahead). If it does
not, small scale lighterage operations are likely to continue, although for containers this
will depend on the availability of geared container ships, which are likely to become less
common in future.

The main issue is whether any investments are needed to create a temporary increase
in capacity until a new port can be built at Mwambani Bay. Tanga port is located near
the city centre, and does not have enough space for expansion. Port development would
increase city traffic, and the noise and dust would have negative environmental impact.
Investment in fixed assets such as new quays or storage areas is therefore unlikely to
be desirable, although proposals for investment in mobile assets which can be written
off quickly, such as cranes and (possibly) lighters, should be considered on their merits.

Even when Mwambani Bay has been completed, some traffic may also continue to be
handled at Tanga on coasters and dhows, but only for local markets and the Zanzibar /
Pemba trade.

Key actions Short Medium Long Remarks
Tanga 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28

Maintenance of port 
equipment
Additional barges and  
pontoons
Redevelop Tanga port for  Port activities will move to
recreational and urban use Mwambani

Final Report - xxi - February 2009

VI – Mtwara

The forecasts for Mtwara have an even larger spread between the high and low figures,
largely because of uncertainty about the viability, form and timing of several large
projects in the Mtwara Corridor. These include compressed natural gas, bio-diesel,
woodchips, hardwood timber, cement, urea, coal and iron ore. Some of the projects
could involve substantially larger ships than those using the port at present.

The high and low forecasts for Mtwara are shown in the table below.

High forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028
Liquid bulks 263 421 619 867
Dry bulks 2,380 4,500 15,050 22,850
Break bulk 139 270 455 682
Containerized 141 229 332 387
Total 2,923 5,420 16,456 24,786
Containers(‘000 TEU) 34 49 68 76
Low forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028
Liquid bulks 11 25 41 61
Dry bulks 130 500 1,500 1,900
Break bulk 81 121 175 228
Containerized 70 114 158 196
Total 292 760 1,874 2,384
Containers (‘000 TEU) 17 24 32 37
Mtwara forecasts ‘000 tons

The Mtwara Corridor project includes the construction of a railway from Mtwara to
Mbamba Bay. Although intended primarily to facilitate coal exports, this would also allow
Mtwara to become a natural gateway to Malawi and parts of Zambia. Mtwara has also
been selected as the site for an EDZ

Container and break bulk operations can continue in the existing port area, where some
limited expansion is possible to provide sufficient capacity. For dry bulk operations an
area away from the existing port must be found with sufficient land close to the main
road and (future) rail network. Development of CNG exports will require a dedicated jetty
just east of the existing port.

Each of the major dry bulk commodities will have its own handling requirements, and the
larger ones may require their own dedicated terminals. Some of the dry bulk facilities
may be funded by major shippers, leaving TPA responsible for the basic port
infrastructure, improvements to the existing port, and any common user bulk terminals.

The proposed port development of Mtwara port is shown below.

February 2009 - xxii - Final Report

Mtwara Port:
- Containers CNG
- Break bulk jetty Dry bulk
- Liquid bulk import

Proposed port development Mtwara

Because of uncertainty about the Mtwara Corridor projects, the attraction of gas-related
industries, and the speed and type of development envisaged for the EDZ, the most
appropriate layout and development sequence for the port cannot be set out in detail at
present. It is recommended that TPA and the National Development Corporation (NDC)
take the lead in establishing a permanent Working Group for the joint planning of
Mtwara port and related economic activities.

Key Actions Short Medium Long Remarks
Mtwara 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28
Dangote cement terminal  In progress.
Private financing.
CNG export jetty  Discussions with Artumas in
progress. Private financing
Woodchips terminal  Discussions in progress.
Development on new
terminal, private financing
Other bulks   Timing linked to individual
industrial projects
Establish permanent Working  TPA and NDC cooperation
Group for joint planning of port and
corridor development

Final Report - xxiii - February 2009

VII – Small coastal ports

Pangani
Pangani port serves local trade only. No new developments were identified which could
increase the national strategic importance of the port. To facilitate local trade a basic
port facility needs to be developed.

