No more Venice?

[ladylemondrop]

Printed in cruise critic newsletter - http://www.cruisecritic.co.uk/news/news.cfm?ID=5507

 

The Italian Environmental Minister is taking steps to banning cruise ships in the Giudecca Canal. Such a lovely place to sail in and out of - this is sad news, but I guess necessary to protect this delicate environment. :(

[helpthejuggler]

I don't see how using Porto Marghera would resolve the problem.

 

Does this also impact to the ferries that sail into the nearby ferry terminal?

[WELSH WIZARDS]

I can quite see how some local environmentalists are concerned by the big ships, but it will be really sad when we have to miss one of the best sail in or sail out views on the planet.

[excitedofharpenden]

This has been bubbling away for a while and now seems to be reaching a head. I know one of the proposals was for cruise ships to pass the other side of Guidecca island and that would mean the existing cruise terminals at Marittima could still be used, but some dredging would be required. Does anyone know if these proposals include vessels using San Basilio piers? These include smaller ships like those of Azamara.

 

It's such a shame that they have to do this, but inevitable. Venice has way too many tourists anyway.

 

Phil

[Iamthesea]

Glad we went in May. :) The next trip is going to be by land so that we can see some of the nearby areas, like Lake Como. Venice really is too crowded when the ships are in. I'd like to explore without all the tourist.

[yukongold]

If they do limit the passage I join with others in saying that I am glad we had the opportunity to do the sail-in and sail-out before the ban. It truly was a wondrous sight.

[maggie.1008]

Glad we are going in 3 weeks.

[CathyCruises]

This has been bubbling away for a while and now seems to be reaching a head. I know one of the proposals was for cruise ships to pass the other side of Guidecca island and that would mean the existing cruise terminals at Marittima could still be used, but some dredging would be required. Does anyone know if these proposals include vessels using San Basilio piers? These include smaller ships like those of Azamara.

 

It's such a shame that they have to do this, but inevitable. Venice has way too many tourists anyway.

 

Phil

 

There ARE too many tourists!! Our first trip was in mid-November, and I felt sure that would be a good time to travel--NOT! It was jammed, and the bridges along the Guidecca Canal were so crowded that it was a huge struggle to get our selves and our baggage to our hotel.

 

On our next trip, in late October, we stayed in Cannaregio, totally out of the touristy area, and that was a vast improvement. We just avoided the San Marco area as much as possible, but our one day around the Peggy Guggenheim museum was packed as usual.

 

I don't know how they control it (except forbidding cruise ships!) but because it's such a small and concentrated spot, it's way more noticeable than in Rome, or Paris. . .

 

I used to live in a touristy area and my livelihood depended in large part on visitors to the area--but even so, when our tiny town (pop 742) would get so crowded, I just wanted to shout, "GO HOME!"

[Blazerboy]

Sailing out at the end of October...I wonder how "immediate" this will be?

 

Some reports have said that they will do this as soon as an alternate is in place, but who knows.

 

Living in a city that is finally building a decent cruise terminal in downtown, it's hard to think if going to a more industrial area, but I do understand the environmental concerns.

 

I do wonder, however, if cruise lines are being scapegoated, as there have been issues long before these ships arrived in Venice. Cruise ships don't help the situation, I'm sure, but are likely now a popular political target.

 

Venetians have long lamented the tourist trade, as far back as the early 1900's.

 

Andrew

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Forums mobile app

[Aquahound]

Coincidently, this article was printed in today's Key West Citizen newspaper. The story is about cruise ships in both Key West and Venice.

 

http://keysnews.com/node/49802

[Cruising89143]

I don't think that this will or can happen overnight. It will take some planning to move the ships. Also cruise lines such as Carnival Corp give a lot of business to Italy with ship building. Many ships are built nearby. The government will need to handle this move carefully to not upset the apple cart.

 

We cruised in and out of Venice in June plus we stayed two nights. It was one of the most beautiful sail aways to date. We are due to sail in next June on the EQ. The statement about cruise guests not bringing in money is not 100% accurate. We dropped about $1500.00 in our two days in Venice. I know that we were not alone.

[WELSH WIZARDS]

There is maybe an upside to this. ;)

I for one will be very happy to NOT have to use Venice airport to fly into or out of ever again. :rolleyes:

[Cruising89143]

There is maybe an upside to this. ;)

I for one will be very happy to NOT have to use Venice airport to fly into or out of ever again. :rolleyes:

 

Why? We flew in and out of the Marco Polo airport with no issues.

[boogs]

I have been on ships and have been on the shore as these ships enter and leave Venice. They are NOT close to shore like has been claimed. That alleged close pass "salute" by Carnival Sunshine has been discredited.

