An appeal to the Assembly to halt the construction of two offshore berths and moorage floats at the site of Juneau’s existing downtown cruise docks was taken into executive session at press time.
The City and Borough of Juneau Assembly heard an appeal by Linnea and Arthur Osborne, owners of the 58-foot fishing vessel Mongoose, to stop the dock’s construction. The Osbornes question the safety of the project for fishing vessels berthing at the Taku Dock. The fishers said they were concerned that the city’s Docks and Harbors officials did not offer the public proper opportunity for input.
The Docks and Harbors 16B project application was approved by the Planning Commission in June.
The proposed cruise dock would consist of a concrete floating structure, dolphins, gangways and small vessel floats to serve ships up to 1,000 feet long and 110 feet wide.
Linnea Osborne said the cruise ship dock was an unworkable design. She said Taku Dock has different currents than in Aurora Harbor. Also, vessels will have to deal with the wash from cruise ship bow thrusters at the new cruise dock, she said.
“When you add all this together it gets more challenging as a mariner,” Osborne said.
Osborne was also concerned that not enough stakeholders were involved in the design of the dock.
“There are only two parties that come out in favor of the project and neither one is running a boat. It raises questions of trust and credibility,” Osborne said. “The record is silent from a lot of different stake holders. I encourage the public to ask why.”
Alaska Fisherman’s memorial also signed onto the appeal. Bruce Weyhrauch testified that the cruise dock ignores Juneau’s waterfront plan, it would block the view from the memorial and staunch the flow of vessels during the yearly Blessing of the Fleet.
“It’s a well designed dock, it is just in the wrong spot,” Weyhrauch said.
Borough planner Greg Cheney said the Osbornes have helped improve the dock project through their testimony and appeal. However, Cheney said the project has already been adapted to meet the Osbornes’ concern over the safety of docking at the Taku Dock.
“This project is better from the process,” Cheney said. “It is an excellent example of the process at work.”
With help from the U.S. Coast Guard and Army Corp of Engineers the applicant has done a “very good design” and the project was appropriate, Cheney said.
CBJ planner Beth McKibben said Docks and Harbors made substantial changes to the design — indicated by the designation of application 16B — to improve the safety of the dock for fishermen and mariners attempting to dock at the Taku Fisheries Dock.
McKibben responded to the appellant’s concern about the safety of docking at the Taku Dock in high winds or swift current by saying that mariners already avoid attempting to dock in inclement weather.
Docks and Harbors Port Director Carl Uchytil said the cruise dock has been a topic of public discussion for more than 10 years.
“This is one of the most publicly visible projects in recent years,” Uchytil said.
However, Uchytil said, time is running out to avoid a delay in construction.
“Given the nature of the project, timing is becoming more important, Uchytil said. Delaying the project at all likely results in the project being pushed back a year, he said. If the project stays on schedule, construction is expected to begin in 2014 with completion in 2016.
Docks and Harbors moved the dock in its designs 50 feet further out from the shore and swapped the two cruise ship berths to improve accessibility to the Taku Dock.
The cruise dock would have two berths, one around 300 feet and the other at over 400 feet, to accommodate larger Panamax cruise ships.
“Significant changes at considerable cost,” Uchytil said.
The designers also added a navigational boom to the cruise dock to address the concern that a boat in distress might drift under the cruise dock cat-walks. The boom would prevent this. Uchytil said.
Uchytil said the new cruise dock is more than twice as wide as Aurora Harbor for maneuvering.
In an interview after the hearing, Osborne said she has more to say about the appeal than she was able to discuss during the hearing due to time and allowable topics.
“With the time limitations we did the best we could,” she said. “All citizens should be looking at this project a little closer. Despite the fact that the project has been around for a long time there are a lot of unanswered questions.”
Osborne said that if the Assembly turns down her appeal, the future of Taku Dock and the Mongoose’s use of it will be in question.
“I don’t know what it will mean to us,” Osborne said. “We already know there will be times we won’t be able to [dock]. Will we want to take that chance to try? The bottom line is there will be an economic impact.”