Kilindoni (Mafia)
No significant trade volumes were identified. However, construction of a jetty is seen as
a government obligation to the island’s 45,000 inhabitants to allow passenger traffic,
improve working conditions, and facilitate trade.

The development of a jetty similar to the existing Tanpesca jetty is recommended, with
mooring facilities for two vessels and a draft of 3m -CD. Based on bathymetric surveys
a location should be selected that minimizes the length of the jetty. A basic facility
should be also developed in Kisiju, the landing point on the main land for Mafia dhows,

Kilwa
Two potential bio-energy projects have been identified in the region, initiated by SEKAB
and Bioshape. These projects could generate significant export volumes of liquid bulk
(bio-ethanol) and (mostly containerized) jatropha nuts. Dedicated facilities need to be
constructed in close coordination with the private developers to handle these exports.

The existing jetty at Kilwa Masoko needs to be rehabilitated to handle project cargo
associated with these projects and other small scale exports. No developments are
required at Kilwa Kivinje.

Gypsum exports through Rushungi must be monitored, and if required a basic facility
should be constructed and the access road improved.

Lindi
Lindi port presently serves local trade only. No new developments were identified which
could increase the national strategic importance of the port. To serve local trade the
dredging or modification of the existing pier is required.

Mikindani
No potential for Mikindani was identified and it is recommended that the site is not
developed.

February 2009 - xxiv - Final Report

Key recommended actions Short Medium Long Remarks
Small coastal ports 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28
Pangani
Develop basic mooring facility  Local use only
Kilindoni
Develop jetty short jetty in  Local use. Social obligation to
Kilindoni island population.
Develop basic mooring facility  Facility to serve Mafia trade with
in Kisiju the mainland
Kilwa
Jatropha nuts  Bioshape, preparations in
(containers / dry bulk) progress. Private financing.
Bio-ethanol export jetty  SEKAB, preparations in
progress. Private financing.
Jetty rehabilitation  Linked to projects above, user
requirements to be determined
Lindi
Dredge or modify existing pier  Local use only
to allow direct berthing
Mikindani
No action No development recommended

Final Report - xxv - February 2009

VII– Lake Victoria

Lake Victoria has many public and private ports. Traffic forecasts for the most important
public ports are shown below. They assume that container shipping will develop on Lake
Victoria within the next 5 years, that there will be substantial improvements to the rail
service to Mwanza, and that the public ports will suffer no further loss of market share to
the private ports, some of which are closely linked to shipping services or fish landing
activities.

2013 2018 2023 2028
High forecast ('000 tons)
Dry cargo
Mwanza South 541 833 1,114 1,491
Mwanza North 152 185 225 273
Bukoba 38 46 56 68
Kemondo Bay 32 38 47 57
Nansio 19 23 28 34
Liquid bulks
Mwanza South 40 51 65 84
Musoma 20 26 33 42
Total 842 1,202 1,569 2,050
Low forecast ('000 tons)
Dry cargo
Mwanza South 170 228 305 408
Mwanza North 56 52 49 49
Bukoba 25 20 15 10
Kemondo Bay 20 15 10 5
Nansio 20 26 33 42
Liquid bulks
Mwanza South 36 42 48 56
Musoma 18 21 24 28
Total 345 403 484 597
Lake Victoria Traffic Forecasts for Major TPA Ports (‘000 tons)

Mwanza South
The existing link span for rail wagon ferries is sufficient and does not require expansion.
Rehabilitation of the wooden mooring is required.

Container operations are expected to be introduced on Lake Victoria in a coordinated
effort between private shipping lines and Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya ports. Break
bulk and container operations can best be organized as a multi-purpose terminal, with
one berth used for containers and one for break bulk handling. Some additional land for
break bulk storage and container stacking adjacent to the existing port will be required.

Ship building and repair facilities could be further developed on the northern side of the
port in combination with the existing floating docks and ship building activities.

