DOCSLIB.ORG

Revitalization of Urban Waterfronts in Port Cities : the Case of New York and Boston

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revitalization of Urban Waterfronts in Port Cities : the Case of New York and Boston University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2003 Revitalization of urban waterfronts in port cities : the case of New York and Boston Francisca Ramalhosa Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Recommended Citation Ramalhosa, Francisca, "Revitalization of urban waterfronts in port cities : the case of New York and Boston. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2003. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/5282 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Francisca Ramalhosa entitled "Revitalization of urban waterfronts in port cities : the case of New York and Boston." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Planning. James Spencer, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Francisca Ramalhosa entitled "Revitalization of Urban Waterfronts in portcities- the Case of New York and Boston." I have examined the final paper copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Planning, with a major in Planning. J We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Acceptance for the Council: REVITALIZATION OF URBAN WATERFRONTS IN PORT CITIES THE CASE OF NEW YORK AND BOSTON A Thesis Presented for the Master of Science in Planning Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Francisca Ramalhosa May 2003 Acknowledgments I wish to thank all those who helped me complete my Master of Science degree in Planning. I would like to thank Professor Spencer for his valuable guidance without which this thesis would not be possible. I would like to thank Professor Shupp for introducing me to various urban design concepts which had a strong influence in my work. I would like to thank Dr. Zanetta for all the suggestions and advice. Thanks to all for being in my committee and for the time spent with me. I would like to thank all in the Department of Urban and Regional Planning for all the support given me during the two years I stayed in Knoxville. Lastly, I would like to thank my parents, my sister, and Miguel, whose encouragement and support made this work possible. iii Abstract The purpose of this study was to study urban revitalization in old port areas in the United States, which for various reasons are no longer used for port activities, specifically the cases of New York and Boston. In the 1960s, changes in port technology and transportation systems led to major transformationsin port activities. Waterfronts that for years were used exclusively for port activities were now vacant. In this context, New York and Boston are two major port cities that succeeded when planning for their waterfronts. This thesis studied the major technological changes that led to vacant harbor land and then the importance of that land for the city and, therefore, the importance for revitalization. The projects adopted by New York-Battery Park City-and Boston-Waterfront and Faneuill Hall area­ were analyzed in order to come to some conclusions about what is possible to do in waterfronts. These two cases are viewed as successful. This thesis explains why. Although there is not an exact formula for redevelopment of waterfronts, it was possible to draw some guidelines. V TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION------------------1 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY-------------1 METHODOLOGY----------------3 CHAPTER II CHANGES IN PORT ACTIVITIES THAT LED TO VACANT HARBOR LAND---5 CHAPTER Ill IMPORTANCE OF THE WATERFRONTS FOR PORT CITIES-------15 CHAPTER IV THE CASE OF NEW YORK---------------25 BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PORT OF NEW YORK --------25 GEOGRAPHY/URBAN CONTEXT------------28 BEFORE THE MASTER PLAN------------30 THE MASTER PLAN---------------37 CRITIQUE-----------------45 CHAPTER V THE CASE OF BOSTON----------------49 BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PORT OF BOSTON---------49 GEOGRAPHY/URBAN CONTEXT------------52 BEFORE THE PLAN---------------53 THE PLAN -----------------55 vii CRITIQUE-----------------63 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION------------------71 BIBLIOGRAPHY------------------77 VITA---------------------81 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 -Typical evolution of a port................................................................................. 7 2- Stages of cityportevolution ............................................................................. 10 3 -Modern container ship..................................................................................... 12 4- Spatial change of port activities in New York in 1850 to 1990 ......................... 27 5- Satellite view of Manhattan ............................................................................. 28 6 -Lower Manhattan ............................................................................................ 29 7-Aerial view of Downtown Manhattan ............................................................... 29 8-The New York City Department of Marine and Aviation 1962 Master Plan for Battery Park City ................................................................................................... 