The Assembly recessed the appeal hearing to an executive session Monday night. No decision was made by press time.
• Contact reporter Russell Stigall at 523-2276, or at russell.stigall@juneauempire.com.
LINKS:
Cruise dock appeals deadline looms
http://juneauempire.com/local/2012-09-06/cruise-dock-appeals-deadline-looms
CBJ project to control vehicle, pedestrian free-for-all
http://juneauempire.com/local/2012-10-08/cbj-project-control-vehicle-ped...
Kiefer shares CBJ news at Chamber luncheon
http://juneauempire.com/local/2012-08-24/kiefer-shares-cbj-news-chamber-...
Planning approves Panamax cruise dock
http://juneauempire.com/local/2012-06-27/planning-approves-panamax-cruis...





Comments (11)
Add commentThe plan
It would have been helpful if the Empire had included links to the actual plan rather than past Empire articles so we could see a drawing of the proposed docks. I had to go seek it out on the Docks & Harbors website.
Now I see the point of the objections from fishermen going into Taku Fisheries. It looks like a pretty tight maneuvering area, right under the bow of the cruise ships.
The answer's simple - relocate Taku Fisheries. Move it over near Harris/Aurora Harbors. Maybe instead of that useless park under the bridge that no one will use. Or over to where the underutilized Yacht Club currently is. Or find another spot. And make it better than the current facility.
Point being, the cruise ships have no practical alternative than to park right downtown. Fishing boats have much more flexibility. And cruise ships bring in a lot more money (& tax revenue) to Juneau than Taku Fisheries does.
Besides, if the Taku building was relocated, it would clean up the flow of the whole waterfront area there, tying the Princess dock in with the other docks, and allowing a seawalk along the entire waterfront.
Could they use cruise head tax money to do that so it costs taxpayers, and Taku Fisheries nothing?
Taku is a private business.
Taku is a private business. They have no ability to make them move. Plus they own the restaurant, cold storage etc. Do you realize how much it would cost to rebuild that?
A Matter of Choice
Cruise ships or commercial fishers? Both are pretty exclusive to the average Juneauite. I'd support the folks who live here and work for a solution that helps our resident fishers!
Agree KP
That's why their move should be funded out of head tax dollars. The restaurant wouldn't need to move, only the cold storage.
And Snagger, it doesn't have to be an either-or solution. Relocate Taku to a better location, they get a new building out of the deal, the local fishers still have a facility to go to, and we also get to keep milking the tourists. Win-win!
Might Be Appropriate......
Building a processing and cold storage facility with head tax dollars seems like a great idea. The fishers are certainly impacted by tourist activities. I just think some good old boys have other ways to spend the $$$$$.
as I
Recall the cruise Line industry weighed in opposed to this boondoggle project inferring the they would not be sending the larger ships this way. So I continue to question the underlying motive/motives for continuing with this waste of money.
Isldand
Who in their right mind would believe ANYTHING that came out of the cruise lines' mouths? (other than our governor, of course)
The real decision
When it comes time to vote up or down on the $25 mil bond to fund the project is when we will know what is going to happen. In the meantime, the planning folks are acting like the money to build is in the bank. Not so fast on that. I will not support the bond. If the majority feel the same, I guess that means this plan is washed up for real.
Thank you Karla.CBJ also
Thank you Karla.
CBJ also prevented an opportunity for a public discussion on fireworks. This topic was literally tabled without any opportunity for public input even though many residents in Juneau have indicated they are having serious problems with fireworks.
Regardless of where you stand on this issue, there should always be an opportunity for open public discussion on any issue brought to the attention of the assembly via the public.This is how our democracy is supposed to work. This is what the people of Juneau must demand of CBJ.
What we have is a minority shoving legislation down the throats of Juneau residents and this is terribly wrong.
Interesting,
I also seem to remember something about the Cruise Lines being opposed to the concept of these new docking facilities?