Although the volumes are small, a liquid bulk jetty could be constructed on the south
side of the link span to separate liquid bulk handling from general cargo operations. This

February 2009 - xxvi - Final Report

should be built around 2018, when occupancy of the multipurpose terminal becomes
higher.

A development scenario for Mwanza South port is shown below.

Mwanza
South Port

Ship building
Floating repair
docks

General cargo
terminal

Container
terminal

Rail link span

Liquid bulk jetty

Port development scenario Mwanza South port

Mwanza North
Mwanza North Port is located close to the city centre, and is mostly used for passenger
vessels and local cargo. Dredging at both berths is urgently required to allow alongside
mooring of the ferries.

There are longer-term plans for a new passenger terminal, which could include shops, a
bar/restaurant and other commercial developments, and a new Ro-Ro berth suitable for
larger vessels. A potential development plan for Mwanza North port is shown below.

Final Report - xxvii - February 2009

Mwanza
North Port

Roro
Pier

Passenger
terminal

Kamanga
ferries

Development of Mwanza North Port

Bukoba
The port area is completely surrounded by urban development. It is more popular than
nearby Kemondo Bay for passengers and local cargo because it is located in the city.
However port expansion will require some resettlement of houses and/or a redesign of
the current port area. A possible layout of the port expansion is shown below.

New
berth
New
berths

Existing
berths

Port area

Relocated
warehouses

Development of Bukoba Port

February 2009 - xxviii - Final Report

Kemondo Bay
Kemondo Bay depends largely on the performance of TRL and the Lake ferry wagons.
Unfortunately, neither are performing well at present. The wagon ferry will continue to
call Kemondo Bay, but because Bukoba is the preferred port for passengers and local
cargo, the development potential for Kemondo port is considered to be low. Significant
investments are unlikely to be justified.

Nansio
The existing pier must be modified to allow proper mooring of the vessel and level
(dis)embarkation and (un)loading. This would require extension of the pier, dredging or
lowering of the existing pier. A floating pontoon could also be considered.

Musoma
Because of the good road connection to Mwanza, the potential for port development in
Musoma is low. Construction of the Arusha – Musoma railway line would provide an
opportunity for further development, but it is not likely that this will happen soon.

Lake Victoria 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28
Mwanza South Port
Purchase container handling   Development of container
equipment shipping could enhance trade
Relocate rail yard  Area required for other port
development
Expansion shipbuilding &  Strategic investment to promote
repair facilities lake transport, private financing
Develop new oil jetty  Improved safety
Mwanza North Port
Initiate dredging program  Urgently required
Develop new Ro-Ro berth and  Requirements need to be
passenger terminal substantiated
Bukoba
Develop additional quay  Requirements need to be
substantiated
Kemondo Bay
No action
Nansio
Modify existing berth to allow 
level (dis)embarkation and
cargo handling
Musoma
No action

Final Report - xxix - February 2009

IX – Lake Tanganyika

The Lake Tanganyika ports handle traffic for DR Congo, parts of Zambia, Burundi and
(less directly) Rwanda. Because of the recent history of civil disturbances, the traffic
has begun to grow again only recently, and its full potential is difficult to estimate. As a
result, the traffic forecasts for Kigoma and Kasanga shown below are indicative.

2013 2018 2023 2028
Kigoma
Local 38 74 104 155
Imports 46 957 1,342 1,883
Exports 134 461 647 907
Total 218 1,492 2,093 2,945
Kasanga
Total 40 100 197 305
Kigoma
Local 24 38 53 68
Imports 30 506 716 1,004
Exports 113 305 422 582
Total 167 849 1,191 1,654
Kasanga
Total 27 40 53 76
Lake Tanganyika Traffic Forecasts for Major TPA Ports (‘000 tons)

Kigoma
As in the case of Mwanza, the traffic forecasts for Kigoma assume substantial
improvements to the TRL rail service from Dar es Salaam. The high forecast is very
ambitious, and market developments must be closely monitored to ensure the supply of
new port facilities does not run too far ahead of the growth in demand.