30 9-The World Trade Center under construction with landfillin the Hudson River 32 10- Harrison's Plan for Battery Park City ............................................................. 33 11 -Lower Manhattan Plan Principle, 1966 .......................................................... 34 12- Master Plan for Battery Park City, 1969 ........................................................ 36 13 -Battery Park City Plan, 1979 ......................................................................... 38 14 -Differentviews of the World Financial Center ........................... � ................... 41 15 -Different uses offered by BatteryPark City .................................................. .48 16 -Harbor areas in Boston ................................................................................. 51 17-Study area, Waterfront and Faneuil Hall area ............................................... 52 18-Evolution of the landfillwork, 1630, 1710, 1860.. .......................................... 53 19 -Quincy, North, and South Market Buildings, with Faneuil Hall in the background, 1827 ................................................................................................. 54 ix 20 - Plan forthe Waterfront and Faneuil Hall ....................................................... 56 21 - Goals and actions proposed by the Plan for the Downtown Waterfront- Faneuil Hall Renewal Plan . .................................................................................. 57 22 - New England Aquarium ................................................................................ 59 23 - Faneuil Hall ................................................................................................... 61 24 - Waterfront Park Avenue under construction ................................................. 62 25 - 'The Boston everyone knows' drawn by Kevin Lynch ................................... 65 26- Schematic drawing of downtown Boston ...................................................... 65 27 - Housing development in the waterfront ........................................................ 67 28 - Differentviews of the Rowe's Wharf ............................................................. 69 29 - View of Boston's waterfront ......................................................................... 69 30 - Downtown seen from the waterfront ............................................................. 69 X Crossing this landscape my dream of an infinite port And the colour of flowers is transparent of the sails of great ships That leave the quay dragging as shadows through the waters Into the sun the forms of those ancient trees ... The port I dream of is sombre and pallid And the landscape is bright sunlight on this side ... But in my spirit this day's sun is a sombre port And the ships that leave this portare these treesin the sun... Doubly free, I leave the landscape below... The outline of the quay is the clear calm road Which lifts and rises like a wall, And the ships pass through the trunks of trees With a verticalhorizontality, And let fall the cables in water through leaves one by one within... I do not know who I dream myself ... Suddenly all the water of the sea of the portis transparent I see the bottom, like an enormous print that was shining there, All this landscape, torn from the tree, the road burningin that port. And the shadow of a ship more ancient than the passing port Between my dream of the portand my view of this landscape And it comes close to me, and enters into me, And passes to the other side of my soul... (... ) Fernando Pessoa xi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Urban Ports have changed in recent years because of changes in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Boston Tea Party Grade 4
    Sample Item Set The Boston Tea Party Grade 4 Standard 7 – Government and Political Systems Students explain the structure and purposes of government and the foundations of the United States’ democratic system using primary and secondary sources. 4.7.2 Explain the significance of key ideas contained in the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the Bill of Rights SOCIAL STUDIES SAMPLE ITEM SET GRADE 4 1 Sample Item Set The Boston Tea Party Grade 4 Use the three sources and your knowledge of social studies to answer questions 1–3. Source 1 Boston Tea Party Engraving This engraving from 1789 shows the events of December 16, 1773. Dressed as American Indians, colonists dumped nearly 90,000 pounds of British East India Company tea into Boston Harbor in protest against the Tea Act. SOCIAL STUDIES SAMPLE ITEM SET GRADE 4 2 Sample Item Set The Boston Tea Party Grade 4 Source 2 Writing of the Declaration of Independence This picture shows Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson writing the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence with help from other members of the Continental Congress. SOCIAL STUDIES SAMPLE ITEM SET GRADE 4 3 Sample Item Set The Boston Tea Party Grade 4 Source 3 Timeline of Events Leading to American Revolution Year Event 1764 Britian passes the Sugar Act on Colonists. 1765 Britian passes the Stamp Act on Colonists. 1767 Britian passes Townshend Acts on Colonists. 1770 Boston Massacre occurs when the British Army kills five Colonists. 1773 Colonists protest at the Boston Tea Party.