 

What perplexes me is the worry about any damage caused by a half dozen or less passes by large cruise ships, while there are hundreds, if not thousands, of vaporetto movements every day that are very close to shore and that also create waves that could cause erosion. Sure, the vaporettos aren't as large, but the shear number of them create constant lapping against the buildings and shore instead of less than a half dozen waves per day caused by large ships during the cruising season. Why single out a few passes and let these hundreds of passes uncontested? It appears to be a couple of small but very vocal groups that are pushing for this for their own personal reasons. One of these groups has been linked to a coalition of local transportation companies who have much to gain if cruise passengers would have to be transported to Venice from a nearby port instead of simply walking there from the ships.

 

Another thing I find amusing about the article. It mentions banning the cruise ships from the Grand Canal. Watching a cruise ship trying to navigate the narrow, winding, crowded canal with it's three low bridges would be an amazing sight indeed!!!

[Karynanne]

We are sailing in and out of Venice later this month. I'm grateful for the opportunity to visit this wonderful city.

[Aquahound]

What perplexes me is the worry about any damage caused by a half dozen or less passes by large cruise ships, while there are hundreds, if not thousands, of vaporetto movements every day that are very close to shore and that also create waves that could cause erosion. Sure, the vaporettos aren't as large, but the shear number of them create constant lapping against the buildings and shore instead of less than a half dozen waves per day caused by large ships during the cruising season. Why single out a few passes and let these hundreds of passes uncontested?

 

I don't think it's about the wakes. It's about the amount of water displaced by a passing cruise ship. The passing of a large cruise ship can displace around 70,000 tons of water. Tugs are used to keep the ships in the center of the channel, but a little deviation either way can cause a significant water rise, especially during the time of year in Venice when the tides are really high.

[Big_G]

I have been on ships and have been on the shore as these ships enter and leave Venice. They are NOT close to shore like has been claimed. That alleged close pass "salute" by Carnival Sunshine has been discredited.

 

What perplexes me is the worry about any damage caused by a half dozen or less passes by large cruise ships, while there are hundreds, if not thousands, of vaporetto movements every day that are very close to shore and that also create waves that could cause erosion. Sure, the vaporettos aren't as large, but the shear number of them create constant lapping against the buildings and shore instead of less than a half dozen waves per day caused by large ships during the cruising season. Why single out a few passes and let these hundreds of passes uncontested? It appears to be a couple of small but very vocal groups that are pushing for this for their own personal reasons. One of these groups has been linked to a coalition of local transportation companies who have much to gain if cruise passengers would have to be transported to Venice from a nearby port instead of simply walking there from the ships.

 

Discredited where? The Carnival boards?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[parallax]

Good grief. I just booked the Silhouette for June of 2014 which starts and ends in Venice. It will be interesting to see if this ban goes into effect how it will impact our cruise.

[boogs]

I don't think it's about the wakes. It's about the amount of water displaced by a passing cruise ship. The passing of a large cruise ship can displace around 70,000 tons of water. Tugs are used to keep the ships in the center of the channel, but a little deviation either way can cause a significant water rise, especially during the time of year in Venice when the tides are really high.

 

Keep in mind that the channel the ships take is about 1,000 feet wide - 10 times wider than the ships - and almost twice twice that width near the Doge's Palace, where the most outrage seems to be about. It is NOT the narrow confines of the Grand Canal, as some of these reports claim. This channel is also the same route that the many large ferries use to and from other ports on the Adriatic sea (see the while lines on the image below), but nothing is said about them.

 

[Aquahound]

Discredited where? The Carnival boards?

 

I wasn't even going to address that one, but since you did, I'll add my .02. I've seen the videos and photos and that ship is a lot closer to the bank than ships usually are in that channel. I don't know if they ever proved the allegation of a "salute," but what is fact is, that ship was way too close. Someone screwed up.

[boogs]

Discredited where? The Carnival boards?

 

Nope, from several respected sources, including the harbor pilot and the coast guard.

 

I wasn't even going to address that one, but since you did, I'll add my .02. I've seen the videos and photos and that ship is a lot closer to the bank than ships usually are in that channel. I don't know if they ever proved the allegation of a "salute," but what is fact is, that ship was way too close. Someone screwed up.

 

The ship passed no closer to shore than 70 meters (230 feet) at the point of dispute. The local harbor pilot and the Italian Coast Guard confirmed that, as did the ship’s voyage data recorder. This is the Coast Guard approved route for incoming ships into the port. In my world, facts have more credibility than trumped up claims from a bunch of activists. What appears to be a close pass on videos is due to zoom qualities of the camera lenses, which makes objects appear closer than they actually are. So, contrary to what you may believe, the camera lens does not provide the "facts" that you claim they do.