In the high forecast berth requirements reach 1,130m in 2028, compared with the 300m
available now. The best area for expansion is on the North-East side of the port, where
land can be reclaimed along the railway line to create a 700m quay and terminal area.

The long-term port development plan is shown below.

February 2009 - xxx - Final Report

0 500 m

Possible future
expansion

Kigoma port Break Bulk /
Containers

Development potential of Kigoma

Kasanga
The forecast for Kasanga indicates a volume of 76,000 tons in 2028, which is conditional
on the improvement of road access. Using mechanized handling this volume can easily
be handled on one berth using one crane.

Lake Tanganyika
2009-11 2012-18 2019-28
Kigoma
Upgrading of the roads 
- Nyankanazi to Kigoma
- Mpanda, Uvinza to Kigoma
- Tunduma to Sanga &
Kasanga
Phased development of berths   Demand is uncertain,
and terminal area development only when
justified by committed cargo.
Kasanga
Hinterland connection  Under development.
Prerequisite for further port
development.
Develop additional handling 
facilities

Final Report - xxxi - February 2009

X – Lake Nyasa

Port development on Lake Nyasa is dependent on the ability of the Mtwara Corridor to
compete with the Nacala Corridor (Mozambique) for Malawi’s foreign trade; the growth
of local/regional commerce; and the upgrading of Lakes shipping services which are
currently operated mainly by Malawi companies.

The cargo forecast for the main Lake Nyasa ports is shown below.

2013 2018 2023 2028
Itungi / Kiwira 144 183 229 292
Mbamba Bay 25 405 680 1,102
Itungi / Kiwira 84 110 142 171
Mbamba Bay 15 30 76 136
Lake Nyasa Traffic Forecasts for Major TPA Ports(‘000 tons)

Itungi / Kiwira
A choice between Kiwira and Itungi should be made to focus port development in this
part of the lake. Itungi port is faced with continuous sedimentation problems, which will
result in high maintenance dredging costs. Development at Kiwira is expected to be a
better solution provided that the road connection to the site is improved.

The high forecast 292,000 tons in 2028 would require operations to be mechanised,
using two mobile cranes shared between two berths (120m in total). Each crane has a
typical annual capacity of 220,000 tons.

Mbamba Bay
The high forecast shows a potential cargo of 1.1 million tons through Mbamba Bay, split
between dry bulks and break bulk. Depending on the commodity and the type of
mechanization selected, the capacity of a mechanized dry bulk terminal using one
(un)loader would be sufficient to handle the dry bulk traffic. Handling of break bulk would
require two or three berths and mobile cranes, depending on vessel sizes and crane
capacity used. Sufficient area is reported to be available near Mbamba Bay port for
these expansions.

Because development at Mbamba Bay is closely linked to the Mtwara Corridor, planning
responsibility should be transferred to the Working Group proposed for Mtwara Port.

February 2009 - xxxii - Final Report

Summary of Projects Outside of Dar es Salaam/Bagamoyo/Mwambani Bay

The projects in the smaller coastal ports and manned lake ports are less well developed
than those in Dar es Salaam, Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay, which makes it difficult to
estimate their costs and prioritise their timing. This is something which needs to be done
fairly quickly, by:
• Setting up a permanent planning organization (the Mtwara Port Working Group)
which would coordinate developments at Mtwara and Mbamba Bay with those
taking place elsewhere in the Mtwara Corridor.
• Commissioning more detailed studies for the two most important projects, namely
the expansion/modernization of Mwanza South and Kigoma.
• Verifying the accuracy of existing cargo statistics for the Lakes ports and minor
coastal ports, and expanding their scope.
• Continuing discussions with potential private investors.
• Consulting with local communities about some of the smaller or less certain projects
(Kilindoni, Mwanza North, Bukoba, Kiwira)

All of the projects identified by this study are dependent on continuous improvements to
the road and rail networks. The Ministry of Infrastructure Development has a crucial role
to play in co-ordinating all of the necessary infrastructure investments, and fast-tracking
the projects which are most urgently required.