    [Show full text]
  • V. Inland Ports Planningand Cargos Handling Opera Tion*
    V. INLAND PORTS PLANNINGAND CARGOS HANDLING OPERA TION* Inland Ports Planning General The term inland waterway port or an inland waterway terminal conveys the idea of an end point. Indeed, traditionally, ports were perceived as end points of the transport system whereby water transport of cargoeswas either originated or terminated. However, from a broader point of view, the one encompassingthe so-called "c~ain of transport", ports or terminals are neither starting nor ending points; they are simply the intermediate points where cargoesare transferred between the links in the transport chain. The emphasis on the transfer function in this introductory section is made since: (a) Ports' main function is to move the cargo and to avoid accumulating and damaging it; (b) In order to efficiently fulfill their transfer function, ports or terminals have to possess convenient access(rail and road) to the connecting modes of transport. broader definition ora port seems especially appropriate for our discussion on inland waterway transportation (IWT). IWT is part of the domestic transportation system which also includes rail and road transpiration. IWT, unlike rail and road transportation, can oQly connectpoints which are locatea on the waterway network. Consequently, in most caSes othercomplementary land transportation modes are required for the entire origin-to-destinationtransport. In other words, since in most casesthe IWT cargo does not originate or terminate atthe port site itself, the main function of the inland port is to transfer the cargo between IWTvessels, trains, and trucks. The inland ports are important for the economic development of a country. The inland port, therail, the road and the seaport are equally important.
    [Show full text]
  • Potomac River Transporation Plan.Indd
    Potomac River Transportation Framework Plan Washington DC, Virginia, Maryland Water transportation is the most economical, energy effi cient and environmentally friendly transportation that exists for major cities today. The vast river network that was the original lifeblood of the Washington, DC region remains underutilized. The Potomac River Transportation Framework Plan is a comprehensive master plan outlining a water based transportation network on the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers in Washington, DC, Maryland and Virginia, for commuters, tourists and the federal government (defense and civilian evacuations). This plan outlines an enormous opportunity to expand the transportation network at a fraction of the cost (both in dollars and environmental impact) of other transportation modes. The plan includes intermodal connections to the existing land based public transportation system. See Detail Plan GEORGETOWN REGIONAL PLAN KENNEDY CENTER RFK STADIUM NATIONAL MALL THE WHARF BASEBALL The plan to the left GEORGETOWN STADIUM NAVY YARD PENTAGON BUZZARD POINT/ SOCCER STADIUM POPLAR POINT illustrates the reach of FORT MCNAIR JBAB the transporation plan KENNEDY CENTER that includes Virginia, NATIONAL AIRPORT RFK STADIUM JBAB / ST. ELIZABETHS SOUTH Maryland, and the DAINGERFIELD ISLAND NATIONAL MALL GENON SITE District of Columbia, CANAL CENTER ROBINSON TERMINAL NORTH fully integrated with THE OLD TOWN- KING STREET existing land based WHARF ROBINSON TERMINAL SOUTH BASEBALL PENTAGON STADIUM NAVY YARD JONES POINT transporation. NATIONAL HARBOR POPLAR POINT BUZZARD POINT/SOCCER STADIUM FORT MCNAIR JBAB A TERMINAL ‘A’ Both Plans illustrate B TERMINAL ‘B’ C TERMINAL ‘C’ potential routes and landings for D TERMINAL ‘D’ MOUNT VERNON FORT WASHINGTON Commuters, Tourists NATIONAL AIRPORT and the Federal JBAB / ST.
