New Dock & Terminal to be built in Whittier

[ARRTrain]

Huna Totem wants to build.

 

2.22.2022-Regular-Council-Meeting-Packet_Final.pdf (whittieralaska.gov)

[Northern Aurora]

The Anchorage Daily News has also covered this proposal.  For those who are interested there was an article in the ADN about two weeks ago.

[don't-use-real-name]

2 hours ago, ARRTrain said:

Huna Totem wants to build.

 

2.22.2022-Regular-Council-Meeting-Packet_Final.pdf (whittieralaska.gov)

Drawings start at about page 69 of 194

A floating dock/pier

[GTJ]

Is this a good proposal? The article in the Anchorage Daily News is a good read. I also note the following.

 

The Army Corps of Engineers, in its general investigation study asserts: “Existing harbor facilities in Whittier are heavily congested and lack sufficient moorage and boat launch facilities to meet demand. Upland harbor facilities are similarly heavily congested. These conditions result in inefficiencies to all harbor users, increased vessel damages, and increased safety concerns.”

 

The proposed site is about one mile west of the center of Whittier, where maritime (deep water port, small vessel harbor, ferry terminal), railroad, commercial, and residential activity are all located in close proximity to one another. It is not entirely clear if the project would supplement the existing dock now used by Princess Cruises and Holland America Line (both subsidiaries of Carnival Corp. & plc), or replace it. It appears as though the project would have no effect on the dock now used by the Alaska Marine Highway, if only because of the ferry’s distinct need to have adjacent automobile queueing space.

 

As to land use within Whittier, dispersal of activity would, on the one hand, likely ease the congestion identified by the Army Corps of Engineers. On the other hand, however, activity dispersal tends to make a community less amenable to pedestrians, and it seems unreasonable to expect passengers on vessels using the proposed site would walk to and from the center of Whittier (instead, most passengers would use the proposed site solely as an interchange point with buses and trains to arrive and depart Whittier immediately). In this case, there would be minimal commercial benefit for Whittier, at least beyond those businesses electing to sublease commercial property from Huna Totem at the proposed site. (Consider how many of the passengers alighting from vessels docked at Icy Strait Point continue into Hoonah itself . . . has it not been necessary for commercial activity to sublease property at Icy Strait Point? Consider as well that Icy Strait Point is a port of call in the middle of a cruise itinerary, not a port of embarkation or disembarkation like Whittier, where passengers are rushing to board, alight, and connect, rather than to sightsee.) Passengers of the Alaska Marine Highway presently have easy access to buses and trains now stationed in the center of Whittier, but if those buses and trains were to be relocated to the proposed site then access by ferry passengers would be diminished (though mitigated if Princess Cruises and Holland America Line remain at the existing dock and did not relocate to the proposed site).

 

As to larger regional effects, the project clearly pits Whittier against Seward. The additional vessels that would sail to the proposed site would not be new vessels, but would be the existing vessels now sailing to and from Seward. To the extent that passenger traffic would flow through the proposed site in Whittier there would be a corresponding decline in passenger traffic in Seward. It seems likely that Huna Totem anticipates luring all traffic from Seward to Whittier. This would be a severe, if not fatal, blow to commerce in Seward, with businesses there possibly having to relocate and sublease commercial property from Huna Totem in Whittier in order to survive. The tax base of Seward would be diminished, and it might even be that the Alaska Railroad would discontinue its passenger train service as a result of greatly diminished demand.

 

It appears that the greatest beneficiary of this project is Huna Totem, while most all other vested interests lose. True, the residents of Whittier might gain some jobs for themselves at the proposed site, though relatively low-paying seasonal retail jobs. But overall, I am a skeptical that this proposal will be good for the region, or that the benefits for Whittier specifically will be as great as anticipated.

[rkacruiser]

8 hours ago, GTJ said:

The article in the Anchorage Daily News is a good read.

 

It was interesting.  Having visited Whittier as a tourist and on a different visit sailed from Whittier, there is not much there to attract me as a tourist whose purpose is to stay in Whittier.  What's the attraction?  Begich Towers?  Wow!  A can't miss tourist site to view?  It's a curious building simply because so many of the community's inhabitants live there.  There's a WW II abandoned multi-story building (used as a hospital, I think) that's more interesting.  (If one is interested in such relics.)  

 

The Corporation's involvement that developed Icy Point Strait in this project is promising.  But, now at Icy Point Strait, I wonder if they are not starting to become less "authentic" than they were?  

 

For me, as a destination where I would be interested in spending 2-3 days before or after a cruise, Seward wins.  

[donaldsc]

1 hour ago, rkacruiser said:

 

It was interesting.  Having visited Whittier as a tourist and on a different visit sailed from Whittier, there is not much there to attract me as a tourist whose purpose is to stay in Whittier.  What's the attraction?  Begich Towers?  Wow!  A can't miss tourist site to view?  It's a curious building simply because so many of the community's inhabitants live there.  There's a WW II abandoned multi-story building (used as a hospital, I think) that's more interesting.  (If one is interested in such relics.)  

 

The Corporation's involvement that developed Icy Point Strait in this project is promising.  But, now at Icy Point Strait, I wonder if they are not starting to become less "authentic" than they were?  