Final Report - xxxiii - February 2009

February 2009 - xxxiv - Final Report

CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

I INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................I.1
I.1 GENERAL ...........................................................................................I.1
I.2 OVERVIEW OF TANZANIA PORT SECTOR.....................................I.2
I.3 PROJECT METHODOLOGY ..............................................................I.5
I.4 CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT .........................................................I.7

II PERSPECTIVE ON NATIONAL PORT DEVELOPMENT......................................II.1
II.1 NATIONAL TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE................................II.1
II.1.1 Railways .............................................................................................II.2
II.1.1.1 Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (TAZARA).................................II.2
II.1.1.2 Tanzania Railways Limited (TRL) ......................................................II.4
II.1.1.3 Isaka inland port .................................................................................II.6
II.1.1.4 New rail links ......................................................................................II.6
II.1.2 Roads .................................................................................................II.8
II.1.3 Pipelines...........................................................................................II.10
II.2 TANZANIA DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS ....................................II.12
II.2.1 Tanga Corridor .................................................................................II.12
II.2.2 Central Corridor................................................................................II.12
II.2.3 Mtwara Corridor................................................................................II.14
II.3 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ZONES............................................II.16
II.4 URBAN DEVELOPMENT ................................................................II.18
II.5 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS.........................................II.19
II.5.1 Introduction on Environmental Assessment.....................................II.19
II.5.2 Potential environmental impacts of port development .....................II.20
II.5.3 Possible mitigation measures ..........................................................II.21
II.6 COMPETITIVE POSITION OF TANZANIAN PORTS......................II.22
II.6.1 Introduction.......................................................................................II.22
II.6.2 Kenya ...............................................................................................II.23
II.6.2.1 Port of Mombasa ..............................................................................II.23
II.6.2.2 Lamu Port.........................................................................................II.29
II.6.3 Mozambique.....................................................................................II.30
II.6.3.1 Port of Nacala...................................................................................II.30
II.6.3.2 Port of Beira, Mozambique...............................................................II.34
II.6.4 South Africa......................................................................................II.38
II.6.4.1 Port of Durban ..................................................................................II.38
II.6.5 Other Potential Competitive Ports....................................................II.41
II.6.5.1 Namibia ............................................................................................II.41
II.6.5.2 Angola ..............................................................................................II.41
II.6.6 Summary ..........................................................................................II.41

Final Report - xxxv - February 2009

II.6.7 SWOT Analysis DSM versus Regional Competitive Ports.............. II.43
II.6.8 Transhipment Market....................................................................... II.44
II.6.8.1 Port Louis, Mauritius........................................................................ II.44
II.6.8.2 South Africa ..................................................................................... II.44
II.7 BASIS FOR TRAFFIC FORECASTS .............................................. II.44
II.7.1 Overview of past trends................................................................... II.45
II.7.2 Drivers of port traffic growth ............................................................ II.49
II.7.2.1 Tanzania Economic Growth ............................................................ II.50
II.7.2.2 Agriculture, Forests and Fisheries................................................... II.52
II.7.2.3 Energy ............................................................................................. II.52
II.7.2.4 Transit Traffic................................................................................... II.60
II.8 VISION ON PORT DEVELOPMENT............................................... II.67
II.8.1 Shipping developments ................................................................... II.67
II.8.2 Port management models ............................................................... II.68
II.8.3 Port development ............................................................................ II.70
II.8.4 Port logistics .................................................................................... II.72
II.8.5 ICDs................................................................................................. II.73
II.8.6 Plan period ...................................................................................... II.74

