Seattle Cruise Terminal to be moved

[RedmondCruiser]

The Seattle Times reports that the Port of Seattle has elected to discontinue a cruise terminal at pier 30. They will keep the facility at pier 66 , which is used by Celebrity and NCL. HAL and Princess will then go down to the pier 91 complex. This is an old US Navy facitility at the north end of Elliott Bay. The pier 30 complex will revert to cargo. One thing will remain the same. Both pier 30 and pier 91 are not near any hotels or tourist draws. Tenative start date is set for the 2008 Alaska cruise season.

[SeattleJ]

Here's the story from the PI.

 

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/259562_port15.html

 

Big port changes in works

Plan would move cruise ships to make way for cargo expansion

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

By BRAD WONG AND JENNIFER LANGSTON

P-I REPORTERS

The Port of Seattle gave the initial green light Tuesday to return one terminal to cargo operations, move cruise ships to a new Elliott Bay location and possibly create up to 725 jobs.

The $90 million to $120 million plan -- designed to increase cargo capacity at North America's fastest-growing container port -- still requires commission approval, environmental and traffic reviews and public hearings.

But by a 4-1 vote, the Port Commission authorized $10.8 million for initial design, engineering, traffic and environmental studies. Commissioner Alec Fisken, who wanted more information, voted against the plan.

The draft plan calls for creating a two-berth facility for cruise ships at Terminal 91, which is home to fishing trawlers. Princess Cruises and Seattle-based Holland America Line, both of which operated at Terminal 30 last year, ideally would move there in 2008. Cruise operations based at Pier 66 would remain where they are.

Then, SSA Terminals, a joint venture involving Seattle-based SSA Marine, would expand its cargo operations at Terminal 30 off East Marginal Way.

Port officials have pointed to the growing number of goods coming from Asia as the main reason fueling cargo expansion projects.

For Terminal 30, the plan would mean a return to container cargo use for the facility.

In 2004, after spending about $17 million in renovations, the port opened up Terminal 30 to the cruise business, said port spokesman Mick Shultz.

The Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks hurt the global trade of containerized cargo, he said, and as a result, the port had extra terminal space.

But the port is quick to change with the global economy, he added.

Mark Knudsen, seaport deputy managing director, said this expansion plan tells shipping companies that the port "can handle growth requirements into the future."

Jon Hemingway, SSA Marine chief executive, said it is crucial to remain competitive in Puget Sound -- and that his company wants to grow with the port.

Vancouver, B.C., he said, is facing challenges with some inland transportation infrastructure and expanding berth capacity.

"In a way, we have a chance to jump ahead of them here," he said. "We would like to see our market share in this area grow."

SSA Terminals would invest money, likely install new cargo cranes and operate at Terminals 30 and 25, which are adjacent to each other. SSA Terminals, which rents space at Terminal 25 and nearby Terminal 18, would enter into extended leases with the port.

While the option to lease Terminal 30 was not bid out competitively, officials said it made sense for one company to operate the combined facility. The reason: It would have cost up to $200 million for a single company to run just the 37-acre Terminal 30, port officials said.

But in a nod to Seattle voters who want better oversight of the taxpayer-supported port, commissioners approved an amendment in which they will review the lease details before they are formally executed.

"There's fleshing out to do," said Commissioner John Creighton, an attorney. Commissioners pointed out that the lease details take up 80 pages. The commission also has the option to cancel the project if it exceeds $120 million.

The port estimates this expansion project -- for which it still needs to find full funding -- could create 364 new jobs and 361 related positions in the regional economy. Commissioners are expected to take up the question of full construction funding in February 2007.

Herald Ugles, president of Seattle-based International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 19, said his membership -- which staffs Port of Seattle terminals -- could grow by 100 full-time members under the plan.

His union has 780 full-time members and about 460 "casual" or part-time ones.

The idea of converting Terminal 30 back to cargo use, said Ugles, sends a message to developers who might have eyed the land for condominiums.

"Stay off our property. We are going to use this ... for what this property is for and that's maritime," he said. "Deep-sea berths are a rare asset. You can build a condo, you can build a coffee shop anywhere. But you can't build a deep-sea port anywhere."

Reaction to the plan was mixed Tuesday.

If approved, it would require Holland America Line to shift about 70 sailings from Terminal 30 to Terminal 91, said Chief Executive Stein Kruse.

"We're not opposed to it," he said. "But we haven't taken a strong look at it."

If hotels and retail stores are developed at Terminal 91, he said his cruise customers would benefit.

But the proximity of Terminal 30 to state Route 99, Interstate 5 and Sea-Tac Airport is ideal for transporting customers. Traveling from the airport to Terminal 30 typically takes about 15 minutes by bus.

"You can imagine it's not a straight line," he said, referring to Terminal 91. "It adds some time."

Vic Barry, president of the Magnolia Community Club, said the initiative to move cruise ships to Terminal 91 was not a total surprise, since the port had considered it years ago.

Nearby neighborhoods didn't have strong objections, as long as it was done without too much noise, traffic and lighting, he said. Many considered it less disruptive than putting cargo operations there -- something that Queen Anne and Magnolia residents have fought for years.

But now that the port is also pushing to redevelop the adjacent "North Bay" property into a business hub with thousands of employees, the question of how much additional traffic cruise passengers might add "certainly gets our attention," Barry said.

 

 

ON THE WEB

 

 

To view details on the Port proposal online, visit: goto.seattlepi.com/r86

[jhannah]

Both pier 30 and pier 91 are not near any hotels or tourist draws.

By design? Do they think it will create too much gridlock to have the terminals closer in to where things are?

[Krazy Kruizers]

Thanks for the news.

[RedmondCruiser]

By design? Do they think it will create too much gridlock to have the terminals closer in to where things are?

 

It is more a funtion of physical size of the ships. Elliott Bay drops off very quickly and pier length is limited. That is why pier 66 docks the ships horizontal. The best location for a cruise terminal would be in the area around pier 54 -- which is in the center of tourist activity but it would probably eat up several piers doing so. Pier 91 is a very large facility that is made to order for cruise ships.

[jhannah]

That makes sense. Thanks for the info. It's just so nice to sail out of a place like San Diego where the cruise terminal is right there in the middle of everything.

[bepsf]

That's not that far away - just on the other side of the Space Needle...

...there's a cute neighborhood down there w/ hotels and restaurants, etc too.

 

And as long as the taximan knows where we're going, what do I care where the boat docks?

:)

[peaches from georgia]

I think it's better for everybody keeping the cruise terminals north or south of the main tourist area. Alaskan Way, the thoroughfare along Elliot Bay, has a lot of traffic, but as it is there are no major traffic jams and traffic keeps moving. Parking is all along the other side of the road and there is easy access to the tourist venues and restaurants along Elliott Bay. Any more busy cruise terminal pax/luggage drop-offs would change the whole character of Alaskan Way and create a real problem.

 

No problem having it north at 91. Pax are going to have to take a cab from their hotel no matter where the terminal is and 91 is not that far anyway.

[bellebaby]

While I understand Seattle is more accessible and flights are more economical from some areas of the US, I much prefer departing from Vancouver. Canada Place is beautiful and right downtown. The surrouding hotels and restaurants are first class.

 

B