    [Show full text]
  • Marinas of Anne Arundel County
    Marina Inventory Of Anne Arundel County 2018 Office of Planning & Zoning Long Range Planning Division Marina Inventory Of Anne Arundel County July 2018 Anne Arundel County Office of Planning and Zoning Long Range Planning Division ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Office of Planning and Zoning Philip R. Hager, Planning and Zoning Officer Lynn Miller, Assistant Planning and Zoning Officer Project Team Long Range Planning Division Cindy Carrier, Planning Administrator Mark Wildonger, Senior Planner Patrick Hughes, Senior Planner Andrea Gerhard, Planner II Special Thanks to VisitAnnapolis.org for the use of the cover photo showing Herrington Harbor. Table of Contents Background Marinas Commercial Marinas Community Marinas Impacts of Marinas Direct Benefit Census Data and Economic Impact Other Waterfront Sites in the County Appendix A – Listing of Marinas in Anne Arundel County, 2018 Appendix B – Location Maps of Marinas in Anne Arundel County, 2018 Office of Planning & Zoning Long Range Planning Division Marinas of Anne Arundel County Background Anne Arundel County has approximately 533 miles of shoreline along the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. This resource provides the opportunity for the marine industry to flourish, providing services to the commercial and recreational boaters. In 1980, the first Boating and Marina Study was completed in the County. At that time, the County had 57 marinas and 1,767 boat slips.1 Since that time the County has experienced significant growth in all aspects of its economy including the marine industry. As of June 2018, there are a total of 303 marinas containing at total of 12,035 boat slips (Table 1). This report was prepared as an update to the 1997 and 2010 marina inventories2 and includes an updated inventory and mapping of marinas in the County.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Massachusetts Freight Issues and Priorities
    Identification of Massachusetts Freight Issues and Priorities Prepared for the Massachusetts Freight Advisory Council By Massachusetts Highway Department Argeo Paul Cellucci Jane Swift Kevin J. Sullivan Matthew J. Amorello Governor Lieutenant Governor Secretary Commissioner And Louis Berger and Associates Identification of Massachusetts Freight Issues and Priorities Massachusetts Freight Advisory Council Chairman Robert Williams Project Manager and Report Author Mark Berger, AICP Project Support (Consultant) Adel Foz Wendy Fearing Chris Orphanides Rajesh Salem The preparation of this document was supported and funded by the Massachusetts Highway Department and Federal Highway Administration through Agreement SPR 97379. November 1999 Identification of Massachusetts Freight Issues and Priorities Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................1-1 Purpose...........................................................................................................................................................1-1 Massachusetts Freight Advisory Council.........................................................................................................1-1 Contents of Report..........................................................................................................................................1-1 CHAPTER 2: SOLICITATION OF FREIGHT ISSUES..................................................................................2-1
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Transportation Research and Education Center Tier 1 University Transportation Center U.S. Department of Transportation
    MARITIME TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER TIER 1 UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION CENTER U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Transit-Oriented Development and Ports: National Analysis across the United States and a Case Study of New Orleans Project Start Date: October 2013 Project End Date: September 2017 Principal Investigator: John L. Renne, Ph.D., AICP Director and Associate Professor, Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions School of Urban and Regional Planning Florida Atlantic University Building 44, Room 284 777 Glades Road Boca Raton, Florida 33431 561-297-4281 [email protected] Honorary Research Associate Transport Studies Unit, School of Geography and the Environment University of Oxford Final Report Date: November 2017 FINAL RESEARCH REPORT Prepared for: Maritime Transportation Research and Education Center University of Arkansas 4190 Bell Engineering Center Fayetteville, AR 72701 479-575-6021 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Transportation under Grant Award Number DTRT13-G-UTC50. The work was conducted through the Maritime Transportation Research and Education Center (MarTREC) at the University of Arkansas. In partnership with and as a member of the MarTREC consortium, this project was funded through the University of New Orleans Transportation Institute, where Dr. John L. Renne was employed until the end of 2015. Dr. Renne would like to acknowledge Tara Tolford and Estefania Mayorga for their efforts on the data analysis and assistance with the report. He is grateful to all of the interviewees who donated their time for the benefit of this study. Finally, Dr. Renne wishes to thank James Amdal for his expertise and assistance on this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Director of Airline Route Development