 

For me, as a destination where I would be interested in spending 2-3 days before or after a cruise, Seward wins.  

 

A possible positive of the Icy Point development is that I believe that the native peoples who live in Hoonan actually own the cruise terminal and the facilities at the cruise terminal.  If this is true, at least they make the money of the terminal.  Who would own the proposed Whittier terminal?  I assume that it is a private corporation.

 

DON

[GTJ]

On 3/18/2022 at 6:05 PM, donaldsc said:

Who would own the proposed Whittier terminal? I assume that it is a private corporation.

The project is being spearheaded by Huna Totem Corporation, a for-profit corporation formed under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. As already noted in another post, the history of Whittier is primarily that of the United States military (with a certain Stalinistic or institutional feel), more so than a history of being a native American settlement.

[wolfie11]

And are they going to double the tunnel capacity as well?

[ARRTrain]

HUNA Totem did a video presentation in Whittier when they announced the plan.

 

The HUNA plan included a Lodge - Tram system - Terminal - Dock - Harbor - Boardwalk shopping area.

 

HUNA pitched the Lodge as guests would spend a night in Whittier before their cruise & after their cruise, as a way to split up tunnel traffic.

 

They seem to be building for NCL and plan on bringing the big NCL ships up to Whittier.

 

HUNA has scaled back the plans for now.  Just a Terminal & Dock to start.  If they bring in a ship on the same days as Princess or Holland - the tunnel lines will be long & some vehicles probably won't make it through on their openings.  Plus, Alaska Railroad does not have enough passenger cars for more train capacity on existing ship days.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next 2 years.

[rkacruiser]

7 hours ago, wolfie11 said:

And are they going to double the tunnel capacity as well?

🤣

 

What do you think the percentages are for such to happen? 

[don't-use-real-name]

4 hours ago, ARRTrain said:

HUNA has scaled back the plans for now.  Just a Terminal & Dock to start.  If they bring in a ship on the same days as Princess or Holland - the tunnel lines will be long & some vehicles probably won't make it through on their openings.  Plus, Alaska Railroad does not have enough passenger cars for more train capacity on existing ship days.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next 2 years.

With 2 years time there is adequate time for Alaska RR to acquire more rail cars - rail tracks to

that Lodge and floating dock location to be laid and a priority schedule for cruise/tourist thru

the tunnel. A train with 10 or more coaches can easily be thru the tunnel before a fleet of cars.

The recent rail stop point at the Anchorage airport will make this work well instead of using

just the Anchorage Depot 

The freight train operation is mostly at night - no conflict here

 

No doubt there will be issues with two ships simultaneously being in port - but that can be

remedied by separating the two i.e. 6 hours apart and also taking into effect the tidal flow.

A ship arriving say earlier than 7 am could have a couple of train loads and a few buses

to clear the tunnel - - -

 

And then another consist of trains arriving to board that 7 am arrival at say noon -

The now empty train would start to load the 1 pm arrival of a second ship and move thru

the tunnel 

 

It is not that insurmountable a problem.

This is all in the planning stages and I am sure that the local heads have thought out a

plan that will work.

And Yes the vehicle traffic thru the tunnel may be more restrictive but that would be mostly

for the local residents.

Trains would not be the only movement of cruise tourist/guests - the motor coaches (buses)

would also be in play here moving perhaps even more numbers of guests.

 

 The ONLY glitch to this is the service ability of the tunnel - no rock slides - no accidents -

no labor contract issues - no protests - no mayhem and what have you - - - - -

 

Like the baseball classic - - -"Build it and they will come" !

[GTJ]

On 3/21/2022 at 3:57 PM, ARRTrain said:

They seem to be building for NCL and plan on bringing the big NCL ships up to Whittier. * * * If they bring in a ship on the same days as Princess or Holland - the tunnel lines will be long & some vehicles probably won't make it through on their openings.

At present, NCL has only one vessel on the route, providing service on alternate Mondays. The mega-carriers have been pretty good in scheduling vessels on separate days of the week. This might be the result of Vancouver's insistence, so as to manage its port resources. This project would require more than just NCL alone to work well. Here's the existing schedule for 2022, showing how Whittier could be readily used by more than just NCL without the risk of being overrun with same day Princess Cruises and Holland American Line port days. An additional three vessels could be added to the schedule--in addition to all the vessels presently calling at Whittier and Seward combined--before there would the necessity of having two vessels in port simultaneously (other than Viking Ocean Cruises, which, with a 20-day cycle, will not mesh with the other lines, and smaller lines with just a handful of visits). For this reason I don't think that tunnel capacity has to be an issue.

 

Alternate Mondays: Norwegian Cruise Line

Every Wednesday: Princess Cruises alternating weeks with Regent Seven Seas Cruises

Every Thursday: Silversea Cruises

Every Friday: Celebrity Cruises alternating weeks with Royal Caribbean International
Every Saturday: Princess Cruises

Every Sunday: Holland America Line

Every 20 days: Viking Ocean Cruises

 

(My prediction for future schedule changes: [1] NCL to add one vessel, [2] Princess to add one vessel, [3] RSSC to move to Tuesday sailings and either RSSC add one vessel or Viking go to a 14-day cycle on alternate Tuesdays.)