III DAR ES SALAAM ................................................................................................. III.1
III.1 PORT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................... III.1
III.1.1 General description .......................................................................... III.1
III.1.2 Navigational access.......................................................................... III.2
III.1.2.1 Entrance channel.............................................................................. III.2
III.1.2.2 Tides, wind and waves ..................................................................... III.4
III.1.2.3 Vessel statistics .............................................................................. III.11
III.1.3 Port infrastructure ........................................................................... III.13
III.1.3.1 Berths 1-11 ..................................................................................... III.13
III.1.3.2 Storage areas ................................................................................. III.18
III.1.3.3 Container yards .............................................................................. III.19
III.1.3.4 Grain terminal ................................................................................. III.25
III.1.3.5 Kurasini Oil Jetty (KOJ) .................................................................. III.26
III.1.3.6 SPM ................................................................................................ III.26
III.1.3.7 Dockyards....................................................................................... III.27
III.1.3.8 Lighter wharf ................................................................................... III.28
III.1.4 Terminal operations........................................................................ III.28
III.1.4.1 Berth occupancy............................................................................. III.29
III.1.4.2 Liquid bulk handling........................................................................ III.30
III.1.4.3 Dry bulk handling............................................................................ III.31
III.1.4.4 Break bulk handling ........................................................................ III.32
III.1.4.5 Motor vehicles ................................................................................ III.35
III.1.4.6 Containers ...................................................................................... III.36
III.1.5 Land access and infrastructure ...................................................... III.39
III.1.5.1 Rail.................................................................................................. III.39
III.1.5.2 Road Access .................................................................................. III.41
III.1.6 Ongoing development projects....................................................... III.43

February 2009 - xxxvi - Final Report

III.2 FORECASTS ..................................................................................III.46
III.2.1 Liquid Bulks .....................................................................................III.46
III.2.2 Dry Bulks .........................................................................................III.50
III.2.3 Break Bulk Cargo ............................................................................III.53
III.2.4 Motor Vehicle Forecasts .................................................................III.56
III.2.5 Containers .......................................................................................III.57
III.2.6 Passengers .....................................................................................III.66
III.2.7 Fish..................................................................................................III.67
III.2.8 Summary .........................................................................................III.72
III.3 PORT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................III.73
III.3.1 Nautical requirements .....................................................................III.73
III.3.2 Terminal requirements ....................................................................III.74
III.3.2.1 Liquid bulk .......................................................................................III.75
III.3.2.2 Dry bulk ...........................................................................................III.76
III.3.2.3 Break Bulk .......................................................................................III.77
III.3.2.4 Motor vehicles .................................................................................III.78
III.3.2.5 Containers .......................................................................................III.78
III.3.2.6 Passengers .....................................................................................III.80
III.3.2.7 Fish..................................................................................................III.81
III.3.2.8 Summary .........................................................................................III.82
III.4 DAR ES SALAAM – DEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING
FOOTPRINT....................................................................................III.83
III.4.1 Liquid bulk .......................................................................................III.84
III.4.2 Dry bulk ...........................................................................................III.88
III.4.3 Break bulk .......................................................................................III.89
III.4.4 Motor vehicles .................................................................................III.89
III.4.5 Containers .......................................................................................III.90
III.4.6 Passengers .....................................................................................III.91
III.4.7 Dhows / lighters...............................................................................III.91
III.4.8 Kurasini logistic area .......................................................................III.91
III.4.9 Traffic circulation .............................................................................III.91
III.4.10 Inland Container Depots .................................................................III.92
III.4.11 Dry docking facilities .......................................................................III.93
III.5 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................III.95
III.6 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ..........................................................III.97

IV NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................. IV.1
IV.1 EXPANSION POSSIBILITIES.......................................................... IV.1
IV.1.1 Expansion in Dar es Salaam............................................................ IV.1
IV.1.2 Alternative port locations .................................................................. IV.3
IV.1.2.1 Potential port development locations ............................................... IV.3
IV.1.2.2 Manza............................................................................................... IV.6
IV.1.2.3 Mwambani ........................................................................................ IV.8
IV.1.2.4 Bagamoyo ...................................................................................... IV.10
IV.1.2.5 Kilwa Masoko ................................................................................. IV.13
IV.1.2.6 Mtwara............................................................................................ IV.13
IV.1.3 Comparison of potential container port development sites ............ IV.13

Final Report - xxxvii - February 2009

Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100

Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100

Semelhante a Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100 (20)

Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100