    About Massport The Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport) is an independent public authority in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that is governed by a seven member Board. Massport is financially self-sustaining and contributes to the regional economy through the operation of three airports—Boston Logan International Airport, Hanscom Field and Worcester Regional Airport; the Port of Boston’s cargo and cruise facilities; and property management/real estate development in Boston. Massport’s mission is to connect Massachusetts and New England to the world, safely, securely and efficiently, never forgetting our commitment to our neighbors who live and work around our ports and facilities. Massport is an integral component of a national and worldwide transportation network, operating New England’s most important air and sea transportation facilities that connect passengers and cargo with hundreds of markets around the globe. Massport continually works to modernize its infrastructure to enhance customer service, improve operations and optimize land use, and has invested more than $4 billion over the past decade in coordination with its transportation partners. Massport also strives to be a good neighbor closer to home. Working in concert with government, community and civic leaders throughout Massachusetts and New England, Massport is an active participant in efforts that improve the quality of life for residents living near Massport’s facilities and who make sacrifices every day so that Massport can deliver important transportation services to families and businesses throughout New England. Boston Logan International Airport Boston Logan International Airport (BOS) is New England’s largest transportation center and an economic engine that generates $13.3 billion in economic activity each year.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Analysis
    Utah Inland Port - Feasibility Analysis prepared for World Trade Center - Utah Utah Governor's Office of Economic Development prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc Global Logistics Development Partners, Inc www.camsys.com report Utah Inland Port - Feasibility Analysis prepared for World Trade Center - Utah & Utah Governor's Office of Economic Development prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 115 South LaSalle Street, Suite 2200 Chicago, IL 60603 Global Logistics Development Partners 14362 N. Frank Lloyd Wright Blvd. Suite 1000 Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA date December 29, 2017 Utah Inland Port - Feasibility Analysis Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 2-7 Summary of Recommendations: .............................................................. 2-8 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 2-14 2.0 Inland Port Typology ....................................................................................... 2-17 2.1 What is an Inland Port?............................................................................ 2-17 2.2 Where are Existing Inland Ports? ........................................................... 2-17 Inland Port Types ..................................................................................... 2-17 Port Profile: DuisburgPort ....................................................................... 2-19 Port Profile: CentrePort Canada
    [Show full text]
  • Port of Houston Authority
    Port of Houston Authority Tariff No. 14 January 1, 2020 Additional Rates, Rules, and Regulations Governing the Fentress Bracewell Barbours Cut Container Terminal EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 111 East Loop North - Houston, Texas 77029 USA P. O. Box 2562 - Houston, Texas 77252-2562 Phone (713) 670-2400 - Fax (713) 670-2564 Barbours Cut Container Terminal 1515 East Barbours Cut Boulevard – La Porte, Texas 77571 Phone (281) 470-1800 - Fax (281) 470-5580 PORT OF HOUSTON TARIFF NO. 14 Page No. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION ONE: DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS SUBJECT SUBRULE PAGE NO. Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ 048 ......................................... 11 Agent or Vessel Agent .............................................................................................. 001 .......................................... 6 Baplie ....................................................................................................................... 002 ........................................... 6 Berth ......................................................................................................................... 003 ........................................... 6 Bonded Storage ....................................................................................................... 004 ........................................... 6 Checking .................................................................................................................. 005
    [Show full text]
  • Final Port Planning and Investment Toolkit
    Port Planning and Investment Toolkit Appendices Port Planning & Investment Toolkit APPENDICES Glossary of Terms Additional Bonds Test - The financial test, Asset - Any item of economic value, either sometimes referred to as a “parity test,” that must physical in nature (such as land) or a right to be satisfied under the bond contract securing ownership, expressed in cost or some other value, outstanding revenue bonds or other types of which an individual or entity owns. 2 bonds as a condition to issuing additional bonds. Asset-Backed Debt - Debt having hard asset Typically, the test would require that historical security such as a crane lease or property revenues (plus, in some cases, future estimated mortgage, in addition to the security of pledged revenues) exceed projected debt service revenues. requirements for both the outstanding issue and the proposed issue by a certain ratio.1 Availability Payment - A means of compensating a private concessionaire for its responsibility to Advance Refunding - For purposes of certain tax design, construct, operate, and/or maintain an and securities laws and regulations, a refunding in infrastructure facility for a set period of time. which the refunded issue remains outstanding for These payments are made by a public project a period of more than 90 days after the issuance of sponsor (a port authority, for example) based on the refunding issue.1 particular project milestones or facility Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) - Taxation based performance standards.2 on an alternative method of calculating federal Best and Final Offers (BAFO) - In government income tax under the Internal Revenue Code. contracting, a vendor’s response to a contracting Interest on certain private activity bonds is subject officer’s request that vendors submit their last and to the AMT.1 most attractive bids to secure a contract for a Amortization - The process of paying the principal particular project.