 

Don't get me wrong - I am not a fan of Carnival, so have no reason to defend them. I just don't like to see fantasy passed on as fact to push an agenda.

 

Much ado about nothing.

[bphman]

I throughly enjoyed our cruise down the Grand Canal with Pavarotti playing in the PA system. It was very special. Mickey Arison's yacht was tied up outside the Danielli and they did a little salute as we passed. I enjoyed it but am also sensitive to the concerns of the people living there.

 

We were last there in July 2008 and it was so crowded that there was no room for the pigeons in Piazza San Marco to land. Venice is a sight to behold but it is quite overrun.

[Happy Cruiser 6143]

 

Living in a city that is finally building a decent cruise terminal in downtown, it's hard to think if going to a more industrial area, but I do understand the environmental concerns.

 

Andrew

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Forums mobile app

 

Andrew, I know this is dreadfully off topic, but I can't resist asking since San Francisco is one of my favorite places. Where are they building the cruise terminal downtown? Does that mean more sailings out of San Francisco? That would be great!

[boogs]

Andrew, I know this is dreadfully off topic, but I can't resist asking since San Francisco is one of my favorite places. Where are they building the cruise terminal downtown? Does that mean more sailings out of San Francisco? That would be great!

 

I live in San Jose, just an hour from the terminal, and have been watching this project, so please forgive me for jumping in and answering for Andrew.

 

The new terminal will still be on the Embarcadero, close to Fisherman's Wharf, the Cannery and Ghirardelli Square. It will be located at Pier 27. The structure is mostly complete, but is currently being used by the America's Cup organization. After the races, more facilities will be added, with a planned opening in Fall of 2014.

 

Here is more information than you will ever need about the project: http://www.sfport.com/index.aspx?page=282

 

Princess now has the Grand Princess home ported out of San Francisco, offering 7 and 10 night cruises. I would expect more cruises in the future, but who knows.

[WELSH WIZARDS]

Why? We flew in and out of the Marco Polo airport with no issues.

I am really glad your trip there was incident free. I am sure others can also say the same.

But ...:(.....We have used this Airport about 6 times, and every time something happened to upset us.

It's a very small Airport and sometimes there are quite a few ships in .

There are only a few toilets , a couple down stairs and a couple more upstairs. The ladies room always seems to have a long queue. Before you can board you have to sit in the two cafes, as there is very little seating , especially when there are lots of ships in.

Consequentially the people trying to get a table are pushing around all the suitcases and bags of the folks trying to sit down somewhere before they can get into the main flight rooms.

I was going to list all my reasons, but then I thought

" Is it just me ? "

...... so I goggled " travellers to Venice Airport reports " .

 

I will let a few others who share my experiences explain some of their reasons.

.......................................................................

Was this Helpful?

Freezing cold and desolate!

 

by daisyhalfwit (December, 2008)

 

Reason for Stay: Early flight departure

Where: Landside

 

This is a horrible airport to spend any time in! I had to arrive around midnight on the last bus out of Venice and couldn't check in until around 4:30 when my airline's counter opened. First of all, the airport closes so it's like a creepy ghost town in there. There are no restaurants open, so bring your own food if you think you'll be hungry. The lights are dim and there is little info or helpful directional signage. I saw a couple ask several airport authorities where a certain check in desk was and they dismissed them without a care. There is no carpet or cushiony chairs. There are only hard, cold metal chairs with arm rests. There are a few that don't have arm rests so you can stretch out if you're lucky. In the middle of the night, a team of security guards came and looked at my passport and flight info. Word to the wise: AVOID.

..................................................................................................

 

by landing101 (September, 2012)

 

Reason for Stay: Other

Where: Landside and Airside

Pros: Fairly decent pizza at the landside cafe

Cons: No air conditioning / disgusting toilets landside

 

My husband and I stayed landside for four hours before we could check in. Dingy was the impression I got with regard to color scheme. There were two very small cafes offering deli style food, pizza slices, sandwitches etc. And two gift / book shops. It was horrendously hot, smokey and generally unpleasant. The ovens used to cook at the cafes were making the heat even more unbearable and there was a lack of seating available, we found a seat after a wait at one of the cafes. Toilets. Dont know where to start. In the two cubicle toilet landside for ladies, there was a pile of used toilet papers next to the toilet going up to head height when you sit down. I was in such disbelief that I took a photo of it.!! Things were a bit better airside, but the toilet not that much cleaner. Was very glad when the plane actually took off and we knew THAT Airport was behind us .

---------------------------------------------------------------

Seems it's not just me.