    [Show full text]
  • The South Boston Haul Road – RAIL CORRIDOR
    Intermodal Corridor To the Port of Boston: The South Boston Haul Road – RAIL CORRIDOR Frank S. DeMasi RTAC Freight Committee November 2009 History of the South Boston Haul Road In the 1850s, the South Boston Haul Road (SBHR) route began to be used for railroad access to Boston from south of the growing city. Before 1900, it was made a two-track, depressed route with 12 overhead bridges. Extensive freight yards and maintenance facilities were constructed near the South Boston waterfront. The present MBTA Red Line subway tunnel, constructed in 1913 along Dorchester Avenue, crosses the cut on a diagonal under a bridge. The top of the tunnel is about 0.6 m (2 feet) below the railroad track on a three-level multimodal structure: passenger subway below freight railroad below highway. The depressed railroad route was widened from two tracks to four by 1920. After the 1940s, passenger service was discontinued and freight service levels declined. The result was that two tracks in the depressed track area and seven yard tracks remained in various levels of deferred maintenance. The other two tracks remained in service for the (usually) daily local freight until the mid-1980s. The route was suggested as a possible multimodal shared-access corridor early in the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) project; community reaction was favorable, and a study of feasibility was authorized in 1987. Rail Facilities Port of Boston Circa 1950 The South Boston Haul Road – RAIL CORRIDOR Property Acquisition During the onset of construction of the Central Artery Tunnel Project, much railroad right-of-way was owned by Conrail, portions owned by Amtrak and Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA).
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Maritime Transport 2012
    UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2012 UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2012 New York and Geneva, 2012 ii REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2012 NOTE The Review of Maritime Transport is a recurrent publication prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat since 1968 with the aim of fostering the transparency of maritime markets and analysing relevant developments. Any factual or editorial corrections that may prove QHFHVVDU\EDVHGRQFRPPHQWVPDGHE\*RYHUQPHQWVZLOOEHUHƅHFWHGLQDFRUULJHQGXPWREHLVVXHGVXEVHTXHQWO\ * * * 6\PEROVRI8QLWHG1DWLRQVGRFXPHQWVDUHFRPSRVHGRIFDSLWDOOHWWHUVFRPELQHGZLWKƄJXUHV8VHRIVXFKDV\PEROLQGLFDWHVD reference to a United Nations document. * * * The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. * * * 0DWHULDOLQWKLVSXEOLFDWLRQPD\EHIUHHO\TXRWHGRUUHSULQWHGEXWDFNQRZOHGJHPHQWLVUHTXHVWHGZLWKUHIHUHQFHWRWKHGRFXPHQW QXPEHU VHHEHORZ $FRS\RIWKHSXEOLFDWLRQFRQWDLQLQJWKHTXRWDWLRQRUUHSULQWVKRXOGEHVHQWWRWKH81&7$'VHFUHWDULDWDWWKH following address: Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland. UNCTAD/RMT/2012 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales no. E.12.II.D.17 ISBN 978-92-1-112860-4 e-ISBN 978-92-1-055950-8 ISSN 0566-7682 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Review of Maritime Transport
    [Show full text]